The antinomy of the evaluation of the university staff is set forth: to search for a mechanism that, when applied to different disciplinary fields, preserves its diversity in a homogenous way. Apparently there is here, a contradiction: What it is homogeneous points towards unicity and it is in opposition, therefore, to diversity which points towards what it is homogeneous. This essay is divided into four parts which correspond to four stages of the evaluative process of the UAM:
1o. diversity without homogeneity (1974-1985);
2o. homogeneity without diversity (1985-1988);
3o. diversity within homogeneity (1989-1993);
4o. homogeneity within diversity (circa 3001).
The hypothesis we propose is that UAM, in spite of opposing statements, has not been able to produce mechanisms of academical evaluation from teachers who recognize and value diversity; The thesis we propose is that homogeneity in academical evaluation can be done only if diversity is fully recognized.