@Walter
You keep thinking you know who I am Walter. That was a really fast post, it took all of 21 minutes for you to reply assuming you spent ZERO time writing a response.
Virtually all schools isn't all schools, and those schools that virtually don't have turnover are the top tier elite schools.
Not all schools are good schools, the good schools are actually only a very small minority of international schools. I'm very sure it's important to you that departing schools speak well of your school and administration, I'm also really sure they don't. If you were such a great school you'd be one of those schools that could go years without having to recruit, since if your such a great school why would anyone leave? Thank you though for saying all the right things.
Sure you'd like your departing teachers to be happy and not be miserable, assuming happy didnt cost energy and resources. Why would you expend energy and resources on someone who was going to use that energy and resources to benefit someone else, that's been my vast experience of admins. Every single one of them has an ego that they are the best school, because they are at that school, and someone who wants to leave is broken and probably shouldn't be there anyway.
"Warped, you keep using this word, I do not think it means what you think it means."
I often present several different avenues of advice (my good the bad and the ugly). I don't advocate or make decisions for people, I give them options and they make the choice. I don't hide a course of action just because you or anyone else thinks a certain course of action is the "right thing to do".
@wrldtrvlr123
I should of clarified that several years meant non consecutive years. Last I looked over the data tables, the elite schools averaged a non recruiting year in one out of 5 years.
It compresses the time cycle either way. If you pushed the recruiting cycle forward to align with the late spring resignation cycle in parts of Europe, it would be chaos. Imagine you'd have maybe one or two fairs tops say one in Early june and one in late July. Everyone would have to go. Search has 13 fairs, ISS another 4-5. Even if UNI and the other small fairs kept their schedule, could you imagine aggregating all those teachers and schools in some huge conference center. You couldn't give teachers time at all to decide for a Contract, because if they said no, you would have lost precious time that you can't makeup at a later fair or through web recruiting. Schools wouldn't have time really to vette their candidates, you could argue that the agencies could do that in advance of course. Getting visas for so many teachers at the lower tier school could easily become a round the clock task for HR. what about moving? A lot of teachers would have to scramble to pack up homes, get their kids prepared, and forget about it if you had to cut ally sell a home. I've discussed this with colleagues and associates on several occasions, and the understanding is that no one accept the schools likes the early recruiting cycle, but A later recruiting cycle would be bad for everyone. What would happen is that the fairs would just become the last chance of desperate teachers and schools, and that schools would just adapt a pure distance/online recruiting model.
From my sources ASIJ had some late recruiting outside the fairs (they could have made Bethesda), but it was minor, a medical leave cover, and some last minute part time vacancies as a result of the restructuring that resulted in some loss of medical benefits that some current staff needed to leave to maintain treatment. However, they did ZERO recruiting at the BKK and BOS fairs they attended.
Would you quit?
I think the early deadline for saying when you leave benefits the schools more than the teachers. Yes, some people will get jobs before the jobs fairs but how many are there really? Not loads, not the majority of teachers.
I think this forum helps to make people panic about not having a job by the end of December. There are only a few 'top' schools and they only have a small turnover, so most of us will end up in perfectly decent tier 2 schools and get our jobs at the fairs or sometime in February.
Only part of the IS community go to job fairs. There are other good schools about, that pay fairly well and have reasonable workloads and they don't fill their all their vacancies by end of December. Agencies and schools want us to feel that we need to get job really early or we will have no job come September and so we take anything at the job fairs.
Actually I know 3 couples who have jobs for next year already. They have all been because of contacts in the schools. All are IB schools, 2 are tier 1 schools.
I think this forum helps to make people panic about not having a job by the end of December. There are only a few 'top' schools and they only have a small turnover, so most of us will end up in perfectly decent tier 2 schools and get our jobs at the fairs or sometime in February.
Only part of the IS community go to job fairs. There are other good schools about, that pay fairly well and have reasonable workloads and they don't fill their all their vacancies by end of December. Agencies and schools want us to feel that we need to get job really early or we will have no job come September and so we take anything at the job fairs.
Actually I know 3 couples who have jobs for next year already. They have all been because of contacts in the schools. All are IB schools, 2 are tier 1 schools.
Naming some schools that have gone one year is not nearly the same thing as proving PG's assertion that it is normal for top tier schools to go two years and more without recruiting.
I daresay that each year there are a small number of schools (percentage wise) that don't have to recruit. It would be foolish to think that it doesn't happen.
I assert with equal confidence that it is far from normal for top schools to do this routinely. Since no one has succeeded in naming even one school that did it for two years running, much less a large number of elite schools, there doesn't seem to be much of a case.
I daresay that each year there are a small number of schools (percentage wise) that don't have to recruit. It would be foolish to think that it doesn't happen.
I assert with equal confidence that it is far from normal for top schools to do this routinely. Since no one has succeeded in naming even one school that did it for two years running, much less a large number of elite schools, there doesn't seem to be much of a case.
Dave, this is beyond silly!
"I'm very sure it's important to you that departing schools speak well of your school and administration, I'm also really sure they don't. If you were such a great school you'd be one of those schools that could go years without having to recruit, since if your such a great school why would anyone leave?"
Firstly, I presume you mean "departing teachers", otherwise your post makes even less sense than usual.
Secondly, those teachers who do leave our school tend to speak very well of it, and very useful recruitment tools for us.
Thirdly, the premise of the last sentence is utterly wrong and reveals how little you know about international education:
1) People tend to become international teachers because they have the travel bug. They are, by nature, itinerant workers and aren't looking to stay in any one place for the rest of their lives.
2) Few, of course, are as "itinerant" as you, since you choose - or the choice is made for you - to move on in a matter of months rather than years.
3) Some teachers do decide to stay on at an international school when they find a spot that really suits them.
4) It is more likely that this will happen in Western Europe or in the few international schools in North America.
5) That isn't in any way because these schools are "better" in any way than international schools in other continents. It is more a case of people finding a culture and a community that works for them rather than the school itself.
6) Most heads of these schools actually wish that they did have more turnover than they do - because turnover helps regenerate and revitalize schools.
7) Nonetheless, all of the top schools are out looking every year, because someone is always leaving. Best school in UK: ASL - they hired last year; best school in France: ASP - they recruited last year; best school in Switzerland: ISZ - they recruited last year; best school in Germany: FIS - they recruited last year etc etc etc. Tell us from your ¨data¨which top school didn´t hire.
8) You keep us all up to date with the top schools in other parts of the world. What did you tell us is the top school in Bangkok? ISB. How many teachers do you think they hired in the last three years? More than 10? More than 20? The answer is more than 60. Do you think that makes them any less the top school? What´s the top school in Singapore? SAS. Guess how many teachers they have hired in the last three years. In both cases I am talking about overseas hire full time teachers. And you can´t explain this away by talking of growth. Both these school populations have been stable in this time.
9) There are always exceptional situations, and Japan is one of these. International schools in Japan are suffering declining enrolment because international companies are pulling out of the country. It´s too expensive to do business there, and the economy has been struggling for nearly twenty years. Obviously that means that there are very few vacancies as these schools, ASIJ included, downsize, but even then most will have some openings. Please don´t misconstrue the shortage of avalable positions as some kind of testimony to the quality of these schools. It´s just not true.
10) And of course I know who you are Dave. Funnily enough, I was on the SEARCH site yesterday and noticed that you are no longer on display. Does this mean that you have pulled out of SEARCH? Or is there another explanation?
Firstly, I presume you mean "departing teachers", otherwise your post makes even less sense than usual.
Secondly, those teachers who do leave our school tend to speak very well of it, and very useful recruitment tools for us.
Thirdly, the premise of the last sentence is utterly wrong and reveals how little you know about international education:
1) People tend to become international teachers because they have the travel bug. They are, by nature, itinerant workers and aren't looking to stay in any one place for the rest of their lives.
2) Few, of course, are as "itinerant" as you, since you choose - or the choice is made for you - to move on in a matter of months rather than years.
3) Some teachers do decide to stay on at an international school when they find a spot that really suits them.
4) It is more likely that this will happen in Western Europe or in the few international schools in North America.
5) That isn't in any way because these schools are "better" in any way than international schools in other continents. It is more a case of people finding a culture and a community that works for them rather than the school itself.
6) Most heads of these schools actually wish that they did have more turnover than they do - because turnover helps regenerate and revitalize schools.
7) Nonetheless, all of the top schools are out looking every year, because someone is always leaving. Best school in UK: ASL - they hired last year; best school in France: ASP - they recruited last year; best school in Switzerland: ISZ - they recruited last year; best school in Germany: FIS - they recruited last year etc etc etc. Tell us from your ¨data¨which top school didn´t hire.
8) You keep us all up to date with the top schools in other parts of the world. What did you tell us is the top school in Bangkok? ISB. How many teachers do you think they hired in the last three years? More than 10? More than 20? The answer is more than 60. Do you think that makes them any less the top school? What´s the top school in Singapore? SAS. Guess how many teachers they have hired in the last three years. In both cases I am talking about overseas hire full time teachers. And you can´t explain this away by talking of growth. Both these school populations have been stable in this time.
9) There are always exceptional situations, and Japan is one of these. International schools in Japan are suffering declining enrolment because international companies are pulling out of the country. It´s too expensive to do business there, and the economy has been struggling for nearly twenty years. Obviously that means that there are very few vacancies as these schools, ASIJ included, downsize, but even then most will have some openings. Please don´t misconstrue the shortage of avalable positions as some kind of testimony to the quality of these schools. It´s just not true.
10) And of course I know who you are Dave. Funnily enough, I was on the SEARCH site yesterday and noticed that you are no longer on display. Does this mean that you have pulled out of SEARCH? Or is there another explanation?
[quote="fine dude"]Thanks for your comprehensive response, PsyGuy. Let's say Teacher Bob says 'Yes' in November and then he applies to a new job and without Bob's knowledge, his prospective employer contacts his current School Head for a reference. The School Head then confronts Bob and screws up his chances of finding a new job. That also means this teacher damaged his reputation at his present school. What should Bob's strategy be to find a new job in the post-confrontation period? Thanks in advance.[/quote]
Just thought I'd give you the benefit of my experience, which is 5 international schools (2 would be classified as Tier 1, 2 as Tier 2 and one was a dodgy for profit operation).
I can assure you that at every one of those schools, there was nothing to fear from informing admin of your intention to leave, or even that you were thinking of leaving. I can also assure you that even the for profit admin were willing to help teachers look for the next job. This usually involved sending an email to their admin contact overseas telling them to take a close look at the resume of Teacher Bob, who has applied for a job.
This is different to working at home, where admin may be a little less accepting of teacher movements. But in the international scene, it is the norm.
The only exception I could think of would be if the school had spent a fortune on your PD on the understanding that you'd stay at the school for a while longer to help develop a program. This happened at my last school, and did piss the admin off. However, they still gave the teacher an honest (and therefore positive) reference and that teacher is now working at an absolutely stellar school.
Of course, their willingness to help will always be determined to some extent by the job you have done for them.
I have always been very diplomatic when my boss had asked why I am thinking of leaving. It is not advisable to tell him or her that it is because the school is terrible and lacking leadership and direction!
One thing I have noticed at my last few schools is that with the advent of Skype, schools are very keen to hire early. And they are keen for current teachers to help attract quality teachers they know of to the school.
There is no benefit to an administrator to piss off their teachers, as they will become advocates against coming to your school. This does not mean that misguided administrators will not piss off teachers - however, it will not be over the point that concerns you.
On the subject of extensions, teachers at all of my past schools have been able to wangle an extra week (usually up to the last day before the holiday break).
To touch very lightly on the PG-Walter comments (and I mean very lightly), there is a real difference between schools in Western Europe and other international schools. PG honed in on schools in Europe and on ASIJ in Japan, which has been rocked by the double whammy of the economic downturn and the terrible earthquake.
Having worked at both, I found that schools in WE had a far higher percentage of local hires, or teachers who had pretty much settled in that country. The reason for the high % of local hires was mainly because it is very hard to make ends meet financially at these schools. In my experience, a very large % of the teachers at my school (in Brussels) had spouses who were working for NATO, or the EU, or for a multinational. The spouse covered the housing and most expenses, and the teacher salary was used to augment what was a nice life for most of them. These folks did not leave.
As a result, turnover was quite low. I'd say it would be similar to good private schools in the UK or Australia.
My schools outside WE (my experience is mainly in Asia) have much higher turnover. For eg, my current school is having what admin call a "light year" with low levels of turnover - only 23 teachers are leaving. It is usually 40+.
Just thought I'd give you the benefit of my experience, which is 5 international schools (2 would be classified as Tier 1, 2 as Tier 2 and one was a dodgy for profit operation).
I can assure you that at every one of those schools, there was nothing to fear from informing admin of your intention to leave, or even that you were thinking of leaving. I can also assure you that even the for profit admin were willing to help teachers look for the next job. This usually involved sending an email to their admin contact overseas telling them to take a close look at the resume of Teacher Bob, who has applied for a job.
This is different to working at home, where admin may be a little less accepting of teacher movements. But in the international scene, it is the norm.
The only exception I could think of would be if the school had spent a fortune on your PD on the understanding that you'd stay at the school for a while longer to help develop a program. This happened at my last school, and did piss the admin off. However, they still gave the teacher an honest (and therefore positive) reference and that teacher is now working at an absolutely stellar school.
Of course, their willingness to help will always be determined to some extent by the job you have done for them.
I have always been very diplomatic when my boss had asked why I am thinking of leaving. It is not advisable to tell him or her that it is because the school is terrible and lacking leadership and direction!
One thing I have noticed at my last few schools is that with the advent of Skype, schools are very keen to hire early. And they are keen for current teachers to help attract quality teachers they know of to the school.
There is no benefit to an administrator to piss off their teachers, as they will become advocates against coming to your school. This does not mean that misguided administrators will not piss off teachers - however, it will not be over the point that concerns you.
On the subject of extensions, teachers at all of my past schools have been able to wangle an extra week (usually up to the last day before the holiday break).
To touch very lightly on the PG-Walter comments (and I mean very lightly), there is a real difference between schools in Western Europe and other international schools. PG honed in on schools in Europe and on ASIJ in Japan, which has been rocked by the double whammy of the economic downturn and the terrible earthquake.
Having worked at both, I found that schools in WE had a far higher percentage of local hires, or teachers who had pretty much settled in that country. The reason for the high % of local hires was mainly because it is very hard to make ends meet financially at these schools. In my experience, a very large % of the teachers at my school (in Brussels) had spouses who were working for NATO, or the EU, or for a multinational. The spouse covered the housing and most expenses, and the teacher salary was used to augment what was a nice life for most of them. These folks did not leave.
As a result, turnover was quite low. I'd say it would be similar to good private schools in the UK or Australia.
My schools outside WE (my experience is mainly in Asia) have much higher turnover. For eg, my current school is having what admin call a "light year" with low levels of turnover - only 23 teachers are leaving. It is usually 40+.
Reply
1) No, people may start as international teachers because they want to travel, when they stay they are looking to be in their dream place and then they stay. Usually either a top tier school or one of the highly desirable regions. What you describe is more the ESL teacher market, not the IS teacher circuit. Yes teachers stay at GOOD schools, thats why the good schools, which have earned being good schools and usually fall into the top tier schools have LOW turnover and BAD schools have high turnover, meaning people WANT to leave.
2) Western Europe, Japan, and Hong Kong. I Cant comment on the longevity of foreign teachers in the USA.
3) NO, Walter thats exactly what it means. Good schools ahve low turnover, and bad schools have high turnover. Teachers leave because their options are better elsewhere.Thats the truth of every industry across the globe. If you have a lot of turnover, your school sucks.
4) OK now your just disagreeing to diasagree. Which is it heads want a constant influx of fresh faces and ideas or they want stability and teachers worth investing in. Cant have it both ways.
What do you mean "they wish", they run the school. Let me show you how it works
"MEMO
Date:
To: All Overseas Recruited Faculty
The board has determined that no teaching contracts will be renewed or extended for the upcoming (insert year) year. The administration of _____ International School thanks all of you for your dedication and service."
No wishes needed, no magic lamps, Genies, Fairies or Leprechauns needed. Takes 5 minutes.
5) No Walter you dont know what you think you know. I use to be surprised that their was someone in the Search database that somehow matches that description. Ive recently had it suggested to me that you just made the whole thing up to give yourself some credibility. More of your fear mongering, but you keep thinking that.
Im a full member of Search
2) Western Europe, Japan, and Hong Kong. I Cant comment on the longevity of foreign teachers in the USA.
3) NO, Walter thats exactly what it means. Good schools ahve low turnover, and bad schools have high turnover. Teachers leave because their options are better elsewhere.Thats the truth of every industry across the globe. If you have a lot of turnover, your school sucks.
4) OK now your just disagreeing to diasagree. Which is it heads want a constant influx of fresh faces and ideas or they want stability and teachers worth investing in. Cant have it both ways.
What do you mean "they wish", they run the school. Let me show you how it works
"MEMO
Date:
To: All Overseas Recruited Faculty
The board has determined that no teaching contracts will be renewed or extended for the upcoming (insert year) year. The administration of _____ International School thanks all of you for your dedication and service."
No wishes needed, no magic lamps, Genies, Fairies or Leprechauns needed. Takes 5 minutes.
5) No Walter you dont know what you think you know. I use to be surprised that their was someone in the Search database that somehow matches that description. Ive recently had it suggested to me that you just made the whole thing up to give yourself some credibility. More of your fear mongering, but you keep thinking that.
Im a full member of Search
[quote="senator"]Walter and Dave:
Just kiss and make up, will you.[/quote]
Ha ... now that is not going to happen;)
In this case, I do have to side to Walter.
I think PG is just having a bit of pre-christmas fun with comments like - if your school have high turnover, then it follows that it sucks.
Let's take a few examples:
Hong Kong IS and Taipei AS - have about 20 vacancies on their websites
Singapore AS - when I was looking for a job last year, its vacancy list went to 4 pages
Jakarta IS - hired 42 new teachers this year
IS Bangkok - hired a similar number last year (a friend was one of them!).
I am not sure any of those schools "suck" (although there have been mumblings about HKIS).
What probably sucks is living in the cities of many of these schools. Jakarta is not Rome! And as PG often tells us, Singapore is a shopping mall;)
On the other hand, IS Berne may be a dodgy school (who knows) but the location certainly does not suck. I think I could put up with a sucky school in Paris or Rome or Barcelona for a couple of years, if it meant I could live in one of those wonderful cities.
High Turnover can, of course, indicate something is very wrong. I was job hunting last year and recall how there were very few vacancies at Shanghai AS Pudong campus, but there were a heap at the Puxi campus. Relative campus sizes was a factor ... but unhappiness with the divisional principal at Puxi was probably a big influence as well.
Walter's comment about admin wishing for higher turnover is something I can support too. They can not just sack teachers.
In Belgium, teachers get tenure after 1 year (that was the case 10 years ago anyway). It was very hard to move anyone on once they had tenure. The admin at my school encountered a lot of resistance from many of the teachers who had been there a fair while.
I recall a teacher sending an email that basically alleged the principal was having an affair with a parent. Even then, the principal intimated to me that it would be too complicated to fire her. A public apology got her off the hook on that score!
Anyway, I have forgotten what any of this has to do with the original poster's questions;)
Merry Christmas ... or Happy Holidays:)
Just kiss and make up, will you.[/quote]
Ha ... now that is not going to happen;)
In this case, I do have to side to Walter.
I think PG is just having a bit of pre-christmas fun with comments like - if your school have high turnover, then it follows that it sucks.
Let's take a few examples:
Hong Kong IS and Taipei AS - have about 20 vacancies on their websites
Singapore AS - when I was looking for a job last year, its vacancy list went to 4 pages
Jakarta IS - hired 42 new teachers this year
IS Bangkok - hired a similar number last year (a friend was one of them!).
I am not sure any of those schools "suck" (although there have been mumblings about HKIS).
What probably sucks is living in the cities of many of these schools. Jakarta is not Rome! And as PG often tells us, Singapore is a shopping mall;)
On the other hand, IS Berne may be a dodgy school (who knows) but the location certainly does not suck. I think I could put up with a sucky school in Paris or Rome or Barcelona for a couple of years, if it meant I could live in one of those wonderful cities.
High Turnover can, of course, indicate something is very wrong. I was job hunting last year and recall how there were very few vacancies at Shanghai AS Pudong campus, but there were a heap at the Puxi campus. Relative campus sizes was a factor ... but unhappiness with the divisional principal at Puxi was probably a big influence as well.
Walter's comment about admin wishing for higher turnover is something I can support too. They can not just sack teachers.
In Belgium, teachers get tenure after 1 year (that was the case 10 years ago anyway). It was very hard to move anyone on once they had tenure. The admin at my school encountered a lot of resistance from many of the teachers who had been there a fair while.
I recall a teacher sending an email that basically alleged the principal was having an affair with a parent. Even then, the principal intimated to me that it would be too complicated to fire her. A public apology got her off the hook on that score!
Anyway, I have forgotten what any of this has to do with the original poster's questions;)
Merry Christmas ... or Happy Holidays:)
Davy, Davy, Davy
I struggle to believe that even you could write something as brainless as this:
"MEMO
Date:
To: All Overseas Recruited Faculty
The board has determined that no teaching contracts will be renewed or extended for the upcoming (insert year) year. The administration of _____ International School thanks all of you for your dedication and service."
No wishes needed, no magic lamps, Genies, Fairies or Leprechauns needed. Takes 5 minutes."
I thought you said you had worked in Europe? Sounds to me like you were working on Fantasy Island if you think a head in Europe could send a memo like this to the faculty. This is the land of protective labor law. Once a teacher has tenure, he or she is practically irremovable. It is only in parts of the world where teachers are hired on fixed term contracts that school heads have any real flexibility about engineering a change of faculty.
I note that you didn't hazard a guess about the number of new teachers at SAS in the last three years...the answer is more than 100. According to your logic, that makes SAS a bad school - along with IS Bangkok. In fact a turnover of about 10% a year is part of what makes these schools so good - and the corresponding lack of turnover in Western European and Japanese schools is what holds them back.
Let me explain why. Schools become great because of the quality of the faculty. Of course there are other contributing factors: quality of leadership; facilities; resources; a supportive community; a stable environment etc etc but it is the classroom learning experience that is at the heart of a top class school - and that is largely down to the teacher. Not every teacher one hires starts off as good; not every good teacher stays good. Top schools spend a lot of money on professional development, and top administrators work with teachers who need support, but this investment in personnel doesn't always pay off. That's why every year, top schools may say to some teachers "Thanks for what you've done; now it's time for you to find a fresh challenge." The school can then go out to try to find a replacement who can give what the kids need. Any such conversation in Europe would take you to the labor court in about 60 minutes, which is why too many schools here have a rump (small or large) of teachers who really shouldn't still be in the job.
I should be clear that still the majority of those who leave great schools like SAS and ISB don't leave under these circumstances. They do so because their adventure in that part of the world is over and it's time to move on. No one should become an international teacher in order to take up permanent residence in the first country they go to. Meanwhile, the influx, every year, of bright, sparky teachers determined to make their mark gives a tremendous charge to schools in many parts of the world.
By the way, I've noticed that when you are asked questions that you don't like, you a) avoid them and b) lash out like a wounded animal.
You never did tell us how many times you have been at a recruitment fair as a recruiter or as a candidate...
Are you really still a full member of SEARCH? Not from what I see.
"MEMO
Date:
To: All Overseas Recruited Faculty
The board has determined that no teaching contracts will be renewed or extended for the upcoming (insert year) year. The administration of _____ International School thanks all of you for your dedication and service."
No wishes needed, no magic lamps, Genies, Fairies or Leprechauns needed. Takes 5 minutes."
I thought you said you had worked in Europe? Sounds to me like you were working on Fantasy Island if you think a head in Europe could send a memo like this to the faculty. This is the land of protective labor law. Once a teacher has tenure, he or she is practically irremovable. It is only in parts of the world where teachers are hired on fixed term contracts that school heads have any real flexibility about engineering a change of faculty.
I note that you didn't hazard a guess about the number of new teachers at SAS in the last three years...the answer is more than 100. According to your logic, that makes SAS a bad school - along with IS Bangkok. In fact a turnover of about 10% a year is part of what makes these schools so good - and the corresponding lack of turnover in Western European and Japanese schools is what holds them back.
Let me explain why. Schools become great because of the quality of the faculty. Of course there are other contributing factors: quality of leadership; facilities; resources; a supportive community; a stable environment etc etc but it is the classroom learning experience that is at the heart of a top class school - and that is largely down to the teacher. Not every teacher one hires starts off as good; not every good teacher stays good. Top schools spend a lot of money on professional development, and top administrators work with teachers who need support, but this investment in personnel doesn't always pay off. That's why every year, top schools may say to some teachers "Thanks for what you've done; now it's time for you to find a fresh challenge." The school can then go out to try to find a replacement who can give what the kids need. Any such conversation in Europe would take you to the labor court in about 60 minutes, which is why too many schools here have a rump (small or large) of teachers who really shouldn't still be in the job.
I should be clear that still the majority of those who leave great schools like SAS and ISB don't leave under these circumstances. They do so because their adventure in that part of the world is over and it's time to move on. No one should become an international teacher in order to take up permanent residence in the first country they go to. Meanwhile, the influx, every year, of bright, sparky teachers determined to make their mark gives a tremendous charge to schools in many parts of the world.
By the way, I've noticed that when you are asked questions that you don't like, you a) avoid them and b) lash out like a wounded animal.
You never did tell us how many times you have been at a recruitment fair as a recruiter or as a candidate...
Are you really still a full member of SEARCH? Not from what I see.
Reply
Yes I have worked in WE, and out side of Belgium (and Luxembourg for that matter) where teachers do get tenure after a year in the Private/Independent schools that comprise the vast majority of International schools, there is no tenure system even in WE (there are state/trust/municipal schools that have a tenure system, but they represent a very small number of ISs). Which still doesn't address the vast number of schools in Asia, SCA, ME, EE where aHOS could certainly dismiss their entire staff, no wishes, or magic required, and wouldn't be illegal at all. So no Walter that's not true.
Again Walter that's false, schools spend a great deal of time and money recruiting the best staff, they don't just pat them on the back like its some kind of Disney movie and say its time for you to move on to new challenges. That doesn't happen, that's just bad schools trying to make excuses for their high turnover. Again, high turnover means your schools sucks. Low turnover means good school. If people aren't leaving, they must like something about the school to keep them there.
I don't guess Walter, SAs didn't hire anywhere near 100 new staff, and I see nothing in your post in the way of proof that there is to debate. I'm not going to debate with you based on your claim of something.
As you addressed though and another fallacy of yours that you use when it suits you, is that its not the number of teachers hired, but the percentage. Saying a school like SAS hired 100 people means nothing in the absence of the proportion of new hires to total faculty.
Yes, 10% is a good turnover rate, 0% is better.
No teachers don't leave schools like ISB and ASIJ to move on, they either retire out of those schools, meaning they are leaving education and are done working, they have a family emergency crises, or they are going home. They don't leave and go on to other ISs.
Why shouldn't teachers take up permanent residence in their first school? If its a great school, great country and their happy why leave? Does it happen often no, but that doesn't mean for a population of ITs their first post can't be exactly what they are looking for. I know several teachers in Japan and Thailand who got their first position their and they are still their a decade later.
I'm really sure.
Again Walter that's false, schools spend a great deal of time and money recruiting the best staff, they don't just pat them on the back like its some kind of Disney movie and say its time for you to move on to new challenges. That doesn't happen, that's just bad schools trying to make excuses for their high turnover. Again, high turnover means your schools sucks. Low turnover means good school. If people aren't leaving, they must like something about the school to keep them there.
I don't guess Walter, SAs didn't hire anywhere near 100 new staff, and I see nothing in your post in the way of proof that there is to debate. I'm not going to debate with you based on your claim of something.
As you addressed though and another fallacy of yours that you use when it suits you, is that its not the number of teachers hired, but the percentage. Saying a school like SAS hired 100 people means nothing in the absence of the proportion of new hires to total faculty.
Yes, 10% is a good turnover rate, 0% is better.
No teachers don't leave schools like ISB and ASIJ to move on, they either retire out of those schools, meaning they are leaving education and are done working, they have a family emergency crises, or they are going home. They don't leave and go on to other ISs.
Why shouldn't teachers take up permanent residence in their first school? If its a great school, great country and their happy why leave? Does it happen often no, but that doesn't mean for a population of ITs their first post can't be exactly what they are looking for. I know several teachers in Japan and Thailand who got their first position their and they are still their a decade later.
I'm really sure.