Leadership roles are defined by reports, peer deliverables, or resource budgeting and allocation.
There are 3 general avenues into leadership:
1) Grow In: You start at an IS as an IT, you work well with leadership, parents and ownership, and then when there is an opening you get the job because ownership trusts you and leadership and parents like you. This pathway is faster at lower tier ISs, where there is a lot of turnover and longevity often means your only one of the few staff to renew.
2) Work In: You get a M.Ed in Ed.Ld, you add a credential, you build some leadership or management experience and you work your way up into leadership. This may and often requires some work in DE. This is the pathway that accounts for the majority of leadership. Candidates were leadership in DE, and they were hired as leadership in IE.
3) Edge In: You make friends and build a network, maybe you marry into, but someone in ownership likes you and gives you the job, or someone in leadership helps you get into the job. This is the least common path into leadership.

It varies greatly what an IS is looking for, on one end you have the US requirements that you typically find requiring a leadership credential. Some of the such as the MA Superintendent (Executive leadership level) require a few years experience and a literacy exam. DC requires a Masters, a few years experience, including classroom experience and passing the SLLA exam. On the other side of the continuum you have the UK where there exist various national qualifications for leadership but the standard requirement is possessing QTS.
In IE the mode you often find as the defacto standard is a M.Ed (or other edu Masters) in Ed.Ld. Though you find ISs that want a doctorate and you also find leaders, including those in senior and executive leadership who only have a Bachelors/First degree. In IE the vast majority regardless of being profit or non-profit institutions are private/independent ISs/DSs that do not have to comply with the same regulations required for faculty and staff as those found in regulated edu (Public/Maintained) DSs/ISs. Ownership in many cases can appoint whoever they want regardless of qualifications and credentials. There are leaders who have non edu based degrees such as in business, though this is more commonly seen in ISs where leadership is divided between the operations and "back office" roles and duties suit a leadership more business orientated and the academic or "front office" leadership tasks are the purview of leadership with more edu focused background. The business focused leader is small but growing, with greater growth in decentralized chain ISs.
Meeting the JD requirements becomes more important the more external to the IS the leadership recruiting process is. If an IS is more internally focused on promoting from within than its less about resume qualifications and credentials. The more external the leadership search the greater the role of qualifications, credentials and experience in an attempt that those criteria can be extrapolated to the needs of the ISs ownership. It should be noted with grave significance that not every IS is looking for a generalist who can competently and proficiently manage the day to day operations and needs of an IS. A substantial number of ISs and ownership do look for leadership, often as part of a leadership (referred to as the SLT, or Senior Leadership team) with a specific or niche skill set. Leaders who are recruited to clean house or get an IS through an accreditation process or increase enrollment or who prioritize revenue, as opposed to keeping the day to day running smoothly.

Two insights. First, regardless of the pathway into leadership the greatest hurdle is the first one into senior or executive leadership. Once in and after a couple of years whether the leader performs well or with mediocrity its generally much easier to move into new leadership roles.
Second, first tier and elite tier ISs become very difficult to move into. There tends to be a revolving cycle of leadership in lower tier ISs but once they get the the top tier ISs, leadership tend to stay and wait for advancement internally rather than move to a lower tier IS with a better title and more responsibility, though it does happen.

@intltchr

Your CA credential doesnt mean anything from the POV of the HK MOE. You either are an exempt ET teaching ESOL, or youre a permitted teacher (PT) or registered teacher (RT).

No, the CA Preliminary (Entry grade) credential is not renewable. You cant freeze it, and you cant renew it. There is a grey area where a DT with really good cause and sponsorship from an LEA can get an extension but thats not really applicable in this scenario. If the Preliminary credential expires you will have to clear whatever deficiencies that were included with your Preliminary credential to obtain the CLEAR (Professional grade) credential. No amount of lapsed time would allow you reapply for another Preliminary credential. Nor can you apply for a different clearance pathway than the one you were given with your initial pathway.

CA is the gold standard in the US NC but you dont need the CA credential with QTS and the NJ CEAS. The disadvantage if any is rather technical but from a practical position probably amounts to a trivial difference if any at all.

Does it have to be an AD title? There are many more ISs that have an HOD for PHE as opposed to an AD. If you have to have that title than I would concur with @scooter93, youre better off finding an IS with an AD role, getting in and then one the job becomes available because the current AD leaves for whatever reasons, your in a better place to secure that appointment internally rather than as an external candidate.

Otherwise you dont mention it but obtaining a pro edu credential would be a strong next step such as QTS, etc. that appears to be missing.

@falconeer

Its not you.

Yes, but only on the 'soft side'. Leaders tend to have two faces the 'soft' side where in men means being one of the guys and your leader tries to be your colleague, your team member or their 'hard' side where its cold, detached, and hyper professional.
The 'soft' side of women in leadership tends to be maternal or just one big family where we all get along for the common and greater good compared to their 'hard' side which tends to over compete with their perceptions of their male counterparts. They have to be colder, more detached, and even more professional so that they an be seen as "capable" compared to male leaders.

@Thames Pirate

Thats not the trick. PE has about as much setup as any studio based course whether its science labs or art classes, or theater production or any class that isnt a seminar.

But yes some data even absent context in this regard is better than no data at all.

@Sid

My interpretation was that the trailing spouse had a remote/freelance/consultant type of career where their office is anywhere they can plug in a laptop and have strong WiFi.

@freetofly2022

Yeah, but you have to work and live in Kuwait.
None of that data on SA though is validated, its all self report. Sure there are ISs who are transparent but theres a greater pool of ISs that want to present as positive and beneficial image as they can. Its not until later they drop the current comp package and it doesnt include waivers for more than one child. Most of the SA IS profiles are little more than marketing and sales. Thats assuming the IS has actually updated their IS profile in this decade.

@Heliotrope

Those profiles are all unvalidated, self reports. There isnt even an indication that they are really current. Just because theres some scenario where an IS would provide more waivers/places doesnt mean that for any particular IT thats a guarantee part of the offer.

If ballpark suggestions are what you want, forget college or uni towns go for the cities with a high enough international presence that there are ISs in the local vicinity.

I have not personally but know a few ITs that have. Most of them did it though because they really couldnt afford to retire fully yet, or at least they felt like an opportunity for a couple more years might not come along later if they found out they really could have used more coin in their savings.

Your disgruntled friend isnt too far off. The modern Uni classroom isnt the same one of 30 or even 20 years ago. It depends what your teaching. If your teaching CSI/ICT, maths, science, engineering those are different students. They tend to be more problem resolution driven and focused on outcomes and results. Can you help them get to the right answers. There also tends to be less pop culture in those classes and fields. Even when discussing topics such as generative AI, those students can separate the ethics, and human approach to utility from the technical skills and aspects. Whereas humanities and social sciences tend to get more of the extremes in student beliefs and dispositions. You get a lot more push from students in those fields and if your not progressive enough in their mind set your more likely to face confrontation. Business tends to be in the middle. Its less about ideology though and more about how the business approach of times past was focused on finding and playing a role in a larger corporate entity. Get those skills, get the job, move up. Now its focused to a much greater degree on entrepreneurship. The difference between the two being that the old school thinking was specializing and filling a niche or role working for someone else, where the new school of though is the generalist who needs to know enough about everything to run their own business.

@intltchr

The HKCAAVQ is reporting you meet the professional/academic requirements for RT status (Professional grade) credential.

There are two agencies involved in the process. The HKCAAVQ which provides you the report you cited does not issue PT/RT status. This is made by the MOE (Education Bureau). You will now need to complete an application Form 8 and attach your documents. As part of the process you need to include a copy of your landing slip of entry into HK (thus you really need to be in HK when you apply).

Your qualifications are at the level of a PGDE. If you have an acceptable Diploma level TESOL certificate you would be eligible for appointment at category 1 or some other kind of acceptable certificate at less than Diploma level at category 2.

With RT status you can teach in HK for any IS/DS that will appoint you.

@Bears123

QTS is a permenant credential, it does not expire. It does not require PD to be maintained, does not require renewal, or validation. There is ongoing talk and has been for a while about attaching some form of ongoing PD expectation, but its a conversation thats been out there for a while. The current and very recent extension of induction by 1 to 2 years and the increased experience requirement for OTTs hopefully will quell those murmurs.

QTS is also not age, grade or subject specific. There is no primary or secondary or subject matter QTS. Your edu dossier contains three fields for the TCL/TRA to put your training subject fields. These are what a maintained (public) DS would use in part to determine your qualification for a particular assignment and post. A DS in England would have issues with the LEA or inspectorate if they appointed or assigned a DT to a subject and classroom without reasonable support that the edu is qualified in the appropriate subject level. Outside of that however, there isnt an inscribed part of your QTS certificate listing grades or ages and subjects a DT is authorized to teach. ISs will generally want to see successful classroom experience in the subject and/or some course work at the tertiary level. As well as some familiarity with the curriculum guide/syllabus. This depends and varies on the subject and grade level as well as the ISs need and availability.

@Bayesic

Yes, absolutely.
In 2020 the US DOE removed the designations of "Regional Accreditation" and "National Accreditation" and aggregated them to the category of "Institutional Accreditation" as opposed to the designation of "Program Accreditation" such as CAEP, MACTE, etc. That doesnt mean they dont exist any more and more importantly that there isnt a difference. Some of those differences are very narrow and specific, such as when applying for citizenship or PR in a country with a points system for open application. A regionally accredited US degree is likely to get those points where as a nationally accredited US degree is less likely to be accepted and award those application points. Some of those differences are very general and broad, an exclusively online Uni with only national accreditation is more likely to be seen as inferior or worse invalid compared to one that has regional accreditation even if its still an exclusively online Uni.
My point is that within the scope of IE and in the context of application marketability and salary band the differences between the exclusively online Unis of UPe and ACE if there is a difference its a trivial one.Two points to note:
1) UPe has a lot of foreign and international students and by extension many more working in IE than ACE does, youre more likely to meet a UPe alum than an ACE alum.
2) UPe is also undergoing the accreditation process for WASC accreditation. They have progressed to the candidacy stage having completed their 2nd accreditation visit with a 3rd scheduled for the Fall of 2024. Their list of deficiencies grows shorter and shorter. The majority of their deficiencies are in regard to documentation in collecting data and formalizing their structure, approach and policies (mainly that their policies are supported by data). They have one maybe two heavy tasks left (mostly dealing with curriculum and OER materials). They are at most a couple years away from receiving WASC accreditation.

First, It depends on the source of the policy or rule. An IS is more likely to require transcripts but a Ministry (for visa purposes) is more likely to be interested in the scroll rather than the transcript.
Second, Many Uni dont include a designation for online/distance courses and programs verses F2F/residence programs. Its not difficult though to discover that ACE (or UPe) are exclusively online Unis compared to the method of program delivery at a Uni. in residence.
Third, theres a higher degree of animosity towards exclusively online Unis that isnt present for online/distance programs offered at brick and mortar Unis.

Likely true. There are Unis that offer summer only degrees that are provided in residence. Its also possible to attend an extension campus of a Uni locally. Nottingham for example has some applicable edu degrees at their campus in Ningbo, Liverpool has a campus partnership in Suzhou, and Sunderland has a campus in Hong Kong as some examples.

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.