It's only better because London and Bangkok are more interesting cities and that a few days there to hang out are generally more exciting. That's all I meant. If the candidate wants to watch TV in a hotel room it doesn't matter.

> It well might. He does have his strong points but sadly this is not one of them.

Apparently! Oh, well. I think I have made the point clearly. For Europe, SA is clearly the better choice of the two. CIS is also good. I can't speak to elsewhere in the world as we have always been focused on Europe (willing to go elsewhere and looking at schools all over, but primarily Europe). Therefore we know the most about those schools.

I am still curious, though, about his handful of elites and every other school being lower tier even though he and everyone else would acknowledge there is a tier 1, tier 2, and that there is a variety in tier 3.

No, there is no black list, but recruiters/HOSs move around just as teachers do, and they DO talk to each other. I knew of an IT who took paternity leave in one country in WE, then accepted a position in China, leaving his wife and new baby behind in Europe. He was collecting a double paycheck. It was brilliant until the two recruiters met at one of the early job fairs and figured the whole thing out. He lost the WE job pretty quickly!

So do your best not to burn bridges (as PG says, how you spin it matters) and do your best to do right by the schools while still looking out for yourself.

True, the advantage of being pre-hired is much more significant in London or Bangkok than in Iowa!

We, too, have our contract. It took just over a week and that was only due to some delays in hearing back from our references. Then again, I was never worried because this is a school with a good reputation and a HOS who values his word, his school's reputation, and the integrity of the process--and we knew that before we interviewed with him.

All agencies rep bad ISs.

I agree that one should be careful and that there are bad apples all around. I agree that teachers are commodities. I would also point out that even with a contract in hand ITs have little recourse, so a letter of intent, a contract, and a promise are not that different all things considered. Know what you are getting into.

Again, PG, this makes no sense and does not match reality. Schools DO skip the ISS portion of the super fairs. I am not saying schools necessarily need to actively search for candidates in databases, but they are getting quality applicants through SA. If they want to meet them F2F, they do it at the SA fairs. They may very well get good applicants from ISS, but they aren't meeting them at ISS fairs. So if I am doing the legwork of contacting the schools and they hire from either database, ISS holds no advantage over SA. However, if that school wants to meet me, I as a candidate would need to either travel to the school (neither company has an edge) or go to a fair the school is attending (giving SA the edge). So as a candidate contacting schools, yes, SA gives me the edge.

Meanwhile you claim schools don't skip the super fairs. Well, why did only two European schools attend the ISS BKK fair when far more attended SA BKK? They DO skip ISS BKK, then attend SA BKK, CIS LON, and SA LON. Why would they do that if they prefer or heavily hire through ISS? The answer is they don't. They either hire through other agencies or no agency at all. So when making a decision of which agency of the two to use, I want the ones schools are using.

You also contradict yourself. If schools aren't hiring through the database ("don't have to go hunting through the database") and they aren't hiring through fairs ("your definition of access is fairs, the data base doesnt go away because you define access as fairs"), why on earth would I sign up with ISS?

No, fairs are not the sole definition of access, but they still represent a vital F2F access point. If I am doing the school-by-school application, ISS offers no advantage over SA (again, if anything their smaller database is a disadvantage). So as a candidate, I want maximum access. SA offers the better database (maximizing my access) and fair attendance (again, maximizing my access). Schools, meanwhile, are sifting through the candidates that come to them, either through direct application (meaning either company or none at all is fine) or through F2F contact (fairs--meaning SA is the better option).

You keep saying ISS is the more elite and selective database, but you offer no evidence of this. ISS requires only a teaching license and a Bachelors to be listed. That is not exactly a highly selective process and is the same minimum as with SA. As for schools, again, what is the screening process? There is a lot of junk represented by ISS, too. In fact, you said so yourself. So the only evidence you have offered in support of your claim that ISS is more selective is that you think they are more elite. I sincerely hope you require your students to support their points with a bit more evidence and - than that.

You claim that ISS treats its "special snowflakes" better--well, great. Does that mean ISS personally contacts those top schools and vouches for you based solely on the paperwork you submit to them? Will they arrange a F2F meeting for you? If not, why use them? What help do they offer their snowflakes that they don't offer the peons? And if you are one of their snowflakes, do you really need the agency's help getting that job? So tell me again why that means ISS is the better agency for finding a job in Europe? After all, that was the point of discussion. How precisely is ISS more specialized, either for schools or for candidates?

Yes, it is foolish to take the position of a recruiter if all evidence points in a different direction. It is not foolish if the evidence supports the recruiter's statement. When a recruiter tells me (again, when just chatting at the hotel in our shared language and his school is not on my list) that his school will no longer be recruiting through ISS--and then they stop attending ISS events they used to attend--his actions match his statements and the other evidence I have.

You say I assume lesser known ISs are good--well, maybe, maybe not. Sometimes they are just new. Sometimes reputations are based on the past and the school has changed (which can happen in either direction--a school can rest on its laurels or a school can get new leadership to undo the mess that it was). Meanwhile you forget that there are TONS of teachers happy at schools you personally consider lesser quality because they are able to work in professionally challenging and dynamic classrooms, have access to PD, and most importantly, do good work with kids. If reputation of a school eclipses the actual day-to-day grind with kids in your eyes, well, you may need to reconsider your profession.

Furthermore, I am still baffled by your concept of tiered schools. We all know there are a few "elites," tier 1 schools (top notch), tier 2 schools (still really good), and tier three (in which there are the "floaters" who are close to tier 2 and the "bottom of the barrel" types). You continually say "top schools" and "bottom schools" and refer only to a few elites. Is there actually a tier 1 or 2 in your book? Since we are talking about European schools in particular and you are apparently in Europe, perhaps you can educate us a bit. Which schools are hiring through ISS? Please feel free to include the sources of your information. I am particularly interested in schools in the countries that didn't attend fairs--Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Poland, Luxembourg, Denmark, or the UK, for example.

You may not be interested in convincing me, but at least I offered multiple sources for my claim. I have offered a recruiter, a listing of schools attending fairs, and the minimum requirements of the two companies in question for candidates. Yes, the minimum requirements are evidence that both companies rep the good and the bad. I can also offer that I have met people at fairs that make me wonder how they ever got teaching licenses (both ISS and SA). As neither of us can go beyond that in terms of assessing candidates, we must accept that based on the minimums, there are bound to be good and bad teachers at both agencies. I could make equal lists of good and bad schools for each agency (which would heavily overlap, BTW). It is not just my perception.

So how is ISS better for getting a job in the EU (for top and/or bottom)? Tell me specifically how a teacher signed up with them has an edge in getting a job in the EU--the step-by-step process.

As to what you were saying to Walter, you again contradict yourself. You say recruiters prefer the more selective candidate pool, then you say they prefer the bigger fairs. So which is it? Tell us the process recruiters use so that we can all make the best decisions based on our own resumes and which schools we want (again, specific to EU for this thread). Explain why a good EU school would attend two or three fairs but not ISS BKK--yet still look first at an ISS candidate.

You say superstar ITs don't need to chase anyone, but the reality is that even the best teachers still have to apply, interview, and make decisions. No, the elite schools don't need to hunt for quality applicants, but they do still need to snap up the best teachers before another school does. You make it sound like the best teachers and schools magically find each other with no effort on anyone's part, but again, this isn't reality. Even the best schools use the fairs (even if they do most of their heavy lifting before the signup session), and even the best teachers use the fairs (depending on what they want and when and where jobs are available--and even if they do all their interviews before the signups).

Walter does not sound like an admin, but like someone with a personal issue with you. You do not sound like an admin, but like a teacher with an elitism complex.


> I wasnt accepted into ISS when I first started out in IE.

Maybe this contributes to your mistaken belief that they are somehow more selective? Funny, I was accepted when I first started out in IE. I switched to SA because they were the better option, and I have never regretted that.

PsyGuy, would it kill you to admit you are wrong? Or at least provide some support for your argument?

No need to make it a personal attack.

The reality is that the barrier for entry for candidates is pretty comparable (Bachelors, teaching cert OR 2 years--really, how is that selective?). So PsyGuy's argument about the best candidates is based only on his perception? memory? while the reality is that both companies rep the good and bad candidates and schools. You can be wildly successful with either and supremely disappointed with either.

So my take is go with the one that has the most options you like. We were interested in Europe, so ISS just wasn't a viable option for us.

It completely depends on the school. The school that hired us in London told us they had a few teachers at the fair and that they were tentatively interviewing for those positions, but that the positions were clearly tentative. Their teachers were checking in with them at the fair.

In some countries labor laws are firmly on the side of the teacher--they might have until spring to notify the school. Anything earlier is a courtesy. So the teacher can (and they often do this even if the law isn't on their side) apply and then tell the school once they are hired somewhere. It's trickier when you are at a small school and attending a job fair, especially if your school is also there. The schools know when the job fairs are, so it could be problematic.

It really is a case-by-case thing. If you are in "get me the heck outta Dodge" mode, you can apply and just leave your school in the lurch (long term ramifications? Word gets around). Pulling a runner is not uncommon, especially at lower tier schools. It can, however, cost you with those administrators, and the IS world is small and mobile. It would really stink to learn the administrator you ran out on is now in charge of your dream school. However, the late notification might not be bad if you do it early enough. A friend didn't tell her school she was looking, but she had feelers out. She got a job that was a phenomenal opportunity for her and that she didn't expect to get in late May. She took it, then politely went to the principal and informed her that she had been offered this awesome job. They parted on good terms and with a good letter of rec, the school filled the job over the summer, and the friend is in her dream job in her dream city (she said she's never leaving).

If you are on good terms with your admin, you can make it an ongoing conversation in which you go to the fair together--your admin can back you up (and even put in a good word) while you keep him/her abreast of how your search is going--keeping things positive on both sides, though of course you have the advantage of keeping the old job (though be careful! You might get bitten by sneaky admin who says he's only interviewing tentatively but then jumps on someone and leaves you without a job) until you have the certainty of the new. This option can work well with a straight-shooting administrator who has a good rapport with the teacher. Incidentally, cultivating that rapport is recommended (different from brown-nosing, which may or may not help and which most administrators see through anyway). The more reputable schools will have those administrators who will want to work to a mutually beneficial situation and will appreciate your honesty. It could turn ugly on either side, so it requires a bit of finesse--but it has the potential for the best outcome.

Or you can do the least safe option short term, commit to leaving, letting the school advertise your position, and then risk being left unemployed. The latter option gives power to admin, but they do prefer firm answers early in the game, so of course long term ramifications are the smallest in terms of keeping your own reputation intact. If you're good with the risk and good at the search, you'll find something!

It really depends on the admin, your relationship with them and the school, your likelihood of needing them later, etc.

Hope that helps!

Sometimes you can get a refund. You could also travel, pop in and out of the fair as it suits you, and do other things. We got a no-show refund on our non-refundable hotel room. So apparently you can't cancel, but you can fail to show up and get some money back.

You could take the already planned sub days at home, using them to get caught up on grading, do research for your upcoming move, or just do something local that you somehow have never done.

Sure you do. At least if it is a reputable school and the contact is coming from their HR department, the vacancy is removed from the wall before fair signups, and the listing removed from online databases. Not having a physical contract in hand is pretty normal in some recruiting circles/schools. But you are right to advise caution; I would be hesitant in most instances.

We didn't have a contract in hand. We were told "pending reference checks." We have since heard from the recruiter, who asked us to follow up with two of the references because he hadn't heard back from them. We did so, and we then heard that two more references were completed. So we are in touch, we are not worried, we know the school is giving us the job, but we have no documentation. Would we be so trusting with every school? Probably not. But that is where your research and experience comes into play. PsyGuy and I are going to disagree (again!). He says contract in hand. I say it depends.

No, fairs are not synonymous with use of database, but again, why would a recruiter search through a database to find candidates (s)he will never meet in person when with the same few clicks they can find a list of people they can meet in person? They wouldn't. Meanwhile they are attending two or three SA fairs but none of the ISS fairs. That is not just because there are more SA fairs. Why would a school skip ISS BKK, then attend SA BKK and SA London? Why go to both SA fairs but not the major ISS fair? They are finding what they need at SA BKK and SA London, but not at ISS BKK. They aren't bothering with ISS at all.

You say ISS has the best candidates, but again, that is your perceived elitism talking. What makes you say that? What is an eliminating factor or barrier for a teacher being listed for ISS that is not a problem for SA? What makes an ISS teacher a better candidate? And if that were really the case, why would the schools not stick with ISS? They would find all they needed through ISS and wouldn't need to bother with SA, which is a much newer company. Instead they quit going to ISS fairs and started going to SA fairs. Not just attending both, but actually going to SA over ISS. That means they were finding what they needed at SA and not ISS. Therefore they are not recruiting with ISS.

You also say that smaller is better because they are more selective, but again, what is the barrier for ISS for schools that doesn't exist for SA? You say ISS is more selective, but ISS still represents a lot of "junk," too. Meanwhile good but lesser known or newer schools aren't listed with ISS but are with SA. Why is that? Because they recognize that ISS is not valuable to them and that they can have their needs met through SA. Furthermore, the point I made was about geography. Some people don't care about teaching in a crummy school as long as it's in Europe. So again, SA has the edge there.

Both agencies accept good AND bad candidates and good AND bad schools. There is no elite status on either side except in your mind. Meanwhile the active recruiting happens at SA, not ISS. Perceptions of elitism are meaningless (just like you always say, it's the offers that count). Again, a recruiter telling me something IS more meaningful because he is telling me his strategy--and you are not a recruiter, so your perception does nothing to convince me that recruiters are looking at ISS. The behavior of his school matches the behavior of other schools, and he did say that was the direction in which his peers were also moving. So yes, I give it some weight. Far more weight than your baseless "better candidates" claim! I would be foolish not to listen to a recruiter talking about recruiting strategies, and even more foolish to take your advice regarding what is elite over his advice on what schools are actually doing.

So yes, for Europe, SA is the better of the two. If I were to sign up with another agency and were looking at Europe, it would be CIS over ISS.

And I said the same thing to @sdakota you did. If you are highly specific, go directly to the schools. If you are a bit broader, go with the agency.

Oh, CIS is absolutely one of the better options for the EU. However, the question was ISS vs. SA.

You say ISS, but I wonder why you are insistent. If schools are not using the agency, then the database is meaningless. Why would they look through the ISS database when they are going to the SA fair? They don't. They look through the SA database because, as you have pointed out, ITs are often similar. Why look through multiple databases when you can get so many good candidates through just one and then plan your fair meet and greet? Many European schools attend more than one SA fair. That means they are actively recruiting through SA. They are looking at those candidates. They are searching the SA database. They are NOT then going to do the same for ISS when they aren't even attending the fairs, not even the iFair. Fair attendance isn't everything, but it IS indicative of where they are searching for candidates.

When we started IT, a friend (who had worked in WE) told us to sign up with ISS as the only way to get a job. Five years ago we attended an ISS fair in SF. There were not a ton of European schools. There are even fewer now. European schools are no longer using ISS (except a few holdouts like Stavanger, who has been using ISS for decades). They used to be THE agency, just as UNI used to be THE fair. Times have changed. Using common sense and looking at the evidence (where schools are going, for example) tells us this. The fact that a WE recruiter told me exactly that--and I only asked because I suspected as much based on other evidence--is further proof.

Schools aren't using the ISS database to find their candidates. They are using SA and independent recruiting through their websites and things like Schrole or direct applications. After all, even if they are going to the fair just to do that F2F meeting as you say the best schools do, they do still have to GO to the fair. If they were finding what they needed via ISS, they could save money and go to the iFairs, too. They aren't doing that.

Meanwhile, candidates can search either database. Most schools in WE pop up in both, but SA has the bigger database. Yes, there are schools in one or the other, and yes, there are schools in neither, but ultimately SA has more. As a candidate, I want the bigger database (always). I can do my own cutting if I don't think a school is worthy, but because ITs have different needs just as schools do, why let ISS decide what might not work for me? The bigger database lets the IT make that decision. There is NO reason to go with the smaller database other than a perceived elitism that nobody but you seems to recognize--after all, there is still plenty of "poo," as you like to call it, at ISS.

The database is meaningless if schools aren't using it to search for candidates.

Sorry PsyGuy, but on this one you are just plain wrong.

@sdakota
Yes and no. It depends on HOW location specific you are. If you only want to work in Denmark, for example, yes, you could apply independently. However, if you are looking at most places in Europe or are Europe-plus-a-few-places, then an agency might make sense. The agencies also offer a place to store references, documents, etc. and offer access to fairs for that meet-and-greet. If Brussels, Helsinki, and Madrid all want a f2f, it's cheaper and easier to go to the SA London fair, for example, than to travel to all three cities--and you have options if you get none of the three.

Knowing nothing about PsyGuy's career, I will not bash him or it. As I said, he does have a lot of knowledge and provides a valuable perspective. It's just a bit disparaging of others at times.

No, it isn't a Disney movie, but you are a bit it isn't a horror movie, either. Yes, a dose of realism is fine, and you are good at providing that. However, you are so negative that you are discouraging, and there is no need for that. You make everybody feel that they can only qualify for the crummy schools, and that just isn't so. Reality is not as negative as you paint it. Telling someone they are less competitive because they lack IB experience is reality. Telling someone they "might" end up at a lower Tier 3 and that because they want a good school for their kids they are tourist teachers is harsh. Telling someone that they are probably less competitive and to be realistic, but aim high because you never know and it sometimes happens is not pixie dust--it's encouragement.

What you say is true for any job--candidates are often indistinct, so they need to make their resumes jump off the page in other ways. I have never denied that, all things being equal, the kids are a factor, but I have also pointed out that if a school wants you, they don't care, so you have to make a school want you.

Do you know anyone at Bangladesh? I do. Their pay is great, the school is great, but the country is currently basically on lockdown. So if someone says they don't care about location but want a good school, why not suggest it? It offers a good work environment, staff LIKE working there, great education for kids, save some money . . . . No, it isn't Japan, but a newbie is not likely to get Japan. So if someone is looking for a foot in the door that still allows their kids to attend a good school, that is a pleasant work environment, and that will allow them to get IT experience, what's so bad about suggesting it? It IS a good school--there are good schools in hardship locations all over the world. As a woman I would never work in Saudi Arabia because to me, that's hardship. There are tons of women who don't mind or even enjoy being driven around. Bangladesh may not suit YOU, but it does suit a lot of people, and my friends like the school enough that they opted to stay (and they are very experienced ITs with top resumes).

Elitism is not a straw man argument simply because you DO display elitism. You may not do it consciously, but you tell every teacher on here that they are not going to get what they are seeking or that they don't stack up. Many posters need a reality check, sure, and I have no problems saying that they are not as competitive or that they could improve X on their resume. But many already know those things, and instead of saying realistic things like "you are competitive in X market), you tell everyone to shoot for the bottom. You create a scoring system, then proceed to trash it for each individual to make sure they score lower, and you tell people who are pre-recruited at fairs (something you claim is mostly reserved for "rockstar" ITs) that they must have been recruited by lesser schools. Yes, you are an elitist. The air must be awfully thin up there. As for schools, yes, there are rockstar teachers everywhere. They just might not be rockstars on paper yet because they are new or don't have a certain checkmark on their application (yet is generally the key word here). There are tons of rockstars on paper who haven't updated their practice in years and phone it in every day simply because they ARE busy being the tourist teachers. And here is the reality of elite unis: They will recognize the elite prep schools of their host nations, sure, but a school like Harvard isn't going to differentiate between Bavarian International School and Munich International School, while teachers most certainly would! You are an elitist for TEACHING. You also fail to recognize that a good school like Bangladesh can allow a capable kid to get a 45 on his IB diploma just as easily as IS Bangkok can. It's just not as much fun to live in Dhaka. So when someone says they want a good school for their kids, you can't compare across regions. Isn't that what you always say anyway?

In spite of your elitism, you do provide a lot of valuable insights for this board, and a reality check is sometimes needed. I have said as much. You are well informed on how to navigate certifications, for example. And you do provide entertainment, so it's nice to have you as a regular poster. Just remember that you are not alone in your insights, knowledge, etc. and that the experiences of others may rival or even trump yours sometimes. It's okay to ignore certain topics or to admit ignorance or even--gasp--to admit you are wrong from time to time.

And the larger database matters because it isn't all just the bottom that fills it. There is trash on both databases, and it is often easy to identify. The bigger database casts a wider net, though, so newer, smaller schools that might be fantastic places to work might not appear on the smaller database. Just because a school doesn't have a top reputation (again, yet is a key word here) doesn't mean it's trash. It may not be elite, but it can still be a great place! So if you are wanting to cast a wider net, why not go with the database that casts a wider net?