The Relationship between Maqasid Al-Shari’ah and Key Intangible Performance for Teaching and Learning: A Content Analysis in Light of Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education) (Hubungkait antara Maqasid Al-Shari’ah dan Prestasi Kerja Tidak Ketara dalam Bidang Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran: Analisa Pelan Pendidikan Malaysia 2015-2025 (Pengajian Tinggi))
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31436/jia.v18i1.1043Abstract
Performance measurement is vital to evaluate job performances and the quality of the work of employees. It is utilized by almost all job sectors including higher learning institutions. Most performance measurements adopt Key Performance Indicators (KPI) to measure performances. This, however, is viewed to be inadequate as it tends to ignore lecturers’ intangible performances. It is argued that there are many significant job and contextual performances which are not being included in their performance appraisals. This article discusses the concept of Key Intangible Performance in teaching and learning tasks by focusing on the relationship between Maqasid al-Shari’ah and KIP for teaching and learning. Specifically, it discusses the concept of Maqasid al-Shari’ah, highlights the KIP for teaching and learning in HEI, and discusses the relationship between Maqasid al-Shari’ah and KIP for teaching and learning using MEB (HE).
Keywords: Maqasid al-Shari’ah, Key Intangible Performance, Malaysia Education Blueprint, Higher Education Institution, Teaching and Learning.
Abstrak
Pengukur prestasi sangat penting untuk menilai pelaksanaan dan kualiti kerja pekerja, ia telah digunakan oleh hampir semua sektor pekerjaan termasuklah institusi pengajian tinggi. Sebilangan besar pengukur prestasi yang digunakan secara meluas untuk menilai tahap prestasi seseorang pekerja ialah Petunjuk Prestasi Utama (KPI). Namun, penggunaan KPI tidak memadai kerana ia lebih cenderung untuk mengabaikan kerja atau aktiviti tidak ketara di kalangan pensyarah. Dikatakan terdapat banyak prestasi kerja dan prestasi kontekstual yang tidak termasuk dalam penilaian prestasi menggunakan KPI ini. Artikel ini membincangkan konsep Petunjuk Prestasi Tidak Ketara (KIP) dengan memberi fokus terhadap hubungannya dengan Maqasid al-Shari’ah dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran. Secara khususnya, ia membincangkan konsep Maqasid al-Shari’ah, menerangkan KIP dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran di IPT, serta membincangkan hubungan antara Maqasid al-Shari’ah dan KIP dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran menggunakan kerangka PPM (PT).
Kata Kunci: Maqasid al-Shari’ah, Prestasi Tidak Ketara, Pelan Pendidikan Malaysia, Institusi Pengajian Tinggi, Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran.
References
Abu-Rahma, Ali, “An Ideal Islamic Educational Institution: A Conceptual Model.” International Journal of Education and Research 1, no. 9 (2013).
Afridi, Muhammad Adil Khan, “Maqasid Al-Shari’ah and Preservation of Basic Rights Under The Theme” Islam And Its Perspectives On Global & Local Contemporary Challenges”. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, no. 4 (2016).
Al-Khadimi, Nuruddin Mukhtar, “Al-Maqasid Ta’rifuha: Amthilatuha- Hujjiyatuha.” (Riyadh: Kunuz Ashbelia, 2003): 29.
Al-Shatibi, Ibrahim Bin Musa, “Al-Muwaffaqat.” (Kaherah: Dar al-Ghad al-Jadid, 2011).
Salleh, M.S. Religiosity in Development: “A Theoretical Construct of an Islamic- Based Development.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 2 no.14 (2012).
Al-Zuhayli, Wahbah, “Nazariyyah al-Darurah al-Shar’iyyah (Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah, 1997).
Kasilingam, G. and Chinnavan, E., “Assessment of learning domains to Improve Student’s Learning in Higher Education.” JYP 6 no. 4 (2012).
Ibnu ‘Ashur, Muhammad Tahir, “Maqasid al-Shari’ah al-Islamiyyah.” (Jordan: Dar al-Nafais, 2011).
Intan Fadzliana, Ahmad, Nor Adha, Abdul Hamid, Mohd Izham, and Mohd Hamzah, “Human Governance Management in Islamic Higher Education Institutions.” Asian Journal of Management Sciences and Education 4, no. 3 (2015).
Ismail, Nik Ahmad Hisham, Tekke, Mustafa, Noraini Osman, and Afareez Abd Razak Al-Hafiz. “Students’ Islamic Personality on Ibadah: A Structural Modelling.” Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, no. 219, (2016).
Masron, Tajul Ariffin, Zamri Ahmad, and Norizan Baba Rahim, “Key Performance Indicators vs. Key Intangible Performance Among Aca-demic Staff: A Case Study of a Public University in Malaysia.” Procedia-Social Behavioural and Sciencesno. 56, (2012).
Ministry of Education Malaysia. “Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015- 2025 (Higher Education).” (2015).
Ng, Hee Song and Kee, Daisy Mui Hung, “Key Intangible Performance Indicators (KIPs) for Organisational success.” International Journal of Asian Business and Information Manegement 2, no. 3 (2011).
Oladapo, Ibrahim Abiodun, and Asmak Ab Rahman, “Maqasid Shari’ah: The Drive for an Inclusive Human Development Policy.” Shariah Journal 24, no. 2 (2016).
Secundo, Giustina, Alessandro Margherita, Gianluca Elia, and Giuseppina Passinate, “Intangible Performnace or Both?” Journal of Intellectual Capital 1, no.2 (2010).
Sequeira, A. H., “Introduction to Concepts of Teaching and Learning.” SSSRN Electronic Journal (2012).
