A sample of 30 instructors nominated as effective teachers to the Piper Foundation and 31 randomly selected control instructors from the same 14 Texas colleges were evaluated by students, former students, administrators, peers, and the instructors themselves. The research instrument incorporated ten sets of characteristics expressed as polar opposites and used a seven-point rating scale. The perceiver groups rated the Piper group higher than the controls on 44 of 50 dependent variables. Ratings of administrators and former students were more nearly alike than they were like other perceivers' ratings and peers tended to rate instructors more like the instructors rated themselves than like any other group. Administrators tended to give controls relatively low ratings. Both groups received relatively low ratings on the sets "original--stereotyped,""student-centered--autocratic," and "probing--cursory"; but both received relatively high ratings on the sets "knowledgeable--limited" and "responsible--evading." All perceiver groups tended to rate both groups highly on the scale; on the seven-point scale, the mean rating of all 50 variables fell within 5.0 and 6.7. The qualities "original,""stimulating,""adaptable,""student-centered," and "systematic" seemed more important in separating the more from the less effective teachers than "knowledge." Implications for selection and evaluation are discussed. (MB)