Raudhatul Athfal Teachers’ Perceptions and Attitudes toward Hadith-Based Preventive Guidance for Early Childhood Tolerance within Islamic Guidance and Counseling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the perceptions and attitudes of Raudhatul Athfal (RA) teachers toward the use of hadith as a pedagogical and guidance-based foundation for fostering tolerance in early childhood education in the Riau Islands, Indonesia. The study responds to concerns about the emergence of intolerant behaviors among young children, including reluctance to interact with peers from different religious, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds. From the perspective of Islamic guidance and counseling, tolerance education is not merely moral instruction, but a form of preventive and developmental guidance that nurtures empathy, social acceptance, prosocial behavior, and harmonious interpersonal relationships. Hadith-based education offers an Islamic ethical framework for cultivating compassion, justice, respect for diversity, and peaceful coexistence. In RA settings, teachers serve not only as classroom educators but also as early guidance figures who support children’s internalization of Islamic values in daily social interactions. This study employed a quantitative descriptive-correlational survey design involving 250 RA teachers in the Riau Islands. Data were collected using a standardized questionnaire measuring teachers’ perceptions of hadith-based tolerance education, including knowledge, understanding, and evaluative judgment, as well as attitudes comprising cognitive, affective, and conative dimensions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson’s Product-Moment correlation. The findings indicate that teachers’ perceptions were categorized as high (96%), and their attitudes were also high (98%). A strong, positive, and statistically significant correlation was found between perception and attitude (r = 0.920; p < 0.05). The study contributes to Islamic guidance and counseling by positioning hadith as a contextual resource for preventive-developmental guidance in pluralistic early childhood education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".