Search found 72 matches

by GrumblesMcGee
Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:12 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Question for PsyGuy
Replies: 4
Views: 6420

Re: Question for PsyGuy

Thanks for the additional info.

Others (e.g., PsyGuy) are better informed to delve into the details of Teach Now, etc.

Not to pick on you, but you're kind of mixing terminology again with the "...looking for a license from an accredited body..." language and arguably even the bit about Teach Now giving a license. "Accreditation" implies the evaluation (and approval) by some sort of educational (or other) institution. In education, it's generally referring to the schools (not the teachers) being approved. While in some countries the accrediting bodies are governmental, in the United States they're not.

So if you're looking for licensure, it's not coming from any "accredited body" in the common usage of those terms--at least not in the United States.

Having said all that, I'll leave it to others to suggest the best path forward for Robert to seek a license.
by GrumblesMcGee
Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:38 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Marketability and dogs
Replies: 47
Views: 59667

Regarding the "PsyGuy vs. His Nemeses" Squabble

I just want to weigh in a bit on this petty squabble. OK, calling it petty is a bit unfair, as there are people trying to weigh in and reduce someone's credibility (ostensibly) in order to prevent unknowing readers from trusting their more controversial advice.

The pseudo-doxxing stuff that @Walter, @hawkeye, et al are pulling is rather creepy. And I'm writing that as someone who agrees that @PsyGuy is: (a) out of his depth on many issues; (b) borderline-trolling with his stubbornness; (c) probably overstating his qualifications for weighing in on certain topics. He MAY even be flat-out lying about his CV (I have no evidence that he is). I've gone on record quite a few times calling @PsyGuy out. But that fact that @PsyGuy may be giving bad advice or engaging in immature arguments does not justify crossing what I believe is a red line: taking an anonymous forum poster and flirting with outing them in order to win your argument or silence someone you deem a nuisance.

The cure for bad speech is more speech. All @PsyGuy is doing, at his worst, is annoying people and giving some dubious views on topics. Catch him spreading nonsense about the rental market in The Hague? Prove him wrong. But to threaten to reveal who he is on a forum, or even to claim that you know who he is and therefore that he's lying? That's over the line.

I'll provide the most egregious example I've found so far. Granted, it's from 2012. But in that previously cited thread, @hawkeye writes:

> So, what's it to be Psyguy- would you like to test your theory about there not being a blacklist or would you like to keep
> going with the charade and have your real identity come out? I’ve tried to drop hints in my posting to tell you I know
> you are but you seem the type who needs the sledgehammer approach. I'm sure the heads who are watching this board
> would be delighted to know who you are. You know of course that Search will now be very interested to know who you are
> as well. Imagine writing that you attended a Search fair that had been set up and run by Search for Search candidates, and
> had no scruples about interviewing them even though you were not registered with them. I know this is an absolute lie
> anyway, but this says a lot about you and your ethics, and I can tell you that you are not the person that an international
> school should hire.

> Over to you now…I'm happy to keep dropping tidbits about you on this forum so the heads can do their own searching just
> as I did.

Later in the thread, @hawkeye raises the threat level:

> If you keep insisting you were at Sydney, I'll post enough information to let Search and recruiters know exactly who you
> are. You should never work in a reputable international school, and to be honest, looking at your CV, there really isn't
> much of a chance, but I'm giving you a last chance. Come clean, admit you weren't at Sydney and don't work in Denmark,
> and I'll stop.

And then @hawkeye begins trickling out supposed information about @PsyGuy.

That's just wrong. You can claim he deserves it. You can declare him homo sacer and argue that he doesn't deserve to be treated according to the same principles that might ordinarily guide you. But that's a scary argument to make and one I always have a hard time buying. In fact, I'd lean closer to ruling you violated some torts just by making that threat than that anyone deserves it.

In that same 2012 thread, @walter, who claims to have been a school head for more than 20 years at that point, is just as vociferous with the ad hominem attacks. He then states that he looked up @PsyGuy's profile and rattles off his tenures at "Tier 9" schools. Really? Is that the kind of maturity, civility, and respect for privacy that we expect in a career school administrator?

The sad thing is that I'm actually on the side of these people who think @PsyGuy needs to stay in his lane, stop making stuff up, and stop giving bad advice. Even when he tries to give constructive advice, I'm critical of its inaccessibility, given @PsyGuy's penchant for (often made-up) jargon and acronyms. But the anti-PsyGuy brigade scares me a lot more than some (likely) strange person who posts here far too often and sometimes expresses questionable information/views.
by GrumblesMcGee
Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:04 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Question for PsyGuy
Replies: 4
Views: 6420

Re: Question for PsyGuy

PsyGuy is overall more knowledgeable in certification matters, so I'd give weight to his overall - of "Robert's" situation, but I'll reduce the variables a bit for you.

I'm assuming that Robert has a bachelor's degree from an accredited school (I mean, he got the iffy online master's). If that assumption is correct, the routes forward are much, much easier. There are plenty of programs (you named a few) that will get you some form of certification as long as you have a bachelor's. Bear in mind, however, that you're (perhaps inadvertently and interchangeably) throwing both "certification" and "license" out there. They're related, but not necessarily the same thing. There's even some debate over the overlap/relationship between the terms.

From my perspective, "licensure" is a pretty straightforward concept: some territorial governing body grants you a credential that says you're legally allowed to teach. Whether it's Missouri or Connecticut or Hawaii or Wisconsin, they're all equally irrelevant (and at the same time, strangely relevant) to teaching overseas. And given the myriad choices and policies, it gets complicated (which makes PsyGuy's knowledge helpful). So if you're looking for that LICENSE, be clear about that (and try not to throw around "...alternative routes to certification..." in the same question), as I'd argue that "certification" can mean different things that may (or may not) involve licensure.

If you're looking for "certification" that isn't directly related to a license, those options are out there, too. In this case, it's really up to you (or Robert) to weigh how recruiters will evaluate that iffy master's degree and what the certification accomplishes for Robert. If all he wants is some license that says you're legally allowed to teach in [insert jurisdiction], that's fine. If you're concerned that simply tacking on a license still leaves Robert's CV vulnerable to a recruiter going "but we don't recognize this CEPR degree, therefore he has no relevant training, just an empty license," then maybe a certification program effectively replaces/supplements the online master's.
by GrumblesMcGee
Mon Jul 08, 2019 11:50 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Marketability and dogs
Replies: 47
Views: 59667

Re: Marketability and dogs

Sgphilli85 wrote:
> Some of your points are well taken: chilling and relaxing expectations. I
> miscommunicated about the “speak your peace” part of what I was saying
> though and it led to a misunderstanding. What I saw was the exact same
> arguments being repeated over and over again and it was the second time
> that I’d pointed it out. What I should have said was that that just wasn’t
> serving anybody or accomplishing anything. I wasn’t trying to claim any
> authority over anyone here because you’re right that would be ridiculous.
> Regarding moderation, I don’t exactly share your views about where the line
> should be drawn as I’ve been a part of great forums (in my opinion) where
> when an off topic argument totally derailed a thread and/or the original
> poster said they got what they needed the thread would be closed. Seems to
> be a reasonable policy to me and not overmoderation, but this isn’t my
> forum to decide anything of the sort. Just my thoughts on the matter.
> Thanks for your reply.

You saw what I saw. You're right that the bickering can get childish. So we're on the same page there and we both wish things were different. What I think is unproductive (even counterproductive) is insisting that people return to "the topic" you've chosen and/or encouraging moderation.

I get what you're saying about differing opinions regarding moderation. Every forum has its own culture, and (hopefully) a moderation policy that is both consistent and matches that culture. Here, there is a bit of a Louis Brandeis approach to idiocy: the cure for bad speech is more speech (not censorship). Other places (including other forums you've enjoyed in the past) may work well differently, I'll grant that much. But to suddenly flip a switch here would not (IMHO) be a wise move.

Anyway, back to the topic of marketability and dogs, I'll echo bits of what others have said: don't even bring it up until there's an offer on the table. Do your research on the country (e.g., China is rough with its mandatory quarantines and (IMHO) overall not-so-pet-friendly culture). If there's flexibility in the housing arrangement (i.e. you're not funneled into provided housing), you'll probably be OK most places, but that's the sort of thing you ask about with the recruiter or HR person while mulling over the details of the offer (e.g., "How about pet friendly apartments in the area?" or "Can I talk to any faculty who have dogs about housing?"). Overall, one of the last things you want is to be left haunted by the possibility (however remote) that you overdisclosed your way out of interviews/offers. So you have to be strategic in how you balance being honest/forthcoming with how you market yourself by leaving out potentially negative aspects of your candidacy.
by GrumblesMcGee
Sun Jul 07, 2019 10:41 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: FAQ: GLOSSARY
Replies: 75
Views: 77387

Re: Reply

PsyGuy wrote:
> I find my position sufficient strong to withstand debate.

And your grammar, too.

PsyGuy wrote:
> If I was so
> disposed to creating barriers, why would I create a glossary and explain
> terms when asked.
> Introducing them on first use is not very helpful, its a minority of
> readers that will go back to read previous posts on common topics.
> Searching for "Glossary" takes less than a minute.

This is just asinine. First, you incorrectly read an element of intent into my comment. I never argued that you were "disposed to" creating barriers. I just argued that your writing (both your awful grammar and your eccentric use/invention of acronyms) creates barriers. In fact, my post concludes with the words "whether it's his intent or not." So, to borrow from your predictable tone: intent is irrelevant.

Second, the argument that you mitigate your inaccessible drivel by creating additional resources (e.g., "creat[ing] a glossary and explain[ing] terms when asked") doesn't carry the day. Sure, it's better than nothing. But you're asking people who are already (supposedly) relative non-experts in an area to do additional reading BEYOND your post...just to understand your post. And for what? It's one thing to say "part of your question involves tiers of schools, which have been addressed at length here. Click <here> for my bizarre treatise on tiers. To the rest of your question..." It's another to intentionally decrease the accessibility of a text through jargon and acronyms, and then ask the reader (or just expect/hope that they will search) to consult another of your own texts just to decipher the first one. Again, there's no need for it. It's saving you less time than you wind up spending answering replies from confused conversants, and it's wasting TONS of their time. Many are just going to give up and never fully comprehend the "wisdom" you're attempting to convey. Which brings me to...

PsyGuy wrote:
> Accessibility is irrelevant, only data matters, as is whether theyre
> pretentious or not, reasonable people can differ, and we appear to
> disagree.

Data is irrelevant if no one can understand it...at least in this context. We're basically discussing a help forum. You're providing advice/perspectives to people seeking information and/or guidance. You can have the best data in the world, but if you can't (or in this case, won't) communicate it, the results suffer. If your aim here is to actually help the people to whom you are replying, maybe you should take that into account. Hell, even the nascent health communication "field" has recognized that "mediocre" doctors are more effective than their more "elite" counterparts if they are better able to convey information to patience and secure patient compliance (e.g., convince patients to take their meds as prescribed). In that sense, the data is less relevant that strategic communication--which revolves around accessibility. And yes, there's "data" to back that up.

As for reasonable people differing as to whether your acronym obsession = pretentious, your opinion is irrelevant, as I don't view you as a reasonable person (not on this front, at least).

PsyGuy wrote:
> OTT is an acronym used by the TCL/TRA, its their term, you can find it
> here:
> https://www.gov.uk/guidance/qualified-t ... status-qts
> First use is under "Teachers trained or recognized in Scotland or
> Northern Ireland"

The fact that you have to explain further supports why you shouldn't be overusing acronyms.
by GrumblesMcGee
Sun Jul 07, 2019 10:21 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Marketability and dogs
Replies: 47
Views: 59667

Moderation

Sgphilli85 wrote:
> I hope this forum is moderated so that this nonsense can get shut down.
> This is ridiculous. This is my first post to this forum; what an impression
> you guys give. I even asked if people could act like adults and kill the
> petty arguing and it continues for pages and pages detailing the thread
> completely. It is a shame to see as this could be a really positive and
> helpful place to get information. I hope the posters here can see this and
> change because you all are obviously quite invested in this forum and yet
> it seems like nobody can give up the last word in an argument that is doing
> nothing but detracting and going nowhere. Speak your peace once by all
> means, but then drop it when it’s done being spoken. For example, what I’m
> doing now. I’ve gotten what I can out of this thread and am done with it
> now. Hopefully if I need to come here again I can just get some
> straightforward help without personal bickering.

@Sgphilli85

I'm with you on seeking quality information/perspectives on marketability for someone with pets. It was a good question and I think it generated some good comments that will help you (and others similarly situated). I had planned to chime in a bit given my own experience weighing multiple offers (one of which was not pet-friendly), but was very busy last week when this thread heated up. Still, I followed it closely.

I also share your contempt for some of the more off-the-wall feuding that goes on here.

That said, chill. It's an online help forum. Topics'll go where they go. Conversations will meander. You can try to keep them focused or reply if part of your question has gone unnoticed as the bickering goes off on a tangent, but to imply that you have any sort of authority over how people will respond to your post (e.g., "speak your peace...then drop it") is just silly. And asking for moderation is a slippery slope.

There are plenty of times when someone on this forum (usually the same person) crosses a line I'd rather they not cross. And sometimes the blowback from others crosses similar lines. But once you open the door to aggressive moderation, you kill the spirit of lively discussion. And I'd rather trudge through a thousands asinine, petty posts than see all the people who participate with passion and perspectives go elsewhere (which would happen).
by GrumblesMcGee
Wed Jun 26, 2019 10:50 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: School in the Wrong
Replies: 11
Views: 12458

Re: School in the Wrong

Spawnboy99 wrote:
> GrumblesMcGee wrote:
> > Given your previous thread [...]
> > I'm just going to lump this altogether. And I'm not sure why you're pulling
> > this awkward third-person phrasing (e.g., "The teacher..." and
> > "but it seems is now actively seek new employment.") If you want
> > feedback, provide clarity. Pretending you're not the subject of the post
> > and therefore are not certain as to what "the teacher" is
> > doing/thinking/wondering isn't going to get you good answers. And it's
> > annoying.
> >

@Spawnboy wrote:
> @GrumblesMcGee seems you have got slightly lost in your comments and missing things,
> firstly the teacher just asked the question to their HR department, nothing wrong
> with that, by simply asking the question has resulted in the teacher's contract not
> being renewed as a poor fit. All PR over the four years were excellent. There was no
> testing the market don't know where you got that idea from. The teacher asking the
> question about penalties from a completed contract should be challenged as to it's
> not written in the contracts. Under the circumstances, other Teachers also are
> challenging that issue. The bear didn't bite the hand, as the teacher is fighting the
> bear, and why shouldn't the teacher fight this when the teacher is in the right. Yes,
> you are correct the teacher should seek the advice of the lawyer which is currently
> happening as far as I'm aware. The teacher never had an issue with the penalties the
> issue was the penalties with the first contract so please stick to the facts and
> reread the post then (Teacher had an issue with paying back airfares and shipping on
> the first completed contract).
>
> GrumblesmcGee you write well - but stick to the facts and no doubt you will write
> another reply.
>
> Looking forward too it.

Thanks. Just between the two of us: I've worked hard on my writing--perhaps too hard, to be honest.

Well, if the facts are that you're truly describing a completely different person/scenario from your earlier thread on May 24 (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7177)...

...and your question about the market in UAE on June 3 (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7187)...

...and your question about cover letters (the sort of thing one writes when testing the market) on June 5 (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7192)...

...and your June 19 question about finding a job for next year (https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... f=1&t=7212)...

...then I apologize for about 25 percent of my frustration with your ham-handed request for advice in this particular thread. This "moral question here let's stick to the topic" framing is bad enough. Then you present some vague scenario without admitting that it involves you (even though it seems to match up with what happened to you, as explained in previous threads), but you aren't explicitly saying it's someone else--just using confusing, robotic language like "the person" and "the teacher" again and again. Then you ask whether others have faced similar problems and what the outcome was (wait, I thought this was a "moral question").

Please.

Look, these forums are all about advice. I've sought it. I've given it. I've participated in the (sometimes productive) tangents and disagreements. If you want advice, that's fine. But enough with the dance that this isn't related to your previous inquiries. It's the equivalent of, "Doctor, I have this friend who an embarrassing medical issue...what should I tell my friend to do?" And chastising people to "stick to the topic" is just arrogant. It's an internet forum. The conversation'll go where it goes.
by GrumblesMcGee
Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:31 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: School in the Wrong
Replies: 11
Views: 12458

Re: School in the Wrong

@spawnboy

Given your previous thread about penalties for late notification and your revelation that the school was: a) being absurdly punitive in its policies, and b) ultimately decided to non-renew you for dancing around the issue, I'm just going to lump this altogether. And I'm not sure why you're pulling this awkward third-person phrasing (e.g., "The teacher..." and "but it seems is now actively seek new employment.") If you want feedback, provide clarity. Pretending you're not the subject of the post and therefore are not certain as to what "the teacher" is doing/thinking/wondering isn't going to get you good answers. And it's annoying.

Yes, the school seems in the wrong on multiple levels. Yes, the penalties for not providing enough notice seemed excessive (but perhaps you shouldn't have renewed if they were opening back up the possibility of taking back benefits you'd already earned).

Given the lack of information, it's hard to tell if/how the school is wrong in not renewing you. Let your lawyer guide you on that one.

As for the pros/cons of legal action, you're best positioned to figure that out. Your lawyer can give you better - as to your chances (and what you can gain). You can speculate as to what you can lose (time, reputation, etc.). Then just decide if it's worth it.

Now I'm just going to be blunt. You have to own up to your end. Sure, if the IS was wrong, you have every right to go after them and force them to employ you for two more years (or settle), etc. Sure, you could have fought over whether the punitive clauses in the second contract were appropriate/legal/reasonable. Hold the schools accountable. But this whole time I've followed your story (over multiple threads) I got the sense that that IS shouldn't renew you.

You didn't want to stay, but with their unusual calendar, weren't sure you'd find work in the middle of the year if you didn't renew. Then you didn't want to abide by the decision deadline because you wanted more time to test the market, and repeatedly pressed them on how their terms were unfair. Finally, they decided not to renew you and you found problems with that decision, so you're trying to see how to get the maximum from them without jeopardizing your future prospects. Am I missing anything?

At every turn, some agreed-upon provision didn't suit your needs, so you poked and prodded until the bear finally bit your hand off. Now you're wondering if you can sue the bear and still live in the woods.
by GrumblesMcGee
Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:13 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Work permit rejected... help!
Replies: 20
Views: 21553

Re: Work permit rejected... help!

@straycat

I hope things are working out for you. After reading the last few posts, I felt obliged to suggest another possible narrative here. This doesn't have anything to do with you pursuing more PD (by all means, do it; even if you don't need it now it'll help you long-term).

Maybe the school is legitimately trying to navigate unexpected hurdles with the Ministry.

I know it sounds radical. I'm as cynical as the next guy, and I've read tons of horror stories on forums like these, so I suspect shady dealings rather readily. Even though I'm relatively new to IE, even I've had some eye-roll inducing school deception moments. But it's possible this really is just a situation where the school is telling you the truth. That means they either screwed up when hiring you (e.g., perhaps they didn't fully understand your credentials or weren't aware of Ministry guidelines), someone at the Ministry is being unexpectedly stubborn, policy (or interpretation of policy) changed, etc.

I think it's (likely) a good thing that they're asking you to sign a modified contract. It suggests that they're serious about honoring their offer to you. Despite PsyGuy's theory of the case, there's no evidence that you're "their backup now" (admittedly, there's also no evidence that's NOT the case). And it's good that you're remaining flexible and willing to do whatever PD you can to satisfy whoever is putting up roadblocks.

That said, even if you believe them, protect yourself. Find as many levers of influence as you can. You don't have to pull them all, and you don't have to pull hard, but you have to be ready. The bottom line is that they made you an offer, and they have to do everything possible to honor that offer as long as you were forthcoming about your background (i.e. nothing was misrepresented). If the end result is that they gain Ministry approval by tweaking it to ESOL, that's on them. You can be OK with it, but I wouldn't budge on any of the terms with regard to package (compensation, etc.), and be hesitant to budge on any changes impacting your duties unless they're fair (i.e. switching some of your classes to something you're comfortable with = OK; jacking up your teaching load = not OK).
by GrumblesMcGee
Wed Jun 26, 2019 12:58 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: PGCE vs Teach Now
Replies: 13
Views: 34531

Re: Reply

PsyGuy wrote:
> @GrumblesMcGee
>
> So skip the ABCTE program. Its not accomplishing anything that isnt
> available from th MO doctoral route for an initial credential. Its cost and
> resources.

Not to hijack the thread (despite the fact that I'm tempted to delve into the complicated balance between convenience and utility when it comes to non-traditional ITs), but I encouraged them to drop the ~$1,700 on ABCTE. I disagree that it's "not accomplishing anything" one wouldn't get from an MO initial credential. I have two reasons.

First, the idea that someone with a doctorate won't gain any subject area knowledge through a certification program is pretty silly. And I'm writing that as someone with a doctorate. Heck, you make a pretty big assumption that my colleague's doctorate "is in a teaching content subject." There are plenty of folks (especially the further away from STEM you go) whose graduate work really doesn't line up neatly with a K-12 subject area. For those folks, even if MO gives them a credential upon passage of their pedagogy test (MEGA), they're still stuck explaining to recruiters that they don't really have any direct subject-area training to prepare them for the positions they're seeking. My reading of the MO doctoral route is that the degree itself must be in the content area (from their website: "such as mathematics or English"), so all those anthropology and sociology and linguistics people can't even go that route anyway. But even for many people I know with Ph.D.s in fields like English, they're really not getting the breadth of subject-area training to prepare them for English Language Arts or English Literature. Their graduate course work is chosen with an eye very specific research programs. Even if they're aiming for a path in higher education, their research-focused departments are grooming them to be "college/university faculty," not "teachers." That means publish or perish, and do well enough in the classroom in your narrow area.

So there is definitely value in some content-area training. Admittedly, that value is going to vary for each individual based on both their training and their desire to grow (vs. just get credentialed easily).

Second, there's the pedagogy training. I'm not sure what your background is, but let me assure you that pedagogy training in higher education is nothing like the pedagogy training K-12 teachers receive. It's not about better or worse (spoiler: it's almost always worse), it's about function. Graduate students are often thrown into classrooms with only a brief crash course in teaching their department's lower-level courses. They'll get some continuing pedagogy training (e.g., a half-credit, once-a-week seminar for the first-year cohort), and the department will do other things to encourage pedagogy training, and maybe the college/university will offer some (voluntary) campus-wide programs. But it's clear what a graduate student's priorities are. Teaching is not at the top of the list, and the training one gets is designed to get you through the courses you're needed in. Beyond that, it's modelling what you see and borrowing from colleagues. Perhaps most importantly, the college classroom and K-12 classroom are radically different.

So even if a Ph.D. can cram/fake their way through a MEGA exam or another pedagogy assessment, there's value in actually getting *some* real training before pivoting to such a different environment.

If I were jumping fully into the tangent (this reply has already gone on longer than I anticipated), I'd flesh this out in terms of the balance between convenience and utility. There are certainly more thorough training programs out there, but they're far less convenient (time and coin). And there are clearly a few somewhat easier paths out there to a license, but you're getting very little in terms of preparation. I'm sure for some Ph.D.s (and other career-changers), convenience outweighs utility so much that they'd get a license from any state/country/warlord possible if the standard were "advanced degree (or X) = instant license." Failing that, I suspect a lot of us are in the "we're going to have to pay and jump through hoops anyway, so let's get some meaningful preparation out of it" mindset.

TLDR: "cost and resources" aren't the only factors, even if you're right about the availability of the path
by GrumblesMcGee
Wed Jun 26, 2019 12:21 am
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: FAQ: GLOSSARY
Replies: 75
Views: 77387

Re: FAQ: GLOSSARY

Heliotrope wrote:
> I guess we all disagree, some even with themselves.

This is really what makes the PsyGuy phenomenon so perplexing. On one hand, I tip my hat to him not only for knowing his stuff in some areas (e.g., certification), but for taking the time to help people. It's worthy of recognition.

On the other, there's this trollish contradiction within him. It comes out when he stubbornly digs in on matters of where reasonable people can differ (often when he's outside of his wheelhouse, too). But that's still somewhat consistent with a "helpful" person, albeit one lacking people skills (a friend of mine would crassly characterize this as "on the spectrum").

The real contradiction is seen in the writing itself. For someone who clearly has a decent brain, teaching experience, and knows how to use a computer, there's scant attention to making his points accessible. You see it in the turgid grammar and spelling (perhaps not a choice, though he could make the choice to proofread a bit). And you see it in the obsession with jargon and abbreviations. Anyone who's spent a moment thinking about technical jargon knows it creates barriers to understanding--the opposite of jargon's intended purpose (clarity and economy of communication). There's no ticking clock when it comes to writing a post. There's no ink to buy or character limit to bump up against. There's the fraction of a second one saves writing "BOS" instead of "Boston" and the resulting extra time each reader spends trying to decode (plus the downside of some readers never accurately decoding and/or giving up).

I'm all for readability and convenience. I'll concede there are a good dozen or so acronyms that can/should be used freely here. And for specific posts, break out others by introducing them upon first use, e.g.: "This is particularly an issue for Overseas Trained Teachers (OTTs)..."

I almost expect PsyGuy to fire back with something like "accessibility is irrelevant, only data matters," or some other dodge that belies the fact that he's spending time (ostensibly) trying to help people while simultaneously making choices that undermines that assistance. But maybe that's just the enigma that he is.

Oh, and they're pretentious. At least the way he uses them--whether it's his intent or not.
by GrumblesMcGee
Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:38 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: PGCE vs Teach Now
Replies: 13
Views: 34531

Re: PGCE vs Teach Now

@PsyGuy

I appreciate you updating the glossary. I'm sure it will be a big help to many.

As for the U.S. state certification, I'm not sure they'll want to go through another examination process after completing the ABCTE.
by GrumblesMcGee
Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:36 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: FAQ: GLOSSARY
Replies: 75
Views: 77387

Re: FAQ: GLOSSARY

Thames Pirate wrote:

> Have not heard these outside of PsyGuy land, but maybe they are used more elsewhere?
...
> I have never heard of anyone other than PsyGuy using DIP. The IB itself calls it the

If we have "TPF" I think we need something like "PGH" (PsyGuy Hubris), although "PGH" gets a bit confusing since it's often an abbreviation for Pittsburgh.
by GrumblesMcGee
Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:34 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Are there any ex-teachers on this board?
Replies: 83
Views: 180218

Re: Are there any ex-teachers on this board?

(disclaimer: I'm a relative newcomer--a well-read and connected one when it comes to the world of IE, but a newcomer nonetheless)

Everyone's right. "Tourist teacher" has been used a bit loosely. I've seen it applied to teachers who do their contract and then hop to a new country. I've seen it applied to neophytes to IE who don't plan to stick around long. So no one on this forum is particularly wrong in defining the term.

That said...it really fits better with the latter definition: teachers who are new to IE and just looking to see the world (or get some other short-term benefit) with no real long-term commitment to teaching abroad. The best examples are the brand-spanking-new ones with little travel experience, or the backpackers who show up without a job and are hoping to land one for a semester.

Sure, you can spin someone who's taught a decade of two-and-dones as a "tourist," but it's a bit unfair. But sticking around for the full contract, and then staying in IE--somewhere else--really wipes away the "tourist" aspect of it, unless you're warping the connotation of tourist away and turning it into a permanent state of being. Maybe we need a new term for such people, like "wanderlust teacher."
by GrumblesMcGee
Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:27 pm
Forum: Forum 1. From Questions About ISS & Search to Anything and Everything About International Teaching
Topic: Work permit rejected... help!
Replies: 20
Views: 21553

Re: Work permit rejected... help!

straycat:

I'm really sorry about your situation. PsyGuy knows a lot about certifications and a bit about other things. He's given you some good advice on that front. But I'll push back slightly on one thing.

Work with ISS-Schrole on this, especially if you had any direct contact with someone from their staff. Even if they're just someone you met at a fair or had an email exchange with, reach out. It's true, they don't have much direct power here, and they're not your "agent" the way Search Associates (falsely) presents their people. But I've found them to be extremely helpful in - situations.

You've indicated that this means a lot to you, and therefore I suggest considering (but not necessarily pulling) every lever available. You never know which one might help. Yes, you should be tactful--bulldozing isn't likely going to work, and even if it does could place you in a situation where you force your way in but there's resentment on both sides--but you should try to find someone who can either shed some light on this situation or interface with someone who can. If it's someone who's not immediately responsible (e.g., an ISS-Schrole contact), just understand that going in. As long as you're not treating them as if fixing this is their job, you're not likely risking any downside just by reaching out.

Beyond maximizing your chances of making this work without burning bridges, I advocate this for another reason. The school has screwed you over (or at least taken you to the brink). If you were truthful and forthcoming about your qualifications, and they hired you despite the fact that the ministry wouldn't grant a work permit to someone in your situation, they need to make it right. If they follow through with the threat you alluded to in your OP (unilaterally invalidating your contract unless you can provide information that wasn't requested prior to them offering you a contract), that's the sort of thing that should render them blacklisted by ISS. You working through ISS (or at least reaching out to them for guidance) not only increases your chance of resolving this, it implicitly ups the ante for the school if they think washing their hands of you is a viable solution.