Short Answer: Yes

Long Answer:

New regulations went into effect in the Summer of 2023. Mostly their intent is to recognize that the EU didnt reciprocate on professional recognition of occupations as the UK (for purposes of this entire discussion UK exclusively means England). Countries didnt play nice and this is why we cant have nice things. The new regulations are actually better than the proposed ones which was going to dump everyone into the ECT framework and require everyone to do induction with no exemptions. The new regulations make two inflections points. To apply as an ECT/NQT (ECT is the new term for Early Career Teacher and replaces the previous NQT, Newly Qualified Teacher designation)you will need 1 year of teaching experience (consisting of no less than 9 months of contact time including holidays). If you do so you will receive QTS as an ECT (Entry grade credential), which will require you to complete induction to remove the ECT designation to full QTS (Standard grade credential). The value and distinction of this is still up to great debate. Mostly by ITs/DTS in IE who never completed induction and have been and likely will continue to be ECTs/NQTs whose salient point is that the induction deficiency is immaterial as the Dfe clearly designates that induction is only a requirement for maintained (public) DSs in the UK. Its not a requirement for any other type of IS or BS including BSOs, and that as such within the realm of IE ECT/NQT, Induction, and Full QTS (meaning QTS without the attached designation of ECT) are irrelevant and immaterial. The opposing point is that the differences in designation do matter as they are real differences. Its a designation that students and parents may very well care about. Inspectorates identify the difference between the two even if it doesnt factor into the metrics. HOSs and leaders are properly versed in the difference and they care to varying degrees (including not at all and very much). It may be a difference that can be ignored under certain conditions, but it may also be very significant. If your asked if youve completed induction, induction is a thing, and if youre an ECT/NQT the answer is no.

Induction is a two year (previously one year) period of mentoring and supervision where an ECT DT/IT (Induction can be completed in IE at a BSO that qualifies) is assessed against the UK NC Teaching Standards. This process is a trial by fire. There is one and only one opportunity to successfully complete Induction. A teacher can possibly appeal failure of Induction but they can not repeat it. An IT/DT that fails induction is added to the barring list of edus who failed induction. They are not permitted to serve in maintained (regulated/public) DSs. Surprisingly, these edus do not loose their QTS, they still retain their QTS for all other practical matters. Its this quirk that primarily serves as the difference in illustrating between a credential and a license (there are others CAN, PA, etc.). This is why within IE there are many ITs who never attempt Induction. Theres a lot at stake, its a very subjective process, and the BSOs where it can be completed are far removed and distant from QA access.

Applicants for QTS that have 2 years or more of applicable experience are exempt from Induction and receive Full (Professional grade) QTS (they are not designated as ECTs/NQTs and are exempt from the Induction process).

It means a minimum of 18 months of 1.0 FTE experience or more. Generally, any period of experience that is less than 1.0 is not considered FTE and is considered substitute/relief/supply teaching and does not count either in full or in part towards the experience requirement. However, the practical standard is whether the DT/IT was the TOR and if the employing institution considered them "Full Time" to include the receipt of benefits such as health insurance, pension, leave, etc. If the answer is yes: 1) The DT was TOR. 2) They received full FTE benefits. 3) The DS considered them "Full Time". Than the actual portion of the contract time doesnt really matter.

If you want to avoid the ECT/NQT designation and the requirement to complete Induction than you should wait to apply for QTS until you have a full 2 years of FTE experience. With the recent changes its unlikely more changes effecting you will be instituted before you have obtained the full amount of time.

One more note, there is a difference between completing Induction successfully and being exempt from induction. Its not a credentialing difference as Full QTS obtained either by successful completion of Induction or being exempt from Induction both have the same effect in that they remove the ECT/NQT identifier and allow the assumption of appointments in a maintained (public/regulated) DS in the UK. Its a perceptual quality difference. Mainly, that an OTT with QTS is more likely not to have any experience or understanding of the lexicon and meds/peds/asst as it pertains to edu in the UK but also that an OTT with QTS hasnt been tested or evaluated against the UK NC Teaching Standards and are more an unknown quality, especially for ITs who dont teach at SLL and dont have testing performance data.

Finally, if you are exempt from Induction as an OTT, you can not voluntarily participate in the Induction process or the ECT framework. Participation in the ECT framework does come with some benefits as well as being able to claim you successfully completed Induction. Thats something a not insignificant number of ITs with QTS can claim. Its a substantially smaller group than the inverse.

There kind of mostly really isnt.

First, HI closed their loop, without an EPP/ITT program they will only award at best a Provisional (Entry grade) credential, which is not acceptable for QTS.

Second, CT is still possible but you dont likely meet the criteria for the Provisional (Standard grade) credential. If your combined experience was acceptable to both substitute for lack of an EPP/ITT program and meet the experience requirement (with or without evaluations) and you received the CT Provisional credential than the TCL/TRA might accept this for issuance of QTS.
Recently as of the Summer of 2023 new regulations were created and went into effect. There is a new tool for determining QTS eligability and new requirements are now in place. For most ITs there is a new experience requirement (1 year to qualify as an ECT/NQT, requiring induction and two years to exempt induction). However, the prior interpretation is now policy, and requires the whole of your EPP/ITT program training to have been completed in the region where you obtained your OTT and credential. The new experience requirements make it easier for the TCL/TRA to determine the entirety of program completion.
The TCL/TRA also has an interpretation that UK nationals should not use outside credentialing programs to obtain QTS. Thats not to say they cant and if everything is above board than youre fine, but your application will receive extensive scrutiny and they will quickly discover that your CT pathway did not include an EPP/ITT program that meets the requirements of a level 6 qualification.

Third, its still possible to get a US credential and some very easily, but of the ones that are available, none of them (with possibly the above exception, and a few others (Notably some of the more esoteric options in CA) meet the eligibility requirements for QTS. The key requirements are equivalence to a level 6 qual., which eliminates the asst. based pathways such as the MA Provisional, AZ Expert, etc. and the requirement the program incorporate a field experience component completed within the geographical confines of the regulating authority issuing the credential, which eliminates programs such as Teach Now (Moreland). It may, unlikely with the new experience requirement, be possible to obtain one of the above asst or skills based pathways for the initial credential and then seek a second layer credential from another regulating authority (WA for example) and possibly obfuscate the application credential. This of course would require subterfuge on the part of the applicant in completing the application, but it is possible. A UK national however is going to receive the formerly mentioned extensive review of their application, and its so far distant from the realm of events considered likely I wouldnt be uncomfortable putting it closer to the category of not possible.

Instead, abandoning the US route and looking at the HK route may be more productive. The new regulations fully accept HK candidates for QTS eligibility. You have an extensive academic record which may be accepted as equivalent to a HK PGDE which is the standard for RT (Registered Teacher) status (Standard grade) credential. You will want to first apply for recognition of your documents by the HKCAAVQ. If a positive determination is made you will then need to travel to HK to apply for RT status. Once you obtain RT status you could then potentially apply through the TCL/TRA for QTS. Though doing so is going to require similar levels of subterfuge in completing the application, HK receives comparatively less scrutiny than the US does.

@Bayesic

No, why would it, Portsmouth isnt a diploma mill. It would provide you a basis for understanding the UK NC and cross system meds/peds/asst tends to have utility in IE.

Yes, but you are eligible for the DC Admin credential. You have the 4 years experience, all you need is to take the SLLA exam and have a Masters.

They are actually about the same amount of contact time. The difference in values has more to do with the calculation of breaks/holidays and end of term. You may also want to consider that a two year degree will have fewer issues than a degree thats less than two years, especially coming from an online only Uni.

You have two primary issues with ACE:
1) Its an exclusively online Uni. There are ISs and Ministries that wont accept online degrees. While this would apply to online programs at brick and mortar Unis as well, its easier to obfuscate. There is also a not insignificant number of individuals and entities that feel online Uni degrees are inferior and some who consider them a diploma mill.
2) The ACE Ed.Ld program requires a field experience (internship, etc.) requiring you to have an IS thats willing to give you some form of leadership role to complete. With the Portsmouth, etc. programs its a thesis or capstone that doesnt require external accommodation or cooperation. Thesis degrees have stronger value if you ever consider a research doctorate or a conventional doctorate with a dissertation requirement.

If youre considering ACE you may as well look at UPe which at USD$4K is half the cost of the alternatives and you could finish in a year.

I am sure you have read in other topics then that unless a Uni is a global ivy than a Masters is a Masters. Despite what the Uni world of ratings and rankings would have you believe, for the purposes of IE neither Portsmouth nor Sunderland is of any tangible benefit over the other (unless the leader your interviewing with is an alum). In this case the program matters more and a Ed.Ld degree has better utility for leadership than a C&I degree (most ISs and recruiters wont read past the title, even if you take some supplementary studies). The Harvard CSML certificate is impressive but its less than a Masters.
Of the two Portsmouth is the stronger candidate for future leadership.

Tier 1 experience would be very beneficial, it has stronger utility and marketability than a degree from Sunderland (or Portsmouth), neither program is going to add anything to an application into a Tier 1 IS other than having a Masters.

The Oxford Masters is very doable from many locations in the WE. All of the seminar dates are on Saturdays, you fly out on Friday and fly back Saturday evening or Sunday morning. For China youd have to take a day off for a long weekend. Fly out of Shanghai late Thursday evening arrive in London on Friday mid day and take either bus or train to Oxford, check in to your accommodations and check out the next morning on your way to the seminar. At the end of the seminar head back to London and fly out that evening back to Shanghai which arrives late morning on Sunday. If your IS is willing to give you PD or comp time or grant the absence its only 5 days in the year but very doable. It does add about £6K to the cost of the program. The benefits however would be substantial though, a leadership certificate from Harvard and a Masters from Oxford, thats a resume that gets looked at. There are tier 3 ISs that would give you the keys just on that alone. Thats a HOS profile an IS can sell to parents.

@smile2017

It was and is an open discussion, you just dont like the direction it went because what you really wanted was a closed discussion aligned with your preconceived ideas.

@popgirl

The TES PGCEi program consist of only two modules, one module over each of two academic terms. One is a research (methodology) module the other is a content specific pedagogy module. Thats the core program. The third module for the HK program meets the requirements for RT status (Standard grade credential), Its a field experience component that additionally explores assessment in greater depth and detail.

The costs are on par with each individual course. The two module core program is £3600 which divided individually is £1800 per module. The difference between the core program at £3600 and the HK program at £5600 makes that third module £2000 which is only £200 more than the core programs individual module cost.

That statement is actually very transparent, the PGCEi isnt a credential, it doesnt lead to QTS its a piece of paper indicating completion of a 1 year Masters course of study. They cant promise or offer any guarantee or assurance it will be worth anything.

@smile2017

I find your lack of faith disturbing.
I know Im helpful, Ive been thanked on numerous occasions for my contributions.
Sticks and Stones...
No it states more about your mindset and attitude than mine. Many of your ilk take similar routes of ad-hominem attacks when others dont agree with you. You have a certain mindset and anyone who disagrees with you is racist or misogynistic or trans-phobic, or some other debased character assault and deserves whatever vitriol you can muster.

You offered nothing in the way of hard numbers, your single data claim is "On their system-wide school climate survey, more than 4,500 secondary students answered "yes" when asked if they've ever seen physical altercations on their campus due to arguments over race, cultural identity, country of origin or language.". 4500 is in that category of numbers that sounds a lot like a convenience quantity, its too much of a guesstimate and lacks any real precision, and this is in addition to being from a climate survey which are little more than preference questionnaires. Even if it had validity and reliability, so what. Water is wet. American kids fight, American kids fight each other because they are different from one another. They have been doing so since the Irish and the Italians of New York City met after Ellis island a hundred years ago, and probably before than and likely will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Kids in ISs outside the US and outside of ASs hit each other as well. What are they supposed to do, hit each other over not being different from one another.
The rest of your observations are only that they arent hard numbers "Leaders are either White or Black, in a county that can benefit from Hispanic, bilingual leadership as they have been completely overwhelmed by migrants getting bussed up to Maryland (approximately 6,000 students arrived to Maryland, many of whom are SLIFE - students with limited or interrupted formal education).". This is just your opinion that bilingual leadership would be a benefit because of non-English speaking immigrants. Theres no hard numbers or concrete anything.
None of your claims support the conclusion that ignoring DEI issues leads to dysfunctional learning environments. You just claim they do because some kids report seeing fights based on students being different than one another. This is a conclusion fallacy.

Youre welcome to post your insight, as much as I am welcome to post my insight.
I dont need your permission or invitation to post my insights, observations, etc.

Again, just because others dont agree with you, doesnt make them wrong.

Superintendents as a group in US DOE dont care that much about internationally minded edu. Its just not a priority for most of them. There are some that have that as their particular pet project, but emulating IE or developing internationally minded edu isnt something they care a whole lot about beyond those few. Why should they. America is the greatest country in the world, what could they possibly gain but integrating foreign ideas and concepts except to make them less American.

Im getting the impression that "quality education" means something different for you than it does other edus. You believe edu should be the way you want it and anyone who doesnt agree with you is at best wrong, and at worst evil.
Its because of this differentiation in what quality edu is that you describe it as some quality that you hope exists in some small pocket. Many edus dont feel the same way as you do and consider themselves quit successful. They just dont have the same goals and objectives that you have, or to put it another way youre more experienced with "so what, now what"

So Im right, you just want to hear from other edu who share and agree with youre already preconceived ideas.

Are you really interested in a conversation or is your inquiry rhetorical and an excuse for your woke treatise on how the US DE system is antiquated?
Because if you are interested in internationally progressive US DE you could have readily omitted the comparison of the MD DE. It didnt address the tenant of your inquiry which would have been served by simply including the VA DE description.

My speculation is that your post serves the function of the latter rather than the former. Further, I heavily question your experience in IE, unless your only experience is in elite tier US Embassy ISs, in such a case, you know very little about the broader experience of IE. The Colonial approach in edu is still and has been the status quo in IE for quit a long time and its not going away anytime soon. IE is still very much a white people only club. Sure, there are upper tier, internationally progressive ISs with long wait lists where parents have to accept the ethos of the IS rather than dictating it, but those ISs are the exception rather than the rule. Ive had recent experience at the brasserie of minorities arriving at an IS for an interview and physically feeling all of the energy evaporate from the room when they walked in and the leadership saw they were a minority. Regardless of their resume, they arent the right fit. If this surprises you you dont know much about IE. That this surprises you as being the case in the US DE system, than I really must assume you have had your head in a hole for the last couple decades?

What surprises me is that some dissertation committee accepted such a proposal. It would seem your doctoral research is little more than a documentation of racial disparities in American edu, which isnt exactly a notable contribution to the body of research in the field. Its trendy enough though, and there are certainly heavy advocates in edu that have a voracious appetite for any topic or subject that is woke enough to appease the Twitter sphere.

@WT123

Were they going to employ you as a PT or RT though? Getting PT status requires a bachelors/first degree and little else. Some HK ISs prefer employing an IT under the PT status scheme because the PT status is directly tied to the employer IS. The PT status is only valid for placement with the IS that sponsored it. The IS knows that PT status is less marketable than RT status which provides the IS an additional measure of control over the IT. They know the IT cant jump across or down the street so readily to another IS/DS. That a new IS would have to apply for a new issuance of a PT permit, which takes time, that the IS may not be able or willing to wait. The issuance can also be delayed for various administrative reasons that can be a deal breaker for the new IS. The IT gives notice to Acme AS, Acme AS dismisses the IT immediately. Genovia IS applies for PT status for the IT and waits 10 days. The application is denied with note that the application must be accompanied by the original degree scroll instead of a certified copy. Now the IT has to get the original degree which they either cant do, or the IS is unwilling to wait any longer. They void the contract and now the IT is jobless and has rent due in a few weeks, and now has to go job hunting. They may find something at another IS but if not they are going to have to contend themselves with ESOL work for the rest of the recruiting cycle. Not the best position to be in and is an incentive to stay with whatever the current IS is.

@SideOut

You actually have three problems and the third one is the bigger problem.

THE GOOD

Unless you finished Teach Ready really fast, as in less than 6 months or in less than one academic term, which I dont think you could do than the length of EPP/ITT program probably isnt an issue.

THE BAD

One week is an insufficient length of field experience to qualify for RT status. However, its not a visa issue, you could still get a visa as you would still qualify at a PT with any length of field experience. It doesnt matter if you have a US DOE credential or QTS credential from the TCL/TRA.

THE UGLY

HK is an academic pathway region and the standard the HKCAAVQ uses is the equivalent of a HK PGDE. This requires courses recorded on a Uni transcript. Teach Ready uses the Uni of Western Florida as their academic partner. You only get a couple (6 credit hours) in Uni credit for the Teach Ready EPP/ITT program which is not nearly enough to meet the equivalence of a PGDE that the HKCAAVQ is looking for to qualify as an RT.

Essentially you have two deficiencys you need a sufficient field experience (student teaching, clinical teaching, teaching practice, practicum, internship, etc.) and you need a record of academic studies/coursework.
You mentioned an M.Ed, unfortunately not any M.Ed will work for you, as youre going to need a Masters program that also contains a field work component, effectively an EPP/ITT program that also awards an M.Ed. Field experience components usually arent part of an M.Ed program that isnt part of an EPP/ITT program. It is possible to find Masters programs that have an internship option as part of their program that is available as an elective. Whether this would be accepted by the HKCAAVQ is more subjective. It depends on the degree of supervision and mentorship and if the internship places you as the TOR. It might be accepted and it might not. Usually an internship elective is one of the last courses a student takes so you wont know if its acceptable until youre done with the degree program, which is a huge investment to make and find out your still deficient.
You commented that the PGCEi from Sunderland would be a waste. The program does contain a field work component and is acceptable for RT status in HK. You can also apply 2 of the modules towards one of their two Masters programs essentially completing one year of graduate study. This would allow you to complete a suitable field experience and obtain a Masters conserving both time and coin in the process. You can also find other Uni that will accept the PGCEi program towards their Masters programs as well.

Lastly, its possible to use prior work experience in lieu of a field experience component. Its highly subjective but in practice its usually only an effective option if the experience was in an HK DS/IS.

If you have a low threshold for bureaucracy than HK may not be the place for you, but I find it no different than other little tiger regions (JP, SG, TW).

Why not all three of them, youre just going to take some PRAXIS tests so youre talking what three days to take the exams and a few hundred USD in fees.

Economics ITs have some of the highest market value but only within the sphere of humanities/social sciences. Social studies pairs well with Literature but its usually only at the lower secondary level you find those kinds of pairings. Economics isnt generally taught outside of the SLL level. This means an IS is going to put their assessment scores in the hands of an IT without any KS/K12 experience in the subject and a degree thats a decade old at least. there are certainly ISs low enough in tiers and in hardship regions that will do that but I dont think thats what your looking for.

There are plenty of non-ASs that dont teach American History.

Youre in the same boat with maths but maths is in very high demand generally, so much so that there are more ISs that have to settle for what they can get. Maths is also one of those subjects you find at all grade levels. So giving you a lower secondary maths class to see how you do doesnt jeopardize the IS nearly as much as SLL does. Still if you cant teach calculus and higher level maths if an IS needs that, then they still have to recruit someone else.

Business has vacancies but not as many as maths or econ does. Many of those business positions are combined with economics and/or other humanities and social sciences positions.

Social studies is one of the easier vacancies to recruit for. Once you get to SLL its typically for specific courses but outside that its rather really close to the saturation point.

Credentials and no experience is more valuable than no credential, and no experience. Its about a wash on what a recruiter would prefer comparing a candidate with no experience but one has a degree in the subject and the other has a credential (but no subject specific degree). The credential checks the legal box, the degree candidate probably understands the subject matter better.

So the first thing to do is what your IS will accept. All the recommendations and suggestions in the world wont matter if your IS says no, before even going to immigration with it on your behalf. At one end we have some certificates like the ACSI certificate and IB workshop certificates that while very, very basic possess some validity in that ACSI and the IBO are legitimate organizations that have a system for teaching their curriculum and their declaration is you need this certificate to meet the requirements of an edu in their system. Their system is primary and secondary edu. So maybe just maybe that would work, I wouldnt pin everything on that or something like that working, but surprises me anymore.

Teach Now and Moreland are the same thing. Moreland is the name of the Uni and Teach Now is the program within that Uni that provides a EPP/ITT skills pathway to a pro. edu. credential. They would take your coin but your looking at a 9 month program, pro. edu, exams (PRAXIS) and 12 week of field experience. Thats a lot of work.

The iQTS isnt much different they finished the pilot cohort this summer and rolled out an extended cohort. The issue is this. The Dfe says iQTS is a credential, the Dfe runs the TRA, and the TRA is the regulating authority for DE in England, but Parliament hasnt made the necessary change for iQTS to be recognized for and issue QTS. This leaves IE and IT with a DE regulating authority saying they regulate IE because they say so. Ofsted inspectorates are very, very likely to recognize iQTS, which helps BSs and BSOs. Its at this point that everything slows to a stop, because its what your IS recognizes and more so what immigration and and any particular MOE recognizes. A similar event happened with the PGCEi it worked for a lot of people in lower tier ISs but got exponentially much less useful as ITs tried moving up tiers in IE. It worked less and less the better the IS got, which cant entirely account for immigration and MOEs with different acceptance and recognition outcomes in the same country. Some of this was due to regional variation, but in some cases ISs were in the same city and a PGCEi was acceptable for one school and not acceptable at another. So really requires you to get strong confirmation iQTS would work for you.
The reason being iQTS takes about the same amount of time, has similar requirements and costs about the same as Teach Now and other skills based EPP/ITT programs.

What you might be thinking is AO, which is a route to QTS that takes about 3 months and cost about £3K. Youll have QTS and be an ECT.

The MA Provisional (Entry grade) credential requires a transcript evaluation (such as performed by SPANTRAN), application, no CRB and a couple of pro. edu. exams that many can be taken remotely online from home. There are some other possible options but given the MA provisional is the easiest and fastest and maybe the least coin (A few hundred USD), there isnt much reason to go further. This gets you an effectively lifetime credential that doesnt require PD nor needs to be renewed.

The other option is to look around at places like HK, etc. if your current credential has not expired yet and see if you cant get another non-western credential.

Theres more marketability for a PGCE, but part of that is because the US tertiary edu system doesnt really have an equivalent of the PGCE thats an actual national certificate. There are still some B.Eds around, but at the undergrad level students typically get a BA in Elementary Ed or more often they get it in some subject matter field and then minor in edu. While there are Post-Bach programs that get a student credentialed its the credential you get, not some Uni certificate typically. The US also has a much higher proportion of credential holders that use alternative credentialing (skills and assessment based) pathways, whereas in the UK the academic pathway is substantially the dominate pathway to a credential (QTS).

Teach Now/Moreland is an EPP/ITT provider, they dont issue credentials or licenses. Teach Now/Moreland recommends the candidate to the DC DOE and the DC DOE (OSSE) issues the credential.

Getting an apostille/authentication from DC is a rather easy process. First request a duplicate copy of the credential from the DC OSSE, request a certified copy when making the request and that you are applying for an apostille. You then send it to the DC office of Notary Commissions and Authentications for the apostille/authentication. Its essentially the same process for every state.

Many states OE use a digital format such as a PDF to download a hard copy of the credential as opposed to printing and mailing.

First week, last week, it could have been any week drama.

Forget first week drama, thats just drama, it could have happened at anytime. This IT is just manipulating your friendship. They probably dont want to lose the coin that rightfully should be going to you. You should absolutely be getting comp for the cover. Its not something your friendship should have to negotiate.

Ive covered for some ITs who wanted or needed to leave early on a Friday before a holiday or break, and couldnt get the coverage approved or didnt want to risk asking. Ive made it very clear though that my coverage as a favor to them is going to be limited to supervising the class, Im not going to teach or run a lesson plan for them. I wouldnt ask for coin for that, but its a favor they owe me.
For a hospital visit, even just stitches theres a policy and procedure in place and leadership would assign someone and they would get cover comp for it, and it wouldnt likely cost the IT with who took the hospital visit anything.