The concept of Tiered Schools

[Flyingpigs]

I find the concept of the 'tiers' very curious. I do understand its an arbitrary thing--and schools are not actually granted Tier status by anybody other than International teachers...but still, the idea is intriguing....the idea that tier 1 schools are the BEST and Tier 3 schools are the bottom of the barrel, and you'd have to be desperate to work there.
I find it curious, because what does "THE BEST" school actually look like? Isnt the opinion rather subjective? What makes a Tier 1 school, a Tier 1 school? And can one man's Tier 1, be another persons Tier 3? Is a Tier 1 a package thing? Can you have a Tier 1 school in say....the Congo? or Sudan? Can you have a Tier 3 school in Italy?
I have to wonder--is one mans ceiling, another man's floor?

[eion_padraig]

Yes.

[MedellinHeel]

Tier 1 are the most exclusive / best schools in a city which reflects in the package and the level of teacher it attracts.

[Dawson]

Personally I think the whole idea of tiers is silly because it is what fits you that is the most important. Some people might love a more remote school with a lot of students from that particular country while others want large, international schools in the city. It's all very subjective like you said. I just don't give much thought to the ranking of a school and instead look at the fit and if it's a place I want to be. I don't know for sure, but I would assume most "top" schools are large and have been around a long time so they have a good reputation. Nothing wrong with that and I'm sure they're good, but that leaves out newer schools and smaller schools, which may also be doing amazing things. AS an example, I'm in Bahrain and due to it's very small size I don't think any the schools here would be considered tier one, yet I love what I'm doing here and think it's a great match for me so again it doesn't mean much for me.

[Flyingpigs]

Dawson--I love what you said, and I could not agree more. Sometimes, I find...that the whole tier thing smacks of elitism. One poster said its about 'the level of teacher it attracts". What does that even mean? To me--a great teacher is one who truly cares about each and every kid in his class, stays current, and forms a relationship with his/her students and parents--if possible. Just because the package is 'great', and you are in a 'great' country ( for me, I would never want to teach in Europe--yawn) does not make the teachers that work there--better. In fact, one could argue that a teacher who works in a small school, with no supplies/resources or infrastructure has to be a BETTER teacher, than someone in a Tier 1 school with all the gizmos/gadgets at their disposal....IMO

[Green]

I think there are two ways to look at a school's ranking. One is from the perspective of the student and the other is from that of the teacher. A tier one school satisfactorily assists both groups in their educational endeavors. For students, are there enough qualified teachers, is the work of a rigorous level, do they have access to good resources, are they challenged, and ultimately, is the school offering them a means to their personal ends? If the answer there is yes, then it's a tier one school.

From a teacher's perspective, defining a tier one school is a personal issue. For me, a tier one school is stable, funded, and gives teachers the right tools to succeed. It also has motivated students and an administration that is fair. I think that a quality school includes financial and post-graduate benefits for its employees. As professionals, we should get treated and paid our worth. We need to live comfortably with an eye towards our own future. As international teachers, the onus is on us to fund our own retirements. There is also a standard of living that one desires. This is where a tier one school's location is important. Do I want a city with a pension scheme? Do I want to live in an unstable country which poses a danger to me and my family? Do I want to have legal recourse if I suffer a grievance? Would I like access to quality medical care? Do I want to live on a compound? Do I want to live a city life? Will I earn enough for a family? Will my students be teachable? Can I retire? This list will go on and on.

I look at the tier system as that of odds. When people speak of tiered one or two schools, what I hear are the odds that if I worked there, I would be happy. But the data comes from hearsay and scores on tests students take their last year. I encourage any teacher to list their priorities for their lives. If a school and location meets many of these, then you've landed in a tier one.

[nikkor]

I find it a bit interesting to hear that some posters don't find a tier system helpful. I disagree.

I would just add this: Highly-tiered schools generally treat teachers more professionally and make work-related and personnel decisions based on student well being.

[LadyCanuck]

Yes the system is arbitrary. But there are certain things that a Tier 1 school will have, like international health coverage, retirement plan, good pay, tuition coverage for teacher's students, flights. The school will also be accredited, teach some kind of International curriculum with regulations (IB, AP), there will be technology available and academic standards, the schools are generally composed a mix of nationalities, not just students from the host country or Koreans trying to learn english. The schools are invested in there teachers and their development allowing for PD training, also they won't hirer uncertified teachers.

Now tier two schools will also have several of these things, but not all. This is where the majority of school fall.

Tier three schools are generally a giant mess, with poor pay, little allowance and are more of a money making institution than a school. However you can still have an IB school that is a tier 3.

[zanyplum]

Personally, this is the best definition of the tiers I have heard. I totally agree! I can definitely see that I am truly moving from a tier 2 to a tier 1. Now tier 2 was not bad! I learned a lot, and saved a lot of money, but definitely looking forward to the positive change!

[Dawson]

nikkor wrote:
> I find it a bit interesting to hear that some posters don't find a tier
> system helpful. I disagree.
>
> I would just add this: Highly-tiered schools generally treat teachers more
> professionally and make work-related and personnel decisions based on
> student well being.

Where did you get that from? I have stated previously that I doubt my school is a tier one because it's new and quite small. However, I love it here. It's non-profit and everything is based on student learning. A blanket statement such as yours is wildly untrue. I happen to love being at a small school where I know many, many students even if I don't teach them. Generally tier one schools are going to be large. No thanks, I'll take the personal interaction with all students at my grade level any day over some faux badge of honor this supposed tier system invokes. What is hilarious to me is that there is no national organization that is in the business of ranking schools. Unlike the magazine US News and World Report which releases a best colleges list every year we don't have that. We just have our opinions. Since we are all different there is no right answer to a top school. It depends on the fit. If you are just looking for tier one schools then I feel sorry for you because you might miss out on wonderful experiences at a school that is not on this imaginary list.

[Flyingpigs]

I also think that great opportunities can be had in rural, small and no-name schools where the parents and kids are appreciative of your efforts and real connections and relationships are formed. The opportunity for true learning is immeasurable.
There is a lot of talk of teachers "putting in their time, or paying their dues" at a Tier 2 or 3 school--with the Tier 1 schools being the holy grail of IT. I personally dont understand this 'quest' to be at schools that are arbitrarily ranked--I have to wonder if opportunities are missed that way?
I said it before here and I will say it again. The best years of my teaching career were spent at a Tier 89 ( ha ha) school. Pay was shite though. :) It all depends what your goal is.

[jesatlarge]

Tiers and teacher salary and benefit packages are usually quite closely correlated, and it's usually fairly easy to find information on what particular schools offer their staff. Thus you have your instant tiers. It is not unusual for the top school in a certain city to offer a S/B package three times better than lower "ranked" competitors down the road. We teachers are not (usually) fools; often those teachers who can, choose to migrate towards the higher paying schools. This in general is a "better" group of teachers than those who cannot get jobs at the high paying schools. Good teachers attract more good students than bad teachers do, and in many folks minds, these are the key ingredients of a good "top" school.

[sid]

Such a contentious question.
I think tiers have to do with the overall quality of the school in supporting students' learning through appropriate provision of quality teachers, quality resources, quality opportunities and a quality working/learning environment. So in my mind, big or small is irrelevant, though in application this theory does mean that a larger school has a better mathematical chance of meeting those points, since most small schools do not have the stable funding necessary to provide them consistently. Any school, small or large, rich or poor, can keep a constant focus on students, student learning, student needs. But only those with a certain amount of money can afford certain strategies for addressing those points.
The tier system, in my mind, is entirely separate from the question of 'do I want to work there?' I may be attracted to many different things beyond which tier a school is in. I could prefer the small, family feel of a new school in a developing country, though that school will not be able to provide the same opportunities for students that a massive school in Paris can, so it will not be a Tier 1 school for quite some time, if ever. I may be looking for a place where I can do things my own way, which is unlikely in a Tier 1 with its established rules, curriculum, systems. I may want to stroke my ego by being the best teacher in the building, which will be easier in a small Tier 2 than when I join a team in a large Tier 1. I might like the slower pace of life in a place where expectations are a little lower (some would say realistic) for students and teachers.
Personally, I prefer Tier 1 for my career. But sometimes I feel the pull of Tier 2, and there can be very valid reasons for working in a Tier 2.

[Monkey]

For me, the tier concept is useful as a shorthand for the types of things I can expect from a school. Many of the things people mention when they talk about the characteristics of Tier 2 and Tier 1 schools are bang on about the 3 IT schools I've worked in. In my experience, most of the stereotypes about each kind of school are correct. But it doesn't necessarily mean I couldn't be happy at anything less than a Tier 1.

I started my IT career at a small Tier 2 in a fantastic location, moved to another Tier 2 in an okay location with better pay, and I'm now in an elite/Tier 1 school in another ok location with fantastic pay. Out of all 3, the first two schools were my favorite to work in for different reasons. I'm enjoying all the money I'm saving and all the fantastic PD opportunities I'm getting at my new school. But after my contract is up, and I have a nice nest egg, my plan is to move to the best, small Tier 2 I can find in the best location I can find. There are things about Tier 2 schools that I just enjoy more than my current school.

[Flyingpigs]

Sid--Your comment about Tiered schools being a different question than " do I want to work there" makes a lot of sense.
Framed that way, the concept of " TIER 1 is GOOD" and " TIER < 1 must be BAD" that seems to be so prevalent on ISR is easier to get my head around.