The International Schools Review Forum

They are--just ones with residency.

@Thames Pirate

They arent, because their permenant residents.

*they're

And no. If they are not US citizens, they're technically still foreigners.
Permanent residents are non-citizens who are lawfully authorized to live permanently within the United States, although they can still be deported.
They also may apply to become U.S. citizens if they meet certain eligibility requirements, at which point they will no longer be foreigners.

@Heliotrope

No, if they are permenant residents they are no longer foreigners. US Citizens can have their citizenship revoked and be deported. Being subject to deportation is not the defining attribute to be or not being a foreigner, because you claim it to be.
They were no longer foreigners when becoming permenant residents.

Further, US immigration law is not the defining global standard, permenant residents of countries outside of the US are also no longer foreigners.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Heliotrope
>
> Being subject to deportation is not the defining attribute to be or not being a
> foreigner, because you claim it to be.


He didn't say that was the defining attribute. Read more carefully please.

If you still have citizenship of another country, and not of the US, you're a foreigner.

@Illiane_Blues

Yes they did, by measuring against that attribute they defined it.

No, citizenship is not the test of foreigner or not. If you have permenant residency you are no longer a foreigner.

PsyGuy wrote:
> @Illiane_Blues
>
> Yes they did, by measuring against that attribute they defined it.
>
> No, citizenship is not the test of foreigner or not. If you have permenant
> residency you are no longer a foreigner.


No, it was merely an aside, meant to say that the 'permanent' in 'permanent resident' isn't as permanent as it sounds.
The defining attribute is citizenship.

A foreigner is defined as "a person not native to, or naturalized in, the country or jurisdiction under consideration".

We all know now that PsyGuy will say whatever he can to avoid admitting he misunderstood my original post--even if I say I was not clear enough and did not actually disagree with his point. Anything rather than admit that I might also be right about something. He dislikes me that much. Guess I got under his skin. How dare I know something he doesn't or ask him to support a claim!

We can all look up the definition of foreigner. We all have expat experience and understand how temporary and permanent residency, citizenship, and national identity work. Let him say what he wants while we enjoy the popcorn.

Agree.
I'm snacking on frozen blueberries right now, but serves the same purpose.

@Heliotrope

Merely an aside is still an aside, merely doesnt modify it. So permenant doesnt mean permenant, it sounds pretty much like how permenant sounds.

The defining attribute is not citizenship, thats one definition, its not a controlling definition. Another definition is: n. "a person born in or coming from a country other than one's own"; another definition is n. "a person belonging to or owing allegiance to a foreign country"; another is: n. "a person who comes from another country".
Your claims are not self authenticating because you claim them to be and your definitions are not authoritative because you claim them to be.

Permanent residents are no longer foreigners.

All of those definitions point to the fact that permanent residents are foreigners.

@Thames Pirate

I didnt misunderstand you, your wrong and we disagree.

No they dont the definition "a person belonging to or owing allegiance to a foreign country", when your a permenant resident you belong to the country you have residence in and while a permenant resident you owe allegiance to the country your a permenant resident of.

By your claim the definition "a person who comes from another country" would still make someone who obtains citizenship in the new country a foreigner, since they still came from another country.

Thames Pirate wrote:
> All of those definitions point to the fact that permanent residents are
> foreigners.

Haha, indeed, I was just about to type the same!

PsyGuy wrote:
>
> Your path ahead of you would be different if you wanted to be an IT in
> business studies or economics, but you said PYP which is primary/elementary
> and thats going to be more difficult.

Revisiting this, and just wanted to ask if you meant that TeachNow would not be the preferred path forward if I were to focus on Economics? How would it be different?

I've just read this (missed it in March - probably enjoying the popcorn) but TBH that was my first thought too.

Economics and Business Studies are the two Humanities subjects which you could consider as "demand" subjects in IT (exactly why, I honestly don't know, since most universities don't consider studying them in school as important even for Economics and Business degrees, and I won't even start on businesses' opinion of them.) As such, if you could sub in a school where this is taught, then a PGCEi might be an option for you.