Development and Welfare of Learners · Student Connectedness
Understand the requirement, then find what supports it. The school judgement follows an evidence review.
Counseling services and psychological/social support.
School has appropriate diagnostic and support systems for almost all students in need of counseling services and psychological/soc ial support.
School’s social worker/guidance department follows up on implementation of comprehensive, varied, and effective individual plans for all identified students in need to ensure effective support/achieving improvement.
School has appropriate diagnostic and support systems for most students in need of counseling services and psychological/soc ial support.
School’s social worker/guidance department follows up on implementation of comprehensive, varied, individual plans for most identified students in need to ensure effective support/achieving improvement.
School has somewhat effective procedures to identify/ plan/follow up on supporting some students in need of counseling services and psychological/so cial support.
There are minimal/ ineffective diagnostic, support and follow-up procedures for students in need of counseling services and psychological/ social support.
Choose evidence that shows what the school does. The same evidence can support more than one standard without uploading the file again.
Reading existing governed sources; no second evidence database is created.
What does the evidence tell us? Record each finding clearly, connect it to supporting evidence, then submit it for review.
This layer interprets evidence; it never changes official QNSA text.
Compare the reviewed findings with the QNSA rubric. A responsible person chooses the judgement and explains why; the system does not choose it automatically.
Judgement is human-owned and grounded in governed findings plus the official QNSA rubric.
What should we keep doing? What needs to improve? Use the findings and judgement, then ask for each point to be reviewed.
This layer is grounded in professional judgement and governed findings.
Convert standard gaps into trackable actions, then record implementation impact.
No actions linked yet.
The reviewer challenges the quality of reasoning; the system never issues an accreditation judgement automatically.
The standard becomes an improvement story, not a static snapshot.
No history yet.