FUTURE, continued from pg 4 
being supported to accompany relocating
parents. Instead, the support has only been for the relocating parent who lives alone in the new location and travels home pe- riodically to visit family. Expense, security (where expatriates may feel vulnerable living in particular locations), and the availability of increasingly sophisticated technology to facilitate international communications are all factors that might persuade international employers that employees no longer need to be relocated internationally with their families, but can either work electronically or relocate alone with regular trips to visit family in the home country. It is possible, therefore, that even within a relatively short time frame, the nature of the international school sector will change considerably from the situation in 2017.
Implications for International Schools
 ere are many issues likely to arise as in- ternational schools develop in the coming years. Here we choose to focus on two is- sues that we envisage to be the most press- ing: the teaching sta /faculty appointed to these schools, and the curriculum that will be o ered in them.  ere are undoubt- edly other issues that those who lead such schools will need to engage with and  nd challenging in years to come — not least the question of whether their growth will con- tinue as relatively unchecked, as it currently is, as planners and policy-makers in national systems become increasingly aware of their existence (Hayden &  ompson, 2008).
Teachers and Leaders
 e source of the teachers and leaders ap- pointed to sta  international schools in the future continues to be an important and pressing question (Hayden &  ompson, 2011). It is clear that at least part of the at- traction to such schools is that they o er in- ternationally-recognised, English-medium quali cations based on a curriculum di er- ent from the host country. It is likely that there will continue to be a premium (as there is now in many international schools) on teachers who are native English speakers and who have experience teaching the in- ternationally–recognised curriculum o ered by the school. Currently, teachers in inter- national schools have usually earned teacher certi cation in their home country, before moving abroad. With a small number of
exceptions, there is no teacher training of- fered that speci cally prepares those to teach in international schools. Exceptions include the one-year Teaching Culturally and Linguistically Diverse & Exceptional Learners (TCLDEL) o ered by George Mason University, Virginia to those who hold a bachelor’s degree, and the bachelor’s degree in Education o ered by a consor- tium of universities in the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway under the name of ITEPS (International Teacher Education for Primary Schools) and, added recently, ITELS (International Teacher Education Lower Secondary), all of which o er prepa- ration to teach speci cally in the interna- tional school sector. Unless many more such programmes are developed in the near fu- ture (which seems unlikely, given the associ- ated challenges), the backwash e ect on the teaching sectors in countries including the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland – as growing numbers of teach- ers trained in those countries take up posts in international schools – seems likely to become increasingly problematic. In the UK, for instance, the shortage of teachers in state schools is a growing problem, and although no clear link has been drawn be- tween the numbers of those trained in the UK who do not continue to teach there, and the numbers who take up posts in interna- tional schools, policy makers and planners (who have tended to have little awareness of international schools to date) are beginning to notice the possible connection. Growing numbers of international schools are surely going to impinge increasingly on teacher recruitment in a number of countries. Is it reasonable to assume that (a small number of) national systems will continue to pro- vide, and fund, the training of teachers for international schools? Is it likely that, as policy makers and planners in such national systems become more aware of the issue, they will endeavour to reduce its prevalence in some way?
Of equal concern, perhaps, will be the num- bers of experienced Heads, Directors, and Principals who relocate from a national education system to take up a role in an in- ternational school abroad. What might be the implications for those national educa- tion systems most likely to be a ected by this phenomenon? For example, in the UK, there is concern with respect to the di cul- ties experienced in making appointments to headships of state schools, and debate as to the reasons for reluctance of suitably
experienced candidates to apply for such posts.  ough it has not been suggested that international schools are contributing to this problem, it is clearly the case that a number of experienced state school heads have relocated to international schools. If the pattern should continue, in the UK and other English-speaking countries, this could become a global phenomenon of in- creasingly challenging proportions. How should it be anticipated?
Of further interest for Heads and Principals are the possible implications of growth in commercial groupings of international schools. If such groupings seek common- ality of policy and practice across their members, will this reduce autonomy and potential for creativity of individual leaders?  e related question of governance in inter- national schools, already a thorny issue in some contexts where relationships between Board and Head vary widely (and can be a factor in the relatively high turnover of in- ternational school Heads), may also become a greater concern if larger numbers of for- pro t, single-owner schools are established where the owner expects to play a greater role in the management of the school than a Head might otherwise expect.
The Curriculum
 e question of which curriculum to o er in an international school is in uenced by many factors. In earlier days of international schools, there was little choice, a school of- fered either its own curriculum or that of another national or state education system. Today, international schools a liated to a particular national context (with titles such as the American International School of Y, or the British School of X), may still o er the national curriculum of the “home” coun- try.  e choices available to international schools  rst opened up in 1968 with the launch of the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma, designed to be recognised by universities worldwide and to be more appropriate in content to multinational stu- dent groups than the programmes available from a variety of national systems. Since the IB Diploma’s launch, the concept of a non- nationally-focused curriculum has been taken up by, inter alia, the College Board in developing the Advanced Placement International Diploma; Cambridge International Examinations (CIE) in of- fering the International General Certi cate
FUTURE, cont'd pg 7  intered www.aaie.org
5