Description: Different variants influence on how the students learn. Among them we consider very important the teaching and assessment styles of the professors. The main aim of the research work that we present is to evaluate the teaching and assessment methods of university lecturers in order to analyse, in the future, their influence on how students learn. Results of this paper were taken from the three-year research "Teaching and Learning Strategies at University. Analysing the impact of significant variables on how students deal with learning", managed by Professor Bernardo Gargallo (code SEC2003-06787/PSCE) (2003-2006). Methodology: Due to the lack of an assessment instrument fitted to our research objectives, we developed a questionnaire for this purpose (QETAMUP, Questionnaire for Evaluation of Teaching and Assessment Methodology of University Professors). This questionnaire evaluates the conception of learning, the teaching and assessment methodology, as well as teaching abilities of a competent professor. It is a 51-item questionnaire divided into three scales: the first scale, consisting of 16 items, understands the conception of learning as a reproduction, with a traditional view of teaching and assessment; the second scale, consisting of 17 items, understands knowledge, teaching and assessment from a constructivist point of view; the third scale, consisting of 18 items, evaluates the most important teaching abilities: planning, a methodology appropriate to objectives, an evaluation consistent with well-established and public criteria, etc. The questionnaire is constructed using Likert-scale format with five possible answers for each item. The questionnaire was validated with a sample of 233 professors from two public universities. The instrument obtained a high degree of internal consistency: Cronbach's alpha coefficient was .879 for the first scale, .832 for the second scale, and .839 for the third scale. We applied the questionnaire to 326 professors from the three universities located in Valencia city (the University of Valencia, the Polytechnic University of Valencia and the Catholic University of Valencia). We selected professors from the different universities and degrees in order to get a group of professors with different teaching and assessment styles. Conclusions: We performed a hierarchical cluster analysis following k-means procedure using as classifying variables the scores found in every scale and we found out four teaching styles of professors: Style 1 (69 professors): professors focused on learning, with constructivist ideas, and with teaching and assessment abilities: good planning, use of diverse and complementary methodologies as well as formative assessment methods. Style 2 (96 professors): professors more focused on teaching than in learning from a conceptual viewpoint -traditional conception of teaching-, and with some teaching and assessment abilities, although less than in the first group. This have effects on the major use of magisterial lessons and the less use of formative assessment procedures. Style (88 professors): professors focused on learning -constructivist conception- and with teaching and assessment abilities although less than the first group. This shows less use of formative assessment procedures. Style 4 (73 professors): traditional professors, more focused on teaching than the second group, and with some teaching an assessment abilities, although lower than in the second group. This have effects on the exclusive use of magisterial lessons and the lack of formative and continuous assessment procedures. In view of this statement is essential to design a reasonable offer of training addressed to university professors in training process and to those ones that are on due. An offer suitable for the necessities that generate the new politics of convergence, more focused on the learning process.