Reflections on the educational landscape in the U.S. and San Antonio
(thoughts presented to parents at the Head of School coffee in November)
A look back and a look ahead:
The history of education in the United States provides an interesting backdrop for an examination of systems that exist
today, and their strengths and weaknesses. The first schools in America were religiously affiliated (often of the Puritan
persuasion), and had the goal of preparing males of high social status for leadership roles in the colonies. In the 1800s,
educational reformers such as Thomas Jefferson and Horace Mann sought to establish free public schools for boys and girls
of all social classes, in a program removed from religious affiliation. The purpose espoused for these schools was to train
students to become skilled workers, though the advocates also expressed the belief that public education options would
create better citizens and a culturally uniform American society.
During the age of Progressivism in the late 19th century, the American system’s goals grew to include the teaching of critical
thinking skills, and Child-centered curricula were devised to address the artistic, imaginative and creative aspects of the
students. Progressives believed that traditional academic learning combined with vocational training would produce citizens
better prepared to understand and participate in community life.
The Current Climate:
Most discussion of education since the mid-1990s has focused almost exclusively on how education is delivered, and what
content is included. The conversation has been impacted significantly by the narrative of globalization brought on by the
development of the internet and the popularity of books such as The World is Flat, the ubiquitous access to modern
technological tools, and a hyper-focus on local, regional, national, and global economic conditions.
Another narrative, usually unquestioned but not necessarily agreed upon, is that American public schools are failing. The
evidence often cited is international test scores, again made prominent by access to information (the internet) and
scrutinized thanks to the framework of globalization. Another statistic lamented is low graduation rates. What is not usually
mentioned is that Americans have never scored at the top of international tests, and that high school graduation rates have
actually improved in recent decades. Regardless, this narrative, coupled with the increasing devotion to big data and
testing, has proved fertile ground for two new types of public schools – the magnate school and the charter
school. Wikepedia provides the following basic information about these options:
A magnet school is a public school or program, either elementary or secondary, that is designed for the specific purpose of
attracting students who have a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds with the goal of voluntary reduction, prevention, or
elimination of racial isolation. In addition, or alternatively, a magnet school may provide a focus, whether academic or social,
on a special theme.
The first charter school opened in St. Paul, Minnesota - the first state to have a charter school law - in 1992. A charter
school is a public school, either elementary or secondary, that operates under a specific charter that the state legislature or
other appropriate authority grants, designating it a charter school. It is administered either by a regular school district, a state
education agency, or a chartering organization.
A key component of magnet schools is that while they are public, enrollment can be limited to students who have special
needs or who meet special requirements.
Charters, on the other hand, must offer their program to any family who falls within the geographical zone in which the
charter operates.
Private Schools can be very similar to or very different from their public counterparts. Many types of private schools have
existed in the United States, each theoretically with its own mission (though many schools did not have articulated mission
statements until the second half of the 20th century): Religious schools, accelerated schools, special needs schools, etc….
The common features of private schools are that they are independent from government oversight, can teach the curriculum
they want, and can admit students and choose the faculty they want. Accrediting bodies can provide guidance and a certain
degree of standardization, but not all private schools are accredited, and some are for profit.
Everyone talks about the what – where’s the why?
In addition to changing how we teach, the factors and narratives surrounding globalization, technology, and America’s failing
education system have seemed to draw our nation’s attention from the why of education to the what. Looking at how and
what we teach is not a bad thing, but in focusing on content and process, it is argued that we have lost a sense of the
overarching goals that should or could be driving the public sector. Without clarity on the why, trying to identify the best
program is akin to jumping in the car and driving before you know where you are going, or if you even need a car to get
there. Sadly, in the absence of an articulated collective vision about the goal of education, the primary purpose that is
almost exclusively implied is that education is preparing not citizens, but workers. Worker preparation has always been a
goal of our educational systems, but now it is increasingly becoming THE goal, at least in much public discourse. Private
schools are not immune to the same influences, though we have the ability to identify and articulate our objectives more
clearly, since each school can identify and disseminate its own mission.
Notes on Charter vs. Traditional public
The proliferation of charter schools has led to some discord – even animosity – on the public side. Ultimately, every school
is funded based on the number of students who attend. When charters pull students from traditional public schools, the tax
dollars follow. This creates funding uncertainty and hardship for operations at traditional schools. A second point of
contention stems from the alleged practice of charter schools skimming the best test takers from the traditional public
schools, which leaves the traditional schools with lower performing test takers. In this era of high-stakes testing, this talent
drain in turn leads to more reduction in funding at the local level (not to mention morale challenges).
The primary reason for support of charter schools has been to improve education through competition. The lack of a clear
or agreed upon definition of what constitutes good education should make evaluating the efficacy of any program
challenging. However, in all public schools – traditional and charter – the mechanism for evaluation has shifted almost
exclusively to testing. Many view this as a tragic development in American education, for while tests can measure some of
our schools’ desired competencies, they cannot measure all of the things schools set-out to achieve. One consequence of
this is that schools increasingly focus only on the elements of their program that are tested (which, increasingly, are
correlated to the aforementioned efforts to prepare Americans for the workforce at the expense of other goals).
Nevertheless, much analysis of charter school efficacy has been studied. Surprisingly, despite the frequent focus of charter
schools on the very testing that is driving the analysis of education, the data thus far does not suggest success in meeting
the goal of improvement through competition. Analysis has shown uneven benefits of charter schools, with results varying
from state to state and from school to school, with great variations even within the same charter networks. For example,
looking at how much students gained from their experience, researchers have found that New York charter students are
underperforming relative to their peers in traditional public schools, while in Chicago, charter students are gaining
more. Overall, the impact of charter schools on their students seems to be lagging the impact of public schools. One
notable exception is that in schools where the student population is economically disadvantaged and/or high in English
language learners, charter schools are seeing increased learning relative to their public school counterparts. A report from
Stanford reads:
Like previous studies, the one from CREDO concluded that kids in most charter schools are doing worse or no better than
students in traditional public schools. About a third, though, are doing better. And that's a big jump from four years ago. The
gains among blacks, Latinos and kids whose first language is not English have been impressive and surprising, says
CREDO Director Margaret Raymond. - 2013 Stanford University's Center for Research on Education Outcomes, or CREDO.
Analysts suggest that the main reason for the success of some charter schools is the simple fact that they keep the students
they serve in school more often, and for a longer school year, than their traditional counterparts.
The reason most often cited for the weaker than expected performance of many charter schools is that they often employ
inexperienced teachers and ask them to do more work than their counterparts in the traditional public sector (which appears
to be one reason for the incredibly high turnover in staff at charter schools).
Keystone’s purpose, proficiencies, and place in the educational landscape:
In the context of a nation that lacks a clearly defined reason for education, mixed with less than promising data about the
things that are happening, it is refreshing to consider the clarity and quality of what we strive to achieve and the ways we
meet our mission at Keystone.
First, the Why - Our mission - we are very clear in why we exist and what we value:
To create students who value, seek, and achieve academic excellence
To create students who are prepared and inclined to give back to their communities
To create students who will lead responsibly and grow ethically
Our vision is to prepare students for meaningful and impactful lives in the world.
There are many essential elements that help us meet our goals. The first is our Program. We offer a rigorous, accelerated
and probing curriculum in all subjects that is designed to be challenging – not onerous (quality over quantity). Our small
classes enable greater teacher impact for each student (16:1 student to teacher ratio, versus 30:1 in traditional public and
charter schools). Also, our teachers are provided room for innovation and creativity in program delivery. In both traditional
public and charter schools, teachers are required to follow a standardized and prescriptive program.
Additionally, our emphasis is on skills, not just content, including critical thinking, communication through writing and
reading, speaking and listening, and research and analysis. We also extend our definition of skills and skill development to
the social-emotional and creativity realms (not traditionally a formal component of public or charter schools). This emphasis
is implicit in all classes and in our culture, and explicit through programs such as 2nd step, advisory, self and community,
and arts classes
Finally, we offer a robust extra-curricular program to promote cognitive, social, emotional and physical learning. This
program includes athletics, drama, clubs and community service, science fair, and outdoor education trips to four states.
The second crucial component that helps us meet our mission is our People. Our teaching staff is comprised of outstanding,
experienced and committed educators who have 20+ years average teaching experience, whereas the average experience
level at traditional public schools is 15 years, and only 5 years at charter schools. Our teachers also have an average of 10+
years of experience at Keystone, whereas the average tenure at a traditional public school is less than 10 years, and only 3
years for charter programs. We also enjoy an average year-to-year retention of 95% of teachers (The industry average is
88%, and for charters, 75%.), which allows for great continuity and collaboration. Not surprisingly, our teachers are leaders
in pedagogy and curriculum development, often serving as team leaders at workshops and conferences around the country.
In addition to our staff, another side of the people equation at Keystone is our identification of mission appropriate
students. Our students are homogeneous in that all are capable and desire to be here, yet incredibly diverse in their
backgrounds and life experiences. This dichotomy creates a wonderful community with a collective mindset where the
individual is both appreciated and celebrated.
The last essential component of Keystone that allows us to succeed in meeting our mission is our culture. The legacy of the
people, traditions, spaces, and experiences that have defined Keystone since its founding in 1948, the School’s culture is
one that embraces and celebrates all forms of learning, that expects effort and achievement, and that encourages
individuality of character but commonality of purpose. Our emphasis on the cumulative social good that we create in
addition to the benefit each individual receives by attending the program adds to the environment here, and is a key reason
our employees have identified us as a top-workplace in San Antonio for eight consecutive years.
Evidence of our success
We constantly assess how well we are meeting our mission. However, doing so is part science, part art, especially in terms
of how our students are growing in non-cognitive capacities. And, while we look at and keep track of statistical student
accomplishments, we caution that our students’ high test scores are not goal of our efforts, just a by-product of them.
SATs – On average, 50% of our seniors are recognized by the National Merit Process (believed to be in the top 10 of all
schools in U.S.) versus a national average of 3% of students recognized. By contrast, the highest performing charter school
nationally reports 15% of its students being recognized.
SATs – On average our students score 2100 on the SAT test (believed to be in the top 10 of all schools in U.S.) versus a
national average of 1500. The highest performing charter school nationally has an estimated average score of 1950.
Advanced Placement exams – Our graduates leave Keystone having taken an average of 7.5 Advanced Placement exams,
and they earn an average score of 4.5 (out of 5) on those exams (despite many seniors not taking tests due to college
policies). 81% of exams receive a score of 4 or higher, and 95% receive a score of 3 or higher. In contrast, the highest
performing charter school nationally has an average of 6 tests taken with average score of 3.5 (requiring all students to take
AP tests).
We see similar results (students at the top of their cohort groups) in ERB testing in grades 3-8 as well.
In addition to our students’ results in testing situations, we are able to quantify some of our students’ achievements,
especially in competitive situations. For example, over the past two years we have had over 40 published poets; since
1965, we have had 148 students qualify for the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair and we have had 13
Discovery Challenge semi-finalists (both believed to be the most in the United States); during the past four years, Keystone
teams have won the regional WorldQuest History competition and have placed second in the World for three of past four
years.
Much of the growth and learning that our students do is not easily measured, and we rely on observations to assess student
accomplishment. Of primary importance as we assess our efficacy is the growth seen by students, parents, and
teachers. Our experienced teacher group has a profound and unparalleled ability to spur and assess learning. This is true
for both cognitive and social-emotional growth.
Given that our mission is to spur growth that has lasting impact for both our graduates and the World they inhabit, we take a
keen interest in the lives of our alumni, and we have begun tracking various elements of their lives. We celebrate their
accomplishments in our publications and in our activities, using their achievements to spur those of today’s students. In
terms of meeting our mission, we are proud that many of our alumni have not only found fulfillment in their own lives, but that
they have also given back to their World as researchers in medicine, as leaders in civil rights processes, as poets and
artists, and as social entrepreneurs. Our graduates also value learning and they seek to better themselves well beyond
college, as evidenced by the fact that from the past decade of graduates, 85% are attending or planning on attending
graduate school.