Explore the vast range of titles available.

Positive teacher-student relationships have been identified as important for teacher and student well-being and for high-quality teaching and learning processes and outcomes. However, research on the perceptions of teachers in higher education on a high-quality relationship with students and the perceived antecedents is still scarce. This study aimed to address this research gap by interviewing 15 Australian higher education teachers about their perception of forming relationships with first-year students. The results suggest that the quality of the teacher-student relationship comprises both a professional and an interpersonal dimension, reflecting the different roles teachers and students assume within it. These two dimensions can be further differentiated into various relational quality indicators, such as approachability, care, support, trust, and others. Furthermore, the results indicate that several contextual and personal attributes contribute to the development of this relationship. Implications about how to shape positive relationships between teachers and students in higher education are discussed.

Team teaching as a close form of teacher collaboration entails frequent interactions between the team-teaching partners in the classroom. During these interactions, the team teachers experience a variety of positive and negative emotions, triggered by their team partner. The teachers may express or suppress these emotions, depending on their habitual use of these emotion regulation strategies. In turn, the teachers’ daily emotions may be related to an important facet of teacher well-being, namely their daily work engagement. This study aims to investigate the related factors (habitual emotion regulation, daily work engagement) of team teachers’ daily positive and negative emotions triggered by the team partner in the classroom. Forty-seven Austrian team teachers working in secondary education completed a daily diary study, consisting of 15 diary entries, measuring their habitual emotion expression and suppression strategies, their daily positive and negative affect and daily work engagement. Multilevel regression analyses were conducted. Results show that positive and negative affect and work engagement vary substantially within and between team teachers. Random-intercept fixed-slope multilevel models indicate that the habitual use of authentic display of positive emotions is associated with daily positive affect, and teachers’ daily positive and negative affect significantly relate to their daily work engagement both on the within- and between-person level. This study underscores the important role that team teachers’ emotional experiences play regarding their work engagement. We draw theoretical and practical implications for the role of emotions during team-teaching practices.

Given the increasing number of genetic tests available, decisions have to be made on how to allocate limited health-care resources to them. Different criteria have been proposed to guide priority setting. However, their relative importance is unclear. Discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) and best-worst scaling experiments (BWSs) are methods used to identify and weight various criteria that influence orders of priority. This study tests whether these preference eliciting techniques can be used for prioritising genetic tests and compares the empirical findings resulting from these two approaches. Pilot DCE and BWS questionnaires were developed for the same criteria: prevalence, severity, clinical utility, alternatives to genetic testing available, infrastructure for testing and care established, and urgency of care. Interview-style experiments were carried out among different genetics professionals (mainly clinical geneticists, researchers and biologists). A total of 31 respondents completed the DCE and 26 completed the BWS experiment. Weights for the levels of the six attributes were estimated by conditional logit models. Although the results derived from the DCE and BWS experiments differed in detail, we found similar valuation patterns in the DCE and BWS experiments. The respondents attached greatest value to tests with high clinical utility (defined by the availability of treatments that reduce mortality and morbidity) and to testing for highly prevalent conditions. The findings from this study exemplify how decision makers can use quantitative preference eliciting methods to measure aggregated preferences in order to prioritise alternative clinical interventions. Further research is necessary to confirm the survey results.