One of the main obstacles to effective faculty evaluation is the inability to reach consensus on the evaluation's intended purpose. On one hand, faculty evaluation has a formative purpose, supporting faculty development, growth, and self-improvement, while it also has a summative purpose in that it provides data to make personnel decisions on tenure, promotion, reappointment, and salary. Since the 1970's there has been debate over whether an evaluation system can be both formative and summative, and still be effective. One of the few points of agreement is the need for multiple sources of input. Possible sources of evaluation data include self-evaluation, evidence of student achievement, alumni evaluations, and instructor performance tests, with the most common source being student evaluations of teacher performance. Two major problems in establishing successful faculty evaluation programs are administration disinterest in whether or not faculty succeed and faculty resistance. Faculty fear that evaluations purported to encourage development and growth will be used to make decisions on tenure, promotion, and dismissal. Despite the lack of clarity over the goals of evaluation and the most appropriate methodology, community college practitioners generally agree that evaluation is a necessary part of teaching and learning. The ideal system of evaluation would be a non-normative or criterion-referenced system that appraises faculty according to a set of professional standards and encourages professional development rather than discourages it. (KP)