There is a growing realization that there is no area in education that has more potential for the improvement of instruction and indeed improvement of schools themselves than a successful teacher evaluation system. In the United States the 1983 Federal Commission on Excellence in Education document, A Nation At Risk, has given a further imperative for effective teacher evaluation. Therefore it has been regarded essential that schools and school districts develop a supervision/evaluation system that uses the skills of existing staff to the extent possible so that the quality of instruction can be enhanced. In this study the following were explored. 1. What are the teacher evaluation methods that are used recently? 2. What are the teacher evaluation models that are used recently? What are the objectives that these teacher evaluation models have? Depending on the situations, which teacher evaluation model can be useful for decision making? Based on what was explored, the implication they can give for teacher evaluation in Korea was briefly examined. As for the ways to evaluate teachers that implicitly define good teaching, which are labeled according to their most distinctive feature, traditional impressionistic, clinical supervision, research-based checklist, high inference judgements, interviewing, paper and pencil tests, management by objectives, job analysis, duties-based approach, theory-based approach, student learning(improvement) outcomes, consumer ratings, peer ratings, self-evaluation, metaevalution of existing models were described. Ten representative evaluation models were briefly described and analysed based on their purposes - summative /or formative evaluation, and their worth for decision making situations such as (1) pretenure(intern) retention, (2) professional development, (3) tenure, (4) posttenure retention, (5) merit pay or similar benefits, (6) promotion (or preparation for area of responsibility), (7) reduction in teaching force, (8) dismissal (for just cause), (9) self-assessment and self development. They were Hunter model, McGreal model, Iwanicki model, Withers model, Manatt model, Toledo model, Shinkfield model, NBPTS model, Tennessee model, and Dallas model. What is important is not the existence of teacher evaluation, whether it be formative and/or summative teacher evaluation, but if it is recognized that quality of education depends on teacher quality and if they try to establish the system and climate where the stakeholders cannot but try to improve themselves incessantly and collectively, always checking the progress of students\' achievement.