The digitalization wave has significantly altered the educational sector, including the management of Islamic Religious Education (IRE) institutions across Indonesia. Although these institutions carry deep historical roots, many still struggle to bridge the gap between their foundational religious principles and the practical demands brought by the current technological era. This research seeks to offer a conceptual reconstruction of IRE institutional governance by drawing upon Maqashid Syariah as both a normative compass and an actionable framework for navigating digital-age challenges. Through a systematic qualitative approach grounded in library-based inquiry, this study examines a range of written sources — from scholarly articles and government policy texts to classical and contemporary Islamic educational thought — using analytical and comparative methods. Three principal outcomes emerged from this investigation. To begin with, IRE institutions — whether madrasas, Islamic boarding schools, or Islamic universities — continue to face substantial organizational deficiencies in responding to digital ecosystem demands. Furthermore, Maqashid Syariah demonstrates strong applicability as a guiding structure across curriculum design, institutional leadership, pedagogical practice, and moral character cultivation. Additionally, learning approaches that weave together digital tools and Islamic principles in a dialectical manner tend to produce more purposeful educational experiences, ultimately directing students toward the ideal of human beings. The study concludes that genuine institutional reform calls for the simultaneous renewal of epistemological orientation, values-driven transformative leadership, and adaptive engagement with diverse multicultural contexts. Practically, this research offers constructive direction for educational policymakers and institutional managers in building IRE systems that are resilient, contextually relevant, and academically sound in the digital era.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Junaidi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: