I agree that in most cases, teachers looking/leaving is just a part of being an administrator. If you are currently at a domestic school, your admin might not be quite as used to it as an int'l admin but it should not taint your relationship (necessarily).

If you are still in the US (or other home country) it might be to your advantage since you can generally paint your int'l job search as just checking out the possibility, might never happen kind of thing (as opposed to seriously thinking about moving down the road to the next school/district for a little more cash).

I agree. It could be everything, it could be nothing (to do with you).

By all means check in with the school to make sure everything is on track to ease your mind (but you may not want to mention that you saw "your" job reposted).

sid wrote:
> You'd have to play "happy couple" during recruitment and first weeks/months at school.
> Holding hands, doing things together, smiling a lot.
================
It's cute that you think all marriages are like that. J/K. Sort of.
9
I agree that it's not an ideal situation but other than telling the OP to go back to their home country (where work/life/family, etc. is likely to be less intertwined) and set up a "typical" separated/divorced family arrangement, there don't seem to be a whole lot of attractive/viable options/advice to give.

You might also want to run the scenario by your current admin and see what they say (depending on your relationship with them and whether or not they know you will be looking/leaving).

We've lived in Beijing and have visited HK (and have friends that moved from Beijing to teach in HK) and by most accounts HK is no where near as severe/oppressive as Beijing. We made it through a couple of years in Beijing with no serious respiratory issues (so maybe we are not the people to ask) and found/hear HK was more hazy/annoying then the oppressive apocalyptic black fog that could hit Beijing for days/weeks on end.

It sounds like it should not be deal breaker in your case or at least worth the gamble for a few years since HK can be wonderful.

Well, unfortunately you are adding a hot mess element to a recruitment process that can already be delicate, awkward. stressful and difficult (for schools and job seekers). I agree that I can't really think of any way to spin the situation that isn't going to give most recruiters pause (maybe someone else will have a better imagination).

Barring that, your options seem to be presenting yourselves separately to separate schools (with the children divided between you somehow 1:1, 2:0, 0:2), or as suggested, present yourself as a teaching couple with two dependents to the same school. Not the best (compared to teaching couple with no dependents, single teacher with no dependents), but certainly a very typical case that most schools will see as the cost of doing business. Once established you can work out the housing situation privately. Yes, you would be paying out of pocket for one housing situation but if you agreed to balance it out between your salaries/packages it wouldn't be too bad in many locations). Or, one person could look to move to a different school where they could potentially pick up housing benefits (not a certainty because schools vary wildly on their policies).

It is also possible to be hired at two different schools in the same city (we have done it) which would solve the housing situation but in your case one person would be marketing themselves as a single teacher with two dependents or you would both be marketing yourselves as single teachers with one dependent (either way presents potential personal and/or professional drawbacks).

Sorry to not have better/more useful input (and sorry that you are going through a situation that is difficult in the best of times, and even more complicated in our career path/lifestyle).

So by that logic there is a WC (World Curriculum), for math and science at least, since mathematical and scientific principals are the same all over the world.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @WT123
>
> I dont and I didnt, I mentioned the deduction, and the exclusion and the credit,
> but while they the exclusion may very well be suitable it by definition implies
> your not making the relocation overseas permenant, which eliminates the probability
> of successfully meeting the bonafide residence test. Which while the physical residence
> test is much easier to understand and has higher confidence, many of the ITs who
> would be unsuccessful with the physical presence test would be successful at the
> bonafide residence test.
==================
Are you sure you are not the current POTUS? You literally said, "The deduction and exclusion really don't
apply in this case, what you want is the foreign tax credit" without any information from the OP about what country they are relocating to, whether they will be paying any significant foreign income tax, how long they plan to stay overseas, etc.

As for the rest, again, it literally makes no sense. How does taking the exclusion give any indication of not making relocation permanent (or at least long term). We (and many other int'l teachers) use/used the foreign income exclusion, to great effect, for many, many years.

Are you privy to some information about the OP that the rest of us are not (or have you been eating too many fast food meals and staying up tweeting all night?

PsyGuy wrote:
> There are three types of foreign tax benefit schemes, the foreign tax
> deduction, exclusion, and credit. The deduction and exclusion really dont
> apply in this case, what you want is the foreign tax credit. Most ITs
> simply claim extensions until they meet the physical presence test of 330
> days. You could also meet the Bonafide resident test based on intent. If
> for some reason you cant claim the credit for reasons, you can just not
> file for the year, and then next year file based on physical presence.
=====================
Why do you assume the OP will only want/need the foreign tax credit? If they will not be paying significant tax on their foreign income (varies greatly by location), they may be better off using the exclusion.

vandsmith wrote:
> it's not free, but it would only cost about $2600. the question isn't whether IB
> schools would accept it but rather, if any other schools would accept it as a real
> masters course. the presentation on it in vienna a few weeks ago was great, the
> idea for it is pretty good as well, as it caters specifically to transient populations.
> anyways...
>
> it's interesting to note that whenever anything like education is given for 'free'
> or at a reduced rate, people are stunned but more suspicious. i guess it was more
> the 'marxist' comment. i mean, take it how you want, but how does the idea of a
> university dedicated to giving extremely reduced rates get tagged as dodgy? and
> then 'marxist' as if it's a bad thing. i guess the idea that people should be educated
> without having to go bankrupt is a social marxist idea, and with today's climate,
> that's akin to saying you want to eat babies, burn dollar bills, and lock up hillary.
>
> maybe i should stop working so much on the weekends...
>
==============================
I was just commenting on the name. The People's anything should in theory be a good thing but too many less than egalitarian/democratic/legit groups have greatly tainted/cheapened the idea. Some examples would include the People's Republic of China, the People's Car (Hitler's VW), the original People's Court (again, a Nazi invention) and the reality TV People's Court (no offense to Wapner fans but it's a little dodgy compared to an actual, legal court).

As for Marx, not greatly alarmed in theory by many of his ideas but again, has been greatly mis-used and abused to get/keep some very nasty people in power.

I received my Masters via an online program and would have loved to have spent a whole lot less than I did.

Or you can join TES UK and start a private conversation over there (I use the same user ID).

There's been some very informative and detailed threads on this subject so you might try doing a search. In general, yes, the first year can be a bit confusing. As I recall, the number of days does not need to be in one calendar year, as long as it's during 12 consecutive months. Many people end up requesting an extension (and possibly a second extension) and THEN filing because they will have met the physical presence test.

Also, you can (or at least used to be able to) qualify for a partial exclusion which would generally cover your partial overseas income for the first year. We used TurboTax for filing and their software generally does a good job with the whole foreign income/exclusion area. We haven't had to worry about it (for good or bad) in a number of years since we now work for a US gov't entity.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Boss Time
>
> PMs are disabled on this forum. You may if you wish go to your control panel (click
> on user control panel) then go to the profile tab, and then under the "interests"
> field include your email address. This way tbots wont index your email address,
> and you can remove it any time. You can then request another forum member contact
> you by email.
>
> Another option is to go too:
>
> http://teachers.net/mentors/DOD/
>
> It is a DODEA centric forum.
Basically this. ^ If you leave an email (and let me know it's there) on your profile I can email you. Or you can join ISR and PM me on the paid forum. Or you can post here or on the teachers.net site and I (and/or other posters) can try and answer your questions.

Know nothing about it but from a cursory glance I had to say, they chose a very unfortunate name. Might be a great option but sounds distinctly dodgy/amateurish/Marxist on the face of it. Will be interesting to read opinions/insights from others.

PsyGuy wrote:

> @WT123 is incorrect, the reason we have a members forum is because of IS efforts.
> They basically defamed themselves, then had their lawyers came knocking, and the
> issue with a lawsuit is that they are expensive to defend against and the ISs are
> many and ISR is one. So could they exert enough pressure to get compliance from
> ISR, or could they get a judge to issue a subpoena to get data, sure, would it be
> useful, maybe, would it be a smoking gun pointing to you, not if you arent the least
> bit careful.
=================
What part of what I said was incorrect? Have any schools/admin/owners forced ISR to give up information on the writers of reviews? Is there any evidence that they are close to doing so?

Reviews have always been on the paid side, so what does the paid forum have to do with this conversation?