Rohit Between Grandmother and English-Medium School
A 14-year-old boy, Rohit, moved from a village in Satara to a one-room tenement in Mumbai three years ago. His parents work 12-hour shifts in a warehouse; he lives mostly with his grandmother, who speaks only Marathi and insists on daily puja. At school, classmates tease his village accent; he now avoids speaking in class and spends four hours a day on Hindi and English short videos. His grandmother says he is 'forgetting our culture'; his parents want him admitted to an English-medium school; his teacher writes in the diary that he 'has no culture and no discipline'. He has stopped eating lunch with others.
1. Identify the agencies of socialisation in conflict and explain Rohit's behaviour sociologically.
Read the worked answer
Four agencies are pulling in different directions - and that conflict, not 'no culture', explains his behaviour.
- Family: the grandmother transmits Marathi language, puja and food practices - primary socialisation and an emotional anchor.
- School: English-medium instruction and a hidden curriculum that rewards a particular accent and cultural capital.
- Peer group: classmates' teasing tells him his village accent is low-status; peer approval now matters more than the grandmother's.
- Media: four hours of Hindi and English videos provide a reference group and a model of urban cool. Rohit is undergoing re-socialisation without losing primary socialisation. Bourdieu's cultural capital explains the mismatch: the school values English and urban manners, while his home capital is ritual and Marathi. He is not cultureless; he is bicultural and code-switching under stress. Withdrawal and eating alone are signs of status anxiety - he is protecting himself from further ridicule. The sociological error is to treat one agency's standards as the standard.
2. Critically examine the teacher's remark using ethnocentrism and cultural relativism.
Read the worked answer
The teacher's note is ethnocentric, and labelling theory predicts its effect. Ethnocentrism is judging another culture by one's own standards; 'no culture' treats Marathi village practice as an absence rather than a different repertoire. Cultural relativism does not mean abandoning standards of behaviour; it means understanding the boy's conduct in his own context - silence may be respect or shame, not indiscipline. The note also performs labelling: a teacher's written judgement can become the child's self-definition, and other teachers may read the diary before meeting him. If he accepts the label, a self-fulfilling prophecy follows. A better note would describe behaviour - 'does not speak in class; eats alone' - and ask what support is needed. The remark is not a neutral observation; it is an intervention in his socialisation.
3. How would a symbolic interactionist explain Rohit's silence? Use Cooley's looking-glass self.
Read the worked answer
Cooley's looking-glass self explains the silence in three steps.
- We imagine how we appear to others. Rohit hears laughter at his accent and concludes that he appears 'village' and ridiculous.
- We imagine their judgement. He infers that classmates and the teacher see him as backward - the diary note confirms it.
- We feel self-reproach. Shame follows, and he withdraws - no speaking, no shared lunch. Mead adds the generalised other: he is now guiding himself by the standards of the school and media audience rather than the grandmother. This is not fixed. A positive appraiser - a teacher who values his Marathi, a peer who shares his interest - can change the imagined judgement. The interactionist point is that the self is socially produced and can be socially repaired. The practical implication is to change the audience's response, not only the boy.