The key to tenure is evaluation; this paper is the result of dissatisfaction with the basic pattern of evaluation that prevails throughout California. The present Quality Control Model of Faculty Development is widespread, deeply entrenched, and grounded on assumptions and premises that are limited, obsolete, and contrary to the interests of students, instructors, college, and community. Alternative models go beyond evaluation while still anchored to a basic substructure of procedural safeguards and academic due process in the administration of tenure. Such models begin with a judgment of competence over the wide range of growth needs of the faculty member. One alternative model introduced in this paper is the Development Model for Faculty Growth and Evaluation. Speculations are offered on what outcomes could be expected from it. (Author/CA)