2019 Search Associates Bangkok

[secondplace]

Berserkly poor spelling and grammar and generally being a belligerent buffoon put me off....

[PsyGuy]

@Sid

I have never had a candidates interaction "take its toll", and thus no woe.

@WT123

There is lots of rationalization this time of year.

@Illiane_Blues

@Sids experience isnt everyones, and theyre leadership what do you expect them to say "Oh yeah we knew the first night who we were going to hire, but the HOS wanted us to interview at least two other ITs, so we did and choose the first night candidate", or "Yeah sometimes we get someone knew and we let them practice their interview skills with candidates".

@teacher tan

I disagree ith several of your observations:
1) Unless a leader has experience in the subject because they were an IT in it in the past, most leadership wouldnt know deep expertise from superficial knowledge.
2) Its not hard to fake anything, such as commitment or enthusiasm for an hour long interview.
3) The whole issue of PD is pretty vague, and the new ideas sounds like someone in leadership wanting a novelty for the sake of novelty. If an IT is coming to the table with expertise and technique thats highly successful ell insist on changing something that works ell and isnt broken.
4) Who gets away with not doing ASPs unless they have some other commitment to the IS during that time.

It sounds more like this principal was just reading off generic and random responses from some management book or website.

@Thames Pirate

There isnt much on the resume, the vast majority of ITs at the fair I already know can teach or they wouldnt be at the fair. Its more checking to see if they were reading the vacancy and are applying for a position they are qualified for. Do they actually have something to indicate proficiency or are they just taking a wild stab because they like the location and IS.
At the pitch its that feeling of desperation, nervousness isnt an issue, thats normal, thats expected, for new IT candidates the process is alien, and its a lot of stress, but the candidate whos applying because its a job is a turn off. The comment showing you have researched our IS and know something about the IS is very positive, hen a candidate just jams a resume in your hands and says hi, as if they are applying because our table just happened to be there isnt a strong first impression.
'Fit' is very much a gut factor, but it starts way before recruiting and requires a deeper understanding of the ISs and staff culture, and ethos, its not nearly enough to know there arent any major complaints its knowing how everyone in a department and the IS feels about and works with each other. Someone may be great in the classroom really exceptional but if they are going to grind up against other ITs in the department or across the hall or down the corridor thats more of an important factor than how I personally feel or like them. Thats hard to get out of even an hour long interview, and its why Ive written before the primary, most important attribute an IT can convey during an interview is being really, really, likeable.

[teacher tan]

@PG
Seasoned admin can see the difference between real and fake teachers, can't say the same for quasi-admin, though.

[PsyGuy]

@teacher tan

Thats not true, seasoned leadership only think they can differentiate between real and fake ITs. If your statement as true this site wouldnt exist and there would never be a mid term dismissal or replacement or runner, or ghosting. Every hire would be successful.

[Frenchie]

This is all a very interesting read.
@sid I was wondering if you could elaborate on the personality issue. What do you look for in balancing out a team?


Someone also wrote about the IT being really really likable in the interview. How does that look exactly to a Head or recruiter? What about the person who is shy? Sometimes their interview skills don't come off as outgoing, but they have a lot of knowledge and skills to offer.Thank you

[sid]

@PG
So taking a toll means I'm asking for pity, while finding something stressful is a different kettle of fish. I do learn so much from our interactions about the subtle interplay of language and psychology.

Now, where were we...

Red flags:
For me, if the candidate can't tell me about misconceptions that students commonly carry for their subject/grade level, and how they address those.
If they can't provide multiple examples of strategies for supporting English language learners, or if the examples are outdated/ineffective.
If their description of classroom management or student-teacher relationships are based on rules, control and one-way respect.
If I hear crickets when I ask what major factors they consider in designing the classroom environment.
I suppose there are more, but the ones above are good examples.

Rounding out a team:
It really depends on the existing team. This year I have a team that is dominated by a very strong, outspoken personality. This person's views are generally pretty good, but would be improved if the team had more actual conversation and consideration of options/improvements, rather than this one person just saying their first thoughts and everyone else hesitating to speak. So I'm looking for someone who will definitely speak their mind too, and also actively seek others' opinions. It can't just be someone who is also dominating. And since we need constructive interaction and debate, rather than just more agreement, it should be someone with a somewhat different perspective. As in, if the existing person's go-to is to consider the knock-on effects of any decision (nothing wrong with that), I'd be happy to welcome someone whose first thought is always "what about the students who struggle?" Their interaction would get more perspectives considered and hopefully build stronger decisions and implementation.
But it depends on the team. I've got another team composed of very soft-spoken individuals, each of whom speaks, but each of whom would tend to speak less in the presence of a confident speaker. They've forged a great working relationship, deliberate and respectful, considering things quite thoughtfully. Their new addition needs to be someone who can flourish in that group, and won't mistake quieter people for people without anything to say.
So no really good advice there. Be yourself, I suppose. There's a place for any personality, and the best teams often have members who are different from each other. Though as above, "different" could mean different in personality, different in educational perspective, different in how they function in a meeting (brainstormer, summarizer, detail-chaser...).

[Thames Pirate]

Wow, really helpful! Thanks! None of those red flags should be a surprise, but I would imagine you do see them, probably more often than any of us would like. What is a surprise to me is how well you know and how carefully you have thought through your team dynamics. My current admin is good there, but I have worked at a lot of schools with relatively absent admin. Do you have a person with you with whom to discuss things like fit?

Some follow ups:
If someone is a good teacher in their own right but you don't hire them because you think the fit is wrong with your existing team, do you tell them that in your rejection? Or only if they ask for feedback?

During sign up is there anything in the 30 second pitch that is a deciding factor? Do you eliminate based on resumes in advance (i.e. wouldn't hire without IB experience)? How valuable are references, and do you look at Search references before sign ups or before interviews? Having no idea how references look on Search, I don't know if that is an at-a-glance thing or a bigger task. If you have a strong candidate whose former or current boss is at the fair, do you seek them out?

[secondplace]

I find this comment interesting:

Someone also wrote about the IT being really really likable in the interview. How does that look exactly to a Head or recruiter? What about the person who is shy? Sometimes their interview skills don't come off as outgoing, but they have a lot of knowledge and skills to offer.Thank you

in that it seems to assume that being outgoing is of huge benefit. Whilst I agree that, superficially at least, more outgoing people may present as more knowledgeable etc.

I think that recruiters should be able to see beyond this. Good teams are made up of a range of personalities and character types and we all need to be really careful about not just listening to and responding to the loudest voice in any room.

I remember once as a candidate at a job fair feeling physically crowded by two quite large leaders who were quite aggressive in both posture and questioning during the sign up phase. Now, maybe they were looking for someone who stood up to them? Maybe they were looking to see how people responded to this? I worried that it spoke to their leadership style and the culture of their school and knew that it wasn't for me. So I guess that made me not a 'good fit' for them.

[Thames Pirate]

It may have simply been an unconscious misogynistic trait. It may have been intentional. If you aren't comfortable, though, you're right; it isn't a good fit. Sometimes it's easy to get swept up in offers and forget that you are also interviewing schools. If I am going to invest half of my day for two years in a place, I want to feel like it's worth my time. That means I not only want to feel safe, but I also want to feel like I can grow and contribute. I want to be a valued member of a team. If I have those things, I am more able to focus on what matters at my job: my students. If I don't have those things, I will disconnect and might even get sucked into the negativity. I certainly will never connect with the city, either.

It sounds like you are better off.

[sid]

Follow-ups:
I generally don't give a reason why someone isn't chosen, unless asked. And then yes, I would absolutely give feedback, including if it's just a question of team dynamics. Most people never ask.
And during sign-up, it's hard to say. I'm no longer surprised that at each fair, no matter how carefully I've searched and filtered the candidate database, I get approached at sign-up by candidates who are exactly what I'm looking for, but someone never saw in the database. In Bangkok, two of these candidates ended up getting offers. Of course, for every such candidate, there are plenty of others who approach but don't get an interview. Usually it's some non-negotiable in their CV, such as a missing qualification. Other times it's making a howler like claiming PYP experience but having to back down on that claim as soon as I ask the simplest question. (I'll take people new to IB, but never someone who misrepresents themselves.)

[Thames Pirate]

So do you put notes in for everyone who meets your qualifications?

Also, let's say I stand in your line for a DP English LangLit job but only have AP experience and lots of it. Assuming I am reasonable in your gatekeeper questions (whatever those might be) and vibe, do I get an interview?

Also, really curious about the weight you give recs. For the above fictional posting, do you look through all IB experienced LangLit teachers and pick your favourites based on CV, recs, or both and extend invites? Or do you extend invites without looking at recs?

Basically I know some schools place a higher value on years of IB experience. Others look beyond that, and I wonder what makes a recruiter look beyond that. What makes a CV stand out beyond years or a checklist of extracurriculars? Also, when do you look at profiles or do culling--is it ongoing or do you have blocks of time where you sort resumes? How often do you check your box? Obviously you can only speak for yourself, but since you are being so helpful and obliging I hope you don't mind that I keep asking. It provides a really good insight for the rest of us.

Could you also speak to your presentation? What is your aim, what do you expect, what do you look for?

[teacher tan]

Not sure how heads can assess teacher's responses to addressing students' misconceptions. How much pedagogical content knowledge do they have outside their subject area? What's wrong about starting classroom management discussion with rules? If you live in Singapore or the middle east, rules is a way of life. You can't mess with rules. Some of sid's insights are a bit idealistic.

[sid]

I would hope my ideas are idealistic. Shouldn’t I be looking for the moon, sun and stars? Often enough, I find them.
As for what I can judge, let’s pretend I don’t really have the subject or age-related knowledge to be able to answer the question myself. I can still listen to your answer, see if you have one (a good percentage of candidates don’t really), see if it’s actually a misconception, and - to what extent your approach would address the problem.

If we have different viewpoints, that’s fine, perhaps our paths will diverge after the interview.

[sid]

And let me share my experience re the ME and SE Asia. Fourteen years in one, a mere three in the other. Rules-based classroom management is not the most effective way to go in either location, and can be quite problematic. When I recruited for those countries, I avoided teachers who base their relationships on rules and one-way respect.
You’d actually do better in my current location in Europe if you’re a rules-based teacher, as it’s readily accepted culturally and doesn’t upset anyone, but it’s still not the most effective method. So I might consider hiring a rules-based teacher where I am, sooner than I would have in the ME or SE Asia, but I’d still prefer not to.

[shadowjack]

If you're in teaching and have X years of experience (let's say by year 4 or 5, when you are out of the trying to save yourself from drowning to starting to get the beat of the teaching music) and you haven't thought about your pedagogical approaches, how to fit students together to maximize learning, how to run a classroom using essential rules, and negotiable ones, how to structure your subject for understanding at different levels, how to assess understanding on the fly and more, then I'd have concerns. Your answers don't need to come right away, in fact, reflecting prior to answering is an asset, but it should be a considered answer, not just the latest fad. We should be able to engage in a pedagogical discussion where our views might not be the same, but we actually have views.