South Whidbey board reviews new student and staff SEL surveys; lunchroom and recess flagged for follow-up

The South Whidbey School District board met in a workshop to review newly developed, school-level student and staff social-emotional learning (SEL) surveys and discussed next steps for translating survey results into building-level interventions.

Dr. Clifford, who led the presentation, said the district designed internal surveys to be more timely and actionable at the school level and modeled some questions on Panorama and CEE instruments. "We're gonna be transparent in showing all the questions that were asked, and then also the data from pre and post," Dr. Clifford said.

Principal Richards walked the board through elementary student results and follow-up practices. Richards said elementary responses to "I feel safe and comfortable in my classroom" moved from 71% in the fall to 68.6% in the spring, and that recess rose from 56.4% to 59.1% after installation of a new playground. Richards explained the SEL student survey data are not anonymous at the elementary level so staff can follow up individually. "If we have kids that are reflecting almost never, we follow up with every one of those children," Richards said, citing the school psychologist and targeted lunch groups.

Board members and presenters raised interpretation issues and operational questions. Several directors recommended tweaking response language (for example, using 'often/sometimes/rarely' rather than 'almost always/almost never') to suit younger students' comprehension and urged the district to present longitudinal views and cohort comparisons where possible. One board member noted differences in response rates between fall and spring and cautioned that testing schedules and construction activity can shift results.

Presenters also reviewed staff surveys. At one elementary building, 34 staff responded in spring; responses showed generally positive impressions of SEL and behavioral PD (including LSCI trainings). The presenter noted that staff responses were anonymous for that survey, limiting the district's ability to follow up individually with staff who said they lacked confidence in certain practices.

Across the middle and high schools, presenters described targeted practices tied to findings: advisory check-ins, self-referral options embedded in weekly advisory, lunch supervision adjustments and intramurals or structured alternatives to support students during passing periods. High-school staff noted construction noise as an operational stressor for some teachers but said students have generally shown resilience.

The board and administration emphasized next steps: producing clearer visualizations without 'not applicable' responses when helpful, creating a small set of actionable priorities for fall BLTs (building leadership teams), and exploring a non-anonymous follow-up mechanism for staff who indicate gaps in confidence. A board member volunteered to help develop longitudinal analyses if the district lacks data capacity.

The workshop closed the presentation portion with the district committing to convert survey comments into prioritized action steps for buildings and to return with more detailed longitudinal views when capacity allows.