Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Climate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Youth Truth survey: high student response at some sites but low family participation; district plans targeted interventions
Summary
District staff presented Youth Truth survey findings showing strong student participation at Jefferson (95%) but low family response overall (~17–23%). Trustees and staff outlined next steps including empathy interviews, expanded clubs, SEL curricula (Ripple Effects, Zones of Regulation), co-teaching, and follow-up reporting to sites.
District staff presented results from the Youth Truth survey and trustees discussed how to translate the findings into site-level actions.
The presenter noted high student response rates at some sites — “Jefferson we Student Response rate was 95% which is great” — while family response rates were low (Jefferson family response about 23%; district-level family response cited as roughly 17%). Staff and trustees said those participation differences should inform how the district interprets percentages for items such as engagement, relationships, respect and belonging.
The survey identified both strengths and areas for growth. Site-level student measures showed gains in some categories, while engagement and academic challenge were flagged as areas needing attention. Trustees and administrators discussed practical follow-up steps: conducting empathy interviews to better understand low-family response and student perceptions, sharing results with site councils, increasing after-school clubs and advisory structures to build relationships, and implementing SEL programs. The district said it will use curriculum and staffing adjustments — for example, expanded CTE offerings, additional AP and dual‑enrollment sections, a co-teaching model to better serve heterogeneous classrooms, and a ripple‑effects SEL program — to address the patterns identified in the survey.
Trustees emphasized the need for clearer reporting and for immediate but measured next steps. A board member recommended sharing the data with parents in accessible ways (QR codes at events, targeted outreach) and asked staff to return with plans to use the data to set measurable site goals. Senior staff said some survey items are countywide benchmarks and others can be customized; staff recommended focused site conversations to identify one or two priorities per school for initial interventions.
Next steps: staff will continue local analysis, pursue targeted engagement strategies to raise family participation, and return to the board with plans and timelines for implementing selected programs and measuring impact.
