District staff survey shows modest gains and areas of regression; district outlines PD, Panorama and AI training plans
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Dr. Tim Ritter presented staff survey findings Aug. 11 showing multi‑year trends with some regression between fall 2024 and spring 2025, and described a professional development plan ("excellence driven by growth"), a switch to Panorama surveys, restorative‑practice training, and generative AI ethics training for staff.
Dr. Tim Ritter presented the district’s end‑of‑year staff survey to the board Aug. 11, summarizing multi‑year trends and a professional development plan intended to address staff morale, workload and professional growth.
Ritter told the board the district’s overall EAB score had been 3.82 (two years prior), rose to 3.93, and that the fall 2024 score reached 4.08 before a slight regression in spring 2025. He called out workload and time/resources as a concern (a roughly 5% decrease from 2024 to 2025 on manageable workload metrics) and said recognition/value and professional growth remain focus areas. "Our overall district score was 3.82 ... and then we grew in the 2024 to 3.93," he said.
Ritter outlined a PD framework with the slogan "excellence driven by growth," three core PD areas (high‑impact instruction, professional learning communities, and curricular resource adoption support for select staff) and a plan to provide sustained, differentiated professional development across the year rather than one‑off sessions. He described district PD days, ongoing virtual supports (used successfully during COVID), and targeted trainings such as restorative practices and counselor and generative AI sessions to help staff manage classroom practice and evolving technology.
Celine (district administrator) described switching from EAB to Panorama to gain a broader comparison base and more specific question sets; she said district staff and building administrators will follow up with school‑level qualitative questioning to understand reasons behind survey responses. "We are switching to Panorama because we're going to have a much broader scope and compare ourselves to almost everybody in Colorado," Celine said, adding the vendor’s tools support identification of intervention points.
Board members asked about the timing of the survey relative to negotiations and whether insurance changes or other events could explain the regression; they also asked whether qualitative comment fields were available and how the district will measure the impact of PD on student outcomes. Ritter and Celine said follow‑up school visits and Panorama’s intervention system will be used to connect staff feedback to measurable student growth goals.
Next steps the board heard include school‑level follow‑up interviews, rolling out Panorama surveys, finalizing PD schedules for the year, and principal training to monitor both adult and student learning outcomes.