Diagnostic Profile of Inferential Reading Ability across Four Indicators among Fifth Graders in Bandung Elementary Schools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61255/jupiter.v4i3.1411Keywords:
Inferential Reading, Diagnostic Profile, Reading Comprehension, Elementary StudentsAbstract
Purpose: This study aimed to construct a diagnostic profile of inferential reading ability across four indicators anaphoric resolution, background knowledge activation, predictive reasoning, and retrospective synthesis among fifth-grade students in Bandung elementary schools, addressing the limited availability of dimension-specific empirical data on inferential reading performance at the primary level. Methods: A descriptive survey was conducted with 84 fifth-grade students from three public elementary schools in Bandung, who completed an inferential reading test structured around the four indicators. A broader cohort of 185 students from the same schools responded to a perception questionnaire, while 35 teachers completed a questionnaire on instructional practices. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with three classroom teachers and three students. Descriptive statistics, frequency distributions, cross-school comparisons, and thematic analysis were employed. Findings: The overall mean score was 45.83 (SD = 15.94), with the majority of students performing below expected levels. Retrospective synthesis recorded the lowest mean (M = 39.06, 84.5% in the lowest category), followed by predictive reasoning and background knowledge activation (78.6% each). Anaphoric resolution, although the highest (M = 54.69), still left more than half of the students below the expected threshold. Comparable patterns were observed across the three schools. Research Implications: The findings indicate that inferential reading competence requires more systematic instructional attention, particularly in retrospective synthesis and predictive reasoning. The four-indicator diagnostic framework offers educators a tool for pinpointing dimension-specific weaknesses and provides researchers a baseline for future intervention studies. Originality: This study contributes an empirically grounded diagnostic profile of inferential reading ability across four discrete indicators at the elementary level, integrating objective test data with teacher and student perceptual evidence within a single analytical framework.
Abstract views: 3
,
PDF downloads: 0
Downloads
References
Ardiansyah, M., & Hardhienata, S. (2025). Modeling and Optimization of Teacher Innovativeness in Mathematics Instruction: A Study on Permanent Teachers at Private Vocational School Foundations in West Jakarta Using the POP SDM Method. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 15(2), 59–70.
Attaprechakul, D. (2013). Inference Strategies to Improve Reading Comprehension of Challenging Texts. English Language Teaching, 6(3), 82–91.
Badecker, W., & Straub, K. (2002). The processing role of structural constraints on interpretation of pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(4), 748.
Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2007). Children’s comprehension problems in oral and written language: A cognitive perspective. Guilford Press.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. McGraw-Hill.
Corkery, F. (2014). An analysis of year 8 poor comprehenders’ responses to the PAT Reading Comprehension test: A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Literacy Education at Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand [PhD Thesis, Massey University]. https://mro.massey.ac.nz/items/2b309e81-bf71-4287-adf7-f3980a89af29
Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative (Vol. 7). Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (6th ed., Ed.). SAGE Publications.
Eilers, S., Tiffin-Richards, S. P., & Schroeder, S. (2019). The repeated name penalty effect in children’s natural reading: Evidence from eye tracking. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(3), 403–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021818757712
Elbro, C., & Buch-Iversen, I. (2013). Activation of Background Knowledge for Inference Making: Effects on Reading Comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17(6), 435–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.774005
Fox, E., & Alexander, P. A. (2014). Text comprehension: A retrospective, perspective, and prospective. In Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 251–263). Routledge. https://api.taylorfrancis.com/content/chapters/edit/download?identifierName=doi&identifierValue=10.4324/9781315759609-22&type=chapterpdf
Hughson, A. L. (2003). Cork and talk: The cognitive and perceptual bases of wine expertise. University of Sydney (Australia). https://search.proquest.com/openview/2e4f1ee54392ff02c9b0a7ce6bcfb955/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2011). Children’s reading comprehension difficulties: Nature, causes, and treatments. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(3), 139–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411408673
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Lata, K., Singh, P., & Dutta, K. (2021). A comprehensive review on feature set used for anaphora resolution. Artificial Intelligence Review, 54(4), 2917.
Nation, K., Cocksey, J., Taylor, J. S. H., & Bishop, D. V. M. (2010). A longitudinal investigation of early reading and language skills in children with poor reading comprehension. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(9), 1031–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02254.x
Oakhill, J., & Cain, K. (2019). Supporting reading comprehension development. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 45, 46–53.
Palumbo, A., & Sanacore, J. (2009). Helping Struggling Middle School Literacy Learners Achieve Success. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(6), 275–280. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.82.6.275-280
Patterson, C. (2013). The role of structural and discourse-level cues during pronoun resolution [PhD Thesis, Universität Potsdam]. https://publishup.uni-potsdam.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6880
Rahmawati, L. E., Octaviani, P., Kusmanto, H., Nasucha, Y., & Huda, M. (2021). The accuracy of complex-procedures texts material in Bahasa Indonesia textbook for the first grade of senior high school. Asian Journal of University Education (AJUE), 17(1), 91–99.
Sanford, A. J., & Garrod, S. C. (1989). What, when, and how?: Questions of immediacy in anaphoric reference resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4(3–4), SI235–SI262. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690968908406369
Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. RAND Corporation.
Trabasso, T., & Magliano, J. P. (1996). Conscious understanding during comprehension. Discourse Processes, 21(3), 255–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539609544959
van den Broek, P., Beker, K., & Oudega, M. (2015). Coherence inferences. In J. Oakhill, K. Cain, & C. Elbro (Eds), Understanding and teaching reading comprehension: A handbook (pp. 33–52). Routledge.
Wahyudi, R., & Rozimela, Y. (2024). The reciprocal teaching and reading interest impact on students’ reading comprehension. Elsya: Journal of English Language Studies, 6(3), 209–230.
Widiastuti, I. (2025). Assessing the Impact of Education Policies in Indonesia: Challenges, Achievement, and Future Direction. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 17(2), 1955–1964.
Zhou, K., Chen, H., Ismail, M., & Yang, T. (2025). Assessment of Sustainable Development Levels, Country Disparities, and Dynamic Evolution Trends of ASEAN ‐10 Countries. Sustainable Development, 33(6), 8547–8568. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.70107
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Indra Suhendra, Wahyu Sopandi, Isah Cahyani, Cepi Riyana

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.






