Digital Progressivism and Rural Social Resilience: A Study of Omah Sinau’s Adaptive Learning Model in the AI Era
Kata Kunci:
digital progressivism, rural social resilience, omah sinau, artificial intelligence, Islamic educationAbstrak
The rapid expansion of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and digital media creates a double challenge for rural education: widening inequalities in access to knowledge and the risk that technological change may weaken local cultural attachments and face-to-face social relations. This study examines Omah Sinau, a community-based learning space in Wonokerto Village, Bandar, Batang Regency, Indonesia, to understand how adaptive learning practices may connect digital participation with rural social resilience. The study uses a qualitative case-study design, drawing on the available institutional study of Omah Sinau and supplementary field accounts concerning management and tutoring practices. Data are interpreted through progressive education, pragmatism, critical pedagogy, and social resilience. Findings indicate four mutually reinforcing practices: learner interest-based projects and weekly reflection; facilitators’ scaffolding of independent inquiry; selective use of digital resources for learning and production; and the enactment of gotong royong, tepa selira, sharing, and Islamic ethical learning. The study further interprets Omah Sinau’s curriculum through five connected pillars, spirituality, contextual learning, leadership, social participation, and environmental stewardship, and a developmental pathway from self-awareness to community impact. The study argues that Omah Sinau’s distinctive contribution is not technology adoption alone, but the social and ethical arrangements through which technology becomes educationally meaningful. It proposes a community-based digital progressivism framework in which learner agency, guided inquiry, ethical mediation, cultural continuity, and collective participation interact. Because the evidence is qualitative and case-specific, the findings should be read as an interpretive account of mechanisms and perceived contributions rather than proof of causal effects on migration or village-wide resilience
