Thank you all for the advice and insight. Gives me plenty to consider and strive for these next few years.

sid wrote:
> Be careful. It could hurt if it reads as if you equate a school newspaper
> with school leadership. Spin it, or leave it off. Don't just drop it there
> for a random reader to interpret on their own.


Hadn't considered that perspective. I believe I know how to spin it. It's not going to be a key factor that would get me job x or y. More so I see it as a tangible example of different strengths I hope to convey. I'm not doing this because I think it will be some gamechanger on the cv. Frankly, I just think it'll be a fun challenge to take on.

shadowjack wrote:
> danielleu91 - if you think that's what makes school leadership (coaching
> and newspaper and committee), the only one that might be valuable is the
> committee. Coaching isn't, school newspaper isn't.
>
> You know what else helps? Learning different curriculum. Expanding your
> teaching repertoire. Teaching different grade levels. All of those things,
> which usually don't happen in two years, help make a well-rounded
> administrator. Look for opportunities that involve those and get involved
> in things like curriculum development, all-school activities, committee
> leadership roles, etc and that will help.


More so indicating that I'm not simply resting on the fact I have a classroom role, but rather trying to immerse myself in enhancing the school culture, and leading programs beyond the classroom. I think I could spin the newspaper experience, especially if it involves building a relationship with local businesses to help sponsor the paper. At the very least, it can't hurt to have on the resume.

I'm going to try to see if I can work my way into some curriculum development, and intend to continue doing cross-subject, grade, observations of more experienced teachers at the school.

Basmad6 wrote:
> Please spend more time in the classroom. Then move into a coaching position
> and THEN consider whether or not you may be an affective administrator.
> Four yrs is not nearly enough time to understand the classroom. Spend some
> time coaching to get your feet wet to understand what leadership is like
> and coping with the demands of teachers, students and families. There's way
> more to admin then what is assumed and we're surrounded by too many jr
> admin who have been given roles they are grossly underprepared for.


For what it's worth, I coached two sports this year, and plan to continue doing so. I also volunteered to be in a group of teachers and admin that are planning the rollout of a schoolwide "house program", and I've gotten the green light to start a school newspaper next year.

PsyGuy wrote:
> I dont agree much with @Sid regarding the doctorate, maybe by the time you
> are there it will have become a defacto standard, as its growing especially
> in tier 1 ISs and more so in elite tier IS, but there are still HOSs of
> tier ISs with Masters degrees. You have a ways to go before your there
> anyway. The other side of the doctorate coin is that once you have a
> doctorate its harder to find classroom IT positions, especially with an Edu
> doctorate, which would make it more difficult to build classroom
> experience.


I wouldn't pursue a doctorate until I began a domestic admin role, at which point I wouldn't think it's productive to return to the classroom.

sid wrote:
> If you really want to be competitive for high-level posts, you'll need a
> doctorate. This is either an absolute requirement or a very strong
> tradition at almost all of the best and/or largest. For a Principal post,
> or a HOS in a "basic" international school, a masters will do,
> but for the truly high-flying, a doctorate.
>
> Four years is a very limited amount of time in the classroom. A, it won't
> give you the depth of knowledge and experience you'll need to properly
> support teachers in your new role. I can't imagine doing my job without
> having spent far more time than that in the classroom. In my experience,
> most teachers are barely out of the survival phase after two years, and
> just starting to get some decent skills after four. Very few are advanced,
> and even those lack exposure to the wider variety of scenarios a leader
> will have to deal with. B, it won't make you competitive overseas. It's
> possible to get basic admin jobs after four years, but again, the
> high-flying stuff will want more. It's hard to make the jump from teaching
> to leadership, and there are plenty of candidates out there with 10+ years
> in the classroom, including some years as HOD, who still can't find their
> break. Not that they aren't ready, it's just that there more interested
> parties than there are posts.
>
> If I were you, I'd plan on a longer path to leadership. It's more typical.


I figured as much, regarding the doctorate. I've found a masters program that looks solid. Going to start looking at Ph.D options over the summer.

I get the importance that experience holds, especially in this field. Four years is a limited amount of teaching experience, but the few districts I've started looking at only require three for their vice principals, which is where I'm looking to start domestically in regards to admin.

shadowjack wrote:
> Move into admin domestically, then move to IE - but be prepared that you
> might have to move down a level if you are going to a decent school so they
> can assess you.


Makes sense

PsyGuy wrote:
> When you say HOS/Director, can you give us a better picture of what you
> envision? There is a big difference between the principal/HOS of a small
> local IS where your the senior and executive leader and you do everything
> and being the HOS of a large or well established IS where your the
> executive leadership of dozens. Understand that the vast majority of ISs
> even elite tier 1 ISs are relatively small (tiny even) compared to some of
> the massive consolidated DE districts with central office complexes. You
> will find ASs that have superintendents but its really just them and a few
> principals/APs/DP/VPs add the counselor and the tech director and the
> librarian and you can get everyone around a board table. Thats very
> different than a district that needs two tables just to get the
> superintendent and the crew of assistant, associate and deputy
> superintendents into one room together, and havent even gotten to the
> coordinators and directors at central office, much less the campus
> principals and APs/VP/DPs. They are very different organizational
> structures to navigate.
>
> There are 3 general avenues into leadership in IE:
> 1) Grow In: You start at an IS as an IT, you work well with leadership,
> parents and ownership, and then when there is an opening you get the job
> because ownership trusts you and leadership and parents like you. This
> pathway is faster at lower tier ISs, where there is a lot of turnover and
> longevity often means your only one of the few staff to renew.
> 2) Work In: You get a M.Ed in Ed.Ld, you add a credential, you build some
> leadership or management experience and you work your way up into
> leadership. This may and often requires some work in DE. This is the
> pathway that accounts for the majority of leadership. Candidates were
> leadership in DE, and they were hired as leadership in IE.
> 3) Edge In: You make friends and build a network, maybe you marry into, but
> someone in ownership likes you and gives you the job, or someone in
> leadership helps you get into the job. This is the least common path into
> leadership.
>
> Assuming this Masters in Ed.Ld provides a credential through the regulating
> authority, it depends what you want to do. If your goal is HOS at one of
> the elite or first tier ISs than you are better staying in DE and moving up
> though DE. The reasons being:
> 1) Your more likely to have more opportunities to get into leadership
> simply because of the vastness of the organization. The hardest part of
> leadership is getting that first break, but once youre in, moving around
> among ISs and into positions of more responsibility is easier.
> 2) Those opportunities at 1st elite tier ISs are relatively few, executive
> leadership tend to stay for long periods of time, often they retire out of
> those positions. When those vacancies become available and your a viable
> candidate it will be easier for you to leave DE for IE than it will be for
> you to leave IE, especially if youre in the middle of or start of a typical
> 3 years contract for senior leadership.
> 3) There is a preference for ownership to hire externally at 1st and elite
> tier ISs as opposed to internally. Most ownership wants to bring in new
> ideas, vision and new value as opposed to someone in senior leadership
> moving up. If your at a 1st/elite tier IS as an AP or as principal you may
> get the courtesy of an interview but youre probably not on their short list
> to move up.
>
> If however your goal is a small IS or of a lower tier and thus moving into
> leadership in IE sooner, than your better off getting the Masters and the
> credential and moving into IE. These ISs have much shorter attrition, as
> those leadership have goals that require them to move on as well, creating
> the opportunities for new leadership to make their bones. In those
> situations being there and being known and well thought of is often all you
> need to move into leadership, even if the executive leadership (HOS) means
> supervising a handful of ITs, an AP and a secretary/office manager in a
> tucked away primary IS somewhere.

Superintendent/Chief Executive duties but on a smaller scale than what you see in larger domestic districts. Something along the lines of Director at WAB or HOS at ISB are the top examples that come to mind. I'm well aware those are considered elite schools, and in the case of China, I don't have much interest in any school. However, I would like to have a similar type role at a school that's generally regarded as being T1 or high T2.

Sticking it out domestically until I can fulfill a principal contract seems the best option for moving into a lateral position at a respectable IE school off the bat. From your outside blood hiring perspective, to get to an elite chief ex. position, it might be better to try and make a mark at a couple t2 schools, or a single school with multiple renewals and hope for an opening. Competition and timing will always make it tough. Even if I couldn't get into an elite school, general admin compensation packages grant me more options in the areas I'd be willing to live at for a few years.

In the process of wrapping up my initial year in DE and I have found myself feeling reflective regarding the past year. Thinking about changes, improvements I would like to make for the upcoming year, and reconsidering what my ultimate goals within the profession are. The more I have given thought to the latter, the more I see myself moving towards an administrative role long term, specifically as a HOS/Director in IE.

I have a general plan in place following my second year in the classroom to apply for a M.Ed in an Ed Admin program that should take ~15 months, putting me on track to receive the degree in the Fall of my fourth year. It is at this point that I am trying to decide what the best way forward to reach my HOS goal is.

Scenario A: After earning a M.Ed in Ed Admin and four years in the classroom, either transfer within the district (top 20 largest in US) into an AP position, or look elsewhere. A few quality references and four years experience should be enough to find a decent AP/VP position domestically without too much trouble. After 2-3 years, transition into a similar position in IE.

Scenario B: Having received the M.Ed in October of year four, pull a reverse-Fievel and embark on the voyage into IE Administration. Optimistically, I luck or can sell myself into a junior admin post in a low T2 school that I can work my way up. Realistically, it's possible the best I get is senior admin at bottom of the barrel T3, or junior admin at a bad T3 school.

Given those two options, what would you do if the intention is to eventually reach the HOS ranks?