Mixed-methods study reveals how classroom management gestures trigger emotional responses in primary students, highlighting the need for non-verbal clarity and warmth.
Classroom management gestures are a routine but underexamined aspect of teachers’ non-verbal communication in primary school classrooms. Although such gestures regulate attention, transitions, and behaviour, less is known about how students interpret and emotionally experience them. This study explored how Singapore primary school students perceived and responded to classroom management gestures, focusing on the emotional and relational meanings they attached to them. A convergent mixed-methods design was used. Twenty-one primary school students viewed a short video of five classroom management gestures and completed a structured worksheet with fixed-response and open-ended items. Quantitative data were analysed using Fisher’s exact test, and qualitative responses using thematic analysis. Students largely interpreted gestures as tools for gaining attention and regulating behaviour, but their responses also reflected emotional and relational meaning-making. Gesture type was significantly associated with emotional response. Familiar gestures were linked to neutral feelings and ease, while less familiar or more complex gestures were associated with confusion. Interpretations were also shaped by perceived teacher tone, friendliness, and relationship. Some gestures were experienced as playful and engaging, while others were understood primarily as cues for control and compliance. The findings suggest that classroom management gestures may function not only as behavioural signals, but also as relational and affective cues through which students interpret teacher intent and classroom expectations. The study highlights the importance of clarity, consistency, and relational warmth in teachers’ non-verbal classroom practices, with implications for classroom climate, student emotional safety, and pastoral care in primary education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Zhengan Chen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: