In this commentary, I consider the three empirical studies in this special issue based on two main aspects: (a) the nature of the learning progressions and (b) what formative assessment practice(s) were investigated. Specifically, I describe differences among the learning progressions in terms of scope and grain size. I also identify three constellations of formative assessment practices and examine their investigation in the three studies. Finally, I consider implications of differences in the learning progressions for how teachers might use them for various formative assessment practices. Findings from the studies suggest that specific types of learning progressions, partnered with other supports like curricula and professional development, may encourage teachers to move from a stance of "diagnose and fix" toward a learning progression stance of "identify and use."