Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Wellbeing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Survey shows mixed belonging results; district, schools and students pilot small‑group interventions
Summary
Panorama survey results presented to the board showed small districtwide declines in elementary belonging from fall to spring but notable school‑level gains where counselors and staff ran targeted small groups and adult‑student pairing programs.
District presenters summarized Panorama survey results and described school‑level interventions aimed at increasing student belonging and supportive adult relationships.
At the elementary level, staff reported a 2% districtwide decline in Panorama belonging from fall to spring but said building‑level variation matters: King Elementary implemented an adult ‘champion’ pairing and targeted small groups run by the school counselor. Staff reported that paired relationships increased that school’s supportive‑relationship scores by about 2 percentage points and that students who participated in targeted small groups saw reported belonging increase roughly 13 percentage points. Sacagawea Elementary rose and reached about the 70th national percentile in some belonging measures; staff credited consistent adult responses across staff, strong paraeducator and FCRC support, and restorative conversations.
At the secondary level, staff described a high‑school trend of modest gains that placed district high‑school belonging in the 70th national percentile; staff and principals credited transition programs (sixth grade and ninth grade kick‑off), affinity groups, and student leadership for the improvements. Student advisory members described student‑led “taco/soup” talks, belonging interventions, a student leadership summit and leadership internships funded by a student advisory grant. Student representative Avery said the student advisory set a 50% belonging goal for high schools and ran small‑group, food‑based conversations and a leadership summit to seed school‑level projects.
Board members asked about measurement details — participation rates, whether students answer consistently across administrations, and the number of students served in targeted groups — and staff agreed to provide participation and subgroup breakdowns and counts for small‑group participants. Staff emphasized that Panorama provides both closed‑ended indicators and open‑ended narrative responses (for example, many elementary open‑ended responses mentioned math and life challenges), and that school‑level follow‑ups (student leadership, videos, targeted groups) are used to interpret the quantitative trends.
Staff recommended continuing the combination of system Panorama reporting with school‑level action teams and PLCs, and to track intervention reach and outcomes. No formal board action was required at the study session.
