Sociology 2022 Paper I 50 marks Comment

Q8

(a) Sociologists argue for democratization of science and technology for inclusive development. Comment. (20 marks) (b) Are traditional social institutions getting weakened as agents of social change in the contemporary society ? Substantiate. (20 marks) (c) How do you understand the relationship between patriarchy and social development ? (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) समाजशास्त्री समावेशी विकास के लिए विज्ञान और प्रौद्योगिकी के लोकतंत्रीकरण का तर्क देते हैं । टिप्पणी कीजिए । (20 अंक) (b) क्या पारंपरिक सामाजिक संस्थाएं समकालीन समाज में सामाजिक परिवर्तन के कारक के रूप में शक्तिहीन होती जा रही हैं ? सिद्ध करिये । (20 अंक) (c) पितृतंत्र तथा सामाजिक विकास के संबंध को आप कैसे समझते हैं ? (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 Sociology questions

Directive word: Comment

This question asks you to comment. 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

The directive 'comment' in (a) requires balanced evaluation with evidence, while (b) demands 'substantiate' with empirical backing, and (c) asks for conceptual clarification. Allocate ~40% word/time to (a) given 20 marks, ~35% to (b), and ~25% to (c). Structure: brief integrated introduction → three distinct sections with clear sub-headings → synthesis conclusion linking technology, tradition and gender as intersecting development challenges.

Key points expected

  • (a) Democratization of S&T: STS critique of technocratic elitism (Feyerabend/Ravetz), participatory technology assessment, inclusive innovation models (Honey Bee Network, SRISTI)
  • (a) Counter: Limits of democratization—regulatory capture, digital divide reproducing exclusion (NSS 78th round on device ownership by gender/caste)
  • (b) Traditional institutions: Continuity thesis—caste panchayats adapting (khap reforms on inter-caste marriage), religious institutions mobilizing for education (madrasa modernization, gurukul revival)
  • (b) Weakening thesis: Decline of jajmani, nuclearization, but institutional conversion not disappearance (Srinivas's sanskritization to competitive sanskritization)
  • (c) Patriarchy-development nexus: Boserup's gendered agricultural intensification, Kabeer's strategic needs framework, feminist critiques of GDP-centric development
  • (c) Indian empirical: Declining female labour force participation despite growth (PLFS data), son preference persistence (NFHS-5), women's SHGs as counter-hegemonic spaces

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Demand-directive understanding20%10For (a), treats 'comment' as evaluative—balances democratization potential with structural constraints; for (b), 'substantiate' drives empirical argument on institutional transformation vs. decline; for (c), analytically frames patriarchy-development as dialectical, not static.Recognizes directives but (a) becomes descriptive list of S&T policies, (b) asserts weakening without evidence, (c) describes patriarchy without developmental linkage.Misreads all three: (a) as 'explain democratization', (b) as opinion on tradition, (c) as definition of patriarchy; no directive-specific handling.
Theoretical framing20%10Deploys STS theorists (Winner, Bijker's SCOT) for (a); institutional sociology (Douglas, new institutionalism) or Srinivas/M.N. Srinivas for (b); feminist political economy (Boserup, Agarwal, Kabeer) for (c)—at least two named frameworks applied correctly.Names theorists (e.g., 'according to Boserup') but applies concepts loosely or without integration across parts.No named theorists; relies on commonsense sociology or general knowledge without disciplinary anchoring.
Indian / empirical examples20%10(a) Cites Honey Bee Network/GIAN, PM-WANI, or COVID vaccine equity debates; (b) Uses khap panchayat case studies (Singh 2014), temple entry movements, or NREGA's effect on jajmani; (c) PLFS female LFPR trends, NFHS-5 son preference data, Kudumbashree/SRLM outcomes—specific numbers cited.Mentions 'Self-Help Groups' or 'digital India' without specificity; general references to 'caste still exists' without institutional analysis.Generic global examples (Western S&T democratization, abstract 'traditional societies') without Indian grounding; or no examples at all.
Multi-paradigm analysis20%10For each part: (a) weighs democratization optimism vs. technocracy critique; (b) presents both weakening and adaptive persistence theses with evidence; (c) considers patriarchy as obstacle and women's agency as developmental resource—shows internal debate within sociology.Acknowledges one counter-position briefly (e.g., 'however, some argue') without sustained engagement or evidence.One-sided argument throughout; treats democratization as unproblematic good, tradition as simply declining, patriarchy as uniformly negative.
Conclusion & sociological imagination20%10Synthesizes three parts: technology democratization requires engaging traditional institutions and addressing patriarchal structures; proposes 'inclusive innovation' framework linking all three; uses Mills' sociological imagination to connect personal troubles (individual exclusion) to public issues (development model critique).Summarizes three parts separately without synthesis; adds no new analytical insight or policy direction.No conclusion, or mere restatement of question; ends with part (c) answer without returning to integrate with (a) and (b).

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 Sociology 2022 Paper I