The theorists whose work appears in this issue have confronted the exercise presented to them in vastly different ways. The editors of this journal asked these theorists to consider how they would evaluate the Bunche-Da Vinci program, and to make and specify assumptions about the program context. The primary task, however, was to describe "a course of action, which may have consequences that lead to other evaluation design decisions." All of the theorists did indeed do this. There was great diversity in the evaluation approaches presented and in the presentation of approaches. As mentioned in "What Theorists Say They Do: A Brief Description of Theorists' Approaches" (Christie and Azzam, EJ791770), the editors anticipated diversity on both of these dimensions and were pleased to see that it emerged. This article explores the differences in approaches that are evident, as well as the similarities on several dimensions of evaluation practice. These authors comment first, however, on each theorist's overall approach to the task before moving on to the discussion of comparing approaches. (Contains 1 table.)