Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
McFarland board reviews student survey showing high teacher respect but gaps in engagement and safety comfort
Summary
District administrators told the school board that a third-party student survey of grades 4–12 (89% participation) showed strong results on teacher-student relationships and belonging but identified lower results for students talking about learning outside school, seniors' response rates and comfort reporting bullying.
The McFarland School District on the evening reviewed results of a third‑party student survey showing strong classroom relationships but continuing weaknesses in student engagement and comfort reporting bullying.
District administrator Aaron Tarnitz presented the results, saying the vendor’s tool produced an 89% participation rate among students in grades 4 through 12 and provided districtwide and trend comparisons. Tarnitz told the board the results are “a very representative sample” and that administrators plan to use building- and grade-level breakdowns for next steps.
Tarnitz told the board that most indicators were high: 94% of students agreed or strongly agreed that their teachers treat them with respect, 96% said they had friends they could sit with at lunch and 95% said parents help them with school. On composite indices measured on a five‑point scale, administrators reported averages above 4.0 across the four key areas tied to the district’s strategic plan.
But Tarnitz and board members highlighted several concerns. The average response to the item “Most days I like my school” was 6.1 on a 0–10 scale, and just 60% of students agreed they talk to people outside school about what they are learning. Tarnitz noted that about 72% of students agreed or strongly agreed that most kids at school follow the rules, and roughly 79% said they would feel comfortable talking to someone if they were bullied — meaning about one in five students might not feel comfortable reporting bullying.
Board members also raised concerns about representation within the sample. Tarnitz said senior participation was low: only about 8% of 12th‑grade students responded, reflecting difficulty reaching seniors who are off campus for internships or youth apprenticeships. Board members suggested exploring incentives and other outreach to increase senior response rates and to ensure disaggregated data are available for groups such as students with disabilities, by race and by grade level.
On achievement gaps, Tarnitz showed district key performance indicators focused on English language arts. He said gaps remain: an 11–12 percentage‑point gap between white students and students of color on proficiency measures, and a 36–38 percentage‑point gap for students with disabilities in past years’ reports. Tarnitz said the district’s school improvement plans and professional development are targeted at reducing those gaps.
Board members pressed for follow-up steps. They asked for building‑level drilldowns, for clarity on whether questions about reporting bullying measure reporting versus discussing a problem with an adult, and for plans to disaggregate data by race, gender and special education status for targeted interventions. Tarnitz said buildings will analyze their data and that the district will include the survey results in upcoming strategic plan KPI reporting.
The board did not take formal action on the survey at the meeting but directed staff to provide more detailed, disaggregated results to committees and to return with suggested follow‑up actions for areas identified as growth priorities.
