The peer evaluation model of university teaching is composed of three domains of behavioral and cognitive skills which, in combination, represent the elements expected of professionally competent teachers. These domains are: (1) the conception of the professional role for which students are being prepared; (2) instructional design; and (3) the execution of the instructional strategy. The measurement of competence in each of these domains poses a particularly difficult challenge. Consistent with the underlying philosophy of the model, methods were developed for collecting data for different dimensions in each of the domains. The data base for making judgments was constructed from interviews with the faculty member and his/her students, classroom observations, and a review of the course syllabus and other course materials. Independent clinical judgments based on definitions of expertness were made by each of six reviewers. Following these independent judgments, disagreements were discussed and consensus reached. The purpose of this paper is to describe the methods employed to collect the data and the processes used to arrive at a consensus clinical judgment. Appendices contain: (1) the scoring sheet used by reviewers to evaluate a professor; and (2) the scoring agreement sheet used by the chairperson to identify the percent of agreement between the reviewers. (Author/JAZ)