Office of Employee Performance and Evaluation

Peer Assistance and Review Data

Client Growth

In January 2014, OEPE calculated scores for non-tenured teachers.  Scores for PAR teachers were calculated in order to make a comparison.  In every FfT Domain, PAR Client Teachers’ averages were lower.  A similar analysis was conducted in May.  At that point, the change in performance of PAR clients was higher than the average change in performance of non-tenured teachers in every Domain.

Table 8: SY 2014-2015 PAR Clients and Non-tenured Teacher Mid-Year to End-of-Year Growth Comparisons   

PAR Data

 

Principal Satisfaction

  • 93.9% of principals responding to our survey noted varying degrees of growth in PAR clients. 
  • 87% of principals believe CTs were a factor in that growth. 
  • 81.6% of principals rated their satisfaction with the program at a 4 or 5 out of 5.

Client Satisfaction

  • 85.6% of responding Client Teachers indicated that they felt that the PAR program helped them to grow professionally.
  • 87.1% stated that they felt that the PAR program helped them to better understand Danielson's Framework for Teaching. 
  • 69.3% of respondents rated their support as a 4 or a 5 out of 5. 

 Retention

  • By May, 2015 PAR served 138 clients. 
  • 99 clients (71.7%) returned to PGCPS for SY 2015-2016. 
  • In SY 2014-2015, 38 clients (26%) were referred by principals to the PAR Panel for non-renewal of contract. 
  • 18 clients (13% of total clients, 47% of clients referred for non-renewal) were recommended for non-renewal of contract by the PAR Panel.
  • Of the Client Teachers who were referred by their principals for non-renewal and recommended for continued PAR support by the Panel, 77.8% returned this year. 
  • Of Client Teachers that were not referred to the Panel by Principals for non-renewal, 83.3% returned this year. 

Thomas Claggett
Teacher Leadership Center
2001 Addison Road S
District Heights,  Maryland 20747

301-952-6240 phone
301-952-6199 fax 


Last modified: 1/5/2016 3:41:10 PM