When I first started teaching in an American-style international school in Hong Kong, I was told by a senior school administrator that I displayed what he described as, 'Commonwealth thinking'.
Two years later, I am still trying to come to grips with what he might have meant. Was my colleague trying to be politically sensitive in not describing my Australian ways as 'British', or even, 'colonial'?
Whatever it was, it was clearly up to me to explore some alternative paradigms. As I started to look back over what I had believed to be a very diverse teaching career, spanning schools in Australia, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Brunei and Hong Kong, I had to acknowledge that I had never taught outside a Commonwealth education system.
What was it that gave me away as a 'Commonwealth thinker'? What new perspectives would I need to explore? Are there really deep-level differences between Commonwealth and American-style educations? I do not pretend to have any ready answers to these questions, but I certainly feel challenged to seek them out. After only two years in an American international secondary school, it is very much 'early days' for me.
Probably the most immediately obvious difference is the role played by externally moderated examinations.
Most Commonwealth education systems still bear the imprint of the old British O and A-level examinations. Accompanying these exams is the underlying belief that, somehow, such external assessments are a great 'leveller' - and that levelling, itself, is important.