Students present recommendations after Pascack Valley climate survey finds strong safety but gaps in social‑emotional supports

A district school climate survey presented May 18 found broad strengths but persistent gaps in student social‑emotional supports, and students who helped analyze the data urged concrete changes such as advisory periods and expanded club access.

Dr. Mark Russo, who led the presentation on the New Jersey School Climate Improvement (NJ‑SEI) survey, said the district administered the anonymous survey to staff the week of March 2, students during ELA class on March 2, and parents/caregivers the weeks of March 2 and March 9. "1,315 students, 130 staff, and 196 parents or caregivers participated in the survey this year," he said, and student participation rose to about 79% from 70% the prior year.

The data showed three consistently strong domains across stakeholder groups: sense of physical safety, supportive staff–student relationships and student voice and involvement. "In aggregate, students, staff, and parents/caregivers registered more favorable designations in all domains in all buildings," Russo said. He cautioned that statewide comparisons should be made carefully because statewide data include grades 6–12, while this district report is high‑school focused.

But Russo and student climate‑team members highlighted areas of relative weakness. "Pro‑social student interpersonal behaviors" and "supports for student social and emotional learning" were among the lowest rated domains. He noted that roughly 30% of students and staff disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that "students at the school discussed different points of view in a respectful way," and that about 65% of students reported limited opportunities to choose assignment types or see how work connects to the future.

Student presenters Sarin Narens and Izzy Mednard (Pasc Hills) and Nicholas Hernandez (Pasc Valley) shared item‑level examples and proposed concrete steps. "We would like to start building a culture where student feedback is part of decision‑making processes such as the new state cell phone laws and AI policies," Narens said. Other student recommendations included collecting more qualitative feedback (open‑ended questions), ongoing training on cultural responsiveness, establishing an advisory/home‑room program to connect students with a trusted adult, mentorship across clubs and sports, year‑round club signups, classroom reminders tied to the handbook, and a makeup room for exams to improve coordination between students and faculty.

Dr. Russo said district climate teams—made up of students, faculty and administrators—met repeatedly this year to disaggregate results by school and subgroup and to develop the recommendations students presented. He described modest shrinkage in performance gaps across gender and racial groups compared with prior years, while noting that certain differences in negative interpersonal behaviors persisted.

Board members praised the student presenters. When asked whether students have presented before, a board representative said students have participated in prior presentations and in conversations with principals and the superintendent.

Next steps discussed at the meeting included consideration of student recommendations by building and district administration; the presentation concluded with the board thanking participating students and staff for their work. The district publication of the full survey report and any administrative responses were not specified during the meeting.