Two questions are addressed in this document: What is worth knowing about Project Follow Through? and, How should the National Institute of Education (NIE) evaluate the Follow Through program? Discussion of the first question focuses on findings of past Follow Through evaluations, problems associated with the use of experimental design and statistics, and prospects for discovering new knowledge about the program. With respect to the second question, it is suggested that NIE should conduct evaluation emphasizing an ethnographic, principally descriptive case-study approach to enable informed choice by those involved in the program. The discussion is based on the following assumptions: (1) Past evaluations of Follow Through have been quantitative, experimental approaches to deriving value judgments; (2) The deficiencies of quantitative, experimental evaluation approaches are so thorough and irreparable as to disqualify their use; (3) There are probably at most a half-dozen important approaches to teaching children, and these are already well-represented in existing Follow Through models; and (4) The audience for Follow Through evaluations is an audience of teachers to whom appeals to the need for accountability for public funds or the rationality of science are largely irrelevant. Appended to the discussion are Chronbach's 95 theses about the proper roles, methods, and uses of evaluation. Theses running counter to a federal model of program evaluation are asterisked. (RH)