Numbers...where are the real people?

Sooo many formulas! Sooo many numbers! I am saturated with statistics, but will try to contribute something to the readings of L/A.
I have questions: Does the move into quasi-experiments(and back to combinations of true and quasi) lose the individual? Does the meta-analysis attempt to validate while ignoring the importance of variables to real life application of the study?
It is interesting that in today's diverse classroom world that everything starts out trying to equalize the subjects. Maybe that is something to address for the fallity of promoting "cookie cutter" education? Everyone is not equal there was the Fox study that excluded maybe some of the very students who needed help(I do not have a motivational answer or burn-out answer). I am reminded of Diane's discussion of how Developmental students might survive the Developmental class, but not more main stream work.
How does anyone get past the perceived "teacher expectation" in any study?
When looking at the meta-analysis, I think the study selection and criteria under the Research design places a real life value to our literature search as well as the annotated bibliography. The value of same or similar studies can be double-edged. Will the study just be a rehash or can the study build on the past? Most importantly, will there be real life applications?
We seem to have great ideas that will work in individual situations, with individual students and teachers-just listen to the conversations in our class. But when will there be social discourse that recognizes the worth of the fluidity of teaching? The Hierarchy of Worth of the research might seem to be more valuable than the front line work. As a parent, my main concern is my child