This paper reports the results of an evaluative statistical analysis of the instrument employed for student evaluation of faculty at Oakton Community College (Illinois). The analysis was performed because the locally devised instrument had never been subjected to systematic study of reliability or validity, and because a review of pertinent literature indicated a lack of consensus on what types of variables affect students' evaluations of faculty. Results suggested that the instrument failed to discriminate clearly between positive and negative aspects of course organization, faculty performance, classroom ambience, and other evaluation variables; that the positive wording used in constructing the instrument was such that faulty data might result from inculcation of a response set; and that equal weighting was given to each item on the evaluation form, even though each item was not necessarily applicable to each instructor or class. It was recommended that Oakton define and clarify the purposes of faculty evaluation, review existing instruments in use at other institutions, select or design an instrument meeting the purposes, and pretest the chosen instrument for reliability and validity before implementation. A review of the literature, tabular data from the instrument analysis, a bibliography, and the evaluation instrument are included. (JDS)