4 exercises — open 1:1s effectively, listen actively, follow up on action items, and support career growth conversations.
0 / 12 completed
1 / 12
You're opening a 1:1 with a junior engineer who started 3 months ago. You want to get a genuine read on how they're doing — not just project status. Which opening question is most effective?
Option C is the most effective 1:1 opening question for a genuine check-in:
Why it works: 1. Sets the frame explicitly — "not about tasks" — removes the assumption that this is a status meeting 2. Asks about energy, not just problems — "what's been energizing" invites positive reflection and reveals what motivates them 3. Makes space for difficulty — "harder than expected" is lower-stakes than "what's wrong?" — people are more likely to share 4. Open-ended — allows them to take the question wherever they need to go
Questions that don't work as openers: • "Any blockers?" — signals you want task status, not a real check-in • "How's the sprint going?" — same; project-focused • "Do you have any feedback for me?" — valuable but should come after they've had space to share their own experience
Good 1:1 question bank: • "What's one thing going well that we haven't talked about much?" • "What are you finding most challenging right now?" • "Is there anything you wish you had more of — feedback, autonomy, context, support?" • "What do you want to learn or try in the next month?" • "Is there anything I could do differently as your manager?"
2 / 12
Your direct report mentions they're frustrated that "nobody explains things clearly" on the team. How do you respond in a way that's helpful without being defensive or dismissive?
Option C is the active listening response for a vague frustration:
Key elements: 1. Acknowledges without agreeing or disagreeing — "useful to hear" — validates that they've said something worth discussing 2. Asks for specifics, not names — Option B ("who specifically?") risks a blame conversation and puts the person on the spot unnecessarily 3. Gives them a concrete prompt — "specific situations where you leave a meeting..." — helps them articulate vague feeling into actionable data 4. States the intent — "understand the pattern so we can actually address it, not just acknowledge it" — shows this isn't a dismissal
The vague frustration pattern: Engineers often report problems in general language ("nobody does X", "things are always unclear") when the specific issue is narrower. Your job as a manager is to help them articulate the specific situation without putting them on the defensive or forcing blame.
After you understand the specific situation: Then you can determine: Is this a communication skills gap? A process gap? A context-sharing habit? A specific person issue? Each has a different solution. Treating "nobody explains things" as a direct accusation to deflect is the wrong move.
3 / 12
At the end of a 1:1, you agreed on two action items: you'll share a relevant RFC by EOD Thursday, and they'll review it and come back with questions by next Monday. How do you follow up?
Option C is the professional 1:1 follow-up message:
What makes it complete: 1. Frames it as a follow-up — "following up from our 1:1" — links the message to the commitment 2. Delivers the artifact directly — link, not a future promise 3. Adds context — "section 3 is most relevant because..." — respects their time, doesn't make them read the whole thing to find what matters 4. Confirms the shared action item — "questions/thoughts by Monday" — makes the ask explicit and shared 5. Links to the next meeting — "I'll add this to the agenda" — creates accountability and prevents it slipping through the cracks
Why written follow-ups matter: A 1:1 with no written follow-up has an action item half-life of about 48 hours. Both you and your report will forget what was agreed. A brief follow-up message: • Creates a written record of what was agreed • Demonstrates you take their time seriously • Sets up the next meeting with context
1:1 documentation tools: • Shared Notion/Google Doc per report (most effective for building continuity) • Running notes with date-stamped entries • Action items at the end of every entry with owner and due date
4 / 12
A team member says they want to grow into a tech lead role. How do you respond in the 1:1?
Option C is the professional career development 1:1 response:
Structure: 1. Validates the goal — "great goal, appreciate you sharing" — not dismissive, not over-promising 2. Makes the path concrete — breaks "tech lead" into specific skill areas rather than leaving it vague 3. Asks for their self-assessment first — "where do you feel strongest?" — builds their ownership of the development plan 4. Commits to a concrete action — "3-month development plan" — not "I'll see what comes up" 5. Distinguishes concrete opportunities from intentions — tells them what good looks like
Why "I'll see what comes up" fails: It creates a passive waiting structure. The engineer has no visibility into what they need to do. When a tech lead opportunity arises, they haven't been prepared for it.
A good development plan for tech lead aspiration includes: • One opportunity to write a technical RFC per quarter • Leading a specific technical discussion or architecture decision • Mentoring a more junior engineer on a specific topic • Owning a scoping and estimation exercise • Tracking outcomes: did the RFC get implemented? Did the discussion go well?
5 / 12
Sarah, a senior engineer, is reviewing David's pull request for a new API endpoint. David has included extensive unit tests, but Sarah notices the error handling isn't robust enough. Which of the following comments would be most constructive during the review?
Sarah's goal is to provide helpful feedback. Option 1 is dismissive and doesn't address the core issue. Option 2 directly points out a specific concern (null values) with a suggested solution. Options 3 and 4 are too vague or prioritize speed over stability, which isn't appropriate for a code review.
6 / 12
Mark, the team lead, is updating the daily standup. He wants to discuss a recent mentoring session with a junior developer, Emily. Which of the following statements would be most effective in communicating this information concisely?
Option 1 focuses on the *outcome* of the meeting (debugging) and is a succinct summary. Option 2 provides more detail about the topic discussed, which is valuable for the team. Options 3 and 4 are framed negatively or lack specifics about the mentoring process, potentially raising concerns.
7 / 12
Lisa receives a notification in Slack from Ben stating: 'Just ran the deploy_staging script and got an error code 500. Investigating…'. What is the most appropriate response to send back to Ben immediately?
Option 1 demonstrates empathy but doesn't solicit necessary information for troubleshooting. Option 2 prompts Ben to gather critical details (logs and steps) – the first step in diagnosing an error. Options 3 and 4 are unhelpful and potentially dismissive of the issue.
8 / 12
You're conducting a one-on-one with Alex, who recently joined the team. He seems hesitant to share challenges and you want to build trust. Which of the following approaches would be most effective in encouraging open communication? Focus on active listening and demonstrating empathy.
The best approach is to demonstrate genuine interest in Alex's experience. Option 1 is too task-focused and doesn't invite vulnerability. Option 2 directly addresses potential difficulties and signals support. Options 3 and 4 are dismissive and don't create a safe space for sharing concerns.
9 / 12
During a one-on-one with Maria, she expresses concern about feeling overwhelmed by the amount of documentation. How should you respond to help her manage this effectively? Offer specific strategies for prioritizing and navigating the information.
Simply telling Maria to 'read it all' is unhelpful. Option 2 provides concrete support by suggesting a structured approach. Options 3 and 4 minimize the issue or place blame, failing to address her specific concern about feeling overwhelmed.
10 / 12
You've identified an area where David needs more support in debugging complex issues. During your next one-on-one, you want to provide targeted guidance without overwhelming him with too much detail at once. Which of the following statements would be most appropriate? Start by asking a focused question about his current approach and observations.
Option 1 demonstrates a collaborative approach by inviting David's input and allowing him to explain his thought process. Options 2 is overly detailed and could be intimidating. Option 3 focuses on lecturing rather than guiding, while option 4 removes responsibility from David.
11 / 12
During a feedback session with Emily, she mentions she's considering applying for a tech lead role. What is the most constructive way to respond to this ambition? Acknowledge her interest and discuss potential steps towards developing the necessary skills.
Simply dismissing her ambition or telling her she's too junior isn't helpful. Option 1 validates her interest and opens a discussion about development. Options 3 and 4 are discouraging without offering any guidance.
12 / 12
Sarah flags a critical bug in John's code during a pull request review. John responds with: 'I spent all weekend on this and it works perfectly for me!' What is the MOST appropriate way to handle this situation? Acknowledge his effort, but firmly reiterate the importance of thorough testing and adherence to coding standards.
Acknowledging his effort softens the feedback but doesn't compromise on quality. Option 2 clearly states the expectations and reinforces the importance of standards. Options 3 and 4 are dismissive and undermine the review process.
This module focuses on Mentoring & Feedback — real workplace phrasing you'll use on the job. It contains 12 scenario-based multiple-choice questions with instant feedback.
Is this exercise free to use?
Yes. Every exercise on CoderSlingo, including this one, is free to use with no account or sign-up required.
How many questions does this exercise have?
This module includes 12 questions. Each one gives an immediate right/wrong result plus a full explanation of the correct phrasing.
What happens if I answer a question incorrectly?
You'll see the correct answer highlighted straight away, along with a plain-English explanation of why it's right and why the other options don't fit — mistakes are part of the learning here.
Can I retry the exercise if I want a better score?
Yes — use the 'Try again' button on the results screen to reset your score and go through the questions again. There's no limit on attempts.
Who is this Mentoring & Feedback exercise for?
It's aimed at IT professionals with working English who want to sound more natural and precise around mentoring & feedback — useful whether you're preparing for real conversations at work or just building confidence with the vocabulary.
Do I need an account to track my progress?
No account is needed. Your progress through the exercise is tracked locally in your browser for the current session, and you can replay the module at any time.
How is this different from reading a blog article?
This exercise is an interactive drill that tests and reinforces specific phrasing through multiple-choice questions with instant feedback, while blog articles explain concepts and vocabulary in prose. The two work well together.
Where can I find more Mentoring & Feedback exercises?
See the Mentoring & Feedback hub for more modules like this one, or browse the full Exercises page for other IT-English topics.
Can I complete this exercise on my phone?
Yes — every exercise on CoderSlingo is fully responsive and works on phones and tablets, so you can practise anywhere.