The Effectiveness of the Quantum Teaching Learning Model on Islamic Re-ligious Education (PAI) Learning Outcomes at State Elementary School 1 Katobengke
Keywords:
Effectiveness, Learning Model, Quantum Teaching, Learning Outcomes, PAIAbstract
This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the Quantum Teaching learning model on the learning outcomes of Islamic Religious Education (PAI) at Elementary School 1Katobengke. This study uses a qualitative method with the object of research being 27 fifth grade students, consisting of 15 male students and 12 female students, and 1 PAI teacher. The instruments used in this study were observation, interviews, and documentation. The study was conducted in two cycles with two meetings in each cycle. The results of the study showed a significant increase in student learning outcomes between cycle I and cycle II. The average student score increased from 71.1 in cycle I to 77.59 in cycle II, with the percentage of student learning completion reaching 85.19% in cycle II. The application of the Quantum Teaching model succeeded in creating an active, enjoyable learning atmosphere, increasing student interest, and motivating them to be more involved in learning. Thus, the Quantum Teaching model has proven effective in improving Islamic Religious Education learning outcomes at Elementary School 1Katobengke and can be used as an alternative learning method that is more interesting and meaningful.
References
Armstrong, T. (2006). The best schools: How human development research should inform educational practice. ASCD.
Asif, R., Merceron, A., Ali, S. A., & Haider, N. G. (2017). Analyzing undergraduate students’ performance using educational data mining. Computers & Education, 113, 177–194.
Benn, T. (2002). Muslim women in teacher training: issues of gender,‘race’and religion. In Gender and physical education (pp. 69–91). Routledge.
Bøe, M. V., Henriksen, E. K., & Angell, C. (2018). Actual versus implied physics students: How students from traditional physics classrooms related to an innovative approach to quantum physics. Science Education, 102(4), 649–667.
Chabbott, C., & Ramirez, F. O. (2000). Development and education. In Handbook of the Sociology of Education (pp. 163–187). Springer.
Chavez, C. I., & Weisinger, J. Y. (2008). Beyond diversity training: A social infusion for cultural inclusion. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, the University of Michigan and in Alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 47(2), 331–350.
Doucerain, M., Vargas, S., & Ryder, A. G. (2016). Mixed-methods research: Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches to the psychological study of culture.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. John Wiley & Sons.
Friedman, B., & Solow, S. (2013). The federal right to an adequate education. Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 81, 92.
Gerver, R. (2014). Creating tomorrow’s schools today: Education-our children-their futures. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Gorsuch, G., & Taguchi, E. (2010). Developing reading fluency and comprehension using repeated reading: Evidence from longitudinal student reports. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 27–59.
Horng, J., Hong, J., ChanLin, L., Chang, S., & Chu, H. (2005). Creative teachers and creative teaching strategies. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 29(4), 352–358.
Ilmi, Z., Darma, D. C., & Azis, M. (2020). Independence in learning, education management, and industry 4.0: habitat Indonesia during COVID-19. Journal of Anthropology of Sport and Physical Education, 4(4), 63–66.
Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2012). Gathering Feedback for Teaching: Combining High-Quality Observations with Student Surveys and Achievement Gains. Research Paper. MET Project. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Levy, P. S., & Lemeshow, S. (2013). Sampling of populations: methods and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
Macklem, G. L. (2015). Boredom in the classroom: Addressing student motivation, self-regulation, and engagement in learning (Vol. 1). Springer.
Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 9–18.
Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning—a cultural change needed in teacher education and schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(7), 763–780.
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2003). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. In Educational Psychology (pp. 89–101). Routledge.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (2005). Language and meaning: Data collection in qualitative research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 137.
Ratnasari, I. T., Wardani, S., & Nuswowati, M. (2018). The impact of multiple intelligences approach through quantum teaching model toward the scientific attitude and science learning outcomes in the fourth grade students. Journal of Primary Education, 7(2), 146–154.
Rodgers, C. R. (2002). Seeing student learning: Teacher change and the role of reflection. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 230–253.
Sinkovics, N. (2018). Pattern matching in qualitative analysis. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods, 468–485.
Sjöstrand, T., Ask, S., Christiansen, J. R., Corke, R., Desai, N., Ilten, P., Mrenna, S., Prestel, S., Rasmussen, C. O., & Skands, P. Z. (2015). An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2. Computer Physics Communications, 191, 159–177.
Sutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3), 226.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Debi Yanti Fatma, Maudin Maudin, Muhammad Ridwan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
