Marching to a different drummer

There was a time when the British Empire stretched across oceans, continents, ports, plantations, parliaments, colonies, and military formations, with its admirers proudly repeating that the sun never set upon it. The line was always more fragile than it sounded. Empires, like schools, often appear most stable when their inner coherence has already begun to decay.

The title of this post is inspired partly by the spectacle of British marching troops: disciplined ranks, polished boots, synchronized movement, and the visual theatre of collective order. Every now and then, however, there would be someone out of step, someone not quite aligned with the formation, someone apparently marching to a different drummer. Strictly speaking, the “different drummer” phrase belongs less to the parade ground than to Thoreau’s Walden, where it appears as a defence of individual conscience rather than a reprimand for indiscipline. But the metaphor remains useful, especially if we reverse it.

The problem with many Islamic schools today is not that some children are marching to a different drummer. That may, in fact, be their gift. The deeper problem is that the institutions themselves are often marching to the wrong drum.

They move to the drumbeat of marks, image, conformity, parental anxiety, market prestige, sectarian defensiveness, cultural nostalgia, and visible religiosity. They march with energy, sometimes with sincerity, sometimes with impressive administrative choreography. Yet the direction is often far from where Islamic education ought to be going.

This is not primarily for lack of effort, funds, support, enthusiasm, or ability, though any of these may well be deficient in particular places. The deeper problem is more fundamental: a flawed understanding of education in general, and of Islamic education in particular. If we misunderstand the human being, we will misdesign the school. If we misname success, we will miseducate the child. If we mistake performance for formation, we will produce students who know how to appear good before the right audience but do not yet know how to become truthful before Allah.

In my view, there are four principles through which success in a Muslim life begins to become educationally visible: character, human difference, curiosity, and creativity. Contemporary Islamic education systems too often run contrary to all four. The result is a milieu in which teachers and learners, instead of growing into these principles, are subtly formed into habits that oppose and diminish them, even when no one consciously intends such an outcome.

1. Character: Integrity Before Image

The first principle is character.

The central goal of an Islamic educational system should be to graduate children of sound character who can enter the world and leave it better than they found it. That sentence is easy to approve and difficult to embody. Nearly every Islamic school claims to care about akhlāq. Far fewer design their incentives, discipline systems, assessments, timetables, teacher roles, parent expectations, and hidden curriculum around the formation of character.

Instead of character as a lodestar, undue emphasis is often placed on marginal goals derived more from the culture of Islam than from the religion of Islam. The distinction matters. The religion of Islam calls the human being toward truthfulness, humility, mercy, justice, sincerity, worship, adab, and a sound heart. The culture of Islam, when it degenerates into social performance, may reward the appearance of all these things while leaving the inward life untouched.

By this route, children can end up being taught hypocrisy as a by-product of the process. They learn to cultivate multiple faces before different audiences: one face for parents, another for teachers, another for friends, another for the Islamic event, another for the digital world. They learn not how to be whole, but how to manage impressions. They learn the choreography of respectability.

Thus, a child may speak one language with peers and another before a “Sharīʿah-compliant” audience. A young person may dress, speak, joke, consume, and desire in one register outside school, then switch seamlessly into the approved religious semiotics inside it. These examples are necessarily simplified, and they should not be used to humiliate children. The child is not the root of the problem. The child is often merely adapting to the system’s real incentives. The broader issue is an educational culture that prizes appearance above mettle, social performance above inward integrity, and public compliance above spiritual truthfulness.

The challenge, then, is no longer to be good intrinsically, but to appear good before the right people. “Why can’t you be like so-and-so?” “You are expected to behave this way in front of so-and-so.” “What will people say?” These become the catechism of image-management. The gaze of people displaces the gaze of Allah.

Islamic education should be ordered in the opposite direction. It should move the child from surveillance to sincerity, from compliance to conscience, from fear of embarrassment to reverence before Allah. The Prophet ﷺ taught that Allah does not look at appearances or wealth, but at hearts and deeds. A school that understands this cannot be satisfied with visible religiosity. It must ask whether the child is becoming more truthful, more merciful, more responsible, more capable of admitting wrong, repairing harm, resisting cruelty, and doing the right thing when there is no audience to applaud.

The Qurʾān’s ultimate measure is not institutional approval, nor public symbolism, nor even achievement in the ordinary sense, but the sound heart: “except one who comes to Allah with a sound heart” (Qurʾān 26:88–89). Character is therefore not a decorative outcome. It is the moral centre of Islamic education.

The hidden curriculum is decisive here. If the school praises marks more than honesty, it will form competitors before it forms truth-tellers. If it rewards outward piety while humiliating sincere struggle, it will form performers before it forms believers. If it treats questions as deviance, it will form concealment before conviction. If it tolerates cruelty from high-achieving students, it will teach that academic success can purchase moral exemption. If it treats teachers harshly while preaching mercy to children, it will expose its own contradiction.

Character is not formed by slogans. It is formed by a moral ecology.

2. Human Difference: Diversity as Divine Pedagogy

The second principle is that human beings are different.

This difference is not merely tolerated in Islam; it is given Qurʾānic significance. Allah created human beings as peoples and tribes “so that you may know one another,” and He locates nobility not in tribe, race, class, school ranking, or sectarian self-certification, but in taqwā (Qurʾān 49:13). Difference, then, is not an accident to be endured. It is part of the Divine pedagogy of recognition.

Each human being is accorded dignity. Each is granted a personal moral journey before Allah. Each is given, until the final breath, the possibility of repentance, awakening, return, clarification, and transformation. This does not abolish truth. It does not mean every belief is correct, every practice acceptable, or every confusion harmless. But it does mean that Islamic education must not arrogate to itself the right to flatten children into types: the good child, the deviant child, the religious child, the weak child, the clever child, the hopeless child, the “ours” child, the “other” child.

Contemporary Islamic education systems—or, indeed, many so-called Islamic systems more broadly—are often built upon conformity and homogeneity as their hidden foundation. Either you are one of us, or you are suspect. Either you repeat the approved formulas, or your sincerity is questioned. Either you belong to the right group, school of thought, family culture, social class, gender performance, devotional style, or ethnic memory, or you become a problem to be managed.

This is a tragic and duplicitous slide. Islamic education should give students tools for truth, adab, evidence, humility, and principled disagreement. Instead, it sometimes gives them slogans of belonging and habits of suspicion. It trains them to identify out-groups before it trains them to purify their own hearts. It teaches them to worry about who is misguided before asking whether they themselves are truthful, merciful, disciplined, and just.

The problem is not limited to belief structures. The education system itself remains focused on what learners can do across a narrow spectrum. One hears parental aspirations framed in terms such as: “I am happy if my child gets 100 in Mathematics and Science and can read the Qurʾān. Success in dunyā and ākhirah.” Or: “I do not mind what my child’s scores are, as long as he is a ḥāfiẓ.” Or: “I want my child as far from the kuffār as possible.” Or: “Art and music? Do you not know they are ḥarām?” Or again: “Only this madhhab, group, or orientation is truly correct, and the curriculum must reflect that”—with the label changing according to the speaker.

There are genuine religious questions here, and they should not be dismissed with liberal impatience. Islamic schools must respect authoritative religious teaching. They must have theological clarity. They must teach children how to distinguish what is agreed upon, what is disputed, what is prohibited, what is disliked, what is permissible, what is culturally contingent, and what belongs to the adab of community life. But this must be done with knowledge, proportion, humility, and mercy—not with zealotry masquerading as fidelity.

Educationally, the same problem appears through the uniform view of schooling. Children are treated as if they learn in the same way, show intelligence in the same medium, mature according to the same timeline, and deserve recognition only when they succeed in the narrow bands most easily measured. This is an academic illusion. Almost everyone’s profile is jagged: one child thinks spatially but struggles linguistically; another reasons beautifully in conversation but freezes on paper; another has bodily-kinesthetic knowledge that remains invisible in sedentary classrooms; another has moral sensitivity not captured by test scores; another has artistic perception dismissed as frivolous because it cannot be converted into a neat composite score.

Any uniform educational approach is likely to serve only a small percentage of children well. A coherent Islamic education should therefore not confuse equality with sameness. The learner’s difference is not an administrative nuisance. It is part of the amānah.

This does not mean lowering standards. It means widening entry points to understanding. A child’s strength may provide access to more challenging areas. One intelligence can catalyze another. A rich topic should be approached like a room with at least seven doorways: narrative, analytical, practical, aesthetic, ethical, dialogical, contemplative. Intelligences should be mobilized to help students learn important content, not used as a new way of categorizing or ranking them.

A school that takes human difference seriously will design for dignity. It will not ask every child to become the same kind of student. It will ask every child to become truthful, capable, responsible, and useful in the way Allah has opened for him or her.

3. Curiosity: The Interrogative Life

The third principle essential to a successful educational institution is curiosity.

A sound system should awaken, support, encourage, discipline, and cultivate curiosity in learners, and then watch how learning begins—almost miraculously—to take place. Curiosity is not a decorative educational virtue. It is one of the first signs that the mind is alive. It is the beginning of inquiry, the first stirring of thaumazein, the wonder from which philosophy, science, jurisprudence, art, and spiritual reflection all draw breath.

Sadly, many education systems operate in direct tension with Plutarch’s famous image that the mind is not a vessel to be filled but wood to be ignited. The aphorism is often misquoted and misattributed, but the underlying passage in Plutarch’s On Listening does indeed contrast filling with ignition. Instead of kindling that fire, Muslim educational institutions—or, for that matter, most educational institutions—too often become information-delivery devices. Or, more elegantly, curriculum-delivery devices.

Students are made to sit, receive, store, and reproduce. They swallow volumes of decontextualized information with little meaningful input of their own, then disgorge that information at the moment of testing. What follows is the triumph of the declarative sentence over the interrogative sentence. The teacher speaks; the student records. The book states; the student memorizes. The examination asks; the student performs. The mind is filled, but the fire is not kindled.

This is not a critique of memorization as such. Memorization has dignity, especially in the preservation of Qurʾān, language, poetry, and foundational knowledge. Nor is it a critique of explicit instruction. Children need teachers who can explain clearly, model carefully, correct misconceptions, and transmit hard-won knowledge. The problem is not memory. The problem is memory severed from meaning. The problem is instruction without inquiry. The problem is curriculum coverage that produces acquaintance knowledge but not disciplinary understanding.

A student who knows many facts may still not understand. A student who can repeat a religious answer may still not know how to live it. A student who can recite a scientific definition may still not know how evidence works. A student who can pass an Islamic studies examination may still not know how to ask a sincere question about the self, the nafs, death, mercy, justice, doubt, technology, desire, beauty, or responsibility.

Questions are often treated with disdain, contempt, or severe judgment. The student’s curious learning instincts are driven into submission. In too many cases, formal study of a topic quenches the very sense of mystery that first made it worth learning, leaving students with inert knowledge and little desire for lifelong learning.

Islamic education should be the opposite. The Qurʾān repeatedly invites human beings to look, ask, ponder, remember, infer, compare, and reflect. It does not flatter curiosity when curiosity becomes arrogance, but neither does it sanctify intellectual passivity. A student who asks honestly is not an enemy of faith. A student who is confused is not a deviant. A student who struggles with a concept may be standing at the threshold of real understanding.

The task of the Islamic educator is not to suppress questions but to refine them. Some questions are immature. Some are borrowed from the zeitgeist. Some are sincere but poorly framed. Some conceal pain. Some express rebellion. Some arise from genuine cognitive dissonance. The teacher’s role is not to panic, shame, or silence, but to guide the question toward adab, evidence, patience, and truthful inquiry.

Education for understanding requires more than answer production. It requires multiple representations, performances of understanding, time for reflection, and a spiral curriculum in which rich, generative ideas are revisited time and again. One almost never achieves instant understanding. The old ideas are difficult to scuttle. Misconceptions have deep engravings. The learner must encounter the material in a variety of forms and contexts before knowledge becomes usable, personal, and durable.

If Islamic education fails to cultivate curiosity, it may produce children who can answer questions they did not ask, but not adults who can seek truth when no one hands them the worksheet.

4. Creativity: Khalīfah, Not Auto-Cruise

The fourth principle is creativity.

Allah is al-Khāliq, the Creator. Human creativity is not analogous to Divine creation, nor should theological precision be sacrificed for poetic exuberance. Yet the human being, as khalīfah, is entrusted with a form of responsible worldmaking: cultivating, arranging, discovering, repairing, naming, designing, composing, building, interpreting, and improving the world under Allah’s command. The Qurʾānic account of the human being as khalīfah on earth gives creativity a moral horizon; it is not creativity as egoic self-expression, but creativity as amānah.

Across the ages, human beings have used this capacity to traverse oceans, deserts, mountains, and outer space; to produce works of art, architecture, literature, mathematical theorems, scientific theories, medicinal advances, engineering achievements, social institutions, and tools of astonishing complexity. Creativity is not a frivolous embellishment of life. It is one of the ways human beings respond to possibility.

Yet this much-vaunted capacity, so prized in the twenty-first century, is often torn out of learners the moment they step out of line. We frequently say that children must be taught how to think, not what to think. But in practice, students are forced into compliance within the boundaries of a standardized, watered-down curriculum, and digression is often treated as transgression. Creative confidence is quietly disciplined out of them.

Try, this Ramaḍān, making an orange or red Ramaḍān or Eid card instead of the customary green, and see how swiftly imagination is summoned back into convention. This example is small, almost comic, but it gestures toward something larger. Much of what we call “Islamic culture” in school is actually a narrow aesthetic habit mistaken for religious necessity. Colour, style, form, format, tone, seating arrangement, poster design, acceptable project type, approved vocabulary, and even the emotional atmosphere of piety can become standardized until students learn that creativity is permitted only inside pre-approved borders.

But creativity cannot flourish where difference is feared, curiosity is punished, and character is reduced to performance. It requires trust, play, discipline, domain knowledge, aesthetic sensibility, feedback, and room for failure. It requires teachers who know the difference between a child being frivolous and a child experimenting with form. It requires adults who can distinguish between principled boundaries and arbitrary conventions. It requires an institution mature enough to say: this is prohibited, this is discouraged, this is disputed, this is permissible, this is culturally inherited, and this is merely what we happen to prefer.

Iqbal’s image of flight is particularly apt here:

سِتَاروں سے آگے جَہَاں اَور بِھی ہَیں

اَبھی عِشْق کے اِمْتِحَاں اَور بِھی ہَیں

تُو شَاہِیں ہَے، پَرْوَاز ہَے کَام تِیرا

تِرَے سَامْنَے آسْمَاں اَور بِھی ہَیں

“There are worlds beyond the stars;
there are still other tests of love.

You are a falcon; flight is your work.
Before you lie other skies as well.”
—Allama Iqbal, Bāl-e Jibrīl, my translation.

This is not a call to restless novelty for its own sake. It is a rebuke to premature enclosure. The Muslim learner is not meant to be a docile consumer of inherited templates, nor a mimic of dominant systems, nor a zombie ambling through life on auto-cruise. He or she is meant to become a khalīfah of Allah: capable of responsible stewardship, disciplined imagination, moral courage, and positive change in an imperfect world.

Standardized learning followed by standardized testing can become the final nail in the coffin of a Muslim educational system when it trains students to wait for instructions, fear mistakes, and equate intelligence with compliance. A school may still need standards. It may still need examinations. It may still need curriculum structure. But standards are not standardization, and structure is not strangulation. The question is whether the structure serves entelechy—the full realization of the learner’s potential under Allah—or whether it merely produces neat institutional outputs.

Creativity in Islamic education must be tethered to iḥsān. It should not be indulgent, chaotic, or vain. It should produce good work: work that is technically sound, deeply engaging, and ethically responsible. It should help students make things well, solve real problems, serve actual communities, beautify environments, communicate truthfully, repair harm, and imagine alternatives to inherited dysfunction.

The Four Principles Belong Together

Character, human difference, curiosity, and creativity should not be treated as four separate educational ornaments. They form a single ecology of formation.

Character without curiosity can become obedient narrowness. Curiosity without character can become clever irreverence. Creativity without adab can become self-display. Diversity without truth can become confusion. Truth without mercy can become cruelty. Standards without human difference become injustice. Religious identity without inward sincerity becomes theatre.

Islamic education must hold these together.

It must form children who are inwardly whole, not merely outwardly impressive. It must recognize difference without abandoning truth. It must cultivate curiosity without dissolving adab. It must encourage creativity without enthroning ego. It must prepare children for the world without surrendering them to the world. It must teach them to be Muslim not only when watched, ranked, rewarded, or corrected, but when alone with Allah, alone with their conscience, and alone with the consequences of their choices.

The child who “marches to a different drummer” may not always be the problem. Sometimes that child is hearing a question the school has suppressed. Sometimes she is sensing an incoherence adults have normalized. Sometimes he is refusing a false binary between dīn and dunyā, faith and beauty, obedience and thought, tradition and imagination. Sometimes the child is merely immature, and needs guidance. But sometimes the institution is the one out of rhythm.

The deeper question, then, is not whether every student can be made to march in formation. The deeper question is: what drum is the school following?

If the drum is market success, the school will produce competitors.
If the drum is social image, it will produce performers.
If the drum is fear, it will produce concealment.
If the drum is sectarian vanity, it will produce suspicion.
If the drum is standardized achievement, it will produce narrow excellence and broad impoverishment.

But if the drum is iḥsān, the school begins to move differently.

It begins to ask whether children are becoming truthful, merciful, thoughtful, capable, beautiful in conduct, strong in service, alive to knowledge, and conscious of Allah. It begins to ask whether assessment reveals growth or merely ranks children. It begins to ask whether discipline forms self-governance or only compliance. It begins to ask whether Islamic studies transforms the heart or merely fills notebooks. It begins to ask whether mathematics, science, art, language, sport, worship, and service are all being drawn into a coherent moral horizon.

This is not easy. It cannot be achieved through slogans, assemblies, policies, or branding. It requires a deep reconfiguration of the hidden curriculum. It requires teachers formed as muʿallim and murabbī. It requires parents to be educated out of anxiety. It requires leadership with helicopter vision. It requires assessment-in-context rather than one-dimensional metrics. It requires multiple entry points to understanding. It requires the courage to say no to performative religiosity, no to market-driven reductionism, no to sectarian arrogance, no to the academic illusion, and no to the quiet killing of curiosity.

It also requires hope.

The current state of Islamic education may be troubling, but despair is not an Islamic methodology. Allah’s mercy remains wider than our failures, and the possibility of reform remains open so long as we are willing to name our incoherence, repent of our vanities, and redesign our schools around what is true.

May Allah help us to hear the right drum: not the drum of empire, market, fashion, fear, or conformity, but the call of amānah, iḥsān, taqwā, knowledge, service, beauty, and a sound heart.

Allāhu al-mustaʿān.