At-Risk Students in Public Elementary Schools: An Exploration of Learning and Behavioral Challenges within a Response to Intervention (RTI) Framework in Central Jakarta
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20961/imscs.v3i1.1162Keywords:
at-risk student, Response to Intervention, KJP Recepients.Abstract
This study explores the characteristics and challenges of at-risk students who are beneficiaries of the Jakarta Smart Card (KJP) in two public primary schools in Central Jakarta, SDN Kebon Kosong 17 and SDN Petamburan 01, using a Response to Intervention (RTI) perspective. This study aimed to identify academic, behavioral, and socio-emotional difficulties among at-risk KJP recipient students, examine contributing factors, and analyze implications for context-based RTI implementation in Indonesian public primary schools. An exploratory qualitative design was employed. Data were collected through classroom observations, semi-structured interviews with 18 teachers and school leaders, and document analysis involving students from Grades 1 to 6. Data analysis followed thematic procedures based on Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña’s model. In SDN Kebon Kosong 17, behavioral problems dominated in both lower grades (52.5%) and upper grades (73.33%), while academic difficulties appeared more prominently in lower grades (12.5%) and decreased in upper grades (6.67%). Students with special educational needs were identified across grade levels (2.5% in Grades 1–3 and 6.67% in Grades 4–6). In SDN Petamburan 01, academic difficulties were more dominant in lower grades (45%), while behavioral problems increased in upper grades (62%). Students with special needs were also present at both levels (3% in lower grades and 4% in upper grades). Family factors, especially parental divorce and low parental involvement, emerged as the most dominant risk factors, followed by socio-economic pressure, uncontrolled digital media exposure, and weak school–parent communication. The study demonstrates that at-risk KJP recipient students experience multidimensional and developmentally shifting difficulties. Early academic and self-regulation problems tend to evolve into more complex behavioral issues if not addressed early. The findings support the need for a contextual, tiered RTI model tailored to the realities of Indonesian public primary schools serving low-income populations.
References
Amato, P. R. (2015). The consequences of divorce for adults and children: An update. Drustvena Istrazivanja, 23(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.5559/di.23.1.01
Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2015). School readiness and self-regulation: A developmental psychobiological approach. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 711–731. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015221
Bappeda DKI Jakarta. (2023). Laporan pelaksanaan Kartu Jakarta Pintar (KJP) Plus tahun 2023. Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah DKI Jakarta.
Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2013). Response to intervention implementation in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures and challenges. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203133903
Conger, R. D., & Donnellan, M. B. (2017). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 273–299. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033537
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cuartas, J., Weissman, D. G., Sheridan, M., Lengua, L., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2022). Poverty and children's executive functions: Developmental pathways. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 54, 101071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2022.101071
Diamond, A. (2016). Why improving and assessing executive functions early in life is critical. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.12.001
Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Eggum-Wilkens, N. D. (2019). Emotion-related self-regulation and its relation to children’s maladjustment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 16, 495–525. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-071018-025607
Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Bryant, J., Hamlett, C., & Seethaler, P. (2012). First-grade cognitive abilities and responsiveness to intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 394–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027408
Garbacz, S. A., Herman, K. C., Thompson, A. M., & Reinke, W. M. (2019). Family engagement in education. School Psychology Review, 48(4), 316–332. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2019-0038.V48-4
Greenwood, C. R., Bradfield, T., Kaminski, R. A., Linas, M., Carta, J. J., & Nylander, D. (2011). The Response to Intervention (RTI) approach in early childhood. Focus on Exceptional Children, 43(9), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17161/fec.v43i9.6912
Hair, N. L., Hanson, J. L., Wolfe, B. L., & Pollak, S. D. (2015). Association of child poverty, brain development, and academic achievement. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(9), 822–829. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.1475
Kristiani, R., Lunanta, L. P., Sondakh, R. R., Kiswanto, G. S., & Vanya, E. (2022). Rights-based approach to improving capacity of Companion of Children at Risk. Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Ilmu Keguruan dan Pendidikan, 5(2), 63–73.
Lansford, J. E. (2018). Parental divorce and children’s adjustment. Future of Children, 28(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2018.0001
Mangunsong, F. (2009). Psikologi perkembangan anak dan remaja. Refika Aditama.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2019). Digital screen time and mental health: Evidence from large-scale data. Psychological Science, 30(7), 1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619830329
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Defining and describing schoolwide positive behavior support. In W. Sailor et al. (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Behavior Support (pp. 307–326). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09632-2_13
Susilo, A. (2019). Analisis kebutuhan peserta didik penerima KJP dalam konteks sekolah inklusif. Jurnal Pendidikan Inklusi, 5(2), 113–127.
Tudge, J. R. H., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2016). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 8(4), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12165
Twenge, J. M., Martin, G. N., & Campbell, W. K. (2021). Decreases in psychological well-being among adolescents after 2012. Emotion, 18(6), 765–780. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000403
Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Munniksma, A., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2021). The complex relationships between antisocial behavior and social status. Developmental Psychology, 57(10), 1660–1675. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001230
Wilder, S. (2018). Effects of parental involvement on academic achievement. Educational Review, 70(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017.1305079
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies: Conference Series
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
