Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Articles
DOI: 10.32806/jkpi.v7i3.1587
Submitted: 15-02-2026
Published: 27-09-2026

DIFFERENTIATED LEARNING IN FIQH INSTRUCTION: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF ADAPTIVE CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND STUDENT LEARNING EXPERIENCES IN AN INDONESIAN MADRASAH

Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar
Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar
Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar
differentiated learning, differentiated instruction, Fiqh education, adaptive teaching, student engagement, madrasah

Abstract

This study examines how differentiated learning is implemented in Fiqh instruction and how teachers and students experience its contribution to classroom participation and learning outcomes in Grade VIII at MTs Negeri Gowa, Indonesia. A descriptive qualitative design was used. Data were obtained through classroom observation, interviews, learning-outcome tests, and documentation of instructional planning and supporting records. The analysis followed data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing, with source and method triangulation used to strengthen credibility. The findings indicate that differentiation was enacted through three main dimensions: content, process, and product. Content was adjusted to students’ readiness through core concepts, enrichment activities, textual analysis, and case-based tasks. Process differentiation involved discussion, questioning, worship practice, collaborative tasks, and other varied learning activities. Product differentiation provided students with alternatives such as summaries, presentations, posters, and simple projects. The reported classroom evidence also indicated increased participation, motivation, confidence, and learning achievement during the implementation period. Teacher readiness, learning-needs mapping, and a supportive classroom climate facilitated implementation, whereas limited instructional time and heterogeneous student abilities constrained it. The study contributes contextual evidence that differentiated learning can support responsive Fiqh instruction, while the qualitative design does not permit a causal estimate of its effect on achievement.

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
  2. Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Waddington, D. I., & Pickup, D. I. (2019). Twenty-first century adaptive teaching and individualized learning operationalized as specific blends of student-centered instructional events: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 15(1–2), e1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1017
  3. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE.
  5. CAST. (2024). Universal design for learning guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
  7. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
  8. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
  9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: The human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  10. Deunk, M. I., Smale-Jacobse, A. E., de Boer, H., Doolaard, S., & Bosker, R. J. (2018). Effective differentiation practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the cognitive effects of differentiation practices in primary education. Educational Research Review, 24, 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.02.002
  11. Frèrejean, J., van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Dolmans, D., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Visscher, A. J. (2021). Ten steps to 4C/ID: Training differentiation skills in a professional development program for teachers. Instructional Science, 49, 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09540-x
  12. Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (2016). Bringing the profession back in: Call to action. Learning Forward.
  13. Gaitas, S., & Alves Martins, M. (2017). Teacher perceived difficulty in implementing differentiated instructional strategies in primary school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(5), 544–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1223180
  14. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512
  15. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
  16. Hasanah, E., Suyatno, S., Maryani, I., Al Badar, M. I., Fitria, Y., & Padmasari, L. (2022). Conceptual model of differentiated-instruction (DI) based on teachers’ experiences in Indonesia. Education Sciences, 12(10), 650. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100650
  17. Kahmann, R., Droop, M., & Lazonder, A. W. (2022). Meta-analysis of professional development programs in differentiated instruction. International Journal of Educational Research, 116, 102072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102072
  18. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
  19. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  20. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  21. O’Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89(9), 1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388
  22. Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M., Scales, R. Q., Gallagher, M. A., Parsons, A. W., Davis, S. G., Pierczynski, M., & Allen, M. (2018). Teachers’ instructional adaptations: A research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 88(2), 205–242. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317743198
  23. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
  24. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
  25. Smale-Jacobse, A. E., Meijer, A., Helms-Lorenz, M., & Maulana, R. (2019). Differentiated instruction in secondary education: A systematic review of research evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2366. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366
  26. Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD.
  27. Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
  28. van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Frèrejean, J., Dolmans, D., van Merriënboer, J., & Visscher, A. (2019). Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(4), 451–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2019.1595476
  29. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  30. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE

How to Cite

Sari, L. P., Sumiati, S., & Dewanti, R. (2026). DIFFERENTIATED LEARNING IN FIQH INSTRUCTION: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF ADAPTIVE CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND STUDENT LEARNING EXPERIENCES IN AN INDONESIAN MADRASAH. Jurnal Konseling Pendidikan Islam, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.32806/jkpi.v7i3.1587