A character that grows into their attitude is definitely a Steadfast character. Jim has a great article on that. They don’t change, but they become more ‘informed’ in their behaviour. I’d also say if an MC/IC doesn’t change their domain ‘topic’, that’s a very clear Steadfast character. If the Racist remains a racist at the end, but in a slightly different way (actively supporting an assassination), she’s still a racist – she’s just grown into her resolve (her mother must be so proud).
I’m not sure on what is the ‘correct’ way to approach Steadfast problem/solution because the theory has evolved so much (I continue to wish for an updated theory book!). That might be for @jhull or someone else that is an expert in the theory to clarify. At one point, the solution was the thing that would ‘satisfy’ what the IC was driven by. Now, I think the consensus is that the solution is the thing that demotivates the IC.
The Judgment seems to be related to an extent. The theory says that the decision to Change results in the audience judging the Outcome as Good/Bad. So that depends on your specific story. I’m going to write another example because it’s fun and I’m filled with political anger.
We have a Bank Robber (Jackson) who has a determined hatred of the government, and the goal is to rob the bank.
Jackson’s whole intention is to show the world that the government, media and banks are crooks, to make them stop “chasing the dream” and avoid any kind of lies the world is attempting to construct. Unfortunately, Jackson changes his mind on how to go about handling the situation constantly. Offered an easy opportunity to leave, or being offered ransom deals if he lets the hostages go, Jackson constantly changes his mind on what he wants (Reconsider). He starts to see that maybe his problems came about because of himself and his poor investments, his misplaced naiveté, or simple inability to make decisions. He thinks seriously and comes to the conclusion that maybe he was the problem, and the banks aren’t all that bad, that the government is okay and just as screwed up as the rest of us – after all, they’re trying to rescue the hostages (Consider). As he steps out of the bank to surrender, he’s shot and killed by the army without a second thought and paraded around the world as a terrorist.
Jackson changed from a guy angrily Reconsidering his place in the system to a guy that Considers the government the good guy. That change got him killed, resulting in a very bad ending for him. Obviously, the Outcome of that story would also be failure, but the point is that any Change character will definitely change from Problem to Solution in terms of whatever it is that the Domain says. The MC or IC will stop the problematic activities/the bad situation/the flawed thinking/the attitude that’s caused the problem.
Also, don’t apologise! We’re all students. Every question’s a good one.