Abstract

Introduction

Education is not limited to the transmission of knowledge and skills; it is also responsible for shaping identity, ethics, responsibility, and social growth. In this article, the authors argue that improving education cannot be achieved merely through curricular reform, administrative restructuring, or changes in assessment methods. Rather, it requires a reconsideration of the pattern of educational governance, that is, the way power is distributed, decisions are made, stakeholders participate, supervision is exercised, accountability is maintained, and moral relationships are regulated within schools and the educational system.

The study distinguishes between “educational governance” and “educational governance in a Pedagogical/educative sense.” While educational governance may emphasize efficiency, transparency, and management, educative governance must connect these elements to moral, spiritual, and human perfection. The research problem arises from the fact that in the existing literature, the relationship between educative governance and Islamic sources—especially Munyat al-Murid fi Adab al-Mofid wa al-Mostafid by Shahid al-Thani—has received limited attention. The main aim of the study is to identify the dimensions and components of an educative governance model in education based on Munyat al-Murid.

Method

This study is applied in purpose and qualitative in approach, conducted within an interpretive paradigm using thematic analysis. The full text of Munyat al-Murid (based on the translation by Seyed Mohammad Bagher Hojjati) constituted the Research Field. No sampling in the conventional sense was applied; instead, the entire text was examined, which means the study used a census-based textual review.

Data were collected through purposeful and scholarly reading of the complete text. The analysis process followed the standard stages of qualitative coding: first, open coding was used to identify initial codes; then axial coding organized these codes into broader conceptual categories; and finally, selective coding was used to extract overarching themes. The software MAXQDA was employed to assist in code comparison and organization. To enhance validity, the authors relied on expert review and established credibility procedures. Reliability was examined by assigning three random five-page segments of the text to another coder; the reported thematic agreement coefficient was 0.849, indicating strong reliability.

The Research Field consisted of the complete text of Munyat al-Murid. Therefore, the sample was not drawn from human participants but from the whole textual corpus of the book. In other words, the research sample was the entire translated text, selected purposefully because it directly contained the ethical and pedagogical concepts relevant to the study. No human respondents were involved.

Results

Through an iterative and fluid process, the entire 649-page text of Munyat al-Murid was coded by the researcher using MAXQDA 2020 software, resulting in a total of 444 initial codes assigned to the textual excerpts. The rule-making mechanisms, the structuring of master–disciple interactions, and the components of educational guidance and oversight were analyzed. The analytical criterion for formulating these themes as dimensions of governance was their

functional overlap with the fundamental elements of governance science—specifically behavioral regulation, role allocation, and institutional leadership of the learning ecosystem. Consequently, themes exhibiting regulatory and institutional functions were abstracted and conceptualized as the strategic dimensions and components of the educational governance model:

1.Educative governance based on ethics and etiquette:This theme includes teacher-student relations, school social life, manners of companionship, and ethics of debate and dialogue. Concepts such as respect, humility, acceptance of truth, avoidance of disputation, backbiting, self-glorification, violence, and fault-finding are emphasized.

2.Educative governance based on legitimacy, trustworthiness, and institutional responsibility: This theme highlights structural legality, the moral and scholarly competence of teachers and administrators, observance of school rules, trustworthiness in using educational resources, and the protection of scientific heritage.

3.Educative governance based on knowledge order and learning sequence: Findings show that education should be organized according to a logical sequence of disciplines, prerequisite learning, learner capacity, and movement from basic to advanced stages. Prioritizing foundational and necessary knowledge is also an important component.

4.Educative governance based on the link between knowledge, action, and self-purification: In this theme, knowledge without action is seen as incomplete and potentially harmful. Education should lead to practical application, moral correction, self-discipline, avoidance of hypocrisy, and spiritual growth.

5.Educative governance based on religious knowledge as a tool for education:This theme stresses the role of committed scholars, the divine value of knowledge, social responsibility, religious guidance, and the enduring educational impact of learning. Knowledge is presented as a means of human guidance and moral upliftment rather than merely a tool for material gain.

A major part of the findings also identifies the harms of argumentative conflict, including stubbornness, refusal to accept truth, arrogance, hypocrisy, emotional excess, and fanaticism. According to the article, scientific dialogue should be based on truth-seeking, openness to argument, calmness, flexibility, willingness to accept truth even from an opponent, and avoidance of performative debate.

Discussion

The findings suggest that Munyat al-Murid contains a rich and integrated framework that can serve as the basis for a comprehensive educative governance model. This model is not limited to school administration or formal decision-making mechanisms; it also includes human relations, professional ethics, learning style, the role of the teacher, student responsibility, the use of resources, institutional legitimacy, and the spiritual purpose of education.

Compared with previous studies on educational governance, this model aligns with themes such as participation, justice, transparency, accountability, trust, and decentralization. However, its main distinction lies in redefining these concepts within an Islamic ethical framework, where

self-purification, trustworthiness, the integration of knowledge and action, and the divine purpose of education are central.

Within this model, the teacher is not merely a transmitter of content but a practical model of knowledge, ethics, and piety. The student is not a passive recipient of information but a moral agent who must move toward self-development and social responsibility. The school, likewise, should be a space for ethical practice, responsible dialogue, respect for others, orderly learning, and spiritual growth.

Conclusions

this study demonstrates that Munyat al-Murid possesses profound conceptual capacity to reconstruct a comprehensive model of educational governance. By bridging classical Islamic heritage with contemporary governance challenges, the research moves beyond traditional pedagogical etiquette to offer a structural, systemic, and value-driven framework. The proposed model shifts the paradigm of the education system from a mechanistic transmission of knowledge to a morally grounded, spiritual, and institutionally secure system. Consequently, educational policy-makers and school administrators can utilize this indigenous, faith-based framework as a viable alternative to dominant secular paradigms. It effectively balances institutional legitimacy, epistemic order, and ethical responsibility, placing the integration of knowledge, practice, and self-purification at the core of governance. Furthermore, this pattern provides a practical roadmap for cultivating ethical citizens and reviving scholarly heritage, while opening new avenues for theoretical dialogue between classical Islamic philosophy and modern educational administration.