This study empirically examined the effectiveness of self, peer, and student evaluations in measuring lecturers of the Faculty of Accountancy UiTM Selangor's teaching performance. Quantitative data from the faculty's depository was used for this research. Complete data of forty-six lecturers covering a period of 2020 until 2022 was gathered. Descriptive analysis, t- test and ANOVA were used to analyze the study's influence on variables and hypotheses testing. Descriptive analysis showed that lecturers with more ample teaching experience performed the same as those with less teaching experience. Scores from students' evaluations topped the other two evaluation methods. However, the ANOVA and T-Test showed no difference in the evaluation by students and peers, and the score from the lecturer's self- evaluation was statistically lower. The results indicate that the current UiTM scoring using the three evaluation methods needs revision. Future studies should include other variables that may influence the results, including but not limited to campus locality, lecturer's academic qualifications, and different working experiences. The findings may suggest how the faculty should evaluate its lecturers effectively.