Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Youth Leadership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Davenport schools highlight student-led Youth Leadership Teams to boost emotional safety and belonging
Summary
At a Davenport Community School District board meeting, staff from multiple schools described Youth Leadership Teams that center student voice to strengthen adult–student relationships, address emotional safety, and shape school practices such as PBIS incentives, student mentoring and lunch offerings.
Get email alerts on the Youth Leadership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a Davenport Community School District board meeting, district staff described Youth Leadership Teams that bring student voice into school decision-making to improve emotional safety, relationships and engagement across elementary, middle and high schools.
Courtney Olson, executive director of Equity and Learning Supports, said the district’s Youth Leadership Team work “started with our work around crisis response, violent prevention about 5 years ago,” and remains connected to district goals for student safety, engagement and connection.
The teams meet monthly and are intentionally designed to represent the diversity of each building. Staff described a challenge-based decision-making model—engage, investigate, act and reflect—that student teams use to identify problems, propose solutions and evaluate results. Olson said the teams have informed district work ranging from conditions-for-learning surveys to high-school schedule feedback and attendance initiatives.
Presenters from three buildings described local projects. Cara Pha, instructional coach at Smart Junior High, said her team has partnered with building leadership and PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports) processes so student perspectives can be fed back into staff decision-making. Pha said students asked for more social time embedded in lessons and helped redesign the PBIS incentive store; after surveying preferences the students suggested items and incentives staff had not considered. “One of the most innovative ones…Crocs Jibbitz,” she said, describing a bulk purchase of shoe charms chosen by students as a successful incentive.
Abby Levens, teacher in charge at McKinley and Garfield, said elementary teams have tied Youth Leadership Team work to the district’s CharacterStrong social-emotional learning curriculum. Levens described student-led recognitions (student-written awards) for staff and a tutoring/mentoring pairing where third- through fifth-grade leaders work with kindergarten through second-grade students on letter-sound and number skills during recess.
Leanne Anderson, counselor at Mid City High School, said her high-school team focuses heavily on student-to-student relationships because Mid City lacks some traditional student activities (prom, homecoming) and serves a population with many students who have not experienced positive school relationships. Anderson described projects including redoing bulletin boards focused on emotional safety, a “take what you need” affirmation board, a Harvest Fest event, and a student-created survey about school lunches. Students want to meet with food-service staff to discuss portion sizes and fresh options; Anderson said representatives from the district urban farm are scheduled to discuss whether produce could be incorporated into more meals.
Board members asked about turnover, continuity and transitions between schools. Staff said teams are used to transient students and try to pair new students with peer leaders; McKinley uses bilingual student leaders to welcome newcomers who do not yet speak English. Presenters said they maintain facilitator networks and a Google sheet to pass information to receiving counselors when a student changes schools, and they encourage students to list Youth Leadership Team service on resumes and college applications.
Directors also asked about size and selection. Smart’s guidance is roughly 5–7 students per grade level; Pha said their target is a core group of about 15 student leaders overall. McKinley and Garfield emphasized teaching leadership skills first so younger students understand expectations before selecting peers to receive awards or mentoring.
Staff described a range of modest, student-driven changes aimed at building trust and inclusion—teacher awards written by students, PBIS incentive redesign, student mentoring for early literacy and a planned meeting between student leaders and food-service staff to review lunch options. No district policy changes or budget votes were taken at the presentation; the only formal board action recorded in the transcript was a voice vote to adjourn the meeting.
The Youth Leadership Team presentations indicate ongoing district efforts to use student voice to shape everyday practices tied to emotional safety and belonging, with staff pointing to concrete, school-level activities they say have increased student engagement and community within their buildings.

