I’m an unabashed advocate for relational pedagogy in higher education. Almost every session I deliver, I try to incorporate the idea of students as partners, as an ethic for higher education. I see students as partners as an extension of the values associated with relational pedagogy. The idea I tend to guard a bit more is that students do not need to be perfect learners to be worthy of an instructor’s respect, empathy, and care for their experience as learners. Students do not have to be dazzling stars to be worthy of receiving an instructor’s curiosity and interest in their success and well-being. I recognize that this stance might be challenging for some educators, so I’m careful about how vocal I am without suggesting some pathways for educators to practice relational pedagogy.
Kindness as part of relational pedagogy
As I’m developing a September session on kindness in higher education, I’m encouraged by the recent publications dedicated to the topic. It’s not about an instructor being sugar and spice and everything nice. Kindness and relational pedagogy align more with critical pedagogy, trauma-informed pedagogy, and the commitment to removing barriers to student success. There’s also the implicit effect of not re-traumatizing students who have complex struggles. For instructors committed to similar approaches and providing scaffolding to help students meet their goals, relational pedagogy implies relationship building. Relational pedagogy can’t always be decided before getting to know students, but there are some things that can be done in advance of a lesson or meeting students.
Consider punitive language in course outlines or assignment directives. Punitive language is so normative that one might not see any harm in it. I’ll admit there was a time when I thought of punitive language as necessary in order to be firm with students. Now, I’ll ask – is it possible to be firm as an instructor without the harsh tone of penalties in statements such as: Students will receive zero if assignments are not submitted by the deadline. How about reframing the statement?
Assignments must be submitted by the stated deadline to receive meaningful feedback and credit. If you experience extenuating circumstances (e.g., illness, emergency), please contact me before the deadline to discuss options.
In my experience, when students have options to address emergencies or life events that interfere with their ability to meet deadlines, more often than not, they do not want unnecessary extensions. I recall a student needing an extra day for a very valid life event. I suggested even an additional day and they declined, insistent that they only needed one day. A student team member who was present for the conversation (I think there to give moral support), whispered to them, “take it, take it” (meaning the extra 2 days) but they were not interested in exploiting the extension. I have not forgotten that interaction and the mutual benefit – an extension for the student’s wellbeing and a renewal in my optimism that students are genuinely trying. Years later, Denial’s discourse on kindness pedagogy makes sense to me. Denial says it is a practice of “believing students” who express struggle, even though there is always the risk that some students try to exploit kindness.
I would rather take that risk, and deal with exceptions as they arise, than make life more difficult for students struggling with grief or illness or even an overpacked schedule or faulty electronics.
(Denial, 2024, p. 9)

Relational pedagogy and kindess come from the social justice premise – beneficial for all and necessary for some. Another way to foster this is by having conversations about educational and administrative processes and addressing gaps in understanding. Are there other times in the course to have conversations about how institutional deadlines influence some course deadlines? Are there other phrases that can be welcoming and suggestive that the instructor sees the students as apprentices and eventually colleagues in the field? That’s the mindset that crept up on me when I decided that my postsecondary teaching should be helping students to excel beyond my current expertise.

Why we do education or what education is for me has always been to support the evolution of our humanity to support students in developing the capacities to contribute to the world in ways that affirm relationships of love and compassion and solidarity…we don’t just learn how to do relationships. Antonia Darder (2022)
(McNutt, 2022)
Think about it, wouldn’t you want your current students to be exceptional in their field by the time you’re ready to step away? Perhaps that’s the inching toward relational pedagogy that is possible for those who are on the fence about kindness in relational practice. Seeing students as future colleagues and leaders might just shift how we relate to them and how we plan powerful and empowering teaching and learning experiences.
*Note relational pedagogy is not strictly anthropocentric, but that’s for another conversation.
Inspirations
Clegg S., & Rowland S. (2010). Kindness in pedagogical practice and academic life. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31(6), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2010.515102
Denial, C. J. (2024). A pedagogy of kindness. University of Oklahoma Press.
Felten, P., & Lambert, L. M. (2020). Relationship-rich education: How human connections drive success in college. Jhu Press.
McNutt, C. (Host). (2022, October 22). A pedagogy of love w/ Antonia Darder (No. 120) [Audio podcast episode}. In Human Restoration Project. https://www.humanrestorationproject.org/podcasts/120-a-pedagogy-of-love-w-antonia-darder


