The International Schools Review Forum

So a salary of only 900,000 vs. 1,000,000 USD is the reason IS Acme is only good while Acme IS is great? Or both are merely good because the difference between them is so minimal that neither has distinguished itself? You really are illogical.

@Thames Pirate

Yes, but that example is pathological. It really doesnt exist, however if it did in context the other ISs in the first tier would ave salaries of $890K, $892K, $885K. In which case a salary of $1M would represent a 10% increase, and that would be a significant difference that if Acme IS made all the other requirements would be the elite tier IS and yes it would be great and IS Acme still in the 1st tier would be good.

There is nothing illogical about that. Its a valid argument.

In reality that scenario is very rare, such as the case of Aramco or DoDDS in which rare cases its just classified an exception.

Well, if you randomly assign descriptors based on tier rather than quality of school, your definition of those words is not what most people would use. Great is not a comparative (the superlative form of good isn't great, but best), but your definition surely is. Therefore you cannot expect the rest of us to use your made up definitions. The OP was using the more commonly understood definition of "wonderful; very good."

The OP could absolutely be competitive for a great school. I also think most of us would consider any school that pays $900,000 great, regardless of how much other schools pay!

PsyGuy wrote:
> @WT123
>
> There can be and often are more than one first tier IS in a region, even a
> city (the majority of 1st tier ISs are actually located in the same city)
> Tokyo is an excellent example.
>
> Every region does have a first tier, regardless of what model you want to
> use, once you determine that IS quality is ordinal then by definition one
> IS is going to be superior to another IS, and that some portion of that
> group is going to be at the top and some group at the bottom, its how
> scales work.
> Of course you can also believe that every IS is special and there are no
> differences, meaning no ones special.
>
> There is actually significant consensus is there much dissent that within
> JP the embassy AS in Tokyo is a first tier IS? No, not significantly. Its
> crazy talk to believe that there are no differences of meaningful value
> between ISs.
---------------------
My PG translator is only working at half speed so I am not sure I caught all of that (and/or you typed this after imbibing a fair amount of whatever passes for local spirits wherever you call home).

Nevertheless, I do accept that quality is somewhat ordinal (with schools of similar "worth" being grouped together). I reject (as probably do many rational/logical people) your premise that ordinal quality somehow starts over every time you shift your focus to a different country.

By that logic (and I use the term very loosely) I could be warning people away from a particularly horrible school in a nightmare location and you would tell me, yes, but they are tier one school. Maybe that makes sense to you (and maybe I am the hard of thinking one here) but it has no place in my view of the int'l circuit.

Did you form this interesting world view just so that you could claim on your mental/virtual CV that you have worked at some "1st tier" schools? It's really not necessary. Many int'l school teachers have wonderful lives and careers without ever having worked at a 1st tier/Elite school. Besides, you are in DoDDS now and for good or bad we are kind of outside all of that (we get to debate what is a good/bad/the best/the worst DoDDS posting).

Go have some more of the local fire water and have a think on it.

@WT123

You can reject that but then you would be comparing nonequivalent groups. All of the tier of ISs in Switzerland are superior to many regions particularly in Asia, its not realistic or valid to expect that your going to find X quality of IS. It doesnt start over is just shifts.

I absolutely would because if an IT was interested in X region than within that region thats the best or highest quality your going to find. It doesnt matter whats available elsewhere if they want to go to a specific location. They would be a tier one IS for that region.

I dont list tier level on my resume C.V. just the IS names.

I agree as I wrote earlier institutions like Aramco, BAE, and DoDDS (and the comparable systems in other WE systems) are typically excepted as exceptions outside or in the periphery of IE.

@Thames Pirate

There is nothing random about my use of descriptors, i assign them as characteristics of one tier of IS, you are the one that wants to remove any meaning by using them haphazardly. Your definitions are.

Great, good, awesome, best, better, bestest, are you the grammar police? Is your argument that the lay person doesnt understand on a contextual level that great is better than good? Your terms, definitions, descriptors are no more arbitrary or made up then mine or anyone elses.

The LW isnt competitive for a great IS. Your welcome to think whatever you want.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @WT123
>
> You can reject that but then you would be comparing nonequivalent groups.
> All of the tier of ISs in Switzerland are superior to many regions
> particularly in Asia, its not realistic or valid to expect that your going
> to find X quality of IS. It doesnt start over is just shifts.
>
> I absolutely would because if an IT was interested in X region than within
> that region thats the best or highest quality your going to find. It doesnt
> matter whats available elsewhere if they want to go to a specific location.
> They would be a tier one IS for that region.
>
--------------------------------------
If your system of rating int'l schools means that a horrible school in a nightmare location can be described as tier one then I will leave it for others to judge whether it has any use or meaning.

@WT123

Of course it can if there were ISs in Hades even amongst them there would be a third tier, a second tier and a first tier. Tier status is bound and restricted to the regional context its located in. That 1st tier IS in hades is not comparable to the 1st tier IS in Eden. Those are two separate regions.

If you are assigning tiers based on characteristics, you must allow for multiple great schools in one city. After all, just because school A is great doesn't mean school B can't be as they are independent of one another.

That's all I am saying. Either you assign based on the quality of the school, in which case each school is judged on its own merits rather than comparatively, or you assign based on tier, in which case the descriptor is functionally meaningless.

Simple logic.

@Thames Pirate

No I must not allow for multiple great ISs in the same city. You should practice your own logic.

You must if you wish to be logical. Schools are independent of one another, so more than one can be great. Again, unless you are using a comparative instead of the traditional descriptor, in which case you can't expect those of us using traditional definitions of those words to fit your made up one. Offering advice using made up definitions is disingenuous.

@Thames Pirate

No I must not logical application have no bearing on whether the descriptor of great or any other descriptor must be allowable for more than one IS in a region or any other combination of labels and descriptors.

If great is a descriptor of elite tier ISs and a region has one elite tier IS than there is one great IS, thats a valid logical argument.

I sincerely hope you don't teach logic.

Can you have more than one great school in a city?

@Thames Pirate

Im fully certified to teach logic.

No you cant, not if great is the descriptor used to describe an elite tier IS of which no region has more than one (though there is disagreement on which IS that is).

Logically how can two things independent of one another have their greatness determined by each other? Either the schools are compared (not independent of one another) or they are independently evaluated. If the former, you should use a comparative (good/better/best), and if the latter there is no limit to the number of schools that are great--it could be all or none or anywhere in between.

Since you insist that it is comparative, you obviously labor under the mistaken belief that "great" and "best" mean the same thing. They are different, and you cannot expect the rest of us to understand your faulty diction. I suppose if you get to substitute random words for others of a different meaning, you can make any argument logical. Just adapt the definition as it suits you to do so, and hey, presto--your argument has actually changed, and you can avoid the charge of being illogical.

@Thames Pirate

Its refereed to as compare and contrast. Its the most basic type of data (nominal). You can use what ever vocabulary you wish, i do not require @Thames Pirates consent to write how i choose.

You labor under the mistaken believe that great and best dont mean the same thing.