Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Climate Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Great Valley presentation flags bullying and group-level declines in student climate survey
Summary
District staff reported results from the Pennsylvania student climate survey showing modest districtwide gains but flagged concerns: participation dipped in places, about 2,200 students responded, and 41% of middle school students reported being teased or picked on; staff said they will triangulate results with discipline data and focus groups before setting 2026–27 goals.
A district presenter told the Great Valley School Board that the district's second administration of the Pennsylvania student climate survey drew "about 2,200 respondents" and showed small overall score increases across buildings but notable declines for some disaggregated groups and specific concerns about bullying.
The presenter said the survey covers students in grades 3 through 11, is brief (about 10 to 15 minutes), and reports three domains: student support, social-emotional learning and safe and respectful climate. "Collectively all scores went up in all buildings at all levels," the presenter said, but added that the apparent districtwide gains do not hold for every subgroup.
The presentation called attention to several patterns the district plans to investigate further: a dip at the elementary level among students who identified as Black or African American and a similar dip for a very small Pacific Islander group in the student-support domain; at the high school level, the presenter said Hispanic, Black and Pacific Islander students showed declines between the spring and December administrations.
Most prominently, the presenter highlighted bullying-related responses: "41% of middle school students reporting that students are often teased or picked on," a figure board members described as concerning given it exceeds the number of formal bullying incident reports currently recorded by the district.
Board members urged caution in interpreting results from only two administrations and pressed for additional context. One board member noted that survey self-reports typically exceed formal incident reporting and suggested pairing the survey with focus groups. The presenter agreed: the administration plans to triangulate the survey with discipline data, follow-up focus groups and existing student forums before recommending goals for 2026–27.
Participation rates were discussed as a limiting factor. The presenter said participation varied and sometimes fell in the 60–70% range; the district will aim for the recommended 85% participation rate by coordinating administration windows and follow-up opportunities for absent students.
The presenter said the survey is available in Spanish as the only non-English option the district used and that principals are beginning work with staff to interpret subgroup trends. The board was told the survey results will inform draft goals the superintendent will present in June.
Next steps: district staff will review the disaggregated results, consider focus groups or additional structured student engagement for clarification, and include the survey findings in the draft 2026–27 goals to be shared with the board.
