In searching for an international school, what are the pros and cons, if any, of a school with mostly local students and staff? And along the same vein, what are the pros and cons with a truly international student body and staff?
What are folks' experiences and thoughts on "international" schools with 90% local students? There is nothing wrong if the school is mainly local students and staff - I was just curious how that experience compares to that of a truly international setting.
I am trying to keep an open mind and I hope different view points/experiences from you folks can help me have a better picture.
Thanking you all in advance :)
Percentage of Local Students
-
interteach
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 2:25 pm
I can definitely see what you are saying, Interteach. I guess it's kind of like a double-edged sword: I want to learn/enjoy local culture but I don't want to do that in a school that is almost all locals...
Also, I understand what you are saying, Overhere, and I agree that the experience would be difficult for kids. However, just for discussion purposes, can't we liken that difficult experience to how new immigrants/foreign students might face in our classrooms here in the US? If I had kids, I might send them to a school with 90% host country students, just so they can have a new learning experience.
Also, I understand what you are saying, Overhere, and I agree that the experience would be difficult for kids. However, just for discussion purposes, can't we liken that difficult experience to how new immigrants/foreign students might face in our classrooms here in the US? If I had kids, I might send them to a school with 90% host country students, just so they can have a new learning experience.
Used to be
JIS used to be off limits for host nationals. Don't think it is anymore. The reasoning back then was said to include the fact that because tuition was so high, you'd attract only the upper crust of Indonesian society. That created problems because their parents were connected and could be an issue if you'd need to expel/discipline their kids. The politics of educating politically-connected kids of people that could cause serious problems wasn't worth it.
You also have the economics of student enrollment. The host country wants the school to have enough seats to educate expats kids so their parents can work in the country and bring in dollars. The school is providing a service to a population and companies that are developing the host country. If you don't have the seats because a bunch of host national kids are there, companies might not be as quick to relocate and invest.
You also have the economics of student enrollment. The host country wants the school to have enough seats to educate expats kids so their parents can work in the country and bring in dollars. The school is providing a service to a population and companies that are developing the host country. If you don't have the seats because a bunch of host national kids are there, companies might not be as quick to relocate and invest.
-
interteach
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 2:25 pm
Those are definitely great points, JIS.
Quick question, Interteach - If the level of English taught and spoken is quite low, are subjects still taught in English?
Consequently, what are folks doing to "tackle" or continue to be effective teachers in this challenge, i.e. the challenge of teaching in English to a class of mainly local students (assuming that the teacher does not have an ELL endorsement.)
Quick question, Interteach - If the level of English taught and spoken is quite low, are subjects still taught in English?
Consequently, what are folks doing to "tackle" or continue to be effective teachers in this challenge, i.e. the challenge of teaching in English to a class of mainly local students (assuming that the teacher does not have an ELL endorsement.)
-
interteach
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 2:25 pm
thats a good point Carbon, but moving overseas can be difficult in the best of situations for single or a childless couple. To go to a school where the majority of students are from the host country will make it especially difficult on your kids and ultimately you. We teach at an American school where most of the students carry American Passports and will attend university in the states but it still has been very difficult for my kids to break in. When you consider you might only be at a school for two years, how much time do you want to spend with your child crying at night as they try to make the adjustment. I'm not saying it can't be done, or that my experience will be yours but thought needs to go into this family decision. You are obviously thinking about it.
My experience with schools that are primarily local students has been that the schools primarily run on local culture standards: However, they try to integrate whatever other standard they claim. They usually have a group of expats that have married locals to support it.
Evaluate your own expectations of education and living and decide if you can accept "their" standards before you decide to go there. B/c most likely YOUR expectations will not be met, but theirs will.
Evaluate your own expectations of education and living and decide if you can accept "their" standards before you decide to go there. B/c most likely YOUR expectations will not be met, but theirs will.
the exception
So... my school may be an exception but I thought I'd throw it out there just so you know they do exist. I teach at a school in Asia that is 90% local students and it's wonderful. However, the teachers are ALL foreign hires except the ones that teach the local language. I think this may make a difference. We have an international curriculum and the quality of the school is similar to the previous one where we were the 'embassy school'.
The students are great to work with ~ and surprisingly they speak English in class with few reminders and even on the playground and cafeteria. They're really proud to learn and know English. All the teachers are English speakers, so everything except language is taught in English.
I'm not a parent so I can't speak to that issue although there are some parents from the embassy who send their kids here because they really like our program and don't want their kids to be elitist.
So, take it for what it's worth ~ I know it's not usually the case and we chose carefully to make sure this was the type of school we were happy with. Good luck!
The students are great to work with ~ and surprisingly they speak English in class with few reminders and even on the playground and cafeteria. They're really proud to learn and know English. All the teachers are English speakers, so everything except language is taught in English.
I'm not a parent so I can't speak to that issue although there are some parents from the embassy who send their kids here because they really like our program and don't want their kids to be elitist.
So, take it for what it's worth ~ I know it's not usually the case and we chose carefully to make sure this was the type of school we were happy with. Good luck!
-
tribefinder
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:51 am
- Location: United States
I worked at an "international" school that was 98% local. It was AWFUL! They had half their classes in local language, as it was the law that all students of that nationality be educated to their own country's standards - something you may want to double check before you go anywhere. It's understandable, but really not an ideal setting. It was really more of a bi-lingual school. There were math, science, and primary teachers from various English-speaking countries, but the children spent so much time with the host country teachers, they could just skate by in the English classes. I was even asked to change a grade from the previous term that I hadn't even given, but was from the previous teacher. None of the children were allowed to fail because their parents would withdraw them and the school had such a limited pool of students that it couldn't afford to lose one.
A problem that is more common than you might think is that in slightly poorer countries, there aren't enough rich locals to afford to send their kids to these schools. So unfortunately, you end up with the politicals, which was mentioned earlier, and worse, the gangsters. The majority of the children at our school had questionable fathers, to say the least. It made it even scarier to send a child home with a bad grade. Our British director was threatened by a child's bodyguard for giving a kid detention.
Not to mention the language barrier between you and the parents. I could never tell them what was going on with their kid. And it was bad enough with the children, many of whom hardly spoke English and all of whom routinely spoke their native language throughout class. And I have an ELL endorsement, but that didn't too much, since the kids didn't care, the school was terrified of their parents, and you weren't allowed to punish or give bad grades. The male teachers did have it a little easier, as men are more respected in that culture. Some things to think about...
About wanting your kids to have an interesting experience, when immigrant children come to the US, they have special ESL classes where they learn everything they need to know and often receive special attention. There are laws that prevent them from being failed because of language barriers. Plus they are surrounded by the language at school and anywhere else they go. When you go to an international school, they don't always offer language classes for their own language, and if most of the classes are in English, there isn't as much immersion going on, hence not as much learning of the new language. So your child is only exposed when out and about, or when left out on the playground, since many local children like to speak in their own language during play.
If you're going to do it, get you children language lessons ASAP. They learn fast, depending on age, and it will go a long way toward helping them assimilate.
A problem that is more common than you might think is that in slightly poorer countries, there aren't enough rich locals to afford to send their kids to these schools. So unfortunately, you end up with the politicals, which was mentioned earlier, and worse, the gangsters. The majority of the children at our school had questionable fathers, to say the least. It made it even scarier to send a child home with a bad grade. Our British director was threatened by a child's bodyguard for giving a kid detention.
Not to mention the language barrier between you and the parents. I could never tell them what was going on with their kid. And it was bad enough with the children, many of whom hardly spoke English and all of whom routinely spoke their native language throughout class. And I have an ELL endorsement, but that didn't too much, since the kids didn't care, the school was terrified of their parents, and you weren't allowed to punish or give bad grades. The male teachers did have it a little easier, as men are more respected in that culture. Some things to think about...
About wanting your kids to have an interesting experience, when immigrant children come to the US, they have special ESL classes where they learn everything they need to know and often receive special attention. There are laws that prevent them from being failed because of language barriers. Plus they are surrounded by the language at school and anywhere else they go. When you go to an international school, they don't always offer language classes for their own language, and if most of the classes are in English, there isn't as much immersion going on, hence not as much learning of the new language. So your child is only exposed when out and about, or when left out on the playground, since many local children like to speak in their own language during play.
If you're going to do it, get you children language lessons ASAP. They learn fast, depending on age, and it will go a long way toward helping them assimilate.
The problem regarding the OP's question is that there is no one answer of course. There are hundreds if not thousands of schools claiming to be "international". However...what does it mean to be an International School?
Is it the makeup of the student body alone? Maybe one could say a truly international school should have so many kids from so many different countries that the language in school IS in English through necessity and not having any lessons demanded by the host country. There are some of those about but out of those hundreds/thousands claiming to be international schools they must be a very small minority. Taking this to its extremes would lead us to these guys...The United World Colleges.
[url]http://www.uwc.org/[/url]
The downsides to this are of course that these International Schools can operate in a closed environment and they tend to be the most expensive options in town as well. Would they provide the most British/American/Australian/IB-based etc education? Yes. Would they be the best place for your kids to learn the local language and assimilate? Probably not.
So...then there are the "International Schools" who have a load of local students. The thing is...there are good and bad examples of these. I have experience of two. One is truly awful and one is a wonderful place to send children. How do you know which would be best for your kids? Read reviews, ask around etc.
If you will only be in the country for a short while or a year then a truly international school would be the way to go surely. However...if longer...and you really want your kids to become bilingual, for example, and experience the culture as much as possible then a VERY GOOD school with an international education system might be the best. Even so...make sure at least 75% of lessons (other than languages of course) are taught in English I would say. Make sure they have lots of foreign staff.
There are no easy answers I'm afraid but don't write off a school [u]solely [/u]because of the student body. There are some truly "International" schools that have nothing but horror stories too.
Is it the makeup of the student body alone? Maybe one could say a truly international school should have so many kids from so many different countries that the language in school IS in English through necessity and not having any lessons demanded by the host country. There are some of those about but out of those hundreds/thousands claiming to be international schools they must be a very small minority. Taking this to its extremes would lead us to these guys...The United World Colleges.
[url]http://www.uwc.org/[/url]
The downsides to this are of course that these International Schools can operate in a closed environment and they tend to be the most expensive options in town as well. Would they provide the most British/American/Australian/IB-based etc education? Yes. Would they be the best place for your kids to learn the local language and assimilate? Probably not.
So...then there are the "International Schools" who have a load of local students. The thing is...there are good and bad examples of these. I have experience of two. One is truly awful and one is a wonderful place to send children. How do you know which would be best for your kids? Read reviews, ask around etc.
If you will only be in the country for a short while or a year then a truly international school would be the way to go surely. However...if longer...and you really want your kids to become bilingual, for example, and experience the culture as much as possible then a VERY GOOD school with an international education system might be the best. Even so...make sure at least 75% of lessons (other than languages of course) are taught in English I would say. Make sure they have lots of foreign staff.
There are no easy answers I'm afraid but don't write off a school [u]solely [/u]because of the student body. There are some truly "International" schools that have nothing but horror stories too.
"International" Schools
What is an "international" school? It seems to be a pretty flexible expression. If most of the students come from the host country, then is it accurate and sensible to call the school "international"? Probably not.
When I was teaching at the British School of Bucharest, only a small proportion of my students were Romanian. It was like teaching the United Nations. We had lots of French and Germans, a sprinkling of Chinese (the school was round the corner from the Chinese Embassy) and lots of other odd nationalities: Greeks, Italians, Americans, Russians and even a few Brits!
When I was teaching in Egypt and in Qatar, it was a very different story: 90% locals, with some other Arabic-speaking children from different parts of the Middle East. This caused a lot of problems. The school, the teachers and the curriculum were going in one direction, while the children and their parents were going in another direction. It is not just a matter of language, although in a primary school I would say that, to a large extent, language IS the curriculum. Even Maths and Science lessons are really English lessons, but the students cannot access the curriculum if their language skills are just not up to it. In Bucharest, this was not such a problem because French and German and Romanian are a lot closer to English than Arabic. Also it was natural and easy for the children in Bucharest to learn English because they wanted to speak to their new friends and English was the common language. In Qatar and in Egypt, Arabic dominated the playground.
When I was teaching in Bucharest, we did what was "internationally" acceptable or else we followed current practice in the UK. You cannot do this if you are tleaching in a school in the Middle East where most of the students are Muslim. Christmas decorations? Definitely not. Comparative Religions? No way. Once the principal has been on the receiving end of a few angry phone calls from parents, most teachers become very cautious. This has a restricting and deadening effect on your teaching, because you are always looking over your shoulder and worried that you might find yourself in big trouble. (And "Mohammed" is not a good name for your class's teddy bear.)
When I was teaching at the British School of Bucharest, only a small proportion of my students were Romanian. It was like teaching the United Nations. We had lots of French and Germans, a sprinkling of Chinese (the school was round the corner from the Chinese Embassy) and lots of other odd nationalities: Greeks, Italians, Americans, Russians and even a few Brits!
When I was teaching in Egypt and in Qatar, it was a very different story: 90% locals, with some other Arabic-speaking children from different parts of the Middle East. This caused a lot of problems. The school, the teachers and the curriculum were going in one direction, while the children and their parents were going in another direction. It is not just a matter of language, although in a primary school I would say that, to a large extent, language IS the curriculum. Even Maths and Science lessons are really English lessons, but the students cannot access the curriculum if their language skills are just not up to it. In Bucharest, this was not such a problem because French and German and Romanian are a lot closer to English than Arabic. Also it was natural and easy for the children in Bucharest to learn English because they wanted to speak to their new friends and English was the common language. In Qatar and in Egypt, Arabic dominated the playground.
When I was teaching in Bucharest, we did what was "internationally" acceptable or else we followed current practice in the UK. You cannot do this if you are tleaching in a school in the Middle East where most of the students are Muslim. Christmas decorations? Definitely not. Comparative Religions? No way. Once the principal has been on the receiving end of a few angry phone calls from parents, most teachers become very cautious. This has a restricting and deadening effect on your teaching, because you are always looking over your shoulder and worried that you might find yourself in big trouble. (And "Mohammed" is not a good name for your class's teddy bear.)