PsyGuy wrote:
> @Reu
>
> Any IT/DT should be able to handle some boys being boys.

Holy sh...

Straight-up

1) If you think that children bullying and physically harming an SEN student or sexting/pressuring Y7 girls for sexual favours is "boys being boys", you're part of the problem, not only in teaching/schools, but in society.

2) If you think that the skills needed to deal with these issues, as well as talking about them with the offending pupils, their parents, and senior management, are "ordinary", you clearly have no idea what thought and diplomacy goes into such matters. If you think sexting is going to stop by telling a "female student to put the phone down", you have no experience dealing with such things, so don't pretend you do. Your attitude would only allow girls to feel pressured into doing things that, in this day-and-age of "informed consent", are foul.

Also, fyi - I didn't say "fighting", I said "in-fighting" - "hidden conflict or competitiveness within an organization".

1) "Students don't fight". But they do get into physical altercations and physical bullying. A previous school I worked for in Asia had very aggressive behaviour (against an SEN student, actually) that escalated to the bullies hitting/swiping the pupil being bullied.

Also, another example: a school a friend worked for had Y7 boys involved in sexting. Sure, TeacherGal is elementary level, but Y7 is just the first year of Secondary, remember.

2) "just ask little Jane if she took her medication, done." Ignores the fact that in some schools teachers are - rightly or wrongly - tasked with handling medications, even if the onus of remembering to take medications is on the child.

3) Here, which of these things are you talking about, then? https://www.google.com/search?q=Nero-Kinesic

Agree to disagree, but to flesh out my reasons so that TeacherGal can make an informed decision:

1) Anti-bullying experience can show you know how to handle children bullying and in-fighting amongst children. Even if the school outwardly tolerates such behaviour, you're not selling yourself to the parents of the monsters, you're selling yourself to the school, who will want teachers who can handle the monsters in some way. More than that, though, a lot of IS schools are actually moving towards anti-bullying stances/policies due to cyber-bullying and sexting - the prevalence of smart-phones and boys being more aggressively sexualised from a younger age are both issues in IS schools (the latter being a definite issue in Middle East co-ed schools, due to the cultural bias towards boys/against girls).

"Strong Behaviour Management is a given" - Yes, which is why mentioning it should be standard. If you don't throw out a line about it you'll look less capable than a candidate who does.

2) Again, a given, and therefore should be a standard line on the CV/Resume.

3) Large-scale trips/events have (in my experience) required a teacher or Form Tutor to handle medication for all children. It also shows willingness to undertake extra responsibilities, especially if you can put down you're first-aid trained, or are willing to be.

4) Again, you're not applying to parents, you're applying to a school. My experience varies between schools, but in my current position I'm teaching one child who all staff concede is very special, and several with varying degrees of either ADHD or autism/Aspergers, and the school is supportive of all the pupils, even though the parents of one refuse to concede to facts. Much can be done when knowledgable staff members coordinate amongst themselves, even when stymied by the parents. One school in the Middle East flat-out refused to accept mention of SEN, yet another one (in a different Middle-East country) had a part-time SENCO.

"Whats more important in IE is English language learning and being able to address the needs of students at different levels of English Language Acquisition."

This should be a given in International Teaching, and should be mentioned as standard. Something along the lines of "able to differentiate classwork for EAL pupils and co-ordinate with the Head of EAL to ensure that all pupils can understand subject content"

"1) Instructional Delivery that is challenging but engaging."

Should be standard in a CV/Resume, alongside "4) Reading Development" for elementary/primary placements.

"3) Whole Child Learning and Growth and 5) Collaboration with specialist ITs."

Both worthwhile suggestions.

"2) Focus on Nero-Kinesic activity in lessons."

A quick Google reveals nothing for this. Did you spell it correctly?

Keywords would be:

Good behaviour management within the classroom, including awareness and enforcement of the school's anti-bullying welfare system.
Liaising with parents - including parent/teacher conferences - to ensure their children are given every opportunity to learn key skills both inside and outside school.
Ensuring the welfare of all pupils, including but not limited to ensuring medication is taken at the correct time (maybe? Not sure on the US system as compared to UK)
Awareness of Special Educational Needs in the classroom, including but not limited to autism and ADHD, to ensure every pupil can learn at a speed comfortable for them whilst not falling behind. This also includes differentiation of material, so that every pupil is sufficiently challenged in the learning environment (again, maybe? Not sure on the US system as compared to UK)

Will post again if I think of anything else.

@PsyGuy

That's fair - forewarned is forearmed, but I'm unlikely to apply for any role in the Middle East, so it's just me being nosy. :)

@PsyGuy

May I ask which school it was who short-changed you? Shortened initials or vague hint would do, if you don't feel like naming it in the public forum. :)

What curriculum do you teach? TES ( http://tes.com ) is fantastic, but it's almost entirely British/IGCSE/A-Level/IB schools, with a few random ones thrown in (New Zealand and Australian, for example). It's entirely free, too.

(Hope this is not too late)

Boring, untidy, and with very rude people. Rubbish everywhere. When I was there, Kuwaiti nationals were (generally speaking) very racist, especially when it came to the Bangladeshi and Indian taxi drivers. There's nothing to do except go to malls and restaurants, unless you're willing to pay for a day at the Hilton (with its private beach, spa, swimming pool). The public beaches are generally disgusting, and it's a very religious country, so expect to be stared at or shouted at for showing almost any amount of leg (if you're a woman, obviously). I also felt very unsafe walking to a decent shop (15 minutes away), but that could've just been the area the school housed us in. Oh, also, clothing regulations for my school were cover shoulders and upper arms, and skirts or trousers down to the ankle. Even with that, creepy guys outside work perved at me.

It's not a country I recommend anyone go to, to be honest, but if you keep your head down out-and-about, and have a good school to work in, it's probably just about possible to think of the money and survive a year there.

(I was there 2014)

eion_padraig wrote:
> Sometimes I wonder what SighGuy says when he replies to a post I've made,
> then I remember how stupid and argumentative most of it was before I
> started to block all his posts, and I don't wonder anymore.
>
> I really advise more people to do it. It cuts back a lot on useless posts
> to the forum.

Ahhh, cheers for that. I couldn't see a Block button, but forgot this forum uses Friend and Foe. Sorted!

Lastname_Z wrote:
>
> It's only my first year so I haven't had the chance to do two years. I guess the main
> reason I'd want to stay past two years (if I do) would be because I like the idea of
> being at the front of changes happening (maybe even having a leadership role in some
> changes) rather than at the back of them (coming into a school where changes have
> happened without my input).

There's definite value to staying on, if you can make your mark on the school. There's the obvious career boost - being able to say you were instrumental in X, Y and Z - but there's also the more communal/social benefits.

Something to remember is that there's always more teachers (young or old) getting on the international circuit, and every school is going to have newbies at some stage. It's never fun being in your first year abroad, away from friends, family, and your old routine. If you can have a positive impact on not only the school's curriculum and development, but also in making the school a nicer, friendlier place to be for new teachers, then that is a genuinely meaningful thing to do.

Obviously, you would hope to not make the "bitches" (for want of a better word) lives better, because there's no justice in them being nasty and having a good life. And you can't devote your life to making schools better places for complete strangers... But it's a way to (possibly) make your life and the lives of others happier in the short-to-medium term. And that's no small thing.

On the whole, it is definitely something to consider alongside how you feel about the country you're in, and the salary/benefits. And in a lot of schools, once you're past the initial 2 year contract, re-ups are only 1 year, so... :)

boss14 wrote:
> @reu
>
> Can you explain in more detail how in teaching it is more personalized and
> you have to click more with your co-workers than for typical office jobs?
>

This is hard to describe... I think in schools there's more to potentially lose, so the social part of things comes to the fore. A more abrasive teacher can be "constructively removed", even if the person in question is a good teacher. This isn't something that happens because the person is rude, it's something that happens because the teacher comes in knowing they're fantastic, and supervisors or colleagues feel like they're going to look bad. If the teacher in question comes in being more meek, more diplomatic, more shy-and-retiring, people don't feel threatened, and everything is fine.

Office work has this, but office work is also less reliant on your colleagues, with less sniping. It's interesting reading this thread. I've been on anime and videogames websites where the posters make less assumptions about people. Psyguy with his Americanised High School cliques is way off base about British Curriculum Schools and their International Teachers. Senator with his "two tribes"... These are the kinds of people you have to deal with in schools, as well as the nice teachers who will help you settle in, and who you'll make friends with. Whilst both PsyGuy and Senator have said horrid things, I'm sure they're fine people to work alongside, as long as you make to bend-the-knee, tug-your-forelock and stay respectful to their infinite wisdom. I'm also sure that their cynical view of younger/inexperienced teachers is something that would no doubt help create/perpetuate a toxic environment. So, with all that said, don't you imagine that "clicking" with them in the workplace would make your life better, compared to not?

> Would you say it's harder to get out of a toxic environment by changing
> schools compared to changing companies in a office job?

The hard part with this is references. Most international teaching contracts are two years, so if you go into a school, and after 3 months you realise the people are awful and it's toxic, you've got to put-up with it for a long time. Office work, you can fudge it a little, work for maybe a total of 9 months, and then make your excuses and leave. Tell the new employer you wanted to be closer to home, better work/life balance, better pay, whatever. International schools are very wary of hiring new international teachers, though, because of the possible flight-risk when things get tough, or the teacher gets homesick, for example.

So, 3 choices:

1) Stick with it, and keep your eye on the goal for over 18 months.
2) Go back to your home country and get a job ASAP, then start your search again the following year.
3) Write the year off, and apply to new international schools ASAP.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Reu
>
>
> I never claimed that younger ITs were incompetent or didnt know what they
> were doing, please identify that statement.

"Those young ITs dont know what they are doing thats why they have such poor work/life balance."

Of course, you could claim you meant that they're inexperienced, naive, or innocent, but none of those are the words you used, and all of them (including the words you did use) hold some sort of negative connotation.

> What younger ITs do that i claimed was bring more drama, which is true.

No - In. Your. Experience. It's true. It is not a universal truth, and to pretend it is is disrespectful in the extreme.

> Teaching is also a leave your work at work job, because its a job.

Perhaps for you it is, but for others the negatives can't just be left at the door.

> I dont let my IS get to me to the point of eating KFC and B&J all weekend.

I of course did not say it was like that for everyone, I said "it's far harder to do that with teaching," and "the lows CAN leave you distraught". Note that I did not say WILL.

@boss14

As you can see from Psyguy's responses, there can be a lack of trust and confidence in colleagues that you wouldn't necessarily find in an office job. I find it hard to believe that his personal view of younger teachers wouldn't affect how he treats them in the workplace. To have to work with or for someone like that - someone who says "young ITs dont know what they are doing" - when you're far and away better than some of the older teachers is demoralising (trust me, I know from what I speak).

I have no doubt some office managers are like that, but teaching is something that has an element of emotional investment, and where office or retail is a "leave your work at work" kind-of job, it's far harder to do that with teaching. The highs are higher, but the lows can leave you distraught and eating nothing but KFC and Ben & Jerrys over a weekend, and the working environment plays a large part in that.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Reu
>
> Educator credentials are not a vast investment in time or coin. A one year
> PGCE or ACP or PB program will get you a credential, and induction is just
> another year.

When, pray tell, did you do your education qualification? Because I can tell you that mine (taken at a red-brick university in the UK last decade), was hard work. And Induction may be "just another year", but it can be immensely difficult to get a job straight-out of a PGCE in order to get your Induction, when there's so many other teachers who already have it. No indeed, it is an investment in time, coin, confidence, and emotional stability.

> Complete an application thats a day,
> and take an exam (such as PRAXIS) thats another day and a number of US
> states will give you a professional educator credential.

Sure, in the US. But British Curriculum international schools require a PGCE, good Bachelors in the subject you're teaching, and minimum 2 years experience. Excepting new teachers who are in PGCE placements, every international teacher in a British Curriculum school should (emphasis "should") have been committed to 4 years minimum teaching-related, and another 3 or 4 years of Undergraduate degree. That ain't will-nilly. And that only puts you on the lowest rung of pay, too.

> Younger ITs are more drama prone. They are the generation of ITs that take
> pictures of their food and then post it to FB and blast it out on there
> twitter and snap chat, as if no ones seen what food looks like.
> Older ITs tend to NOT constantly broadcast every single aspect of their
> lives to everyone around them.

God, what an awful generalised view that is. I sincerely hope you're not teaching in any school currently, because such a negative opinion does nothing for colleague's confidence, or the profession as a whole. I know younger teachers who are so incredibly invested in work that they barely get time to relax.

No doubt, schools are a bit of both our viewpoints, since we've experienced vastly different things. But in that case, perhaps you (and I!) ought to be less "MY view is the correct one", yes? :)

> Your not really seeing the world your just exchanging one location for
> another, youre not an explorer or adventure, or journalist. Youre moving
> what you call home from one location to another. Most ITs really dont get
> to travel except during long holiday breaks, in which case IE is no
> different than DE.

Generalised again. Depending upon location, long-weekends give ample opportunity to visit historic sites within the country, and city-breaks nearby. And that's just long-weekends due to national or religious holiday. Someone in China could easily take a half-term break in Indonesia, Cambodia, Malaysia, for example.

---

boss14 wrote:
>
> But plenty of office job environments are toxic as well. That's why I was curious to
> know how the negativity in teaching at ISs *compares* to typical office jobs

It's too broad to really give a simple answer to. I've worked retail alongside awful people, worked office alongside people who just keep their heads down and do the job, and worked in schools that are both those things and toxic besides, as well as working alongside fantastic teachers who are genuinely happy to be in school. I do think that school environments are far more personalised places. By that, I mean that they rely far more on whether you "click" with colleagues and senior staff than an office job. Which is unfortunate, but is the same whether teaching in my home country, or internationally.