Scope statements
according 2 walker & cohen,?r scope st8ments? *d scope of studies is determined by d definition of d subject.it aims @ taking d objectives as d thumb rule,we nid 2 focus in dis direction frm research point of view.(philosophy,subject,institution,policies.dis is d end of d initi8on process 4 d project as a whole.yur project should b now b defined.dat is,u should have reached agreement with yur key stakeholders about d following: project objectives (time,cost & quality or functionality,d exact nature of d product of d project,who will deliver it.it is gud practice 2 write a short st8ment @ dis stage which defines ?d project is going 2 deliver.it should b no longer than 1 or 2 sentences.d vision (scope) st8ment functions as a kind of project “vision” st8ment.it is used 2 keep d attn of d project team & key stakeholders on d purpose of d project during d planning & implement8on phases wen projects r likely 2 suffer frm “scope creep” or change in direction,particularly as new stakeholders arrive.qualifying st8ments aka scope conditions- serve 2 constrain d applicability of universal propositions.universal st8ments dat define d circumstances in which a theory is applicable.(reconcile contradic2ry findings) scope st8ment as a written confirm8on of d results yur project will produce & d constraints & assumptions under which u will work.*d tru-false paradox is a dilemma 4 d development of cumul8ve knowledge 4 evry proposition dat is advanced as a general sociological principle is both tru & false.same level of theoryparadox- ol theories r t & f it depends on who youre applying d concepts 2 / phenomenon 2.main theory- promoting using scope 2 target certain classes of phenom 2 which youre theoretical proposition will apply.last sentence on yelling sheet (central thesis)- cant measure directly/theyre abstract ,u have 2 put dem in2 testable hypothesis.no way u can know t or f u have 2 oper8onalize & define d conditions in which dat’s gonna apply – no way 2 test theory @ d abstract level.pariculary-u can say its falseifiable 2 a given scope—i’m saying it applies here but nt in d other places.dat way u can have neg8ve findings (& nt throwing out) u can say within dis scope ive refined it works or doesn’t.–set of str8gies 4 researchers 2 make more meaningful st8ments.dey argue its nt possible 2 prove a theory f.within d scope it doesn’t workm nt within d whole theory.scope st8ment- applies 2 d whole thing (theoretical levels) cant say d unconstrained theory (without scope) is d t-f paradox- cant ever say @ d abstract level (authors would argue)
how do walker & cohen suggest dat scope st8ments can b an integral part of d ongoing development of theory thru research? generliz8on- arguments 2 d process dey’ve described: meaning,start 2 describe process on p.291their argument is dat u start narrow = more likely hypothesis will work & gradually being 2 apply it 2 more & more cases & dat’s how u generalize.(soc class-hetergenious groups/kinds of diff soc class commit crimes – nt ol soc class commits dis crime etc) it allows more variance in choosing groups.-u chose a scope condition in a way dat would allow u 2 give u a btr chance 2 get support 4 d theory & then work yur way out til it doesn’t work.—authors r talking about d sample 2 which youre applying it 0 ?set of cases will dis work btwn soc class & severity of sanction (lit talking ?part of sample 2 apply it 2).—-using scop conditions here 2 limit cases in analysis 2 dat of d scope condit – only include offences there r rel8vely = #s of offences in each soc class (only focus on – rel8ve = distrivution of soc class) then u run yur analysis!each argument = ?u can derive frm d use of scope conditions.argument 3 – wen u don’t meet d scope conditions,u cant do anything/determine anything frm it-end result,if u don’t specify scope conditions,u cant say anything b.c dat tf paradox u cant define scope in which theory gonna hold.it comes down 2 wen u don’t specify sc u cant complet & 1ce u specify,u cant make ne claims if u haven’t s8sfied dem.-(way it plays our in research: generalizing thru theoretical route,wen critique work,focus on scope conditions (building off found8onal research & expand sc & c we know it works here but can i broaden dat sc so it applies 2 even larger set of conditions so it works.sc2 (p.294)- opens up 2 ol cases so now run analysis.arg 5- condition s8sified (c2-operat down 2 hypoth level) means dey’ve limited it 2 d cases w d only 1s dat nid scope conditions -wen u open up broader,it doesn’t —saying xry in sc1 but nt in sc2 or broader cases.xry by sc2 doesn’t work – u can make it less constricted in sc1 but more restricted than sc2.–back it up & nt b so broad or take it an entire diff direction.d scope conditions of dis theory r used in d process of generalizing 4 dey r applied 2 d whole rel8onship.