This study explores the theoretical foundations and practical implementation pathways of the Socratic Case-Method within undergraduate Sport Psychology courses. Grounded in the educational philosophy of Socratic dialogue, this paper systematically develops a theoretical framework that integrates student-centered pedagogy, critical thinking development, and case-based experiential learning. By analysing historical, philosophical, and pedagogical dimensions, the research delineates key components, such as guided questioning, collaborative debate, reflective writing, and contextualized case design, that constitute the core of this teaching methodology. Furthermore, the study proposes a structured implementation pathway adapted to the disciplinary characteristics of Sport Psychology programs, encompassing course design, teacher facilitation, student engagement, and assessment alignment. The findings provide a theoretical foundation and actionable guidelines for integrating the Socratic Case-Method into sport-related higher education, offering insights into how this approach can deepen conceptual understanding, foster analytical skills, and enhance practical application in a psychologically complex field.

Xiangtong Liu, Qun Tang, Xiaoya Han, Yanjun Ge. Theoretical Foundations and Practical Applications of the Socratic Case Method in Sport Psychology Teaching within Undergraduate Sports Science Programs. Frontiers in Sport Research (2026), Vol. 8, Issue 2: 29-34. https://doi.org/10.25236/FSR.2026.080205.

[1] Bhuttah T M, Xusheng Q, Abid M N, et al. Enhancing student critical thinking and learning outcomes through innovative pedagogical approaches in higher education: the mediating role of inclusive leadership[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14(1): 24362.

[2] Attipoe S G. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PEDAGOGY: CULTIVATING CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS IN HIGHER EDUCATION[J]. Advanced Education, 2024, 12(24): 151–172.

[3] Tam N T T, Tien T N. Unveiling Critical Thinking Pedagogy: Classroom-Based Assessment Strategies in Higher Education[J]. rEFLections, 2024, 31(3): 1178–1195.

[4] Miller C J, McNear J, Metz M J. A comparison of traditional and engaging lecture methods in a large, professional-level course[J]. Advances in Physiology Education, 2013, 37(4): 347–355.

[5] Roberts S J, Ryrie A. Socratic case-method teaching in sports coach education: reflections of students and course tutors[J]. Sport, Education and Society, 2014, 19(1): 63–79.

[6] Dickinson J A. Understanding the Socratic method in law school teaching after the Carnegie Foundation's Educating Lawyers[J]. W New Eng L Rev, 2009, 31: 97.

[7] Ho Y-R, Chen B-Y, Li C-M. Thinking more wisely: using the Socratic method to develop critical thinking skills amongst healthcare students[J]. BMC Medical Education, 2023, 23(1): 173.

[8] Boa E A, Wattanatorn A, Tagong K. The development and validation of the Blended Socratic Method of Teaching (BSMT): An instructional model to enhance critical thinking skills of undergraduate business students[J]. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 2018, 39(1): 81–89.

[9] Wang F, Hannafin M J. Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments[J]. Educational Technology Research and Development, 2005, 53(4): 5–23.

[10] Hammersley M, Traianou A. Ethics and educational research [M]. British Educational Research Association London, 2012.

[11] Latinjak A T, Hatzigeorgiadis A. The knowledge map of sport and exercise psychology: An integrative perspective[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, 12: 661824.

[12] Robinson S M. Socratic questioning: A teaching philosophy for the student research consultation [J]. the Library with the Lead Pipe, 2017, 1.

[13] Burgess K E, Bradley E, Dray K, et al. The state of research in teaching and learning in sport and exercise science: A scoping review[J]. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 2025, 37: 100573.

[14] Hemmings B, Holder T. Applied sport psychology: A case-based approach [M]. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.

[15] Petko D, Prasse D, Cantieni A. The interplay of school readiness and teacher readiness for educational technology integration: A structural equation model[J]. Computers in the Schools, 2018, 35(1): 1–18.

[16] Keengwe J, Georgina D, Wachira P. Faculty training strategies to enhance pedagogy-technology integration[J]. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), 2010, 6(3): 1–10.

[17] Korechkov Y V. Institutional support of the competitive educational environment[J]. Journal Of Regional And International Competitiveness, 2021, (2): 48–54.

[18] Stanger-Hall K F. Multiple-choice exams: an obstacle for higher-level thinking in introductory science classes[J]. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 2012, 11(3): 294–306.

[19] Fischer J, Bearman M, Boud D, et al. How does assessment drive learning? A focus on students’ development of evaluative judgement[J]. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2024, 49(2): 233–245.