Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Staff Climate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Weston reports improved staff climate on Panorama survey; staff input still flagged
Summary
District staff climate scores improved sharply from last year: teacher favorable responses rose to 62% and staff favorable responses to 64%, but low support‑staff response rates (17%) mean some results should be interpreted cautiously, presenters told the board.
Dr. Julie Givoni presented results from the district’s Panorama survey and framed the findings as evidence of meaningful growth in staff perceptions of school climate.
Givoni told the board that teacher favorable ratings for overall school climate rose to 62% from 47% the prior administration, and that staff favorable responses rose to 64% from 58%. She said the teacher results were based on 168 responses (about 78% of teachers), while the staff subgroup had 17 responses (roughly a 17% response rate), and she urged caution in interpreting the smaller staff sample.
Givoni highlighted other positive indicators: 60% of participating teachers and 88% of participating staff rated the working environment as quite or extremely positive, and 56% of teachers and 59% of staff said they were quite or extremely optimistic about future improvement. She also noted that favorable ratings for leaders’ responsiveness improved (60% teachers, 63% staff), while favorable ratings for staff input in decision making remained low (33% teachers, 35% staff).
Board members asked about response‑rate changes and steps to probe neutral responses. Presenters said the district increased outreach (more reminders, time set aside at faculty meetings), provided Panorama professional development for staff, and plans to use building‑level committees and targeted focus groups or interviews to unpack neutral responses.
Givoni said the district will be cautious about rewriting Panorama questions because changing question wording can reset baselines, but that a committee is reviewing which questions best serve the district’s goals.
The presentation concluded with a request for continued emphasis on building staff voice and increasing support‑staff engagement in feedback processes; board members suggested incentives and other tactics to boost response rates.
The board did not take formal action on survey methodology at this meeting; presenters indicated follow‑up work will continue.
