ABSTRACT
Superordinately, a pervasive and pernicious Social Darwinism exists in these biases, a stance often legitimated by reference to what are labeled as “modern” biological theories such as behavioral genetics and sociobiology. The measurement models people develop through this collaboration must be embedded in structural models that are more complex than many of the extant ones in use. Calling for change-sensitive designs and measures, and for longitudinally evaluating the outcomes of our policies and programs, may seem like “preaching to the choir”. Such actions represent our theoretically-guided attempts to change the trajectory of human development; and the evaluation of these activities not only provides peopel with information about these endeavors but, as well, gives people quite basic information about how to enhance the life chances of diverse children. Becoming more directly engaged with the development and evaluation of policies, with professionals who make them, and with people whose lives are affected by them, will help both our science and our service.
