SEL screener survey

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a way to opt out from future ones?

Contact your kids school in writing and tell them your kid no longer has your permission to participate in the SEL screening.

Demand they purge your kids information and survey answers from the database used by that company.

[Anonymous]

My child's results came last night and I just read them. I also read the specific questions from the link posted on page 1 of this thread.

Looking at the results, I'd say the scores he got on each topic were pretty much as I expected after reading the questions. I know which areas of socio-emotional development are strengths and which areas have room for growth.

I agree with those that say the data mining is unacceptable, and I wonder why teachers told kids that it was anonymous, when it clearly isn't.

My question for those posting their extreme objectives to the survey (aside from the 2 issues I listed above)--why is the SEL screener as a concept a bad thing?

[Anonymous]

Are the results posted online?

[Anonymous]

we got the results in the mail for our 7th grader. nothing is higher than a 2.7. Should we be concerned?

[Anonymous]

They are coming in the mail. Is a 4 on sadness good or bad. I am pretty progressive and okay with the school asking about these things, but the results are confusing.

[Anonymous]

This survey is so useless! What a waste of millions of dollars + waste of teachers time + waste of students time.

200,000 students spent an average of 1.5 hours - filling it out and talking about it + I would guess 10,000 or more staff must have spent 10 hours each going through with students.

A total of 400,000 person hours of effort into this.

This could have been used a lot more productively on other things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This survey is so useless! What a waste of millions of dollars + waste of teachers time + waste of students time.

200,000 students spent an average of 1.5 hours - filling it out and talking about it + I would guess 10,000 or more staff must have spent 10 hours each going through with students.

A total of 400,000 person hours of effort into this.

This could have been used a lot more productively on other things.

400,000 parents spending 15 minutes on this adds another 100,000 person hours.

A cool half a million person hours wasted!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are coming in the mail. Is a 4 on sadness good or bad. I am pretty progressive and okay with the school asking about these things, but the results are confusing.

A 4 on that particular topic means that there is room for growth. Calling the rating scale "strengths" is stupid--if it's a "less desired" emotional/social developmental aspect, then the higher the score means the more room for growth. We don't want our kids to be experiencing outsized levels of worry or sadness, which is why the higher the score on that one, the more room for growth there is. It probably should have been called high/medium/low/no presence or something like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This survey is so useless! What a waste of millions of dollars + waste of teachers time + waste of students time.

200,000 students spent an average of 1.5 hours - filling it out and talking about it + I would guess 10,000 or more staff must have spent 10 hours each going through with students.

A total of 400,000 person hours of effort into this.

This could have been used a lot more productively on other things.

400,000 parents spending 15 minutes on this adds another 100,000 person hours.

A cool half a million person hours wasted!

I hope there is a way to make FCPS accountable. What did this effort generate? What are the metrics around how many students they found at risk and got referred, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are coming in the mail. Is a 4 on sadness good or bad. I am pretty progressive and okay with the school asking about these things, but the results are confusing.

A 4 on that particular topic means that there is room for growth. Calling the rating scale "strengths" is stupid--if it's a "less desired" emotional/social developmental aspect, then the higher the score means the more room for growth. We don't want our kids to be experiencing outsized levels of worry or sadness, which is why the higher the score on that one, the more room for growth there is. It probably should have been called high/medium/low/no presence or something like that.

Thank you. I wasn’t sure if they flipped it. It’s consistent with the screening results from the doctor. And okay with that score because they also had a four on the happiness section. My son is basically like no one is happy all the time. And he’s right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I got these and I'm a bit confused by one of them. One of our kids was basically 3 - 3.5 straight down the board on everything.

My other kid, who is pretty happy-go-lucky, got a 5.00 in how frequently they feel challenging emotions like worry or sadness. But scores of 4.3 - 5.0 are High Strengths. I wouldn't call feeling constantly worried or sad a high strength. Does this mean the reverse, they almost never feel bad? That's the one I don't get.

5 means they don’t have a problem with those emotions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are coming in the mail. Is a 4 on sadness good or bad. I am pretty progressive and okay with the school asking about these things, but the results are confusing.

Private companies run this scheme. The screener is not anonymous. The data collected is used in data mining and is sold.

No one should be OK with this. Opt out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are coming in the mail. Is a 4 on sadness good or bad. I am pretty progressive and okay with the school asking about these things, but the results are confusing.

Private companies run this scheme. The screener is not anonymous. The data collected is used in data mining and is sold.

No one should be OK with this. Opt out.

Interesting tidbit: The private company running this scheme is Panorama Education and its founder is Merrick Garland's son in law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are coming in the mail. Is a 4 on sadness good or bad. I am pretty progressive and okay with the school asking about these things, but the results are confusing.

Private companies run this scheme. The screener is not anonymous. The data collected is used in data mining and is sold.

No one should be OK with this. Opt out.

Interesting tidbit: The private company running this scheme is Panorama Education and its founder is Merrick Garland's son in law.

The company is also connected to facebook.

[Anonymous]

If you feel strongly, opt out, but keep in mind some of the conspiracy here. There is no data meaning of your kids. The "connection," to Facebook is that that evil twat Zuckerberg is an investor. That's all. Most of this controversy over the data and FB is more crazy right-wing anti-CRT astroturfing campaigns.

I am not dismissing individual parents and their concerns with the questions, but don't let the paranoid conspiracies drive the discussion.

Panorama has signed a legally binding contract with FCPS that specifies how the data will be collected, stored, and used," said a FCPS spokesperson. "The data will be used only for the purposes of serving FCPS and only for education purposes. In addition, Panorama complies with all applicable federal laws, such as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), as well as state and local regulations concerning student data.”