Having started 'on the circuit' to gain IB experience, I went backwater in order to become HoD. In terms of professional development this has been a good thing but the school is a French lycee (with an IB section) and therefore way off the radar of recruiters.

I'd like to progress to an HoD position at a better international school than the one in which I started my career, but realistically what are my chances?

I have 5 years IB teaching experience, the past three years as HoD. But in your experience, do recruiters at reputable international schools take a chance on someone from an 'unknown' school for a leadership position?

Hi Ringler,

As I understand it, a Masters in Ed is de rigeur for Americans wishing to become teachers, completed after their bachelor's. Of course the undergrad and post grad degrees involve pedagogy and some field experience, but the requirement to work for a year or two in a classroom to become fully accredited is optional.

In the UK, both in Scotland and England, a bachelor's degree in the teaching subject is required, as is a post graduate certification in pedagogy which also involves working in schools for several months. After this, the putative teacher still has to work on probation in a school for a year in order to be fully accredited. As you can imagine, many of these teachers stay on/are offered full jobs in the school which accredited them and thus have no incentive in the short term to return to university for a Masters.

I am sure that the M Ed in the US is more demanding in terms of research and academics than the PGCE in the UK. On the other hand, the PGCE is, as the name suggests, more demanding in terms of research and praxis than the B Ed in either country.

The point is that the Master's is a normative qualification in US education, whereas in the UK it is optional (unless one wishes to take on a leadership role). There are Master's in specialist fields of education in the UK, requiring dissertation, research etc... at the cost of $20,000+ for a year's tuition, but far fewer UK teacher's hold masters than US teachers. Why? Because of the different structure and requirements of teacher training and accredition.

For example, someone like myself, who changed careers and retrained as teacher in his mid 30s - I made a considerable investment doing two years of training (PGCE plus probation) and once i was working in a school I had no incentive (and no money) to return to college for a Masters. Working where I am (international school in France) I don't have the money to do this now anyway, but I am increasingly worried that I will be left behind. It is bad enough having to compete with PhD people who wanted to teach in universities but have had to settle for private schools in the UK. Is this the way it is going to go at International Schools as well?

I have to admit being rather paranoid about qualification creep in the international teaching world. I understand that top schools will take the M Ed over the B Ed, but it is not that simple. The M Ed that American teachers acquire on route to accreditation is really just the same theory that UK teachers learn and apply for their PGCE; both are one year post-graduation courses involving dissertations etc.. Yet, one never has the right to call a PGCE a 'masters', so it would seem that UK teachers are at something of a disadvantage in this job market. If I am wrong about this, please put me right.