Psyguy

"Why doesnt the Canadian government fly some Special Operations people into Indonesia and get Neil out?"

Because countries do not do this for individual legal cases for regular citizens. This statement is idiotic.

"Do you have any video EVIDENCE of corruption?"

I don't need any. All I would need is to demonstrate that correct procedure has not been carried out in this case. And yes, I do know for a fact that this is enough to have a case thrown out of any reputable court system. Anyone with a basic legal understing knows this. You have been provided with scores of reasons and examples of why normal investigative and legal procedure was not followed but you continue to ignore this. The point about the legal NGOs mentioned is that there is ample evidence from these organisations of cases where proper legal procedures have not been followed - just like this case. EVIDENCE for the defense has been deemed inadmissable for no reason.

"Is your child psychology expert an expert on psychology?"

Bahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahah…………draws breath…………..hahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahah

"or on how to conduct an investigation and secure a conviction. It would appear the investigators were doing a great job of getting a conviction, those are the type of officers that get promotions"

So what you're arguing is that, even if police officers coerce children into concocting stories, this is simply excellent police work. Fantastic logic.

"My position that they are guilty is strongly supported by fact, and my judicial/legal expert is the presiding Judge in the Jakarta Southern District court, and the difference between my expert and your experts, is that my experts opinion is one that matters."

Right. So a judge's verdict, by itself, consitutes a "fact" in the case. Therefore, no judge has ever made an incorrect decision in the history of law, because that would no longer make the guilt of the accused, a "fact. Furthermore, a judge that makes references to the existence of magic stones in her verdict is an export that you trust? This keeps getting better and better.

It frightens me that you're a teacher. You cannot string a coherent or rational sentence together.

Psyguy

You are clearly not an expert in legal matters. I'll tell you who are; Amnesty international, Transparency International, Human Rights Watch and a whole host of other international and human rights lawyers who have resoundingly condemmed the legal process in this trail, as well as the legal system in Indonesia - this includes indonesian legal experts.

Nor by your previous post do you demonstrate any understanding of the phrase "rule of law". This phrase relates to the consistent application of existing laws, not whether or not a law (and the penalties for breaking it) are stricter in some countries than they are in others. The spirit of 'rule of law' is that laws are applied consistently, and do not privilege particular individuals or groups over others. Your example of Singapore has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of rule of law.

You are also not an expert in child psychology. I'll tell you who is: An Australian expert who has strongly argued that the police questioning of the alleged victims was entirely inappropriate and used leading and suggestive questions. Of course, the prosecution manipulated it so she could not provide evidence. There is a whole host of psychological literature to support the phenonenon of children actually believing they have been abused through suggestive questioning. This last reason, by itself, and amongst others, would have this case thrown out of any court system in the developed world.

A final word. There is a significant distinction between the presumption of innocence and a fair trial. What people are outraged by is that proper procedures have not been followed - even by Indonesian standards. On the basis of the evidence we have been furnished with through the public record, as well as what we know of the prodecures that have been followed, there is almost zero chance that this would have resulted in a conviction in a reputable court system.

Ditto twoteachers. In fact, I regularly drank tap water in KL.

PsyGuy, you are forgetting that the Indonesians have not even applied their own standards of jurisprudence in this case. You can take a moral relativist stance all you like, in this case it makes you a moral coward. By your standards of logic I could accuse you of the same crimes here on this forum and you would have no way of proving your innocence. I can go on to suggest - like you have - that my accusation alone should tarnish your reputation. You should now never work in an international school again and rightly so. You would very quickly change your tune if I discovered your personal details and spread rumours about you.

It strikes me as completely insane that you can use second hand information to make dogmatic value judgements about a school, accuse posters of being 'admin cheerleaders' by their posts, yet remain defiant against a tide of evidence suggesting that this whole case is a cynical money grab.

Just what is it that you are trying to prove to people on this forum? I stronly believe that you need to seek professional help.

PsyGuy

"assumptions are not opinions"

Nor are assumptions necessarily true, by definition.

For example, I assume that you are illiterate, ignorant, pig-headed and mentally unbalanced. It doesn't necessary make it true, as I'm only working with the evidence I've collected from your posts. However, I suspect that you're simply a wind-up merchant, pretending to be a complete nut-job, as I find it hard to believe that your posts could actually be genuine.

Psy Guy

Again, please provide data. Standard deviation of what? You do understand that statistics involves measurement and, therefore, NUMBERS, don't you? Give us some actual values. What are you measuring?

1) "this isnt a measurement issue in obtaining data its how the data is tabulated"

WHAT DATA? AGAIN REFER TO MY FIRST POINT.

2) "The tier system existence is not subjective it exists"

WHERE? SHOW US PROOF!

3) "Examination results are one and only one factor in a robust system. They are not the only one"

EXACTLY. SO WHAT OTHER MEASURABLE CRITERIA DO YOU HAVE DATA FOR?

4) "tiers dont exist because their subjective and admins dont agree on them so they dont exist. The tier structure has utility to educators, and we will keep using it."

THIS DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS POINT (2)

"Your position is essentially UWCSEA is 1st tier"

SHOW ME WHERE I HAVE SAID THIS. QUOTE ME.

Stop embarrassing yourself!

Psy Guy.

A Criterion: (n) 'a standard why which something may be judged'. (OED). If you had any form of statistical literacy, you would know that any discussion of percentiles, curves or standard deviation requires values or quantifiable measurements to be -. You have not provided a single way of establishing your "data" in order to "shape and form" it, as you so put it.

Your attempts to obfuscate through pseudo statistical and pseudo scientific language, in addition to your vast armoury of red-herrings and non-sequiturs, do not remove the fact that you have not provided a objective justification for why UWC Singapore is a "2nd Tier" school. You've also employed the burden-of-proof fallacy - suggesting that others need to disprove your position, without the need to actually justify your own position. Remember that it is you that advanced the argument that UWC Singapore is a 2nd Tier school, yet you still fail to tell us why.

The fact remains that the 'Teir' "system" is your own subjective invention. There is no generally established basis to evaluate a school's relative standing in the community - only hearsay and unreliable anecdotal evidence from current and former staff and parents. And because you yourself have correctly discounted examination results from being a reliable metric, you are left with no real justification for awarding a particular tier.

Perhaps it's time you cut your losses with this argument? It's clear that you have some sort of chip on your shoulder with respect to UWC, which is obviously clouding your judgement.

Wow. This thread is hilarious.

Psy Guy has managed to invent 4 different methodologies for establishing a school's "tier" without actually describing a single criterion or providing a single metric. That's some feat.

Again. Please ignore Psy Guy's advice.

Labour laws have changed in 2013 and loads of English teachers are getting burned through 'Breach of contract' scams. There are increasing numbers of stories of expat teachers spending time in jail for attempting to break contract - particularly if you have signed a contract which includes wage penalties. There are provisions within the laws that can prevent expats from leaving the country whilst civil suits are pending.

Please read the following article to confirm the law changes and the risks associated with them.

http://chinadailymail.com/2013/07/08/ch ... et-expats/

My school principal arrived came back from the Bangkok fair and made some general 'out of interest' comments in our HOD meeting. She said that a theme of chatter amongst administrators was that the quality of candidates was very disappointing in general. Furthermore, she indicated that many administrators have been so disillusioned with the fairs in recent years that they believe the job fair may be on its way out as a primary recruitment tool. Recruiters and admin are starting to explore other more fruitful and cost-effective options for hiring international teachers.

Hi all

I am applying to a school that would like both a covering letter and a statement of educational philosophy, as separate entries onto an online application website. As I have only ever written a covering letter which includes my educational philosophy, I was hopeful for some advice as to the distinction between the two. Here's what I assume:

Covering letter: Why I am specifically interested in the school, what I can offer the school, my skills and experience as they would be relevant to the school, as well as a snapshot of me personally.

Statement: Specifically how I approach teaching and learning. My buy-in to the IB philosophy and Inquiry (Full IB school obviously) which aligns with the school's mission statement.

Is this how people understand it? What's the ideal length of each document?

Many thanks for your help.

I would have to disagree with the first reply. I think a lot of North Americans are confused by the NQT concept. As your NQT year is your first full teaching year post professional qualification, it is considered by a great number of international schools to still count as a full year's experience. I think the misunderstanding by many is a result of not realising that the teacher training year (PGCE) involves a heavy teaching component.

That being said, it will be harder for you without two full years of experience post qualification, but not impossible. Many have done it. I would certainly give it a crack, and would not rule out search associates. You have nothing to lose by trying and I wish you the best of luck

Agree with both posts above. What I would add is that I find it fairly easy to spot the teachers with axes to grind in the reviews, and therefore feel as though I can filter out a lot of the noise. The generic and systemic criticisms tend to be more believable than the personal sob stories. Additionally, there are some reviewers who expertly describe contexts and issues that seem instantly familiar; I certainly pay attention to those.

If nothing else, some of reviews are hilariously entertaining. My favourite is the Albanian International School, where the first reviewer speaks as though she's been subject to medieval torture, only to correct it with a glowing review and a casual mention that she's been recently been promoted to head teacher.

Suzy Q says: "the scope of your courses is limited only by the interest of your students"

This is complete hyperbole of course. In MYP/PYP, departments and year groups are still required to form guiding questions and create the units of inquiry in collaborative agreement with other colleagues. As I expressed above, it's only lazy and deluded teachers, as well as pie-in-the-sky, out-of-touch administrators that preach the intellectually bankrupt 'knowledge is useless' mantra, peddled by many on this board. Skills and key concepts cannot be developed in a knowledge vacuum. The ironic danger with this mis-interpretation of MYP/MYP is that many students are absent of core skills and academic discipline once they are confronted with post-16 rigour.

Furthermore, the notion that the UK education system is so rigid that it drains any creativity from teachers and students is borne from people with childish axes to grind or with hefty chips on the shoulder (I'm not British by the way). Having structured, off-the-shelf curricula does not prevent creative, inquiry based learning - just as much as MYP/PYP does not guarantee it. There is still a very key danger that, with PYP in-particular, poorly designed and implemented units of inquiry do students a massive disservice. Working in what is considered a tier 1 international school, I witness this on a daily basis. Furthermore, every MYP workshop I have ever attended has an alarming majority of very experienced professionals bemoaning the ambiguity and lack of clarity of the guiding documents.

When going to an full IB school, don't be intimidated by zealots who will preach the new dawn of progressive education. If your school has no accountability or consistency within its curriculum, there will be problems. Good learning is still good learning.

From someone who has also made the transition, Yantantether provides a pretty balanced synopsis.

I would add a couple of things. Firstly, it depends on which age level you are teaching. My girlfriend teaches PYP and would concur wholeheartedly with Yantantether's summary. However, at the Diploma end of the spectrum, teachers and students are confronted with the highly prescribed, content driven curriculum, which is identical in most ways to A-Level. In fact, for my own subject, I would argue that the A-Level course is more applied and skills focussed when compared with the highly traditional, highly technical IB diploma course. The contrast between the IB diploma and the very open and often ambiguous MYP scaffold frustrates a lot of professionals who teach both. Teachers used to a standard curriculum have a hard time grasping the concept that the MYP is not a curriculum, but a framework for how your curriculum is designed (by you) to suit the unique context of your school. For people who are used to off-the-shelf curricula like GCSE, this can be daunting and confusing. Furthermore, the MYP documents are unnecessarily convoluted and contradictory in my opinion.

Good, creative, organised and accountable teachers can thrive in an MYP/PYP environment. However, teachers can interpret inquiry based education very loosely - often incorrectly. Some teachers will often remove any guidance and structure on the basis of their rigid interpretation of inquiry, often neglecting basic numeracy and literacy skills. Content is considered anathema to many IB zealots which, again, is contrary to the philosophy of the IB, which still holds content in high regard. To make the MYP consistent and accountable requires quite a lot of planning. Teachers need to be far more collaborative, assessments need to be moderated and departments need to be highly reflective in a very structured way. Otherwise it can be a flowery free-for-all.