Students' Difficulties in Learning Islamic Jurisprudence: Learning Analysis Based on Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Styles Kesulitan Belajar Fikih Siswa Ma: Analisi Pembelajaran Berdasarkan Gaya Visual, Auditori, Dan Kinestetik
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study focuses on analyzing the learning difficulties faced by grade X students of MA Bahrul Ulum Tambakberas Jombang in the subject of fiqh, viewed from the perspective of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles. The aim of this research is to identify the types of learning difficulties that arise according to different learning styles, analyze the underlying factors, and formulate appropriate instructional solutions. This research employs a qualitative approach with a descriptive method, using observation, interviews, documentation, and questionnaires involving 30 grade X students. The findings reveal that visual learners experience difficulties in explaining material orally and composing long written answers, even though they benefit from diagrams and visual aids. Auditory learners tend to understand better through discussions and verbal explanations but struggle to express their understanding in written form. Meanwhile, kinesthetic learners often feel bored during long lectures and find it challenging to grasp abstract concepts, although they show enthusiasm during hands-on practice. The factors contributing to these learning difficulties include internal factors, such as limited awareness of individual learning styles, and external factors, such as the dominant use of lecture methods and limited availability of teaching media. The implications of this research highlight the importance of implementing differentiated instruction tailored to students’ learning styles, enabling teachers to help reduce learning difficulties and improve students’ understanding of fiqh material more effectively.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Aunhabundit, N., & Lu, A. C. C. (2024). Visualizing Success: Amplifying Learning Outcomes across VARK Learning Preferences through Visual Notes. Science, Technology, and Social Sciences Procedia, 2024(6), ICCM03-ICCM03.
Bouncken, R. B., Qiu, Y., Sinkovics, N., & Kürsten, W. (2021). Qualitative research: extending the range with flexible pattern matching. Review of Managerial Science, 15(2), 251-273.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00451-2
Conrad, C., Deng, Q., Caron, I., Shkurska, O., Skerrett, P., & Sundararajan, B. (2022). How student perceptions about online learning difficulty influenced their satisfaction during Canada's Covid‐19 response. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 534-557.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13206
Crick, J. M. (2021). Qualitative research in marketing: what can academics do better?. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 29(5), 390-429.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2020.1743738
Dewaele, J. M., & Pavelescu, L. M. (2021). The relationship between incommensurable emotions and willingness to communicate in English as a foreign language: a multiple case study. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15(1), 66-80.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2019.1675667
Drigas, A., & Mitsea, E. (2021). 8 Pillars X 8 Layers Model of Metacognition: Educational Strategies, Exercises &Trainings. International Journal of Online & Biomedical Engineering, 17(8).
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v17i08.23563
El-Sabagh, H. A. (2021). Adaptive e-learning environment based on learning styles and its impact on development students' engagement. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 53.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00289-4
Enderle, C. (2025). “So That You Can Feel Well”: Perspectives of Students with Social, Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties on Factors that Support School Attendance. School Mental Health, 1-22.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-025-09764-z
Ezzaim, A., Dahbi, A., Aqqal, A., & Haidine, A. (2024). AI-based learning style detection in adaptive learning systems: a systematic literature review. Journal of Computers in Education, 1-39.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-024-00328-9
Forber-Pratt, A. J., Hanebutt, R., Minotti, B., Cobb, N. A., & Peagram, K. (2024). Social-emotional learning and motivational interviews with middle school youth with disabilities or at-risk for disability identification. Education and Urban Society, 56(1), 33-65.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245221110557
Gunawardena, M., Bishop, P., & Aviruppola, K. (2024). Personalized learning: The simple, the complicated, the complex and the chaotic. Teaching and Teacher Education, 139, 104429.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104429
Halme, M., Piekkari, R., Matos, S., Wierenga, M., & Hall, J. (2024). Rigour vs. reality: Contextualizing qualitative research in the low‐income settings in emerging markets. British Journal of Management, 35(1), 36-51.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12690
Hasbiyallah, H., Duran, B. N., & Suhendi, S. (2024). Indonesian Fiqh in higher education: A pathway to moderate and inclusive Islamic values. Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 10(1), 149-162.
https://doi.org/10.15575/jpi.v10i1.26151
Hassan, M. A., Habiba, U., Majeed, F., & Shoaib, M. (2021). Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students’ learning styles. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(4), 545-565.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1588745
Hayati, A. N., & Usriyah, L. (2023). Implementation Of Islamic Education With Blended Learning Model In New Normal Era. Fenomena, 22(1), 53-66.
https://doi.org/10.35719/fenomena.v22i1.119
Ismail, R. N., & Astutik, A. P. (2024). Development of Canva Based Interactive Multimedia Teaching Materials on Fiqih Material for the Hajj and Umrah Worship.
Jain, N. (2021). Survey versus interviews: Comparing data collection tools for exploratory research. The Qualitative Report, 26(2), 541-554.
https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4492
Joswick, C., Skultety, L., & Olsen, A. A. (2023). Mathematics, learning disabilities, and learning styles: a review of perspectives published by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Education Sciences, 13(10), 1023.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13101023
Leko, M. M., Cook, B. G., & Cook, L. (2021). Qualitative methods in special education research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 36(4), 278-286.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12268
Lim, W. M. (2025). What is qualitative research? An overview and guidelines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 33(2), 199-229.
https://doi.org/10.1177/14413582241264619
Memarian, B., & Doleck, T. (2023). Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Ethics (FATE) in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and higher education: A systematic review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100152.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100152
Molina Roldán, S., Marauri, J., Aubert, A., & Flecha, R. (2021). How inclusive interactive learning environments benefit students without special needs. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 661427.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.661427
Ostrom, T. M., Pryor, J. B., & Simpson, D. D. (2022). The organization of social information. In Social cognition (pp. 3-38). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003311386-2
Page, A., Charteris, J., Anderson, J., & Boyle, C. (2021). Fostering school connectedness online for students with diverse learning needs: Inclusive education in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 36(1), 142-156.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2021.1872842
Probowati, D. E. P., Chariri, A., & Isgiyarta, J. (2023). The Causes of Low Learning Achievement of Sharia Accounting Subject Among Sharia Economics Students. Dinamika Pendidikan, 18(1), 66-74.
https://doi.org/10.15294/dp.v18i1.42379
Romadhon, A., Amrullah, A. M. K., & Sholeh, A. (2025). The Influence of Differentiated Learning Model Based on STIFIn Test on Fiqh Learning Outcomes. Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 15(1), 123-134.
Schwartz, A. E., Hopkins, B. G., & Stiefel, L. (2021). The effects of special education on the academic performance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 40(2), 480-520.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22282
Taylor, S. E., & Crocker, J. (2022). Schematic bases of social information processing. In Social cognition (pp. 89-134). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003311386-4
Thompson Burdine, J., Thorne, S., & Sandhu, G. (2021). Interpretive description: A flexible qualitative methodology for medical education research. Medical education, 55(3), 336-343.
https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14380
Tisdell, E. J., Merriam, S. B., & Stuckey-Peyrot, H. L. (2025). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Troussas, C., Giannakas, F., Sgouropoulou, C., & Voyiatzis, I. (2023). Collaborative activities recommendation based on students’ collaborative learning styles using ANN and WSM. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(1), 54-67.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1761835
Tzagkarakis, S. I., & Kritas, D. (2023). Mixed research methods in political science and governance: approaches and applications. Quality & quantity, 57(Suppl 1), 39-53.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01384-y
Yousaf, Y., Shoaib, M., Hassan, M. A., & Habiba, U. (2023). An intelligent content provider based on students learning style to increase their engagement level and performance. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(5), 2737-2750.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1900875
Zulkifli, H., Rashid, S. M. M., Mohamed, S., Toran, H., Raus, N. M., Pisol, M. I. M., & Suratman, M. N. (2022). Designing the content of religious education learning in creating sustainability among children with learning disabilities: A fuzzy delphi analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1036806.