New to The Game...

shadowjack
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by shadowjack »

@Sid

Leaders and recruiters with an agenda.

Yup - my agenda is helping to hire people with a proven track record that INCLUDES longevity at schools they have worked at. Not looking at 2/2/2/2 with department head (LOL) and thinking "Wow, there's a good hire" especially if they have spent eight years at bottom-feeder schools. I look for upward trajectory and longevity, along with experience and background/other interests.

Hiring staff can be hit or miss. But you want a good variety of backgrounds, ages, and experience. But as I said above, I'll pass on the 2/2/2/2.

I would seriously look at a 3/6/2/2 given the history since 2019.

Sorry PG - there really is no other agenda here than the one I state above.
EyEyEy
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 10:32 pm

Re: Reply

Post by EyEyEy »

Almost any person -teacher or recruiter- looking at a C.V. with 2,2,2,2,2,2 will expect the next stay will be another two years and they'll very likely be correct in that assumption. I have seen teachers like that pass through my first schools and Heliotrope is right: this is not someone who will want to settle down. Certainly not a coin flip situation anymore after the third two year stay.

Leaders and recruiters commenting here are just being honest and helpful. Avoiding risk is part of their job and if you want teacher to stay longer you hire the ones that have done so before. You seem to be the only one doing the fear mongering here.

I have been part of recruiting for my new school for the first time in my career and Shadowjack is right: upward trajectory and longevity will help your chances.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10419
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@SJ

No your agenda is fearmongering in an attempt to get 3+ years out of an IT by offering very negligible concrete incentives and scaring them into thinking if they dont choose to give you an extra year or two to add value that their IE careers will evaporate and it will be all doom and gloom.

@EyEyEy

An IT with 2/2/2/2/2/2/2 doesnt care what the @Sids and @SJs would do with their application. This IT is a traveler they dont care about the tier or quality of the IS, theyre just looking for their next passport stamp. Its not like theres some magic line that five 2 year contracts is doable but a sixth nope, cant happen.

No they arent their engaging in fear mongering. There is no research data to show a significant correlation that those with a series of 2 year tenures are less stable or likely to move to a higher length of tenure under better conditions.
If you complete your contract and have a strong and positive reference you will be marketable regardless of staying 2 or 3 years (or 4 years for that matter).
Heliotrope
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 1:48 am

Re: Reply

Post by Heliotrope »

PsyGuy wrote:
> Its not like theres some magic line that five 2 year contracts is doable
> but a sixth nope, cant happen.

Lots of school will also not like a string of 5 or 4 single contracts. My school certainly won't hire you.
If there's a magic line, and there probably is for most of the better schools, it'll be after three 2 year-contracts.


> No they arent their engaging in fear mongering. There is no research data
> to show a significant correlation that those with a series of 2 year
> tenures are less stable or likely to move to a higher length of tenure
> under better conditions.
> If you complete your contract and have a strong and positive reference you
> will be marketable regardless of staying 2 or 3 years (or 4 years for that
> matter).

They are not fear mongering, they're just informing teachers what helps recruiters decide between candidates. You are the one doing teachers on this forum a disservice by claiming duration of stay won't affect their chances at getting a job at good schools, while actual recruiters and also teachers are saying it will.
With five 2 year-contracts you'll still be marketable for some schools, but definitely fewer schools than someone with a longer stay on their CV, all other things being equal.
sid
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by sid »

And let’s remember the original point of this thread. The OP is looking to build a career, expand options and work at better schools. The path to that is decidedly not 2-2-2-2.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10419
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@Heliotrope

There is no magic line. What the leaders and recruiters on this forum are doing is peddling fear mongering as opposed to actual incentives like coin to motivate ITs into longer periods of service. If you complete your contract and have a strong and positive reference you will be marketable regardless of staying 2 or 3 years (or 4 years for that matter).

@Sid

No the path to that is very much a decidedly 2-2-2-2. Something like:
1st 2yr: Third tier IS in the LCSA, coin is poo, and the IT can really only afford to live on the economy.
2nd 2yr: Third tier IS in China, Coin is 3x what it was in the LCSA
3rd 2yr: Floater third tier IS in China but an IB IS, the IT is appointed to teaching in the MYP and the DIP
4th 2yr: Third tier IS in Myanmar but as a Coordinator/HOD of a department and founding IB program.

Changing that to longer lengths of tenure is a waste.
1st 2yr: Third tier IS in the LCSA, coin is poo, and the IT can really only afford to live on the economy.
2nd 2yr: Third tier IS in China, Coin is 3x what it was in the LCSA
3rd 3yr: Floater third tier IS in China but an IB IS, the IT is appointed to teaching in the MYP and the DIP
4th 4yr: Third tier IS in Myanmar but as a Coordinator/HOD of a department and founding IB program.

The first 2-2-2-2 is just as marketable as the second and the second wastes 3 extra years.
sid
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by sid »

Wrong.
Waste of time working at four low-tier schools in a row. You should move up a tier as often as possible (for those who want better schools), and if not after the first school, definitely after the second. Staying at that level for four schools tells recruiters that something is amiss. A good egg with potential moves up fast.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10419
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@sid

Wrong, its my example, and this progression is what it is. In this case the presumption is there was no second tier IS offer available. Which could be for many reasons, such as the ITs teaching field is very small or niche, or the available positions were in regions the IT would not consider living in, etc.. Even then youre still wrong, staying in a lower tier IS to get a senior leadership appointment for example is a MUCH better option than moving up to a 2nd tier IS classroom IT position.
What is a waste of time is putting in excessive and additional time in an IS based on some fearmongering myth that an ITs career will be over and doom and gloom if they somehow dont volunteer to extend their length of tenure beyond their initial contract so that a leader can add value.
shadowjack
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am

Re: Reply

Post by shadowjack »

PsyGuy wrote:
> @SJ
>

> @EyEyEy
>
> An IT with 2/2/2/2/2/2/2 doesnt care what the @Sids and @SJs would do with
> their application. This IT is a traveler they dont care about the tier or
> quality of the IS, theyre just looking for their next passport stamp. Its
> not like theres some magic line that five 2 year contracts is doable but a
> sixth nope, cant happen.

And that's why we take a pass and don't hire those teachers at schools where we are involved with the hiring process...and they stay in their bottom glass cage oblivious to the wide world of international education, and maybe wondering idly every now and then what it would be like to work at a school where students, rather than money, are the drivers for many decisions made.

Note that neither Sid nor I ever said they wouldn't get a contract SOMEWHERE - but the likelihood of it being a decent school as recognized by most experienced ITs is like your unicorn underwater basketweaving dressage flower arranging finding a job requiring all those skills.
shadowjack
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by shadowjack »

sid wrote:
> Wrong.
> Waste of time working at four low-tier schools in a row. You should move up
> a tier as often as possible (for those who want better schools), and if not
> after the first school, definitely after the second. Staying at that level
> for four schools tells recruiters that something is amiss. A good egg with
> potential moves up fast.


With you on this one Sid. I have had colleagues finally reach a decent school (mine!) who were going to leave after two years to find their dream job at school X, Y, or Z. I had to sit down and ask them why they thought that one of those schools would be interested after 2,2,2 and now 2, the first three positions all tier 3. "Well, I've now done this specialized position for a year..." hahahaha

After scoping them in on how the system works and why they would be going back to the type of school they just got out of, they stayed longer, and ended up at a tier 1 in South America. Funny how doing specialized position for 3 years with solid data to back up teaching, a vastly expanded understanding and glowing references built up over those years led to that...
sid
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by sid »

I’ve got a teacher at my school right now who wallowed in low-tier schools far too long, rising to principal. He met his partner at a better school across town, and she clued him in. They hitched up and came to us. He had to drop all the way back to teacher, and his past experience is hurting more than helping him. his understanding of leadership skills is ridiculously unusable.
shopaholic
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:42 pm

Re: New to The Game...

Post by shopaholic »

What do you recruiters think of a 5-6-2-2?

My past two schools have been disasters where I was very unhappy. But I do have the longer commitments at my first two schools and am looking for somewhere else I can stay longterm. Does having more recent 2-2 experience cancel out the earlier longer stays?
secondplace
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 12:40 pm

Re: New to The Game...

Post by secondplace »

I would about those 2s and ask what it is you're looking for.

I'm 5-10-2-5 (so far), and more than happy to talk about the 2 and what it means for me.
shadowjack
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by shadowjack »

shopaholic wrote:
> What do you recruiters think of a 5-6-2-2?
>
> My past two schools have been disasters where I was very unhappy. But I do
> have the longer commitments at my first two schools and am looking for
> somewhere else I can stay longterm. Does having more recent 2-2 experience
> cancel out the earlier longer stays?

If those two are the from 2017 - 21 or 2018 - 22, then as Sid said earlier, I'd give you a pass. The schools themselves would also matter. But at this point there is no pattern, holistically speaking, for me to form a negative judgement, as the 2s are balanced by the other.
sid
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: New to The Game...

Post by sid »

[quote=shopaholic post_id=62596 time=1641905427 user_id=219184]
What do you recruiters think of a 5-6-2-2?

My past two schools have been disasters where I was very unhappy. But I do have the longer commitments at my first two schools and am looking for somewhere else I can stay longterm. Does having more recent 2-2 experience cancel out the earlier longer stays?
[/quote]

I'd look for the bigger picture, the story. (Which I do anyway, even for a 2-2-2-2. In my career so far, I've only found one 2-2-2-2 worth taking a chance on, but one never knows when another could appear.)

Your earlier commitments demonstrate that you have it in you to commit, or at least that you once did. That's a good start. So I'd want to know about the 2-2, and if those were just bad fits or another reasonable explanation, and you seem keen to find another longer stay, it would be fine.

One caution - we regularly see people with early-career longer commitments in their home country, before moving overseas. If those domestic commitments are followed by a 2-2 internationally, they don't count for as much. It's important for you to show that you can commit in the very different international arena.
Post Reply