Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aims to describe the interaction pattern between teachers and students and students’ ability to represent reading texts in reading instruction in grade III at SD Inpres 3 Lai, North Palu Subdistrict. The study used a descriptive qualitative approach with case study and ethnographic characteristics. Data were collected through observation, audio-visual recording, interviews, and a meaning-representation questionnaire across three learning sessions, then analyzed using the model of Miles et al. (2014), covering data condensation, data display, and conclusion drawing. The results show that the teacher-student interaction pattern was dominated by the Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) structure; of the 27 teacher questions recorded, 15 developed into complete IRF sequences and 5 required scaffolding. Based on Mercer’s (2013) discourse types, cumulative discourse was most dominant (7 occurrences), followed by exploratory discourse (5 occurrences), while disputational discourse was almost never found. Based on Walsh’s (2013) SETT framework, materials mode dominated the interaction (22 of 27 occurrences) compared to classroom context mode (5 occurrences). Meanwhile, students’ ability to represent and interpret reading texts was in the good category, with an average score of 2.98; literal comprehension obtained the highest score (3.58), while inferential comprehension obtained the lowest score (2.42). These findings indicate that classroom interaction remains material-oriented and teacher-controlled, which has implications for students’ still-limited inferential comprehension ability. This study recommends strengthening exploratory discourse and classroom context mode to optimize students’ deeper comprehension of reading texts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Milianti et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: