Anthropology 2024 Paper I 50 marks Discuss

Q3

(a) What is meant by karyotype? How does its analysis help in diagnosis of the chromosomal aberrations in man? 20 marks (b) Define urbanization and discuss its impact on family in India with examples. 15 marks (c) Discuss the contemporary challenges in fieldwork method in anthropological research. 15 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) गुणसूत्री-रचना से आपका क्या तात्पर्य है? इसका विश्लेषण मनुष्य में गुणसूत्र विपथन के निदान में किस प्रकार सहायता करता है? 20 अंक (b) शहरीकरण को परिभाषित कीजिए तथा भारत में परिवार पर इसके प्रभाव की संदर्भ विवेचना कीजिए। 15 अंक (c) मानवशास्त्रीय अनुसंधान में क्षेत्रीय कार्य-पद्धति में समकालीन चुनौतियों की विवेचना कीजिए। 15 अंक

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

This multi-part question requires defining key terms and then elaborating with analysis and examples. Spend approximately 40% of word budget (~400 words) on part (a) given its 20 marks; allocate ~30% each (~300 words) to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief unified introduction, then three clearly demarcated sections with sub-headings, ending with a synthesized conclusion on anthropology's applied relevance. For (a), define karyotype precisely then explain diagnostic applications; for (b), define urbanization then analyze impacts on joint family, marriage, and kinship with Indian cases; for (c), discuss challenges like ethics, access, and technology in contemporary fieldwork.

Key points expected

  • (a) Definition of karyotype as complete set of chromosomes arranged in homologous pairs by size, shape, and banding pattern; mention G-banding, Q-banding techniques
  • (a) Diagnostic applications: detection of aneuploidy (Down syndrome-Trisomy 21, Turner syndrome-Monosomy X, Klinefelter syndrome-XXY), structural aberrations (deletions, duplications, translocations, inversions), prenatal diagnosis via amniocentesis/CVS, and karyotyping in cancer cytogenetics (Philadelphia chromosome in CML)
  • (b) Definition of urbanization: demographic shift, economic transformation, and spatial reorganization; distinguish between urban growth and urbanization
  • (b) Impact on Indian family: erosion of joint family system (M.S. Gore's studies), rise of nuclear families, changing marriage patterns (inter-caste, love marriages), women in workforce, elderly care crisis; examples from Mumbai Dharavi, Delhi resettlement colonies, or census data trends
  • (c) Contemporary fieldwork challenges: informed consent and ethics (Nuremberg Code, ICMR guidelines), 'studying up' vs traditional communities, digital ethnography and virtual fieldwork, post-COVID methodological adaptations, insider-outsider dilemma, funding and access constraints, decolonization critiques of anthropological practice

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10For (a), accurately defines karyotype with technical precision (chromosome number, morphology, banding patterns) and correctly identifies specific chromosomal aberrations with their karyotypic notations; for (b), distinguishes urbanization from urban growth and uses correct sociological terminology; for (c), precisely identifies contemporary methodological challenges without conflating with historical issuesBasic definitions correct but lacks technical specificity in karyotype description; conflates urbanization with urbanization rate; mixes historical and contemporary fieldwork challenges without clear distinctionIncorrect or vague definition of karyotype (confused with genotype/phenotype); fundamental misunderstanding of urbanization; describes outdated fieldwork issues as contemporary without awareness of recent methodological debates
Theoretical framing20%10For (a), cites cytogenetic pioneers (Tjio and Levan, 1956 human chromosome count); for (b), employs theoretical frameworks (Redfield's folk-urban continuum, Srinivas's sanskritization, or Dumont's hierarchical opposition); for (c), references reflexive turn (Clifford and Marcus), multi-sited ethnography (Marcus), or digital anthropology (Horst and Miller)Mentions theories without systematic application; cites one or two names without elaborating their relevance; theoretical connections remain implicit rather than explicitNo theoretical engagement; answer remains purely descriptive without situating within anthropological theory; misattributes theories or uses them inappropriately
Ethnographic / Indian examples20%10For (a), references Indian genetic studies (e.g., ICMR cytogenetic surveys, tribal population studies); for (b), uses specific Indian cases—M.S. Gore's study of family change, Delhi slum studies, Kerala urban family patterns, or 2011 Census data on household structures; for (c), cites Indian fieldwork experiences (Srinivas in Rampura, Beteille in Sripuram, or contemporary Naxal-affected area research)Generic Indian references without specificity; mentions 'joint family breaking down in cities' without concrete studies; fieldwork examples lack temporal or spatial anchoringNo Indian examples; uses Western cases exclusively (e.g., only mentioning US urban families); or fabricates non-existent studies; examples irrelevant to the specific question asked
Comparative analysis20%10For (a), compares different banding techniques and their diagnostic applications; for (b), contrasts rural vs urban family systems, or compares metro vs small-town urbanization effects; for (c), contrasts traditional vs contemporary fieldwork, or compares challenges across different field contexts (tribal vs urban vs virtual)Brief comparison mentioned but not developed; contrasts are implicit rather than explicit; lacks systematic comparative frameworkNo comparative element; treats each aspect in isolation; fails to draw connections between parts (a), (b), and (c) where methodological parallels exist
Conclusion & applied angle20%10Synthesizes all three parts into anthropology's applied relevance: karyotyping in genetic counseling and public health, urban family studies for social policy, and ethical fieldwork for sustainable research relationships; suggests future directions (CRISPR and karyotyping, smart cities and family, decolonized methodologies); ends with UPSC-relevant policy insightSummarizes main points without synthesis; applied angle mentioned superficially; conclusion predictable and genericNo conclusion or abrupt ending; missing applied dimension entirely; or introduces new unsubstantiated claims in conclusion

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Anthropology 2024 Paper I