This study identified the current practices of two-year colleges in the area of instructor performance appraisal; classified the models of evaluation currently in use in the various types and sizes of two-year colleges; established the efficacy of each model as it relates to the twenty-one personnel evaluation standards recently identified by the Joint Committee (1988); and developed a profile of the "typical" supervisor conducting instructor performance appraisal;The results of this study support previous recommendations of related research which strongly suggests the need for improvement in two-year college instructor evaluation. The extent to which the practices of instructor performance appraisal are being carried out indicate a need for training;The major approaches being used in instructor evaluation are characterized by a close relationship between the instructor and the supervisor with emphasis on collegial rather than authoritarian orientation. However, evaluation is synonymous with observation and the major emphasis is on summative evaluation; standardized criteria; and comparative judgements. This process usually takes its principal data from the classroom and is designed to improve the instructor's performance;This study concludes that differences in the essential elements in use and current practices of instructor performance appraisal were substantial. Additionally, only a few two-year colleges had instructor performance appraisal processes that appeared to represent a well-developed system which were balanced to facilitate the attainment of both improvement and accountability. Additionally, the process of instructor performance appraisal appears to be an under conceptualized and underdeveloped activity in the majority of two-year colleges. However, there is consensus about what design process results in successful teacher evaluation. This study concludes that efficacy ratings (the power or capacity to produce the desired effect) of the Personnel Standards were higher when clinical supervision was identified as the model of instructor performance appraisal;Common procedures for capturing data about instructor performance included the use of: a single instrument to evaluate most of the instructors; student feedback as a source of evaluation data; and peer feedback. The span of control, which was in some cases in excess of 100 instructors, is far too large to conduct quality, comprehensive instructor evaluations.