This report presents dual analyses of an undergraduate student, Cassie, whose work provides nice contrasts between Grounded Theory (GT) analysis and Knowledge Analysis (KA). The analyses highlight particular methodological differences, such as grain size of findings, positioning of novices and more general implications about expert-novice studies. The combination of the two methods results in a more complete and nuanced description of Cassie as a prover, while mediating many of the methodological concerns from the individual analysis. [For the complete proceedings, see ED583608.]