This response to Slavin's article (2008) explores the issues of transparency, representation, and warranting of claims in Slavin's descriptions of the work of others and his suggestions for program evaluation syntheses. Through contrastive analyses between Slavin's representations of the program evaluation synthesis efforts of five organizations and their own representations of their synthesis work, the authors uncover the ways in which the gaps in Slavin's text become consequential for readers, limiting readers' opportunities for developing understandings of synthesis efforts. Through contrastive analyses, the authors foreground the need for transparency in reporting, raise questions about the use of narrowly focused reviews, and demonstrate how a contrastive analysis of texts may constitute a productive approach to critical reading and an opportunity for learning. (Contains 5 tables and 1 note.)