Vol. 4 No. 12 (2025)
Open Access
Peer Reviewed

An Analytical Study of the Content of the Islamic Studies Textbook for Grade 1 in Light of Its Alignment with the National Standards for the Islamic Studies Learning Area

Authors

Huda Dalwah Al-Elaiwi , Asma Sulaiman Al-Fayez

DOI:

10.26389/AJSRP.H130825

Published:

2025-12-30

Abstract

 

This study aimed to determine the extent to which the content of the Islamic Studies textbook for Grade 1 aligns with the National Standards for the Islamic Education Learning Area. To achieve this goal, the descriptive method based on content analysis was adopted. A content analysis tool was developed using the 2020 standards document for the foundational level (Grade 1), issued by the Education and Training Evaluation Commission. The standards include two branches—Tawhid (Creed) and Fiqh (Jurisprudence)—and consist of five content standards and sixteen performance standards.
The sample comprised the Islamic Studies textbooks for all three academic terms of the 1446 AH / 2025 CE school year. The findings revealed a disparity in alignment: Tawhid received a relative weight of 25.05%, five points higher than the 20% specified in the standards, while Fiqh received 19.95%, five points lower than the target of 25%.
The study recommended reviewing the textbook content to ensure balanced inclusion of both branches.

 

Keywords:

Islamic Studies Grade 1 National Standards Performance Standards Islamic Education Learning Area Standards Alignment

References

Author Biographies

  • Huda Dalwah Al-Elaiwi, جامعة الملك سعود | المملكة العربية السعودية

    King Saud University | KSA

  • Asma Sulaiman Al-Fayez, جامعة الملك سعود | المملكة العربية السعودية

    King Saud University | KSA

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite

Al-Elaiwi, H. D., & Al-Fayez, A. S. (2025). An Analytical Study of the Content of the Islamic Studies Textbook for Grade 1 in Light of Its Alignment with the National Standards for the Islamic Studies Learning Area. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching Methodology, 4(12), 44-62. https://doi.org/10.26389/AJSRP.H130825