Forty faculty volunteers from 30 departments were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions: "full process," with teaching performance data collection, feedback, diagnosis, applied instructional improvement strategies and data re-collection; "diagnostic," which excluded the applied improvement strategies; and "data collection only." Full process and diagnostic condition faculty were assisted throughout by graduate student "teaching improvement specialists." Late semester findings were that full process instructors considered the process to be effective, worth their time and effort, and appropriate for their peers. There were no across treatment differences in faculty attitudes or self-ratings of teaching skill improvement, need for improvement, or overall teaching competence. Nor were there consistent across treatment differences in their students' attitudes or ratings of instructor teaching skill and improvement. (Author)