Prompted by the current debate over tenure, the spread of teacher's unions, and the concern of legislators for providing a uniform teaching load in institutions of public higher education, there seems to be great interest in the whole area of faculty evaluation, as well as in the improvement of college and university teaching. The central purpose of evaluation should be to help a person improve his performance, whether that person is a student or a teacher. It appears, however, that most evaluation systems work primarily to reject people rather than to help them attain better performance. Several options are open to educational administrators in the field of faculty evaluation. One is the growth contract, a system under which every faculty member must state, at 4- to 5-year intervals, his personal goals for the next interval, even if he has tenure. Even on a campus with a tenure system, the faculty growth contracts inject a vital new dimension: the institutions expect faculty members to grow and change during their stay, and will help them to do so. Another alternative to traditional means of faculty evaluation is classroom observation of teachers either by colleagues and by video tapes. This would afford immediate feedback so that professors could improve their teaching before they developed bad methodologies. (HS)