The final paper builds on the theorizing project that has been developed in the project work and the workshops.
(2000-2500 words)
In the theorizing group projects, we have 1) observed a social phenomenon; 2) named it and developed concepts by using heuristic strategies; 3) proposed plausible explanations; and 4) connected our explanation with some existing scholarship.
For the final paper, you will need to provide an individual account of the theorizing project. This means that you will individually go through all the steps of the theorizing process and describe and reflect on it, excluding the 4th one, i.e., connecting the explanation with some existing scholarship
This account should include the following parts:
1.An individual description and reflection of the observation of the social phenomenon
2.A description and reflection on your individual process of naming and heuristic development of concepts
3.A proposal and development of a plausible explanation
4.A final reflection on the process of theorizing
You may include diagrams and visual material to illustrate and explain your theorizing process.
Given the group nature of the projects during the semester, I will expect to see similarities in the projects, but because you will be going through the steps individually in the final paper, I also expect to see significant variation.
You need to stick to the same phenomenon but you can name it differently, develop new concepts and offer a new explanation if you wish. You can also stick with the choices from the group project if you like, but you need to explain and reflect on them in your own terms.
Your proposed explanations are plausible and thoughtful. Each of them, however proposes new concepts that need to be fully integrated. For instance, in the first one, social networks, emotional support, other network-specific resources or cultural affinity, customs beliefs in the second. It is important to define these concepts by linking them together in webs of other concepts that can then be used to develop a narrative based on causality or meaning. At this stage, it is important to try to be as precise as possible regarding the meaning of the concepts. In this context, it might also be worth referring to the specificity of the analysis. Is the empirical phenomenon to be explained ethnic domaining in general, or ethnic domaining among international students at the university? If the latter, it is possible to be more specific about the nature of the networks, the resources shared within them, or the basis of the cultural affinity.
