This review surveys major currents of thought and practice in teacher evaluation. Citing recent state-mandated teacher evaluation policies and procedures, several compelling questions of accuracy, fairness, and utility are raised. In response to these questions, the document first focuses on the distinction between formative and summative evaluation, the relation of the latter to minimum standards and legal mandates, and the correlation of methods with purposes. Alternatives developed since the 1960s include goal-setting models such as the performance-objectives approach, outcome-based models, and clinical supervision models. In the next section, the separate problems of the two main participants in the teacher evaluation process--evaluators and teachers--are analyzed. The evaluator's main concerns are the separation of summative and formative tasks, the need for expertise, and the relationship with the teacher, while teachers need to be involved in developing evaluation criteria, and they need to feel that the criteria by which they are evaluated are sound and relevant to their teaching. The fourth section discusses the three stages of teacher evaluation--preobservation conferences, the observation itself, and the postobservation conference--and touches on other sources of data besides observation: parent evaluations, peer observation, teaching materials, student evaluations, and self-evaluations. The conclusion addresses four key issues: (1) coexistence of teacher development and accountability; (2) supervision versus evaluation; (3) utility of evaluation in improving teaching; and (4) the most productive, least time-wasting approaches to observation. Appended is a syllabus of Thomas McGreal's training program for staff and supervisors. (TE)