Meena and Kiran: Nature, Nurture and the Agencies of Socialization
Meena, 15, was born in a village in Kolar district and lived with her grandmother until she was six, in a house with no television and few visitors. Her parents, who had migrated to a town near Bengaluru for work, then brought her to live with them and her younger brother Kiran, who was born in the town. Meena is quiet in class, avoids answering, and does most of the housework without being asked; Kiran, 12, talks easily with strangers, uses his father's smartphone, and argues with teachers. A new teacher writes in Meena's report card: 'Slow learner, poor communication, lacks confidence - probably low intelligence.' The headmistress, who has studied sociology, objects to this remark. Meena's mother says, 'She was always like this - it is in her nature; her brother is different.'
1. Which agencies of socialization shaped Meena and Kiran differently? Distinguish primary from secondary agencies and support each with evidence from the passage.
Read the worked answer
Primary agencies are face-to-face, emotional and early: family, neighbourhood, peer play group. Secondary agencies are formal, impersonal and later: school, media, workplace, associations.
- Meena's primary agency: the grandmother's household - few visitors, no television, an adult-centred and largely oral environment. One strong model, little rehearsal of talk with strangers.
- Meena's secondary agencies: the town school, entered late at age six and after her basic habits were formed.
- Kiran's primary agency: the parents' town household, with a street, neighbours and a phone from an early age.
- Kiran's secondary agencies: school, media and town peer networks, used continuously.
Both children have a family, so the difference is not the presence of an agency but its content and timing. The point to make in the answer: the same list of agencies can produce different personalities because what matters is the kind of interaction each provides and the age at which it occurs.
2. Was the teacher's remark justified? Use the distinction between heredity and social environment, and say what evidence would actually be needed.
Read the worked answer
Not justified. The remark commits three errors:
- It infers a fixed capacity from a single observed behaviour - silence in class - and labels it 'low intelligence'. Quietness, housework done without being asked and avoidance of strangers are descriptions of learned conduct, not measurements of ability.
- It ignores differential socialization. Meena's early environment gave her few opportunities to speak to outsiders and no practice with the kind of talk the school rewards; Kiran's gave him constant practice. The difference in their behaviour is exactly what socialization theory predicts.
- It ignores the school's own role - a new teacher, an unfamiliar register of language, a large class. The self-concept of a pupil is formed partly from how teachers treat her; a label can produce the very behaviour it claims to describe.
What would be needed: a language and learning assessment in her own language, observation over time in small-group settings, and information about her earlier schooling. Sociology does not deny heredity; it denies that heredity alone explains a difference that tracks two different environments.
3. Meena's mother says the difference is 'in her nature'. How should a sociologist reply, and is what Meena is going through best called socialization or re-socialization?
Read the worked answer
Reply to the mother: 'Nature' explains nothing here, because the two children do not differ in nature but in the sequence of groups they grew up in. The self develops through interaction - through imitation, play, role-taking and the reflected appraisals of others. A child who has been responded to mainly by one grandmother has learned one set of habits; a child surrounded by adults, phones and street play has learned another. The mother's statement is itself part of the process, since it tells Meena that her silence is permanent.
Socialization or re-socialization? Primarily continuing socialization into new agencies, with an element of re-socialization - learning norms that partly replace earlier ones, as happens on moving house, changing school or entering a hostel. It is not total re-socialization of the kind seen in residential institutions, because her earlier dispositions persist.
Prediction with reasoning: change will be gradual and uneven, and will depend on participation - small-group work, a speaking role, a teacher who responds to attempts. If the environment keeps confirming the label, the behaviour will harden; that is the practical stake in the headmistress's objection.