Evaluating the Identity of Program Recipients Using an Identity Exploration Instrument
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article argues that the self and identity of program recipients should be an important variable in program evaluations. In a smoking cessation program, for example, the aim should be to achieve a change in the way recipients view themselves and their identity as smokers or nonsmokers. The article identifies a gap in published studies that consider self and identity as an outcome or process measure in program evaluation. The potential of such an approach to give added depth to program evaluation is considered. Three studies in this area are identified and summarized: the identity of parents after child death; the professional identity of students after a program of interprofessional education; and the characteristics of male identity in Germany. To identify possible approaches, conceptualizations of self and identity and methods of exploring and measuring it are considered, culminating in the identification and description of a synthetic theory of identity, Identity Structure Analysis (ISA), and its associated measuring tool, Ipseus. The choice of this method as part of a program evaluation is justified. The use of ISA/Ipseus in three program evaluations—decision-making in community safety; student constructions of theory and practice in nurse education; and demands and tensions in nursing lecturing—is described. The strengths and weaknesses of this approach are considered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".