Kindness and connectedness: Enhancing remote student support with peer evaluation

Connectedness is important for students in the development of self-efficacy (Leino et al., 2024). However, this is a challenge for students who study remotelywho often choose to stay living in their regional, rural and remote communities (O’Shea et al., 2019). Employing a pedagogy of kindness, showing care,compassion, and empathy in student interactions positively affects students’ experience (Teakel et al., 2024). Peer evaluation is widely implemented in highereducation institutions as part of professional development for academic staff (James Jacob et al., 2015). This study evaluates the impact of a peer evaluationprocess on connectedness and service delivery through structured facilitation of feedback. It presents insights into how the process provides opportunities forreflective practice, relationship building, collaboration, and overall improved support for students.
The Embedded Tutor Program offers one-on-one tutor sessions to commencing students in key subjects to receive feedback on a draft assessment from anacademic tutor. Students book a 20-minute Zoom session online via a booking tool embedded in their subject site. Each session up to 50 subjects aresupported by approximately 60 academic tutors. Ethics approval was received from the Charles Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC Protocol No.H22085). Tutors in the Embedded Tutor Program received training focusing on transition pedagogy and using a pedagogy of kindness. Tutors wereinstructed to conduct the peer evaluation process with the same mindfulness, compassion, and empathy as interacting with students. Three dimensions oflearning and teaching were nominated for review. Tutor sessions were observed, synchronously or asynchronously (using recorded sessions) and discussedfeedback on the delivery of support. Tutors disclosed the nature of the training to students being recorded. An evaluation report was completed no later thantwo weeks after completion. Tutors who participated in the peer evaluation process provided a link to a voluntary, anonymous online feedback survey (SurveyMonkey).
In 2024, 21 tutors participated in peer evaluation. Tutors unanimously agreed that the process ‘facilitated constructive feedback’. However, most felt that thefeedback they received was overwhelmingly positive. Tutors found observing other tutors insightful to their practice and indicated that they would look forfuture opportunities to implement the observed strategies. Tutors agreed the process ‘positively influenced communication skills’ and ‘overall contributed toimproving delivery of student support’. Challenges in implementing peer evaluation included scheduling difficulties, as most tutors are casual academics withlimited overlapping availability. Tutors also expressed concerns regarding recording private conversations and students potentially viewing it as a breach ofconfidentiality, compromising a ‘safe space’ and impacting student vulnerability. These considerations impacted their choice of suitable sessions.
Overall, tutors indicated that the peer evaluation process was a positive experience and encouraged collaboration. Tutors gained knowledge and strategies toovercome challenges without explicit feedback. This provides evidence that modelling and observing good practice is a valuable tool for the continuousimprovement of tutoring programs and enhances reflective practice. We propose that peer evaluation should be implemented with a pedagogy of kindnessfor academic student support roles to promote building relationships between staff and students