Comparing methods for research mentorship: structuring graduate student feedback using the Socratic method versus the Critical Response Process (CRP)

Recent research finds that a classic approach to research mentorship–the Socratic method–where faculty foster learning by posing probing questions, can also create gender and racial disparities in learning gains. A newer research mentorship method, the Critical Response Process (CRP), may address these shortcomings by giving students control over the flow and quality of feedback they receive. We test and compare the efficacy of these two methods in a three-week, summer-intensive graduate program. We assess student (n = 20) and faculty (n = 4) perceptions of each method’s strengths and weaknesses using participant-observation, surveys, and focus groups. While there are strengths in both methods, some students preferred the familiarity of the Socratic method, while others felt it created anxiety. Most students felt empowered by the CRP, as it provided more control over the feedback process. We conclude by providing recommendations for advancing research feedback methods to better align with inclusive and student-centered pedagogies.

Duke Scholars

Author Anais Roque Environmental Social Systems