already have to deal with the ambiguity between intermediate and final outcomes, so
we do not see this as an insurmountable problem.2
Personal identity refers to the characteristics of the individual that define his or her
outlook and self-image. It includes specific personality characteristics, such as ego
strength, self-esteem, internal locus of control (see Cote, 1997, on identity capital).
The triangle is designed to recognise the fact that these three dimensions intersect, and
that many of the outcomes are a combination of two or all three of the polar concepts.
Thus health (physical or mental) may be affected by the skills a person is able to
deploy, or by the sets of relationships in which they are involved and by their personal
outlook on life and view of themselves; and all these factors interact.
Obviously the model is a simplification, in two senses. First, there are many more
items that could be included in the triangle as actual or potential outcomes of learning.
One example, which is relevant to our own possible programme of research but not
included in the triangle as here presented, is criminal activity (or its converse, law-
abiding behaviour), but there are many others. Another, difficult to capture but
emerging strongly from our fieldwork, is the general socialising effect of education:
the mere fact of bringing together people from different backgrounds serves to extend
our general understanding of each other, whatever the actual content of the education.
The model is therefore not comprehensive in its content, but is designed as a
framework with potential for embracing most other issues.
Secondly, the model appears static. It presents the areas on which we are
concentrating our analysis of the outcomes of learning in this particular programme of
research. However these are not necessarily final outcomes. In some cases, and some
contexts, they could be regarded as intermediate outcomes. For example, participation
in civic activity may be seen as a good in itself, something that is regarded as a
defining feature of a flourishing and healthy society. However it can also be regarded
as a means to a further end, in the sense that civic engagement leads to greater social
cohesion and more learning. In our view, it does not make sense to attempt to define a
single linear sequence with discrete categories of intermediate and final outcomes that
hold good in all circumstances. Items can and will be allocated to the intermediate or
final category according to the particular focus of interest. So the model simplifies in
being static as it is presented on the page.
The 2001 NALS survey reaches the following conclusion: “The hypothesis that an individual’s
level of social capital may relate to their participation in learning, independent of their other
characteristics such as demographics, education and employment has been supported. However ...
.the ways in which indicators of social capital are related to other socio-demographic characteristics
are complex, and do not conform to the simple patterns predicted by some of the literature on social
capital.” (La Valle & Blake, 2001; p. 96).
11