Order 1428946: Exploring Supervisor and Peer Support on US Army Junior Leader’s Transfer of Training
Abstract
Self-Perception and Identity Negotiation of Muslim American
Women in Higher Education
by
Carol Warren Koller
MA, Fuller Theological Seminary, 2000
BA, University of Washington, 1982
Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Global and Comparative Education
Walden University
June 13, 2014
Abstract
Religion and spirituality have been found to be an integral part of the well-being of
American college and university students. Although Islam is currently practiced by a
small minority, it is the fastest growing faith in the United States indicating a larger
presence on campus in the near future. Muslim American students, especially women
who choose to wear the veil, have received limited attention from researchers and
policymakers regarding their campus and classroom experiences in spite of
discriminatory treatment many have faced since the terrorist attacks of September 11.
This study seeks to discover the influences and experiences that may contribute to the
self-perception and identity formation of traditional college age Muslim American
women on campus in order to better understand how higher education policymakers may
improve their learning and social environment. Tajfel’s (1969) social categorization
(identity); Turner, Oakes, Haslam, and McGarty’s (1994) self-categorization; Allport
(1954/1979) and Pettigrew’s (1998, 2008) intergroup contact, and Peek’s (2005) religious
identity theories form the basis of understanding the effects of group or context on
identity development. The study will take place at a large public 4-year university in
Southern California and utilize a phenomenological research design. Data will be
collected through series of two interviews and one focus group for all participants in
order to establish history, details, and meaning of experiences. Analysis after the first
interview, and again after the focus group, will refine the questions asked of participants.
Findings from this study will assist campus policymakers and student services in
providing traditional college age Muslim American women with the tools to grow, thrive,
and achieve their academic and social goals.
Self-Perception and Identity Negotiation of Muslim American
Women in Higher Education
by
Carol Warren Koller
MA, Fuller Theological Seminary, 2000
BA, University of Washington, 1982
Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Global and Comparative Education
Walden University
June 13, 2014
iii
Table of Contents
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 4
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study ................................................................................... 1
Background ..................................................................................................................... 2
Problem Statement .......................................................................................................... 5
Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................................... 6
Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 7
Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................... 7
Personal and Group Identity Theories as Framework ................................................. 8
Campus Climate Framework .................................................................................... 10
Nature of the Study ....................................................................................................... 11
Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 12
Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 16
Scope and Delimitations ............................................................................................... 16
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 18
Significance ................................................................................................................... 18
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 19
Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................................ 22
Literature Search Strategy ............................................................................................. 23
Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................. 24
Individual, Group, and Social Identity Theories ....................................................... 24
iv
Campus Climate Framework .................................................................................... 28
The Role of Religion and Spirituality in Higher Education ......................................... 31
Religious Minorities and Campus Climate ................................................................... 34
Pluralism and Ecumenical Worldview .......................................................................... 35
The Role of Faculty ...................................................................................................... 37
Muslim American Women and Higher Education ........................................................ 38
The Effect of the Media on Identity Formation ............................................................ 39
Complex American Identities ................................................................................... 42
The Meaning of the Hijab and Identity Formation ....................................................... 45
The Choice to Wear the Hijab ...................................................................................... 46
Traditional Interpretations ......................................................................................... 47
Feminism and the Veil .............................................................................................. 49
Islamic Feminism and the Veil ................................................................................. 52
The Veil as a Symbol of Political and Cultural Resistance ...................................... 53
The Choice Not to Wear the Hijab ............................................................................... 56
Theory, Campus Climate, and Student Considerations ................................................ 60
Equality and Historical Climate ................................................................................ 60
Common Goals and Structural Climate .................................................................... 61
Intergroup Cooperation and Behavioral/Psychological Climate .............................. 62
Authority and Behavioral/Psychological Climate ..................................................... 62
Summary and Conclusions ........................................................................................... 63
Chapter 3: Research Method ............................................................................................. 66
Research Design and Rationale .................................................................................... 66
v
Research Questions ................................................................................................... 68
Role of the Researcher .................................................................................................. 68
Methodology ................................................................................................................. 69
Participant Selection Logic ....................................................................................... 71
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................... 75
Data Analysis Plan .................................................................................................... 78
Issues of Trustworthiness .............................................................................................. 80
Ethical Procedures ..................................................................................................... 81
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 83
Appendix A: Introductory Email/Letter .......................................................................... 101
Appendix B: Consent to Participate in Research ............................................................ 102
Appendix C: Data Collection Instrument and Relationship to Research Questions ....... 106
Appendix D: Interview Data Analysis Form .................................................................. 109
vi
List of Tables
Table 1. Attitudes Toward American Muslims by Trusted Media Sources ..................... 39
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Racial/Ethnic Composition of U.S. Muslims by Percentage ............................. 41
1
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study
American college and university campuses are more diverse now than in their
400-year history. Race, ethnicity, culture, gender, and socioeconomic status all represent
the multiple identities students share within the larger framework of being “American.”
It is religion, however, that is one of the most fundamental characteristics in defining
one’s individual or collective sense of self and belonging (Cole & Amhadi, 2010). In the
wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks many perceptions of minority students,
specifically Muslims, present a challenge for educators and administrators in creating a
positive learning environment in light of prevalent negative views regarding Islam
(Muedini, 2009; Shammas, 2009). Within this religious group, women have received a
mixture of pity, disdain, and admiration (Zine, 2008) from Western theorists, who
according to Middle Eastern scholar Edward Said (1979) have imposed an Orientalist
image upon these women, one that portrays them as simultaneously oppressed and
hypersexual (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010; Said, 1979; Zine, 2008). Media stereotyping of
Muslim women as subservient, or participants in terrorist activities, made more
identifiable in the symbol of the hijab—the Muslim head covering, has frequently
complicated or challenged Muslim American women’s choice to express their religious
identities (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010; Muedini, 2009)
The college experience represents a crucial time in a young adult’s social and
personal identity development as well as the potential for interaction with those from
previously unknown groups including racial, ethnic, and religious minorities (Gurin, Dey,
Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002). Given the current challenges Muslim women face as an
outgroup in society and on campus, it is imperative that their experiences be collected
2
and understood in order for university policymakers and academic affairs leaders to take
steps to improve or maintain a campus climate conducive for the full development of all
students. The implications for building a better understanding of this growing segment of
women in higher education is twofold: a meaningful learning and social experience for
American Muslim women on campus and an informed understanding of these women by
other students that may lead to tolerance or even pluralistic attitudes and actions.
This chapter begins with a background and summary of the research literature
related to the perceptions of traditional age female Muslim American undergraduate
students—both those who choose to wear the hijab and those who do not. A statement of
the problem addressed by this research and its relevance and purpose is provided as a
context for the research questions that guide this study. A conceptual framework, the
nature of the study, necessary definitions, assumptions, scope, delimitations, limitations,
and significance of this research precedes a final discussion outlining the implications for
social change.
Background
The relationship between higher education campus climate and the personal and
group identities of Muslim American women, in particular, an understanding of identity
formation by choosing to wear the traditional hijab or veil on campus, has received
limited attention by researchers. Connections between choosing to reject or participate in
this traditional religious practice and the campus climate experience must be examined in
order to more fully understand the challenges these women encounter.
Most of the research regarding campus climate and the treatment of minority
groups has been concentrated on racial issues (Hurtado, Milem, Clatyon-Pedersen, &
3
Allen, 1998). More recently, attention has expanded to examine the role of women in
higher education as they currently make up more than half of those students searching for
their classroom on the first day of instruction and many of these students are bringing
with them spiritual paths that they assume will continue to develop during their college
years (United States Census Bureau, 2012). The importance of the role of religion and
spirituality in the lives of college students has been brought to light by the University of
California at Los Angeles’ (UCLA) Higher Education Research Institute (2010). This
longitudinal study, which took place from 2004 to 2007 with an initial national sample of
112,232 college students from 236 institutions, found that the majority of students
acknowledged that spirituality or religion played an important role in their lives and well-
being.
Current research has had limited success determining whether religious affiliation
(as opposed to spirituality and religious struggle as reported by Astin, Astin, & Lindholm,
2010) has had an impact on graduation rates and academic achievement (McFarland,
Wright, & Weakliem, 2011). The data regarding retention in higher education and its
connection to religion have only marginally pointed to small retention increases for
religious majority students enrolled in campus religious activities (Butterfield &
Pemberton, 2011). Several higher education studies have followed Tinto’s (1997) theory
of retention and attrition that argued the likelihood of retention increased with integration
and socialization and point toward the importance of providing minority students with an
environment that includes both in order to encourage growth.
The combination of gender and spiritual/religious development on campuses can
be a factor in determining group and personal identity perception (Astin et al., 2010).
4
Prior to the terrorist hijackings of September 11th, Cole and Ahmadi (2003) investigated
a small sample of immigrant and American Muslim college women who veiled to
discover how this choice impacted their collegiate experience. Even before the intense
negative attitudes toward Islam surfaced after 9/11, many of the women complained of
negative or discriminatory behavior directed toward them, so much so that many chose to
remove the veil. A separate study conducted from 1996–1997 by Read and Bartkowski
(2000) revealed a more complex response from 24 Muslim women; their reasons for
choosing to veil had less to do with increased negative attention and more with personal
theological, political, or personal choices.
The present research regarding Muslim American women and higher education as
it pertains to identity construction is limited. Mir (2009) has written of Muslim women
and their campus experiences regarding sexual identity and practices. Seggie and
Sanford (2010) and Rangoonwala, Sy, and Epinoza (2011) have explored the role of
campus climate and its relationship to identity and personal well-being for those who
choose to wear the veil. Although there are numerous studies pertaining to the benefits of
diversity, including pedagogy that promotes religious awareness in order to increase
tolerance and promote pluralism (Antonio, Milem, & Chang, 2012; Gurin et. al, 2002;
Milem, Chang, and Antonio, 2005), studies concentrating on traditional age
undergraduate Muslim American women is scant. The gap in the research points to a
need to further understand and improve the experience of Muslim women in higher
education with the goal of providing learning that is supported and promoted through
student affairs programs.
5
Problem Statement
Muslim students can be an integral part of a university religious diversity
experience and have the potential to guide the campus community in embracing their
presence and appreciating their heritage in a multicultural and multireligious society
(Cole & Ahmadi, 2010). According to the University of California at Los Angeles’
Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) 2010 study, Muslim students acknowledge
more than any other religious minority group that their faith had shaped their identity
(44%) and influenced their approach to life (33%). This landmark longitudinal study
assessed the spiritual and religious development of undergraduate college students and
concluded that religion and spirituality played an important role in the lives of most
students (Astin et al., 2010).
Recent studies conducted by the Pew Research Center (PRC, 2011), however,
indicated that 28% of American Muslims reported they experienced suspicion from non-
Muslims with 22% reported being called offensive names (p. 46). Obvious forms of
discrimination or religious marginalization may or may not surface on college and
university campuses; however, subtle expressions of Islamophobia (frequently
unconscious or unintentional) in the form of microaggressions (stereotyping Muslims as
terrorists, the belief that religious traditions other than Christianity are illegitimate, etc.)
are a part of the daily experiences of many Muslims, including college students (Nadal et
al., 2012). In the case of Muslim American women, particularly those who wear the veil
or other outward symbols of faith, these microaggressions may discourage the
development of personal and social identities, and therefore deplete their college
experience. Although classroom and campus experiences may or may not have an impact
6
on whether a Muslim American student chooses to wear the hijab as a reflection of her
identity, exploration of how these students perceive their interaction with the campus
environment and its relationship to identity formation and its expression (wearing or not
wearing the hijab) needs to occur.
The role of faith and spirituality in college students’ lives has recently been
examined and found to be a key component for student well-being during college years
(Astin et al., 2010). Given the rise in Islam, whether through birth, immigration, or
conversion, to the fastest growing religion in the US, and the frequency of discriminatory
treatment in American society of both women and Muslims in general, it is paramount
that leaders in higher education are equipped with a better understanding of how these
women perceive themselves as members of the college community in order to provide
them with the tools to succeed and grow personally and academically (Maslim & Bjorck,
2009).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this dissertation is to identify on campus factors and experiences
that influence the self-perception of traditional college age Muslim American women,
both individually and collectively. As women, and as a distinct cultural and religious
minority, these students present a challenge and opportunity for those charged with
providing an environment that allows them to develop personally and academically; one
that has received little attention to date on many college campuses. A better
understanding of identity formation that includes religion, gender, and community
engagement will be valuable in designing or modifying existing campus policy and/or
academic structures.
7
Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to determine how traditional age undergraduate
Muslim American women view themselves in relationship to their citizenship and
religious identity on campus; how these women view wearing or not wearing the hijab,
and what improvements they perceive could be made by student services or academic
affairs to insure a positive campus climate for these women.
RQ1: How do traditional age Muslim American women seeking bachelor’s
degrees at a Southern California public university perceive their engagement with the
campus environment socially and individually?
RQ2: What campus influences impact traditional age Muslim American college
women identity perceptions?
RQ3: How do traditional age Muslim American college women describe
experiences that affect whether they wear or do not wear the veil on campus?
RQ4: In what ways would traditional age Muslim American college women
believe student services and/or academic affairs could support a positive climate that
allows their engagement and identity development?
Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework seeks to explain key constructs and terms, situates the
research within prior theory, and identifies the phenomena to be analyzed and its
justification for examination (Islamia, 2010). The selection of a conceptual rather than a
theoretical framework for this study allows for fluidity and flexibility not only in
designing the research methodology (interviews and focus groups) but in interpretation of
the emerging data without the constriction of firm or unyielding theoretical constructs.
8
That being said, several theories will guide in the explanation of identity development of
female Muslim American college students and their campus experiences.
Personal and Group Identity Theories as Framework
Tajfel’s (1969, 1982) social categorization (identity) theory explores the
relationship between intergroup and group behavior (i.e. there can be no intergroup
behavior without prior classification of groups). Originally employed in psychology to
explore racial prejudice, Tajfel (1969) claimed that individuals live in a social
environment that is constantly changing, and this change is related to the activities of the
group(s) to which one belongs. In addition, these shifting relations between groups
require continual modifications in understanding the forces changing life’s
circumstances. These attributions are based on “the process of categorization,
assimilation, and search for coherence” (Tajfel, 1969, p. 81). For Muslim American
women, a college or university setting provides a plethora of environmental forces that
impact her ingroup or outgroup status and may cause her to define and redefine her status
within these collectives.
Building on social categorization (identity) theory, Turner, Oakes, Haslam, and
McGarty (1994), proposed a self-categorization theory that explained the mechanisms
through which group processes shift member self-perception from personal to social
depending upon social context. They argued that self-categorization is intrinsically
flexible with a continual competition ongoing between the self-identity (categorization) at
both individual and group levels, and that “self-perception varies along a continuum
defined by the conflict between the two and their shifting relative strengths” (as cited in
Turner et al., 1994, p. 456). In the case of Muslim American female students, this theory
9
will guide the exploration of social pressures (peers, campus influences, or societal
norms) as they influence identity compared to that of ingroups such as family and
community. The theory behind self-categorization argues that there is a collective self
derived from a subjective perspective and includes both a personal and social identity at
two different levels (Turner et al., 1994). Within this concept
Personal identity refers to self-categories that define the individual differences
from other (in-group) persons. Social identity refers to social categorizations of
self and others, self-categories that define the individual in terms of his or her
shared similarities with members of certain social categories in contrast to other
social categories. Social identity, therefore, refers to the shared social categorical
self (“us” vs. “them”). (Turner et al., 1994, p. 454)
Self-categorization therefore, is a fluid integration of personal identity as it relates to a
social group and is highly dependent upon situational circumstances.
A sister to self-categorization theory, bicultural acculturation theory (Tadmor &
Tetlock, as cited in Stubbs & Sallee, 2013) posits that individuals and/or groups are faced
with choosing one identity over another in any given situation (e.g religious/Muslim
versus cultural/American). Originally applied to expatriates engaging in international
business environments, I will apply this theory to help understand Muslim American
women student’s accountability to family, community, and religious values on the one
hand, and non-Muslim teachers, friends, and classmates, as well as popular culture on the
other, both in the classroom and in extracurricular settings.
Allport’s (1954/1979) intergroup contact theory can be used to explain, predict,
and provide mechanisms to overcome racial prejudice. In order for positive contact to
10
occur, four key conditions must be met: (a) all groups must be perceived as equal in
status, (b) all groups involved must strive for a common goal, (c) intergroup cooperation
must exist, and (d) the support of formal/informal authority, law, or custom must support
the legitimacy of the group. Pettigrew (1998, 2008) reformulated and expanded on this
theory, taking into account individual differences, multilevel social contexts, and the
possibility that negative outcomes may result.
Finally, Peek’s (2005) stages of religious identity development, constructed from
working with young Muslims, determined that religious identity is first ascribed, later
chosen, and finally declared by a collective or individual. Peek’s identity model is based
on the assumptions that identity is attained through social and evolutionary processes;
that the length of time taken to proceed through these stages varies from person to
person; and that it pertains to a specific group of individuals in a particular social and
historical environment (p. 223).
Campus Climate Framework
Campus climate frameworks have been built based upon empirical evidence and
research regarding the benefits of racial and ethnic diversity in higher education. The
campus climate framework put forward by Hurtado et al. (1998) stressed the importance
of university leaders and policymakers in acknowledging the role of (a) institutional
history of inclusion/exclusion, (b) structural or organizational diversity, (c) the
psychological ramifications of diversity on student groups, and (d) monitoring the
behavioral results of interaction among various groups. Building on this
multidimensional framework, Gurin et al. (2002) and Milem et al. (2005) studied the
impact and success of exposure to diversity on campus and in the classroom, coursework
11
that emphasized pluralism, and intergroup dialogue to provide a clear roadmap for
American college campuses to implement diversity programs.
Using Hurtado et al.’s (1998) framework, Stewart, Kocet, and Lobdell (2011)
categorized and provided recommendations for achieving religious pluralism in the 21st
century. Colleges or universities might fall into one of four categories: (a) Apathy, where
religion, spirituality, or secularization is “muted”; (b) awareness, a campus state where
religious or secular diversity exists or is tolerated rather than embraced; (c) acceptance, or
active incorporation of nonmajority religious beliefs and diverse perspectives; and (d)
active engagement, which “connects religious pluralism with social justice advocacy to
address local, national and global issues” (Stewart et al., 2011, p. 16).
Social categorization (identity; Tajfel, 1969, 1982), self-categorization (Turner et
al., 1994), intergroup contact theory (Allport 1954/1979; Pettigrew, 1998, 2008),
bicultural acculturation theory (Tadmor & Tetlock as cited in Stubbs & Sallee, 2013), and
Peek’s (2005) religious identity formation theory are explored in depth in the literature
review of Chapter 2.
Nature of the Study
A phenomenological research design will be used to better understand, illustrate,
and analyze the perceptions and experiences of Muslim women in higher education.
According to Moustakas (1994), “In phenomenological studies the investigator abstains
from making suppositions, focuses on a specific topic freshly and naively, constructs a
question or problem to guide the study, and derives findings that provide the basis for
further research and reflection” (p. 47). In order to discover the personal stories,
perceptions, reflections, and descriptions of their conscious experiences it was decided
12
that this would be the most effective approach. A phenomenological research design
utilizing personal interviews and focus groups will be employed. All research will be
conducted at a single site—a large research university in Southern California—that
engages Muslim students in cocurricular activities. The study will be limited to Muslim
American women who have attained this status either by birth, immigration, or
conversion, and who have completed one academic year of full-time study on campus.
With the permission of students and the university, all communication will be either
recorded, videorecorded, or both for accuracy in transcription. Interviews will be used
for the first and third phase of participant contact; a focus group setting will be used for
data collection during the second phase of contact with participants. Both interview and
focus group portocol and are fully outlined in Chapter 3. Justification for focus group
interviews has been presented by Bradbury-‐Jones, Sambrook, and Irvine, (2009) who
argued that focus groups are a beneficial addition within phenomenological research as
they stimulate discussion and bring out perspectives that may not come to light in one-on-
one personal interviews.
Definitions
This section introduces and defines terminology in the study that is derived from
practical, theoretical, theological, and cultural sources. Because some of the words or
terms listed here are Arabic and have dual meaning, a clarification of usage is made.
Islam is one of the fastest growing yet most controversial and misunderstood of
the major religions (Abu-Ras, Ahmed, & Arfken, 2010; Maslim & Bjorck, 2009). The
word itself means submission in Arabic, and the religion centers around the Qur’an, the
recitations that Muslims believe are the revelation of God’s word to his Prophet
13
Muhammad in the early 7th century C.E. As with Judaism and Christianity, Islam has a
diverse ethnic, racial, and theological contingency, with its largest division between
Sunni and Shi’a Muslims. Although it is beyond the scope of this research to discuss the
ideological differences between these two sects, it should be understood that students
may or may not identify with one of these two subgroups that have since ancient times
experienced a rift in theological and political perspectives.
Islamism. This term refers to members of a radical, conservative, sociopolitical
organization that argues that Islam should govern all aspects of public and private life.
These groups advocate, using force if necessary, the adoption and implementation of
sharia’h (religious) law that rejects secular or non-Muslim governments and establishes a
purely Islamic state (Aslan, 2006). Many in the media and the political arena as well as
non-Muslim religious leaders mistakenly (or intentionally) use the word synonymously
with Islam.
Islamophobia is the fear of Islam as a religion, and a social discomfort or hostility
with towards Muslims in general. The term was first introduced by the United
Kingdom’s Runnymede Trust Report (1991) and defined as an unfounded fear and
hostility towards Muslims that stemmed from the belief that Islam is an inferior,
maladaptive, violent, and politically manipulative religion. The report also demonstrated
that anti-Muslim prejudices are frequently encouraged by other religions, in particular,
Christianity.
Islamic feminism. A controversial term and form of activism that refers to
assertion of women’s rights as they are found in nonpatriarchal readings or interpretations
14
of the Qur’an, sacred texts, or historical contexts in order to bring about gender equality
(Mernissi, 1991; Mir-Hosseini, 2011).
Qur’an. Its meaning and purpose in Islam cannot be understated. It is a source of
sacred history, thought, law, and a spiritual path for believers. According to Nasar
(1991),
If the soul of the Prophet is the fountainhead of Islamic spirituality, the Qur’an is
like that lightning which having struck the human receptacle caused this
fountainhead to gush forth or like the water descending from heaven which made
streams to flow from this fountainhead. (p. 3)
Hadith (narrations) refers to second-hand reports of Muhammad’s personal
conversations, traditions, and lifestyle that began to be collected soon after his death.
They are used as legal and theological adjunct texts to assist in the interpretation and
implementation of Qur’anic instruction. The full collection of these hadiths is known as
the Sunnah (clear path) and is second only to the Qur’an in theological importance (Read
& Bartkowski, 2000).
Hijab: The most frequently used word to describe the outer and most noticeable
piece of clothing worn by a Muslim woman is the hijab or veil. In Islam, the word has
two meanings: in the broadest sense, hijab means a show of modesty in dress and
behavior required in the Qur’an for both women and men, whereas in the contemporary
vernacular the word has come to represent the head covering of Muslim women that
specifically covers the hair and not the face (Gurbuz & Gurbuz-Kucuksari, 2009). It is
this piece of clothing that has become the most recognized symbol of Islam and is at the
15
heart of the controversy that surrounds the suppression of women, particularly in the
Middle East.
Campus climate. Perceptions, outlooks, and expectations that define a higher
education institution and its members (students, faculty, and staff). These traits are more
flexible than the organizational culture that represents the customs and beliefs of the
institution (Hurtado et al., 1998).
Student affairs. A higher education office composed of members that seek to
promote teaching and development, encourage understanding and respect for diversity,
individual worth, and support for student needs (Student Affairs Administrators in Higher
Education, 2013).
Identity. The perception and conceptualization of the self as an individual or a
member of a group as it may pertain to social, cultural, religious, or national affiliation.
Individuals may identify with one or more complementary or competing identities
(Stubbs & Sallee, 2013).
Ecumenical worldview as defined and measured by Astin et al. (2010) is the
extent to which one is
interested in different religious traditions, seeks to understand other countries and
cultures, feels a strong connection to all humanity, believes in the goodness of all
people, accepts others as they are, and believes that all life is interconnected and
that love is at the root of all the great religions. (p. 21)
Religion. According to Tisdell (2003), religion is a structured community of faith
that has a written doctrine, creed, and code of behavior.
16
Spirituality is a personal belief or experience of the divine, or a higher purpose
through which meaning is constructed; it is about an awareness and interconnectedness of
all things. Although religion and spirituality may be interrelated, one is not necessary for
the practice or experience of the other (Tisdell, 2003).
Assumptions
The first assumption of this study is that the participants will offer honest,
complete, and thoughtful answers to both interview and focus group questions. It is also
assumed that these young women will be willing and free to express themselves without
judgment and to ask questions of the interviewer if she does not understand an inquiry or
need further clarification. Student commitment to participate in all three points of contact
(interviews and focus group) is also anticipated. Finally, it is assumed that these young
Muslim American undergraduates would provide valuable insights into their experiences
that shaped their identities as individuals and as a group of unique religious minority
students. These assumptions are necessary in order to provide confidence in accurate
cataloging and interpretation of participant responses.
Scope and Delimitations
This study is comprised of traditional college age Muslim American female
undergraduates attending a single 4-year research university located in a large city in
Southern California. All participants must have completed one full-time academic year
of study on campus, and were U.S. citizens of birth, or immigration. The reason for the
selection of this demographic was (a) to sample the most common age group of college
undergraduates, (b) to categorize the experience of American rather than immigrant or
international women so as to have a common understanding of American culture and
17
social norms, and (c) to understand identity construction of these early adult learners as it
pertains to individual and collective religious personas (Gurin et al., 2002).
It is beyond the scope of this research to investigate the experiences of female
Muslim international or exchange students and their perspectives. Although the literature
regarding this outgroup is informative and has been intermittently referenced in order to
establish a comparison to American students, it is politically, socially, and
demographically divergent from the planned research participant pool. Investigation of
the phenomenon of student identity formation and education experience provided the
opportunity for larger data collection through interviews and focus groups as opposed to
case studies or a personal narrative.
As the author of this study, it must be disclosed that I have a complex and unique
educational, theological, and sociological background that has inspired this research.
Although I hold a master’s degree from Fuller Theological Seminary, I do not identify
with Christianity in the traditional or doctrinal sense. I have expanded my theology
throughout the course of my life and education, which has included membership in a
Reform Jewish temple and residency of a rural Muslim village in the Middle East. I
consider myself a spiritual and ecumenical feminist who works as an experienced college
professor in the diverse racial and ethnic environment of South Central Texas, engaging
with students from multiple religious backgrounds.
Limitations
The limitation of this study is the small participant sample from a single campus
location in the US. Many of the women will be contacted through the Muslim Student
Organization on campus known for attracting students with leadership characteristics and
18
pride in their faith and heritage; therefore, they may represent an exclusive percentage of
Muslim students in higher education. Generalization of Muslim American undergraduate
women in higher education should be avoided, and the experiences of these women
understood in terms of their exclusive personal perceptions and interpretations.
An additional limitation includes the timing of the research during the summer
vacation schedule of the university chosen for the participant pool. Although a large
public institution of over 30,000 students has been selected, difficulty in contacting
students who would normally be on campus during the normal school year make an
increase in the time it takes to complete this study a possibility.
Significance
Astin et al.’s (2010) examination of the HERI (2010) longitudinal study regarding
the importance of religion and spirituality in higher education indicated the need for
further exploration of those who practice Islam in their college years, including
differences in gender. Although studies have been conducted in the United Kingdom,
Turkey, and Canada regarding the treatment and identity formation of Muslim women in
higher education, relatively few have been published regarding this phenomenon in the
US. The experiences of the Muslim American females (including recent immigrants and
established citizens), however, cannot be easily compared to European, Asian, or other
national female identities according to Shirazi and Mishra (2010) and Carvalho (2013).
The significance of this research is to discover barriers that may prohibit Muslim
women from expressing and developing their full academic and religious potential while
in higher education, building upon characteristics that promote positive personal and
collective identities. This is particularly important in a post-September 11th environment
19
where these women are often stereotyped, oppressed, and even confused regarding
openly expressing or obeying their faith by wearing the hijab (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010).
The existence of national (superordinate) and minority group identification that
constitutes dual identities (Dovidio, Gaertner, & Saguy, 2007; Hopkins, 2011) and/or
hybrid self-perception that shifts, transforms, and merges during college years (Mishra &
Shirazi, 2010) deserves examination to provide these women with the support and
services they need on campus.
The implications for positive social change are contingent upon gaining a better
understanding of the experiences that shape identity formation for Muslim American
undergraduate women. As this segment of society continues to grow and participate in
their communities, their success will be accentuated by a campus environment that
promotes meaningful learning, religious/spiritual growth, and personal fulfillment.
Summary
Institutions of higher education offer a unique opportunity to provide a
meaningful cultural, racial/ethnic, and religious interaction with diverse student groups
for the purpose of achieving positive academic and democratic outcomes (Hurtado et al.
1998). The majority of campus climate research, however, has been directed at racial
minorities, leaving a gap in the literature regarding how religious outgroups negotiate
their campus identities. Both gender and religious status for Muslim American women
undergraduates put them at risk for marginalization in a primarily White, Christian, and
male privileged environment. In addition, those women who choose to wear the hijab,
particularly since the attacks of September 11th, may be seen as symbols of a volatile and
controversial faith (Rangoonwala et al., 2011; Seggie & Sanford, 2010).
20
The recent focus on the importance of spirituality and religion for college and
university students underscores the need for an in-depth understanding of Muslim women
as they represent the largest group (both men and women) that claims a relationship
between faith and identity (HERI, 2010). In addition, a positive program for interaction
and engagement with diversity has the potential to increase tolerance and pluralism on
campus (Gurin et al., 2002).
The literature review that follows in Chapter 2 provides a background and in-
depth analysis of the current research concerning Muslim American women in higher
education, their identity construction, and the challenges that they face on campus. In
particular, the choice to wear the hijab as the most recognizable symbol of Islam in a
post-September 11th society is addressed (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010; Muedini, 2009).
Campus climate diversity frameworks, social, individual, group, and religious identity
theories will be considered and applied to the literature in order to draw a clearer picture
of the identity negotiation of traditional college age Muslim American women. The goal
of this review is to provide information that may be used to assist campus policymakers
and student affairs coordinators in providing changes to existing programs, or the
creation of new mechanisms for improving campus climate and the learning experience
for students in higher education.
21
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Traditional college age Muslim American women represent a growing segment of
the diverse higher education landscape. As members of Islam, a religion whose members
are increasing more rapidly than any other faith in the United States, these women
simultaneously gain high visibility, particularly if they choose to wear the hijab, and are
potential targets for discrimination in the wake of the events of September 11 (Aziz,
2012; Ghumman & Jackson, 2010; Gurbuz & Gurbu-Kucuksariz, 2009; Muedini, 2009;
PRC, 2011; Rangoonwala et al., 2011; Seggie & Sanford, 2010; Sirin & Katsiaficas,
2011). Research has demonstrated that identity formation and development is prominent
during early adulthood; therefore, it is imperative these young women have the
opportunity to thrive in a campus climate that understands and encourages their gender,
cultural, and religious identities (Arnett, 2000; Torres, Jones, & Renn, 2009). This
literature review includes recent scholarly articles both empirical and theoretical
concerning the experiences of Muslim women in higher education, their identity
formation and negotiation, and their reasons for choosing to wear or not wear the hijab,
the most visible symbol of their faith. In addition, research that emphasizes the
importance of religion and spirituality in higher education as a component of student
well-being will be presented. This chapter is organized according to four major topics
after a discussion of the conceptual framework upon which it is based: the role of religion
and spirituality in the lives of college students, the complexities surrounding traditional
age Muslim American women in higher education, the identity factors surrounding the
decision of these students to wear the hijab, and the integration of theory and the
literature concerning their well-being within the campus climate framework.
22
Literature Search Strategy
In order to collect and analyze recent research concerning Muslim American
women in higher education, the importance of the hijab, and religious identity, multiple
sources were accessed. Peer-reviewed journals, books, established research organizations
such as the Brookings Institute, University of California at Los Angeles’ (UCLA) HERI,
the PRC, and various Internet sites provided valuable research and survey data in order to
accomplish this task. My online research employed search engines available from
Walden University and public sources that included: Academic Search Premier, EBSCO
Host, Education Research Complete, Google Scholar, Lexis Nexus, ProQuest Central,
SAGE, Taylor and Francis Online, and Wiley Online Library. Keyword and Boolean
phrases were as follows: Muslim American women and higher education, Muslim
American female college students, Muslim college/university students, colleges,
universities, hijab, veil, headscarf, campus climate, religious identity, spirituality, Islam,
9/11, September 11, post-9/11, religious discrimination and Islam, religious minorities,
gender, Islam and the media, Muslims and the media, Orientalism, hijab and oppression,
hijab and resistance, social identity theory, self-categorization theory, and intergroup
contact theory.
Google Scholar reaches across and synthesizes databases unlike other search
engines, therefore all terms were used in searching this site.
Although past and present research regarding identity negotiation of traditional
college age Muslim American women is not prolific, there is ample evidence of the
treatment of Muslim Americans in the US and the challenges they face post-September
11. Peer reviewed articles that reflect current and historical phenomena are used to
23
supplement and support my analysis of the specific demographic of Muslim American
college women. In addition, there is a plethora of literature concerning the impact of
majority religious groups (including several forms of Christianity) in higher education as
they relate to minority religious and racial subgroups. Finally, the role of spirituality and
religion in higher education has been the subject of recent research and provided insight
into religious identity struggle and formation, and its importance to students of all faiths.
Conceptual Framework
The study of religious identity and its formation by both individuals and groups
has evolved from theories based on constructivism (unique personal experience), and
social constructionism (cultural meaning) in an attempt to explain and understand the
significance of this human characteristic (Beckford, 2003). In addition to developing
identities based on religious affiliation, many men and women simultaneously assert
national and gender personas that may operate together, separately, or at odds with their
religious identities (Mir, 2011; Stubbs & Sallee, 2013; Zahedi, 2011). This study builds
on established theories of identity (individual, group, and social) and campus climate
diversity structures to establish a conceptual framework with the purpose of gaining a
more comprehensive understanding of this process through the perceptions of traditional
age Muslim American female college students.
Individual, Group, and Social Identity Theories
Tajfel’s (1969, 1982) social categorization (identity) theory posits that individuals
exist in a social environment that is constantly in flux, related to group behavior, and
requires continual reevaluation of these forces. The ongoing process of social
categorization, group assimilation, and search for unity can lend insight into young
24
college students who encounter a dynamic environment that may require them to define
and redefine their personal, group, or social identities (Torres et al., 2009; Ysseldyk,
Matheson, & Anisman, 2010). Sirin and Katsiaficas’s (2011) study of Muslim American
emergent adults suggested the Muslim community not only provides buoyancy to its
members when discrimination is perceived, but that women in particular will engage in
activities that clarify their identities to non-Muslims (stereotype busting). Conversely,
Rangoonwala et al.’s (2011) research of Muslim college students found that participants
who claimed lower Muslim identity appeared to have better college adjustment (although
those who wore traditional Muslim dress reported higher adjustment regardless of
claimed Muslim identity).
Self-categorization theory as presented by Turner et al. (1994) argues that group
processes shift member self-perception from personal to social in relationship to context.
Self-categorization is therefore highly dependent upon context and circumstance.
Research conducted by Stubbs and Sallee (2013) revealed that Muslim American college
students shifted or moved between cultural (mainstream American) and religious
identities (both social and individual), asserting one over the other depending upon peer
group, living arrangements, and situational context. Mishra and Shirazi (2010) pointed
out that Muslim identity in itself is not fixed but complex, heterogeneous, and
evolutionary. In their research with young Muslim American women they found that
many selected or rejected aspects of hybrid or multiple identities according to their
theological interpretation of the Qur’an or other sacred texts.
Allport’s (1954/1979) intergroup contact theory was originally developed to
understand and overcome racial prejudice; Pettigrew’s (1998, 2008) subsequent
25
expansion has recently been applied by others to include religious discrimination.
According to Allport (1954/1979), four elements—equal group status, common goals,
intergroup cooperation, and the support of authority—must be present to lead to the
reduction of prejudicial behavior between groups. Recent research by Jung (2012)
concerning interreligious contact demonstrated that a higher frequency of interaction with
Muslims by Americans of other faiths predicted a slight overall improved attitude toward
this minority group. Using data from the Portraits of American Life Study, Jung
measured the frequency of adult (N =2,610) conversational experiences with Muslims on
a ordinal scale (1–5) over 12 months ranging from no contact (1) to daily conversations
(5). The analysis revealed that each additional engagement improved the likelihood of
respect for Muslims by 18.5% for most groups; however, Evangelical and Black
Protestants produced the opposite reaction with negative perception increasing with each
interaction (Jung, 2012, p. 120). According to Jung (2012), Evangelical Christians may
view Muslims in competition for “souls” in so far as personal salvation is concerned and
therefore view them as a spiritual threat. Jung also postulated that because Black
Protestants have witnessed a growth in African American conversion to Islam they, like
Evangelicals, may perceive Islam as spiritual competition thus falling short of Allport’s
(1954/1979) prerequisite of group cooperation (p. 124).
Pettigrew’s (1998, 2008) research on the future directions of Allport’s
(1954/1979) theory acknowledged that a very small percentage of intergroup contact may
lead to increased prejudice, distrust, and conflict when a group is confronted with others
it views as threatening. This is particularly the case when encounters are not voluntary,
superficial, or one group is considered unequal in status. Type of contact may determine
26
whether a positive or negative reaction occurs. Pettigrew (2008) observed that the
majority of the data that confirm intergroup contact leads to constructive interaction due
to the fact that research has been more focused on positive outcomes than those that are
less successful.
Kalkan, Layman, and Uslaner’s (2009) study of racial and cultural outgroups
concluded that acquaintance with Muslims had a positive statistical relationship to
favorable views of this group—approximately 25% greater based on analysis of Pew
Research data. Similar to Jung’s (2012) research their findings revealed that those groups
who identified with religious traditionalism including Evangelicals, had a negative view
of Muslims although this was not necessarily based on contact. Policymakers and
administrators of both private Christian and public secular institutions of higher
education might benefit from further research into the specific challenges these groups
pose to the success of intergroup contact on campus.
Religious identity development consists of stages of ascription, choice, and
declaration of collective or individual distinctiveness based on the assumption that
identity is evolutionary, separate, and pertains to groups in unique social and historical
contexts (Peek, 2005). According to Hogg, Adelman, and Blagg (2010) religious
worldviews may feel personal, but in reality are collective belief systems that have a
wider reach than other ideologies because they attempt to explain the nature of existence
and provide hope of an afterlife. Empirical findings support the claim that religious
identification promotes individual psychological well-being and serves the dual function
of a social support system (Ysseldyk et al., 2010). Keddie’s (2014) research in the
United Kingdom with younger students (ages 11–15), however, demonstrated that
27
religious identity may fluctuate, coexist, or even merge with other religious belief
systems especially during the early adult development years.
Religious identity as understood through the theories described indicates that
individuals operate in a fluctuating social environment that requires continual evaluation
and self-reflection depending upon prevalent forces (Tajfel, 1969, 1982). These group
processes in turn, shift member self-perception from individual to social dependent upon
context (Turner et al., 1994). According to Allport (1954/1979) intergroup contact may
lead to the elimination of prejudice or progress toward pluralism, but only if equal status,
common goals, cooperation, and structural support are present. Finally, religious identity
development may move through stages throughout a person’s life, evolving as
circumstances or experiences modify or solidify identity perception (Peek, 2005).
Campus Climate Framework
According to Hurtado et al. (1998), students arrive at college with a formed sense
of identity based on their communities, parents, religions, etc., and that these influences
are important to their growth. For many college or university students the development
and negotiation of identity through social and personal experience may also be directly
influenced by campus climate, curriculum, and mission. Higher education as an
institution, however, “has not decided whether it should merely reflect our society or
whether it should try to consciously shape the society,” thereby missing the opportunity
(or responsibility) of introducing diversity experiences that may positively affect
student’s worldview (Hurtado et al., 1998, p. 280). As claimed by Allport (1954/1979)
and Pettigrew (1998, 2008), exposure to those different from one’s ingroup can result in
greater tolerance and cooperation between previously misjudged or stereotyped
28
individuals or groups. In order to improve campus climate based upon the introduction
and application of diversity Hurtado et al. (1998) developed a higher education campus
climate framework that stressed four critical areas: (a) Acknowledgement of institutional
history, (b) organizational diversity, (c) psychological consequence of diversity, and (d)
behavioral results of interaction. Originally developed to promote racial equality, this
model has the potential to be modified to include religious minorities, who according to
Bowman (2011) present a separate and unique group challenges on campus from racial
minorities.
Building on the concept of campus diversity as a means for student growth, Gurin
et al. (2002) stressed the importance of exposure to diversity in order to achieve tolerance
or pluralistic attitudes among students. Contact with diversity is therefore vital to identity
construction as it challenges past experiences and stimulates critical thinking; in this way
the university setting allows students to make informed decisions regarding their beliefs
and values before entering a more permanent community.
In support of Hurtado et al. (1998) Milem et al. (2005), and Antonio et al. (2012)
advocated the benefits of campus diversity programs, including curriculum that promotes
religious awareness. It is not enough to bring diverse groups of students together, there
must be willingness on the part of the student and educators to interact and exchange
ideas in the classroom. In much the same way that Gurin et al. (2002) recognized the
importance of contact with diversity to challenge preconceived ideas, a carefully
formulated curriculum that takes this concept one step further and stimulates discussion
may further tolerance and promote pluralism.
29
Recent data analysis of the extensive HERI (2010) data has supported the need for
a campus climate framework that promotes diversity to achieve positive experiences for
both majority and minority religious groups. Bryant’s (2011a, 2011b) analysis of the
data concluded that cocurricular activities that are challenging in higher education lead
toward an ecumenical worldview. Mayhew’s (2011) examination confirmed that college
may indeed have an impact on ecumenicism and concured that creating challenging
curricular activities may promote discussion and reflection among religious groups with
positive outcomes.
There is a small but salient body of research that supports the need for further
investigation into identity formation of traditional college age Muslim American women,
and the importance of campus climate in this process. Much of the published literature
has focused on women who wear the veil on campus, interpretation of its personal and
collective meaning, treatment by non-Muslim students, and adjustment to higher
education (Rangoonwala et al., 2011). The well-documented importance of a positive
and inclusive campus religious climate has extended the research to more than individual
or single group well-being to that of all religious minorities (Seggie & Sanford, 2010).
Because the conceptual framework covers a broad spectrum of identity formation
analysis often based upon minority or outgroups group membership, it is important that
the current research bring this into focus and specifically address gender and/or religious
needs. The following empirical analysis of the literature will examine the role of religion
and spirituality in higher education, religious minorities and campus climate, pluralism
and ecumenical worldview, and the role of the faculty in this process. In addition,
30
particular attention will be paid to Muslim American women in higher education and the
meaning of wearing the veil to their identity formation.
The Role of Religion and Spirituality in Higher Education
Before reviewing the literature concerning female Muslim American identity
perception in higher education, this section discusses the importance of religion and
spirituality in the lives of college and university students in the 21st century. The HERI
(2010) study of 112,232 freshmen from 236 higher education institutions responded to a
six-page survey questionnaire (UCLA’s Cooperative Institutional Research Program and
College Students’ Beliefs and Values Survey) and demonstrated that these young adults
had high levels of spiritual interest (80%), belief in god(s) (79%), and confidence that
religion provides strength, support, and guidance in their lives (69%; p. 5). Astin et al.
(2010) in their book detailing the findings and implications of the HERI (2010) study,
note that nearly one half of respondents indicated that it is important that colleges
encourage their personal expression of spirituality; although one fifth indicated that their
professors “frequently” encouraged queries of personal “meaning and purpose” 62%
reported that educators never promoted discussion of religious or spiritual matters (p. 37).
Further research by Bowman and Small (2012) using the HERI data has found
that religious engagement among college students is positively related to hedonic
(psychological pleasure and avoidance of pain) and eudaimonic (living life to the fullest)
well-being. Double religious minority students—defined as those who are both religious
minorities on campus and in American society—were shown however, to have a
decreased sense of well-being relative to mainline Christian’s regardless secular or
religious campus affiliation. In addition, these same double minority students may
31
experience negative growth at religious colleges, particularly Catholic institutions
(Bowman & Small, 2010).
It cannot be ignored that some religious affiliation may negatively influence the
pursuit or attainment of higher education for some groups. In the United States 48% of
Hindus, 35% of Jews, and 26% of Buddhists hold postgraduate degrees. Among
Evangelical Protestants, however, only 13% have undergraduate college degrees, with the
percentage even less (5%) for those who identify as members of historically Black
churches. According to the most recent PRC (2008) survey, mainline Protestants claim
20% of college graduates with 16% of Catholics, 18% of Mormons, and 14% of Muslims
earning diplomas (p. 56). With the religious population of America currently trending
toward religiously unaffiliated (31% of those under 30 years of age as compared to only
11% of 65 years of age and over), it might appear that there is a shift away from faith and
its importance in the lives of individuals and groups (Jones, Cox, Galston, & Dionne,
2011). These findings indicate that the plurality, depth, and breadth of religion and
spirituality must be more clearly understood and explored by higher education
policymakers in order to accommodate, encourage, and develop a holistic experience for
college and university students.
Studies concentrating on the impact of higher education on religious belief or
practice in the US have largely focused on Christian traditions and type of institution
(secular, religious, or elite) and have been mixed. According to an analysis of the
National Study of Youth and Religion (NSYR) survey data consisting of 2,532 college
students and nonstudents aged 18–23, from all 50 United States, Hill (2011) found that
college had no straightforward impact on religious beliefs. The results did not suggest
32
that belief was abandoned or transferred to another faith, although skepticism regarding
“super-empirical” aspects of religion (God, angels, demons, and an afterlife) did occur (p.
535). In addition, Hill found that attending college is mildly associated with increased
inclusivity of other belief systems and institutions. McFarland et al.’s (2010) analysis of
five Christian denominations support the PRC (2008) findings regarding the relationship
between denominational affiliation and degree earning, with the authors’ concluding that
increased education for mainline Protestants and nonaffiliated did in fact promote some
loss of belief. For Evangelicals, Black Protestants, and Catholics however, it altered the
nature of faith (view of the Bible as inspired by God rather than a literal text). According
to Mayrl and Oeur’s (2009) and Bowman and Small (2010), the question has shifted from
whether students retain or reject their religiosity during their college years to if and how
they reconstitute or realign it to meet their spiritual needs.
Religious Minorities and Campus Climate
Social identity, self-categorization, intergroup contact, and religious identity
theories seek to explain and guide personal, group, and social identity construction and
negotiation. Although the college experience affords opportunities for each of these to
form and interact, student identity may be influenced by the climate a college campus
provides. Specifically, religious, racial, and sexual minorities attending both secular and
religious institutions face unique challenges in a country that is predominantly White
(75%), Christian (78%), and has traditionally been associated with male privilege
(Mayhew, 2011; Park, 2012; PRC, 2008; United States Census Bureau, 2011).
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, minority religious groups including
Islam, and particularly those who demonstrate their faith through visible means (clothing)
33
are at risk for both overt and microaggressions (Nadal et al., 2012). According to
research by Penning (2009), religious outgroups such as Muslims and Mormons are
viewed in American society more negatively than other faith-based traditions (atheists
exceed these groups and are viewed unfavorably by 53%); however, American Muslims
are perceived more positively than their international counterparts. Although social and
political attitudes have an impact on American perspectives concerning both Muslims
and Mormons, it is the religious variable that elicits the strongest response regarding
these two faiths. Penning’s (2009) research revealed that the media, personal experience,
and education level were directly related to these negative views.
Pevey and McKenzie’s (2009) mixed methods interview and survey sample of 20
self-identified Christians attending a Southern university campus indicated that
knowledge of Islam is scant among many Americans (confirmed in the PRC, 2010, U.S.
Religious Knowledge Survey) and associated with emotional responses including fear.
Park’s (2012) longitudinal survey sample analysis of 3,008 college freshman from 28
institutions suggested that because religious groups and subgroups are traditionally
homogeneous, the higher the frequency of association with the ingroup, the more likely
the student is to isolate themselves from outside groups (other religions). A meta-
analysis of college students and racial diversity experiences by Bowman (2011)
demonstrated that these experiences are not comparable to diversity and religious
engagement because religious individuals or groups are less salient than race. Bowman’s
(2011) conclusion that racial diversity in higher education leads to increased civic
attitudes through interpersonal contact might be tested in future studies that involve those
who visibly define their identities (e.g. wearing the veil).
34
Pluralism and Ecumenical Worldview
Much of the previous literature and campus climate framework (Hurtado et al.,
1998) has been built around racial diversity and its impact on student experience. The
widening diversity and religiosity of the youth population in the US presents educators
and policymakers with current and future challenges in order to provide an environment
for the student to not only learn but flourish (Jones et al., 2011). Although these studies
indicate that tolerance and liberal worldviews are more likely to manifest in the college
educated and younger demographic, the needs of minority religious groups and the effect
of campus climate upon these students must continue to be addressed.
Developing the capacity in college students to live, engage, and contribute
positively to a pluralistic society that moves beyond tolerance to acceptance of differing
worldviews is one of the essential goals of higher education institutions (Bryant, 2011a).
Organizational characteristics, including type of college or university (public,
private, religious, or secular), majority/minority groups enrolled, peer association, and
even gender have an impact on this development (Bryant, 2011b; Mayhew, 2011).
Studies have shown that students who engage in religious struggle (questioning,
understanding, or reinterpreting faith) achieve higher levels of ecumenical worldview
than those who do not (Astin et al., 2010; Bryant, 2011b). Exposure to peers who are
experiencing this phenomenon or participating in classroom exercises or curriculum that
encourage religious pluralism through discussion have been found to increase this
tendency in students regardless of institution type (Bryant, 2011b). Friendship and/or
contact with religious minorities (Jews and Muslims) for Mainline Protestants and
Catholics have been shown to boost pluralistic beliefs and support for these groups,
35
except among Evangelical denominations, making it increasingly important for all higher
education environments to offer courses in this area (Brown & Brown, 2011). For those
minority students who attend religious colleges that represent faiths other than their own,
Bryant and Craft (2010) discovered through narratives that a “spiritual climate is not a
singular, absolute reality,” rather it “varies by one’s social location…background,
worldview, and minority/majority status” (p. 418).
Gender has been shown to have an impact on the development of ecumenical
worldview with more women (along with racial/ethnic, religious minorities, and
nonreligious students) than men embracing this philosophy (Bryant, 2011b; Mayhew,
2011). Although women in general have traditionally been more religious than men
(PRC, 2008) they are less apt to subscribe to conservative gender ideologies often
associated with patriarchal religious groups perhaps allowing them to embrace
nonmajority traditions (Mayhew, 2011; Whitehead, 2011). Achieving student
ecumenical worldview, therefore, might include programs that utilize and include women
and their perspectives regarding religious alliances.
The Role of Faculty
In an increasingly globalized and multicultural higher education environment, the
sensitivity of faculty members to the religious and spiritual backgrounds of students will
be necessary to provide a positive campus experience for these individuals. Contrary to
popular notions that academia is in tension with religion, Gross and Simmons (2009)
found a diverse American professorate that (in secular universities) were able to privatize
their faith rather than impose or deny it. Research by Park and Denson (2009)
concerning faculty views on racial and ethnic diversity also found that those who
36
regarded themselves as spiritual were significantly more likely to stress the importance of
diversity in education. There is evidence of growing or mixed support from faculty, staff,
and administrators for the promotion of spiritual and religious education that includes
classroom instruction and cocurricular activities to immerse the student in diversity
exercises that encourage inclusiveness (Bryant, Wickliffe, Mayhew, & Behringer, 2009;
Mayhew & Bryant, 2013).
Equally important is the role of educators in identifying and correcting perceived
bias or discrimination in the classroom. In a survey of 1,747 undergraduates, Boyson,
Vogel, Cope, and Hubbard (2009) found that one half of students alleged classroom bias
with 22% seeing themselves as the target of overt discrimination in the past year (14%
claimed religious discrimination). In the same study, the authors’ found that instructors
(443 graduate student instructors/fellows and 333 professors) had an inconsistent
understanding of bias in the classroom whereas undergraduates’ perceived 44% overt
bias and 63% subtle, whereas graduate students claimed 25% and 40% and professors
27% and 30% respectively.
Finally, Shahjahan’s (2009) research found that faculty strategies that incorporate
spiritual pedagogy in the classroom serve as a motivation for social justice. Stoltzfus and
Reffel (2009) observed that courses encouraging religious pluralism can be important in
assisting students cultivate a balance between racial, ethnic, or religious identity.
Muslim American Women and Higher Education
There are no definite census numbers or percentages that account for how many
Muslims currently reside in, or are citizens of, the US as government agencies are
prohibited from asking questions regarding religious affiliation. The PRC’s (2008)
37
comprehensive study of religion in America estimated that Muslims comprise 0.6% of
the population and are of the most ethnically and racially diverse groups in the nation (no
single racial or ethnic group makes up more than 30% of the total). Although a relatively
small portion of the American landscape, it is estimated that Muslims represent 2% of
those enrolled in higher education (over 3 times their overall population percentage),
twice as many (26% versus 13%) than among the general public (PRC, 2011; Stubbs &
Sallee, 2013). If Muslim gender enrollment mirrors that of the general U.S. population,
then women would represent 56% of Muslim students attending institutions of higher
education (USCB, 2011). Given the small size of this complex demographic, educators
and policymakers may be unaware of how to meet the needs of this often overlooked
student group.
As previously stated, personal identity is often far from monolithic—individual,
group, and social personas overlap and shift with circumstance and need (Hogg et al.,
2010; Hopkins, N., 2011; Mishra & Shirazi, 2010; Stubbs & Sallee, 2013). At a time
when emerging adults are searching for, and/or negotiating identities on college
campuses, women who claim affiliation with an often politically maligned religious
minority may find themselves asked to address their national loyalties as well as justify
their commitment to a religion that is often misrepresented as oppressive or antifemale
(Ahmad, 2009; Aziz, 2012; Mir, 2009). These young women are faced with several
challenges: how to adhere to their religious beliefs amid a secular and/or Christian
majority environment, assert their equality as American citizens when they are often
perceived to be foreigners, and overcome the misinterpretation of their religious gendered
expressions such as wearing the veil (Hu, Pazaki, Al-Qubbaj, & Cutler, 2009). In order
38
to comprehend how young Muslim American women develop their modern personas and
choose to identify themselves on college campuses it is important to understand the
source of this misrepresentation and the impact it has on their gendered, religious, and
American identities.
The Effect of the Media on Identity Formation
The single most consistent theme expressed in this literature review is that media
portrayals of Islam and Muslims are not only overwhelmingly negative, they are also the
primary source of information the general public relies upon to form their views and
opinions of both this faith and the faithful (Ali, 2013; Kalkan et al., 2009; Penning, 2009;
PRC, 2011). Researchers doing content analysis have found that consistent references in
film, news coverage, television, broadcast political rhetoric, and cartoons continually
portray Muslims as terrorists and have contributed to the adoption of discriminatory laws
in some states, the denial of religious freedom (blocking buildings of mosques in some
communities), and covert/overt aggression (Ali, 2013; Amer & Hovey, 2012; Awad,
2010; Aziz, 2012; Jackson, 2010; Muedini, 2009; Shammas, 2009). In part, Islam has
been recast as a political ideology rather than a religion or a religion opposed to
democratic values, and its adherents as violent, evil, and untrustworthy (Ali, 2013; Aziz,
2012; Jackson, 2010; Nadal et al., 2012; Navarro, 2010).
According to Jackson (2010), the media is viewed by the public as “educational”
in that its message contains norms or models of acceptable behavior. Images such as
Princess Jasmine in Disney’s Aladdin are marketed to young children just as Fox News’
media coverage of former Speaker of the House and 2012 presidential candidate Newt
Gingrich, who claimed that the initiators of the controversial Manhattan mosque project
39
are like “Nazis,” market a more disturbing stereotype (Ali, 2013; DeLong, 2010; Jackson,
2010). Generally, the media’s producers provide their audience with what is considered
socially acceptable; therefore, according to Jackson’s research of American print media
since 9/11, the lack of objection from the majority of Americans to the plethora of these
images implies the legitimacy of identifying Islam and Muslims with terrorism.
Table 1 illustrates common perceptions among Americans regarding Muslims and
their attitudes as reflected by the media outlet they trust most. The survey methodology
was designed and conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute and consisted of
telephone interviews of random samples during August 2011 of 2.450 adults 18 years or
older. Note that for each of the three topics, the difference between Americans who have
confidence in the conservative Fox News stations compared to those who choose other
media sources is a minimum of 19 points (Jones et al., 2011).
Table 1.
Attitudes Toward American Muslims by Trusted Media Sources
Note. Adapted from “What it Means to Be American: Attitudes in an Increasingly Diverse America Ten Years After 9/11,” by R. P. Jones, D. Cox, W. A. Galston, and E. J. Dionne, Jr., 2011, p. 19.
____________________________________________________________________________ Muslims want to
establish Shar’ia (Islamic) law in the US. _______________
American Muslims are NOT important to the U.S. religious community _________________
Values of Islam at odds with American values ___________________
General Public 30% 43% 47%
Fox News 52% 60% 68%
Broadcast News 28% 35% 45%
CNN 20% 41% 37%
MSNBC 29% 36% 39%
Public
Television
23% 29% 37%
40
Negative depictions of Muslims are not unique to the U.S. media and are also
commonplace in parts of Europe, partially over fears of increased immigration from Asia
and North Africa and the lack of perceived assimilation into secular societies (Byng,
2010; Guven, 2010; Haw, 2010). Navarro’s (2010) analysis of television programming
and news found Muslim women were stereotyped as ignorant or submissive in the
Spanish media, whereas women who wore headscarves in the French social imagination
were perceived as threatening the Republic and its values. Legal action in France now
prohibits female students the right to wear the veil in schools. The French government
perceived Muslim girls as in need of liberation from oppressive religious norms while at
the same time precluding them from making their own personal and informed decisions
(Al-Saji, 2010).
An exploration of Muslim British women and identity formation by Haw (2010)
found that many participants in her study felt socially isolated and confronted with
images they perceived were projected upon them by a wider public, even scapegoating
them for society’s ills. Byng’s (2010) analysis of 72 articles published in the New York
Times and The Washington Post between 2004 and 2006 detailing the ban on the hijab in
France and the debate in Britain revolving around the niqab, or face covering, depicted
Muslim women as not only oppressed but as a homogenous group that included Muslim
American women. In all accounts the voices of strong, feminist, and religiously
independent devotees to Islam were ignored. Instead of representing the complexities
and strengths of female Muslim identity both in the US and abroad, these media outlets
ignored the educated aspects of these women and instead chose to make them either
41
victims or perpetrators of an oppressive or threatening religious segment of the
population.
Complex American Identities
The Muslim American population in the US originates from, and is composed of,
a wide array of racial, ethnic, and geographical locations. According to the PRC (2011)
although 37% were born in the US, more than three quarters are either the first generation
to be born on American soil (63%) or the second generation (15%), with one or both
parents born in another country. Only 22% belong to third, fourth, or later generations.
The lion’s share of U.S.-born Muslims whose parents were also born in this country
(69%) are converts; the majority are African American (63%). Figure 1 details the
diverse ethnic and racial composition of U.S. Muslims in comparison to the US general
public.
Figure 1. Racial/ethnic composition of U.S. Muslims by percentage. Adapted from “Muslim Americans: No Signs of Growth in Alienation or Support for Extremism,” by the Pew Research Center, 2016, p. 16.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
General Population
Total
Native Born
Foreign Born
42
Muedini’s (2009) interviews with Muslim American college students noted that
many of these individuals perceived a difference in the identities of African American,
Arab, South Asian, and European Muslims within the larger U.S. community. This
echoes previous findings by Seggie and Sanford (2010); however, shared negative
experiences since September 11 has blurred many of these separate identities and brought
many Muslim Americans together in solidarity (Ali, 2013; Keddie, 2011; Zahedi, 2011).
The tendency to stereotype all Muslims as Arab or of Middle Eastern descent in the
American media is not only incorrect but presents the perception of Islam as a religion of
uniformity (most Arab Americans are Christians; Awad, 2010; Pevey & McKenzie,
2009). In addition, conversion to Islam by some Americans may suggest a meaningful
identity formation by choice that defines itself in opposition to a dominant culture or an
objectionable value system (Maslim & Bjorck, 2009).
Generational factors may also influence Muslim American attitudes, particularly
for young women. According to Hu et al. (2009) age at immigration may play a part in
the veiling decision: younger immigrants in this study of 33 first-generation Muslim
American women were far less likely to wear the hijab in public than those who
immigrated after age 20. The desire among recent immigrants to assimilate may be
impressed upon first generation offspring through pressure to eliminate traditional dress;
specifically, many women have been discouraged to wear the hijab (Mishra & Shirazi,
2010; Read & Bartkowski, 2000). On the other hand, the opposite may occur as
demonstrated in a case study of several high school young women in Texas and New
Mexico border cities who routinely left the house in family sanctioned attire only to
43
remove it, apply makeup, and go about their daily school experience defying their
parent’s modesty instructions (Hamzeh, 2011).
Given the extraordinary racial, ethnic, generational, and national diversity it is not
surprising that young Muslim American women have cultivated multiple and complex
identities and strive for growth and development within the higher education
environment. As a religious and frequently racial minority (30% White as compared to
68% in the general population) they have the opportunity to add to a constructive campus
dialogue that encourages pluralism. At the same time, these students may feel pressure to
balance the expectations of college life (alcohol consumption, dating, and attire) with
traditional Muslim values that may not be clearly understood by their peers (Abu-Ras et
al., 2010; Stubbs & Sallee, 2013).
Studies have shown that young American Muslim women are willing to assert
their collective and individual identities not only on college campuses through
involvement in Muslim Student Associations, but through community activism (Sirin &
Katsiaficas, 2011). After experiencing discrimination, marginalization, and
misperception in the years after September 11, these young women are beginning to
declare themselves in their communities in positive ways recognizing the need for local
and national dialogue in order to improve their standing on the national stage (Sirin &
Katsiaficas, 2011; Zahedi, 2011).
The Meaning of the Hijab and Identity Formation
The most visible religious and political symbol of Islam in the US and abroad is
the hijab, or headscarf worn by Muslim women (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010; Muedini,
2009). Simultaneously viewed as a tool of female oppression, a symbol of defiance, or a
44
personal representation of religious/spiritual obedience, the hijab is a modern lightening
rod for both Muslims and non-Muslims alike (Botz-Bornstein, 2013). In the section that
follows, I discuss different interpretations, meanings, and symbolism associated with the
veil as viewed by traditionalists, Western and Islamic feminists, and the young Muslim
American college women themselves. I provide an analysis of U.S. political and
ideological perceptions of the veil as separate and unique from those in other parts of the
world and its importance in creating an American identity for young women who choose
to wear the headscarf. Finally, I discuss the choice by many Muslim American college
students not to wear the hijab, the forces that impact this decision, and the meaning it
holds in relationship to their identity formation.
The Choice to Wear the Hijab
A distinction must be made between Muslim women who live in the US and those
who reside in countries that function as political theocracies or where cultural and social
pressure to wear the hijab take precedence over personal and legal freedoms. Wearing the
veil is first and foremost a choice for Muslim American women, although the meaning of
this choice may not be fixed (Davary, 2009; Mishra & Shirazi, 2010). The decision to
veil is a matter of personal conviction and reflects a chosen identity in a country where
there is religious freedom to express this choice in spite of negative stereotypes or
misinformation. Muslim American college students are different from their European,
Middle Eastern, or Asian sisters who may be either culturally pressured to veil, or
subjected to legal constraints and restrictions on physical attire that prohibit them this
form of expression (Al-Saji, 2010; Botz-Bornstein, 2013; Byng, 2010; Guven, 2010;
Seggie & Austin, 2010; Shirazi & Mishra, 2010). Unlike parts of Europe that have
45
forced young women to choose between their educations or being true to their religious
convictions, electing the veil in the US does not present a legal dilemma. The separation
of church and state theoretically implies the absence of religious privilege, whereas
elsewhere, secularism infers the absence of religion prompting legal action to prevent
religious symbols in the public schools. In addition, America has a long tradition of
valuing and the independence, equality, and the creation of self-directed personal identity
(Shirazi & Mishra, 2010).
In order to gain perspective on the complexity of this symbol and its meaning to
Muslim American college students, an understanding of often competing or conflicting
interpretations of the veil must be explored. Traditional and feminist interpretations of
the Qur’an and the hadiths, or sayings of Mohammad recorded after his death, provide a
theological basis for many women to wear (or not wear) the veil. Antioppressive and
feminist reactions, modern Muslim feminist reinterpretations, and the rising perception of
the hijab as a symbol of resistance to intrusive government policies or social stereotypes
present multiple bases for this choice. The literature reveals that Muslim American
college students draw from a diverse array of meanings attached to the hijab, and create
personal and collective identities based on these meanings.
Traditional Interpretations
For many Muslim women wearing the veil is an act of religious obedience, and/or
an expression of modesty as required in the Qur’an and subsequent hadiths of the Prophet
(Dunkel, Davidson, & Qurashi, 2009; Gurbuz & Gurbuz-Kucuksari, 2009). According to
a recent study by the PRC (2011) 36% of Muslim American women report always
wearing the hijab out in public, 24% admitted they wear it most or some of the time, with
46
40% claiming they never wear it at all (a decrease of 8% since 2007; p. 31). Wearing the
hijab is most common among those women with the highest religious commitment
(59%), and is 14% higher among the native born. In a survey of 118 Muslim American
women (61% college students) 90% of those who indicated that they wore the hijab some
or all of the time stated that they did so because Islam and the Qur’an required it, whereas
69% claimed its purpose was to show religious modesty (Tolayman & Moradi, 2011, p.
387). Not unique to Islam, the veil has been a part of both Jewish and Christian traditions
and remains in place in many orthodox communities (Davary, 2009; Zahedi, 2011).
Carvalho (2013) observed that assuming the veil varies with social context and is often
perceived as a barrier to secular values, particularly when women reside in communities
that are not primarily Muslim. McDermott-Levy’s (2011) study of 12 nursing students
from Oman studying in the US observed that these women found comfort from the stress
of attending a foreign college by maintaining their religious practices and gender roles,
including modest attire.
For many young women, wearing the veil predicates that she who wears it
practices traditional family values, particularly sexual purity (Davary, 2009). The
headscarf may simultaneously function as a marker of her unwillingness to participate in
activities counter to the teachings of her faith, while at the same time protecting her or
serving as a “do not disturb” sign to would be offenders (Gurbuz & Gurbuz-Kucuksari,
2009). Wearing the hijab, especially in a coeducational environment, provides the student
with the ability to mix with those of the opposite sex without sexual tension or perceived
objectification. Although a few students acknowledged that the burden of maintaining
sexual discipline and distance had been laid at their feet instead of the personal
47
responsibility of the men themselves, they recognized that this was an integral function of
the hijab (Read & Bartkowski, 2000).
Finally, Bilge (2010) argued that “taking the veil” may be construed as divine
submission; a religious act in and of itself that should be taken seriously (p. 23). As
previously discussed, religion and spirituality play a significant role in the lives and well-
being of college students. Research confirms that perceived support from Allah, religious
leaders, and other believers is important to the social and psychological health of many
Muslim women although they may not actively seek this reinforcement (Bjorck &
Maslim, 2011; Herzig, Roysircar, Kosyluk, & Corrigan, 2013; Ribeiro & Saleem, 2010).
Social expectations play a part in influencing women to wear the hijab not only in
conforming to cultural and religious doctrine, but as a physical manifestation of Islam
itself and may function as a personal or collective reinforcement of religiosity. The veil
“exemplifies a performance of a moral identity, in which acquisition of symbolic
modesty becomes more prevalent than seeking active religious duty” (Guruz & Gurbuz-
Kucuksari, 2009, p. 395).
For young college women who view the hijab as an obedient gesture or a symbol
of their faith, many in the literature voiced that this provided them with the opportunity to
represent Islam in a positive light to their peers. Rather than hiding her minority religious
status, one participant in Mir’s (2009) study of Muslim American female college students
stated, “Once I put on the scarf, I have to act—like, I would want [sic] to act as a Muslim
woman should in front of the community” (p. 244). In this way, the student fulfills the
expected behavior and image of the reputable Muslim woman.
48
Feminism and the Veil
A prominent view of the hijab in Western society is that it is an instrument of
oppression imposed upon women by a patriarchal religion and culture (Seedat, 2013).
Although this may certainly be the case in many parts of the globe where political and
religious extremist groups prohibit women from receiving an education or even basic
human rights based on their gender status, this has become a focus of concern in
democratic countries such as the US, France, and Great Britain (Al-Saji, 2010; Byng,
2010). Many traditionalist Muslim women however, view this perspective and the
Western feminism that supports it as “anti-family, anti-men, and consumed with sexual
liberation” (Zahedi, 2011, p. 193). The feminist positions regarding Islam and the veil
are multifaceted: (a) Western popular feminism views the veil as the embodiment or
denial of a woman’s right to exert her sexual freedom through religious mandates and
holy texts, and exposes her to shame, guilt, or ostracization if she does not comply, and
(b) Muslim, or what has come to be known as “Islamic feminists” reinterpret sacred texts,
historical contexts, and challenge the restrictive male-imparted potency to the veil to
unseat the dominant political oppression of woman and reframe it as a new female
celebrated identity (Mernissi, 1991; Mir-Hosseini, 2011; Seedat, 2013). Each must be
considered as a possible influence on the identity formation for young Muslim American
students.
The idea that a Muslim women would choose to wear the headscarf without
pressure from family members or the fear of social and spiritual consequences has been
the held up as suspicious by many Western feminists (Aziz, 2012; Bilge, 2010).
Portrayals of hijab wearing women as uneducated, unthinking, and manipulated prevail in
49
the modern media and fuel the perception that these women are victims of a repressive
faith (Ali, 2013; Seggie & Sanford, 2010; Zahedi, 2011). In the course of the modern
immigration debate within many European countries, the practice of veiling is viewed by
many as counter to Western values of female equality prompting legal restrictions on the
practice to “protect” Muslim immigrants, and therefore society from archaic cultural
norms (Bilge, 2010). Images of the Taliban’s horrific treatment of young school girls in
Afghanistan, proposed marriage laws that allow for prepubescent girls in Iraq to be
married off with the consent of their fathers without the right to refuse sex, and the 51
million female circumcision victims in Egypt and Nigeria do little to ease these
perceptions (Chumley, 2014; United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund,
2013;). The veil itself has become a marker of sexual submission and marginalization
that stands for all aspects of the plight of Muslim women irrespective of nationality.
As previously discussed, Muslim American women are distinct from their
European, Asian, or Middle Eastern counterparts as they are generally highly educated
and enjoy the freedoms of speech and religious expression often denied them elsewhere.
Much of the Western feminist rhetoric and media coverage, however, has focused on the
behaviors not observed in the US that many young Muslim American students feel the
need to constantly combat or explain that they also find this behavior repulsive and not in
any way representative of Islam (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010). One student in Ali’s (2013)
study of Muslim college students in the US noted that Americans believe that
Men are aggressive and scary, and women are submissive and stupid. This is
what people see. When people see Muslim women getting an education they
50
don’t take it seriously. The think we will just get married have babies and that
will be the end of it. (p. 13)
In addition, if these young women choose to wear the veil they may risk the label of
“terrorist” as this garment is not only viewed as a tool of subjugation but of a radical
political ideology that is unpredictable, suspicious, and dangerous (Aziz, 2012). The
combination submissive or oppressed female in contradiction (or collusion) with the
stereotype of terrorism present a difficult challenge both in the classroom and on campus
for many Muslim women who choose expose their identity with this disputed and often
confused symbol of their faith (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010).
Islamic Feminism and the Veil
The term Islamic feminism has attracted extensive intellectual commendation and
criticism because it was considered a scholarly and activist movement in the 1990s. It is
neither a homogeneous or unified ideology and is contingent upon “local, diverse,
multiple and evolving” social and personal experience (Mir-Hosseini, 2011, p. 71).
Although there is disagreement over the compatibility of Western feminist movements
and an authentic exegetic interpretation of the Qur’an without patriarchal influence, it at
the very least stimulates a dialogue that aims to find a spiritual and political space for
feminine equality through reinterpretation of sacred texts and/or historical precedence for
the promotion of human rights (Mir-Hosseini, 2011; Seedat, 2013). Claiming women are
in need of protection, shelter, and special care, Islamic fundamentalism, according to
Zahedi (2011), has carefully selected and rigidly interpreted religious texts to support a
suppressive agenda. Not unlike modern Jewish and Christian feminists who do not seek
51
to abandon their faith due to the political or religious marginalization this undertaking
seeks to reclaim a religious heritage from those who have hijacked it for their own gain
(Ahmed, 1992; Mernissi, 1991; Mir-Hosseini, 2011).
Within this loosely cohesive structure, the subject of the veil has become not only
a religious-political point of contention, it has become a generational one. Ahmed
(1992), one of the preeminent scholars of the Islamist feminist movement explained
Establishment Islam (institutional and legal Islam) articulates a different Islam
from the ethical message the layperson justifiably hears or reads in the Quran,
and…continues to be the established version of Islam, the Islam of the politically
powerful. These profoundly different meanings of Islam both exist
simultaneously, the personal meaning as a source of ethical and spiritual
comfort…and the political; and these meanings are at the root of the profoundly
different views of Islam held by the preceding generation of feminists and the
current generation of women adopting Islamic dress. (pp. 225–226)
For Muslim American college students, the immediacy of oppressive political regimes
that require submission to tradition by wearing the veil are not, or may never have been, a
personal or social reality. Instead, this generation of women has the freedom to select the
hijab and act in harmony with their own spiritual and religious beliefs, not those of
lawmakers who claim to have their best interests at heart.
The Veil as a Symbol of Political and Cultural Resistance
Two final motivations for wearing the veil gaining prominence with young
European and American Muslim women, is the establishment of identities that are
52
counter to Western political or sexual norms. The establishment of a “loud” identity by
wearing the hijab to defy religious marginalization, Islamophobia, or negative political
rhetoric establishes the wearer as proud, fearless, and a positive example of Muslim
activism (Mir, 2011). This phenomenon is not unique to the US and Europe and has been
the topic of discussion in India where Muslim women are in a distinct minority (Wagner,
Sen, Permanadeli, & Howarth, 2012). On the other hand, some women in the existing
literature indicated another, more personal demonstration against social norms: a
rebellion against the perceived obsession with female attractiveness and judgment based
upon physical appearance (Aziz, 2012; Gurbuz & Gurbuz-Kucuksari, 2009). By refusing
to comply with cultural or sexual norms, these women have chosen the hijab as a means
to remove a sexual barrier that may complicate or inhibit cross gender contact.
Many young, educated, and professional Muslim American women are declaring
their identities beyond religious duty and personal modesty. According to Gurbuz and
Gurbuz-Kucuksari (2009) stigmas attached to Muslim identity, particularly since
September 11, can be reconstructed by asserting communal and personal positive power.
In this way Muslim students claim that wearing the hijab is a liberating experience in
contradiction to the stereotype of oppressed victim or threatening terrorist. One woman
in Mir’s (2011) study of college students who wore the veil expressed that it was her duty
to assert Muslim American rights which included wearing the hijab after the backlash
against her faith stating: “It’s about Muslims in the US standing up for themselves.…If
everyone stays in their shell, there’s nobody going to call out when the one house is
raided….Either we all step forward or none of us do!” (p. 554). Clearly, these are not the
words of an oppressed woman.
53
Another phase of identity development and struggle universally prominent among
teenage and emerging adults is what Botz-Bornstein (2013) referred to as “coolness,” an
action or concept that is at odds with the status quo. The cool person is “usually in a non-
power position and challenges those who have power in masked and ironical ways”
(Botz-Bornstein, 2013, p. 249). Can wearing the hijab be cool? Aside from modern day
terminology that brings to mind marketing a consumer value such as fashion, coolness in
America is a rebellion against subversion originating in Black segregation when overt
resistance was impossible without personal injury. An African American who
experienced abuse without the power of justice to redress it had to appear submissive or
unresponsive to ridicule (cool/calm) while at the same time subverting the discriminatory
action (Botz-Bornstein, 2013). In much the same way, a veiled Muslim woman may
appear to fulfill the Western stereotype of female oppression while intentionally wearing
the veil thus asserting her chosen identity.
Taking the concept of coolness a step further, Muslim lifestyle magazines
specifically targeted at young, fashion conscious women have helped create an industry
that promotes stylish traditional (and nontraditional) attire (Lewis, 2010). By exerting
their power to consume, young American Muslim college students can participate in
identity development by exercising her choice of clothing that is modern, attractive, and
distinctly Muslim. Magazines such as the North American Muslim Girl (now online
only) targeted the 18–24 year age group and included articles on self-development that
were “cognizant with faith as well as fashion” (Lewis, 2010, p. 65). The cover girl
alternated monthly between a model wearing the hijab and one who did not.
54
A separate form of resistance for Muslim American women is the choice to ignore
popular pressure to publically exhibit physical beauty in traditional Western style dress or
makeup. Prevalent as an influence on young women, the multibillion dollar beauty
industry comprised of mass marketers, television, film, and fashion magazines
collaborate to promote physical beauty as healthy, desirable, attainable, and necessary for
professional success and personal happiness. As previously stated, many Muslim
American women describe the choice to wear the hijab as liberating from the pressure to
appear physically beautiful, allowing them to be judged on their intellectual abilities
rather than their sexual appeal (Dunkel et al., 2009; Gurbuz & Gurbuz-Kucuksari, 2009;
Read & Bartkowski, 2000). Tolaymat and Moradi’s (2011) study of 118 U.S. Muslim
women found that incidences of reported perceived sexual objectification were less for
those who wore the hijab than for those who did not. Whether the hijab symbolized
personal and collective religious modesty and deterred demeaning behavior or covered
what has culturally been considered sexually attractive (long hair) is unknown. It is
possible that college age women find the veil an equalizing force in the classroom and on
campus to redirect focus to their academic abilities and away from the exclusively sexual
aspect of their gender.
The Choice Not to Wear the Hijab
Just as women who choose to wear the veil may see this commitment as an
integral part of their religious, feminist, political, or fashion identity, many traditional
college age Muslim American students do not. Most of the literature has focused on the
reasons for veiling rather than abstaining or removing the hijab. What both groups have
in common is that they have been found to recognize and respect their sisters’ personal
55
choice in this complex and controversial matter (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010; Read &
Bartkowski, 2000).
The concept of religious belief or obedience for many women who do not wear
the hijab is grounded in the concept that Islam cannot be reduced to a physical
representation but is an internal and personal faith that no garment can define. Many of
these young women neither bow to social pressure to conform to Western values of
beauty or modesty, nor are they any less inclined than their veiled counterparts to stand
up for their Muslim identity or tackle the oppressed female or terrorist stereotypes
prevalent in American culture. These women may consider themselves Western
feminists, Islamic feminists, or neither; they are Muslim Americans that establish their
identities through their actions rather than their overt expressions and find their own
liberation through their religious choices and personal responsibilities.
Read and Bartkowski’s (2000) pre-September 11 study of veiled and unveiled
Muslim women living in Austin, Texas, is a valuable narrative that demonstrates the
complexity of the choice to wear the headscarf before the intense political focus on Islam
and its frequent misinterpretation by the media. It is one of the rare studies that
specifically investigated the reasons women chose not to wear the veil and presents the
most diverse responses of any of the current literature reviewed in this chapter. In
keeping with Islamic feminism’s objection to the veil, several of the women remarked
that they opposed it because it has been used as a tool to control women within a
patriarchal society. One participant remarked, “Men can’t control themselves, so they
make women veil,” thus rejecting a view of many veiled participants that the hijab was
God’s divine remedy for men’s lack of sexual control (Read & Bartkowski, 2000, p.
56
408). The women in this study, however, did not accuse their veiled counterparts of
succumbing to gender submission. Veiled participants in Shirazi and Mishra’s (2010)
research echoed that no one should ever force a woman to wear the hijab, indicating that
it must be the sole decision of the women herself.
Another common theme expressed by women who did not select to wear the hijab
was that Islam required inward piety, not outward symbols. One woman in Zahedi’s
(2011) study of post-September 11 Muslim women insisted, “Beliefs are personal and
private and should not be publically displayed. I do not want to wear my beliefs outside.
I am a Muslim but hijab does not define me or my beliefs” (p. 199). Stubbs and Salle
(2013) found similar sentiments from students who lived on campus and did not wear the
hijab:
The headscarf is supposed to show your modesty, but I really feel like you don’t
have to wear the headscarf…You can show your modesty the way you carry
yourself, the way you dress yourself and the way you interact with people. (p.
460)
These students stressed that their faith was not only personal, but that outward
expressions of compliance were not necessary to their personal identities. Still others
have researched the scriptural component of wearing the hijab and determined that it was
not obligatory, similar to the conclusions of their Islamic feminist counterparts (Mishra &
Shirazi, 2010).
Although many of the interviews with Muslim American college students have
supported the notion that refraining from wearing the veil is not contingent upon outside
pressure, other participants have removed the headscarf due to discrimination,
57
harassment, or peer pressure. Cole and Ahmadi’s (2003) research revealed that those
removed the veil did so because they felt isolated or alienated on campus, or experienced
negative reactions from peers. Zahedi’s (2011) inquiry into the perceptions of
discrimination a decade post-September 11 involving interviews with Muslim college
students revealed that some felt that the hijab put them at risk: “[The] hijab is supposed to
provide you with safety; it no longer did so I removed my hijab” (p. 190). Some
participants only wore the veil when going to mosque, putting it on in the parking lot
after experiencing harassment as they walked to services (Mishra & Shirazi, 2010). Even
in high school, some young women felt pressured to remove their headscarves only to
take the practice up later in college when they felt more secure in their Muslim identifies
(Gurbuz & Gurbuz-Kucuksari, 2009).
Finally, many women choose to remove or refrain from wearing the hijab in order
to increase or maintain employability. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC), in 2012 there were 784 charges filed by Muslims for religious
discrimination in the workplace compared to 330 in 2001. In addition, many employers
have changed their dress policies since September 11 to discourage or forbid female
workers from wearing the hijab (Aziz, 2012). The problem seems to be ongoing, as
demonstrated in Cole and Ahmadi’s (2003) initial study of Muslim women who veiled,
with one respondent noting that she quickly discovered that she would not be hired if she
wore her hijab. A study conducted by Ghumman and Jackson (2010) of 219 American
Muslim women found that decreased employment expectations existed to a greater extent
among women who veiled versus their Muslim nonveiled counterparts. Removing the
58
hijab in this incidence has a direct impact on career trajectory and earning potential, not
to mention emotional stress.
Theory, Campus Climate, and Student Considerations
Both groups—Muslim women who choose to wear the hijab, and those who do
not—deserve the opportunity for a positive experience in higher education. Policy
makers and student affairs personnel must work to ensure institutional mechanisms are in
place to offer a nonthreatening, embracing, and engaging college climate. Using
established frameworks and theories in conjunction with the current research, campuses
can provide numerous avenues for support, growth, and identity development for young
Muslim women.
Equality and Historical Climate
Allport’s (1954/1979) intergroup contact theory and Pettigrew’s (1998, 2008)
subsequent research provides insight into why many Muslim students have experienced
unfair treatment by their peers and faculty and how leadership can change this pattern.
The first condition mandates that equal group status must be established in order for
successful interaction to occur. Muslim women must be seen to be equal in every way to
their nonMuslim peers in order for learning outcomes to be achieved. As demonstrated
by Park’s (2012) study of race and religious student interaction, the effect of contact with
outgroups where lower status is assumed can lead to negative consequences if not
properly handled. It is the responsibility of university and college policymakers and
administrators to assure that faculty are educated in religious diversity and sensitivity so
an inclusive philosophy is integrated in the classroom (Shahjahan, 2009). Faculty must
also be prepared to assist minority groups, including Muslim women, in overcoming any
59
stereotyping they might face, and mitigating any classroom tensions that arise (Boysen,
Vogel, Cope, & Hubbard, 2009; Stolzfus et al., 2009).
Hurtado et al.’s (1998) historical legacy dimension of the campus climate
framework, along with Milem et al. (2005), and Antonio et al.’s (2012) proposals for
campus diversity insist that to overcome any past racial or gender discrimination, it is
imperative that modern colleges and universities take a hard look at their previous and
present policies regarding minorities (including religious minorities), and how they can
address and improve any shortcomings. Campus policies of inclusion should originate
with leadership and be widely disseminated to create a culture of diversity. The addition
of ecumenical religious spaces have been shown to be an important part of the college
campus climate for many Muslim students and should be provided (if possible) to assist
in group and individual support (Hopkins, 2011; Johnson & Laurence, 2012; McDermott-
Levy, 2011; Seggie & Sanford, 2010).
Common Goals and Structural Climate
Allport (1954/1979) and Pettigrew’s (1998, 2008) second provision is the
establishment of common goals to provide a meaningful learning and social experience to
prepare the student to contribute and flourish within the larger community. Through
structural/organization policies that create a diverse campus community, instructors can
enhance diversity engagement with pedagogies and curriculum that bring understanding
and appreciation of religious minorities (Stoltzful & Reffel, 2009). Seggie and Sanford’s
(2010) study found that student expectations of fairness and equal treatment were not
consistently realized, with all participants expressing disappointment in the limited
number of faculty from minority racial, ethnic groups the their lack of interreligious
60
awareness. If, as Peek (2005) theorized, religious identity’s third evolutionary stage—a
declaration of a collective or individual distinctiveness—means wearing the hijab on
campus, it is important that faculty and administrators create a secure environment for
this expression. Mishra and Shirazi (2010) concluded in their study of 26 Muslim
American women that not only do ethnic and cultural differences exist between
international and American Muslim groups, but these women do not perceive their
religious identities uniformly.
Intergroup Cooperation and Behavioral/Psychological Climate
The third component for successful intergroup contact is cooperation (Allport,
1954/1979; Pettigrew, 1998, 2008) and involves the behavioral and psychological aspects
of campus climate (Hurtado et al., 1998). Group efficacy can have a direct influence on
the positive social categorization (identity) of young college students, including religious
minorities (Tajfel, 1969, 1982). Intergroup dialogue between Muslim and non-Muslim
students that is expedited by an instructor or group leader can be helpful in removing
barriers to learning, perceived discrimination, and misperception (Boysen et al., 2009).
Gurin et al.’s (2002) theory that complex social structures (diversity exposure) promote
critical thinking can be facilitated in the classroom and through campus sponsored
activities to help reduce anxiety and increase empathy toward outgroups (Stoltzfus &
Reffel, 2009). Bowman and Small (2012), based on data collected in the HERI (2010)
study, concluded that double religious minority students have decreased well-being
during college compared to their White Christian peers. These outcomes reveal the need
for examination of campus policy in order to correct these trends (Milem et al., 2005).
61
Authority and Behavioral/Psychological Climate
Support from authorities, law, or custom is the fourth criteria for successful
intergroup contact (Allport, 1954/1979; Pettigrew, 1998, 2008) and is reflected in the
structural and behavioral campus climates through federal, state, and university mandates
(Hurtado et al., 1998). In public institutions the separation of church and state must not
be in name only; campus cultures that reinforce Christian beliefs and traditions while
ignoring or marginalizing those of religious minority groups are culpable in potentially
compromising these students’ college experience or forcing them to suppress their
identities. Self-categorization or the identity shift between personal and social depending
upon context should not be employed as a “survival tactic” by students to avoid
ostracization or to subvert their religious identity in order to avoid negative stereotypes
(Turner et al., 1994). As educational environments collectively shape identity, the
merging of diverse worldviews can create a context for growth or fragmentation, and it is
important that Muslim women have the resources and mechanisms in place to insure fair
and equal treatment (Bryant et al., 2009).
Summary and Conclusions
This literature review began with a presentation of the importance of a positive
campus climate for the identity formation of traditional college age Muslim American
women and the strategies for collection of data in order to build a conceptual framework
for this study. An in-depth review of the current empirical literature was arranged
according to the following topics: the role of religion and spirituality in the lives of
college students, the complexities surrounding traditional age Muslim American women
in higher education, the identity factors surrounding the decision of these students to wear
62
the hijab, and the synchronization of theory and the literature concerning student well-
being.
The role of religion and spirituality for college and university students has
recently gained attention with the HERI (2010) longitudinal study confirming the
importance of both in the lives of traditional age students, including Muslims. What has
not been widely explored is the specific role that religion plays in campus experience of
Muslim women and how this impacts identity development. These young women, unlike
their Christian majority peers, face a myriad of challenges including religious and
politically motivated discrimination fueled by media misrepresentations. An ethnically,
racially, and geographically diverse demographic, the literature has only been capable of
capturing the portions of the complexities of their experiences.
Although several studies have been focused on Muslim women in higher
education and their choice to wear the hijab, very little of the research has been targeted
toward traditional college age American citizens who have spent a minimum of full year
of full-time scholarship in an on-campus environment. The choice to wear the hijab and
its impact on identity formation or reformation has not been extensively explored, and
very little effort has been spent to juxtapose this action with Muslim women who choose
not to wear the veil. The need for further scholarship in this area is necessary to
understand how current or future campus climate plays a role in this decision making
process.
Finally, this literature review synthesized the current research with social
categorization (identity; Tajfel, 1969, 1982), self-categorization (Turner et al., 1994),
intergroup contact (Allport, 1954/1979; Pettigrew, 1998, 2008), and religious identity
63
development (Peek, 2005) theories. In conjunction with the campus climate framework
of Hurtado et al. (1998) these laid a foundation upon which the literature forms meaning
and provides policymakers with direction for future higher education improvements.
Chapter 3 details the research design and justification, defines my role as
researcher, and provides a complete description of the methodology to be employed,
including data collection and analysis plan. Issues of trustworthiness (internal and
external validity, and dependability), and ethical procedures will be addressed.
64
Chapter 3: Research Method
The purpose of this dissertation is to identify influences and experiences that
contribute to the self-perception and identity formation of traditional college age Muslim
American women. As part of a unique religious and cultural minority, these students
provide a challenge and opportunity for policymakers responsible for promoting a
campus environment that encourages them to grow individually and academically. In
order to understand the complexities and needs of this group, it is important to research
the meaning of their experiences both in the classroom and on campus to discover best
campus practices and policies that encourage growth and development.
In this chapter I describe and support the selection of the research design chosen
for this study and its alignment with the established research questions. My role as
investigator and participant is discussed and any personal bias disclosed. Methodology is
described in depth and include participant selection, procedures for recruitment,
participation, instrumentation, data collection, and a data analysis plan. Finally, issues of
trustworthiness that involve credibility, transferability, dependability, conformability, and
coding reliability are detailed. Ethical procedures and institutional review board (IRB)
documents are included as necessary and explained.
Research Design and Rationale
As discussed in the literature review, the choice to wear or abstain from wearing
the hijab is often linked to religious, political, social, or other personal and group identity
factors. The meaning of this action cannot easily be established through quantitative
means such as surveys or other variable measurement tools; therefore, a
phenomenological research design has been selected to better examine and understand
65
the perceptions of these young women. Empirical phenomenological research is
appropriate in order to define the framework of personal or collective experiences,
provoke a complete account of the experience, and comprehend its constructed meaning
as the participants describe it (Moustakas, 1994; Seidman, 2006). At the center of
phenomenological design strategies are a curiosity regarding the stories of others and
their fundamental significance in the complexity of human awareness and behavior. The
process of selecting specifics from the beginning, middle, and end of an experience
involves reflection that may afford new meaning for both the participant and researcher.
Although there are limitations that preclude an individual from fully comprehending the
lived events of another, the quest for understanding is profoundly connected to the
personal, social, and cultural desires of human beings and their need to share the meaning
of their existence with those around them (Seidman, 2006).
The selection of an ethnographic research design for this study would shift the
focus from understanding the meaning of a shared phenomenon (identity development) to
that of determining the shared values and beliefs of Muslim American women in higher
education (Creswell, 2007). This form of research requires extensive observation and
immersion in the culture under study and would be cumbersome on such a large
university campus if not intrusive. Although significant data might be obtained through
this type of study, the time involved in properly collecting information also prohibits its
use in this situation.
Previous research of Muslim American women has used case study as a vehicle to
understand their experiences in a higher education setting (bounded system). The goal of
this research has been to provide in-depth comprehension of a few participants (cases)
66
and to analyze common themes. My selection of phenomenology rather than case study
centers on my interest in the identity formation process of Muslim American women and
for this reason multiple participants are necessary. Rather than examine the special
experiences of a limited number of students, my study seeks to capture meaning of these
experiences and its relationship to self-perception.
Research Questions
The focus of this study is to determine how traditional college age Muslim
American bachelor’s degree-seeking women develop, define, or redefine their identities
in relationship to their American and religious self-perception while in higher education.
The following research questions guide this dissertation:
RQ1: How do traditional age Muslim American women seeking bachelor’s
degrees at a Southern California public university perceive their engagement with the
campus environment academically, socially, and individually?
RQ2: What campus influences impact traditional age Muslim American college
women identity perceptions?
RQ3: How do traditional age Muslim American college women describe
experiences that affect whether they wear or do not wear the veil on campus?
RQ4: In what ways would traditional age Muslim American college women
believe student services and/or academic affairs could support a positive climate that
allows their engagement and identity development?
Role of the Researcher
As a phenomenological researcher I will function as an interviewer-participant. I
am responsible for recording the context and content of revealed lived-experiences,
67
details, and reflections of all participants (Seidman, 2006). In order to accurately
ascertain the core of an experience, I must engage with the research as an authentic
observer to the information expressed, as well as maintaining honesty and consciousness
of my own perspectives or preexisting beliefs (Starks & Trinidad, 2007). One of the
most problematic tasks for the phenomenological researcher is to achieve liberation from
previous expectations, or what Husserl (as cited in Moustakas, 1994) referred to as “the
Epoche, a Greek word meaning to stay away from or abstain, “where all meanings are
equally accepted and are likewise characterized by and through objective research
interpretations” (p. 84).
I do not foresee any conflict of interest, ethical dilemmas, or other research
conundrums to arise during my work at the school that I will refer to in the dissertation as
Southern University. I have had no ongoing personal or professional relationship with
any student or faculty member attending or employed at this institution. I am not
currently nor have previously been employed by Southern University; a research
institution with an enrollment of nearly 40,000 students in one of the largest cities in the
United States. I was previously employed as a professor at a small college in the San
Antonio area and do not anticipate this will create a power discrepancy between those
who choose to be a part of this study and myself. Because the expression of individual
experiences and the connotations they embody for the participant are at the center of
phenomenological investigation, privacy, and confidentiality will be my upmost concern.
Methodology
To effectively research the identity formation and negotiation of traditional
college age Muslim American women in higher education, I have selected Seidman’s
68
(2006) practice of in-depth interviewing to encourage students to recreate their
experiences through focused, yet open-ended questions. I will use Seidman’s three-
interview sequence to (a) establish the groundwork or context in the first interview by
asking the participant to elucidate as much as she can about her identity formation and
how this corresponds to her college experience, (b) to encourage the participant to relay
specific details of her experience as a Muslim American woman who attends a large
university in Southern California, and (c) to contemplate the meaning of her experiences
in an effort to make sense or meaning of the details (in context) that contributed to in her
self-perception. This is the goal of interview three.
An alteration to Seidman’s (2006) three-interview structure will be to substitute
focus group sessions for the second encounter rather than one-on-one interactions to
encourage additional details from peers that otherwise may have been overlooked during
individual conferences. For students who might feel embarrassed disclosing personal
details in a focus group setting, personal interviews will remain an option for the second
interview protocol.
Grounded in a structure that calls for three separate points of contact with each
participant, Seidman’s (2006) interview protocol stresses the importance of context,
details, and meaning that evolve or are discovered more thoroughly through each
encounter. Seidman’s philosophy of interviewing is more than simply data collection
from each participant. According to a review by Dilley (2004) of Seidman’s first edition,
the interviewer’s role in the process is to understand that
Meaning is not “just the facts,” but rather the understandings one has that are
specific to the individual (what was said) yet transcendent of the specific (what is
69
the relation between what was said, how it was said, what the listener was
attempting to ask or hear, what the speaker was attempting to convey or say. (p.
128)
Recent research by Kirtley (2012) employed Seidman’s model without using interviews
to collect data. Through the use of literacy narratives completed in three stages she was
able to evaluate student perception of their technological ability to assist in improving
learning outcomes. Reda’s (2010) research regarding the lack of undergraduate
classroom engagement followed the interview model to discover how to better elicit
responses from students in classroom discussions. Both of these researchers
acknowledged Seidman’s philosophy of understanding meaning through multiple
interactions.
Participant Selection Logic
The study will be limited to Muslim American women who have achieved
citizenship status either by birth or immigration, and have completed one academic year
of full-time study on campus. All women must identify themselves as Muslim either
through upbringing, conversion, or other declaration. The selection of traditional college
age students, typically ages 18–24, is based on studies that demonstrate identity
formation is active during these emerging adult years (Arnett, 2000; Torres et al., 2009).
The exclusion of international students, those who have not attained American
citizenship, or who have completed less than one academic year of full-time study on
campus is designed to narrow the focus to the experiences of women who are immersed
in both American and campus culture. No previous studies discussed in the literature
70
review have established both of these criteria; the recent data represent a very broad
swath of campus experience and American cultural engagement that does not specifically
address the needs of this student group. In addition, because wearing or abstaining from
wearing the hijab has been demonstrated in the literature to have a significant impact on
Muslim identity, the hope is that a fair representation of both types of individuals will
volunteer for this study.
To gather sufficient and appropriate data, purposeful sampling will be used to
select participants who meet the above criteria for the interview and focus group sessions
(Patton, 2002). I will use criteria and snowball sampling to attain adequate sample size
and achieve variation. Participants will be contacted through the campus Muslim Student
Association; however, members of this association are often in leadership positions,
highly motivated, academically successful, and represent an elite segment of the
university population. Snowball sampling that includes women who are not members of
the Muslim Student Association may assist in acquiring a more conventional student
representation. Variables sought to achieve variation include a fairly even distribution of
women who wear and do not wear the hijab on campus. Academic majors that include a
range of subjects such as the humanities, social sciences, technology, engineering and
math will provide depth of student interests and increase the diversity of the sample.
Participants will be made aware in writing of the established criteria for this study
which will be listed in a sample email provided in Appendix A. Any ambiguity will be
resolved through additional written or verbal correspondence. Because citizenship status
and year of study is considered protected or personal information outside of government
71
or university records, verifiability can only exist insofar as the student agrees to honestly
comply with the research criteria.
Patton (2002) noted that sample size is contingent upon what the researcher wants
to know, the reason for the study, the risks and benefits involved, what constitutes
credibility, and what can be accomplished with available time and resources (p. 244).
Two criteria—adequate numbers to reflect the target population, and saturation of data to
the point where the investigator is no longer discovering anything original from the
sample—unite to establish when the study has run its course (Seidman, 2006). My
research sample will ideally consist of nine individuals with the expectation that a
minimum of seven participants will finish the two interviews and focus group session
based upon the standard participation in phenomenological research of one to 10 persons
(Starks & Trinidad, 2007). This sampling will allow for approximately 24 points of
contact and help provide assurance in the sample’s representation of the phenomenon is
sufficient. Although much of the qualitative investigation regarding identity formation
has been performed using case study or ethnography, and may have consisted of a larger
sample size than the nine proposed here, the use of multiple points of contact should
insure sufficient data collection.
Southern University currently allows approximately 65 religious organizations to
be affiliated with the campus under the direction of the Student Affairs. The Muslim
Student Association has a permanent office on campus and its members fall under the
jurisdiction of Southern University I will need to submit the proper IRB forms for
approval. Once this has been successful I will file an IRB application to Walden
University. When both of these have been approved, I will contact the Muslim Student
72
Association’s president, explain the process and value of the study, and negotiate a forum
(a regular organizational meeting or arranged conference) where members will have
access to information regarding the study and participation. Recommendations from these
participants of other students who meet the criteria for this research but are not members
of the Muslim Student Association will be encouraged (snowball sampling). A formal
letter of cooperation will not be submitted to Southern University because their
partnership will only consist of distribution of invitations such as emails, flyers, etc., and
will not require individual identification of potential participants or collecting data.
Initial contact will be through introduction by Muslim Student Association members
either in person or through emails that detail the nature and purpose of the study. All
contact including interviews and focus groups will take place on the Southern University
campus unless otherwise agreed upon and arranged.
Building a trusting and respectful relationship between the researcher and
participant is not only an ethical obligation but necessary to obtain candid and rich data
(Seidman, 2006). For this reason during the introductory meetings all students will be
given a copy of Southern University’s “Consent to Participate in Research” form
completed and attached in Appendix B, and a list of established criteria for participation
(copy of introductory email correspondence). If the student cannot take part in these
meetings, she will be contacted via email with the same documentation attached. Each
participant will select a pseudonym and understand that she will be identified by this
name during the data collection, analysis, and dissertation submission process. Due to
the personal and religiously sensitive nature of the information to be collected each
student will be informed that she has choice to participate or refuse to take part in the
73
study, or agree to participate and later change her mind. She will be informed that her
decision not to take part will not be held against her, and that she may ask all the
questions she feels necessary before she makes her decision. My contact information will
be supplied in the event of future questions or concerns.
Instrumentation
Phenomenological data can be obtained through participant observation in the
context where the phenomenon is experienced, individual or group interviews with those
who have experienced the phenomenon, or a combination of both (Aspers, 2009; Starks
& Trinidad, 2007). For the purposes of this study, on-campus personal interviews of 60
to 90 minutes in duration and focus groups will be the only instrument of data collection.
Campus observation or document assessment will not be employed as a research
instrument in this study because determination of meaning will be performed by the
participant herself and not inferred or derived from secondary sources. Audio recordings
will be used to insure accuracy; participants must be fully informed and consent to this
protocol. A hand-held recording device as well as my laptop computer with recording
software will be used to capture the data at each interview/focus group session. If
objections by any student arise regarding these recordings, handwritten notes will be the
only source of documentation. Extensive journaling that record impressions of each
interview will be completed immediately after each session. All audio recordings will be
transcribed by me as soon as possible following each interview using computer software
designed for this purpose. I will be the only individual with access to these recordings.
Interview 1. In order to put the experiences of traditional college age Muslim
American women into context, a series of questions aimed at encouraging each student to
74
narrate as much as possible about herself, her history, and her campus experiences has
been designed. Building on Seidman’s (2006) interview protocol and in alignment with
the research questions, the first interview seeks to understand and define context through
the participant’s reconstruction of her personal story and history. With the exception of
the first two demographic and background questions, these attempt to lay groundwork for
understanding the importance of past experiences and their relationship to campus life. I
have avoided “why” questions, and instead concentrated on eliciting descriptions through
“how” inquiries in order to encourage each woman to participate or relive her past.
Interview of Focus Group 2. Although phenomenological research is frequently
performed through a series of personal interviews, I have chosen to utilize the focus
group as a means for encouraging students to share their lived experiences and build on
those of others. Although some have objected to this form of data collection in
phenomenological research claiming that it contaminates or influences the responses of
other participants, others insist focus groups may encourage and prompt responses that
might otherwise have been neglected in individual interviews (Bradbury-‐Jones et al.,
2009). As an option for those students who may feel uncomfortable sharing personal
information in a group setting, I will substitute a personal interview for the second data
gathering session.
According to Seidman (2006), the second interview should stimulate participants
to provide a reconstruction of experience with as many details as possible being
expressed. The emphasis in this phase is put on description and recollection of events
which may be enhanced, clarified, or probed by other students who have had similar (or
different) interactions. As with any focus group encounters, questions build upon
75
themselves and can provide additional or unexpected information for the researcher,
however, careful guidance and control of the group must be maintained.
Interview 3. The final interview in this phenomenological study is focused on
the participants’ reflection upon the meaning of their experiences on campus. In order
for the each student to create meaning this requires that they inspect how influences have
interacted to assist in their present state of identity development. According to Seidman
(2006), participants need to extensively review their current experience within the context
in which it occurs. The exploration of past actions to more fully understand the events
synthesized with detailed descriptions of their present experience, creates conditions for
reflecting upon their current situation. In order to accomplish this, the first interview and
second focus group must establish personal history and details of experience so that they
combine to may merge to create meaning for the student. In all interviews searching
questions, discussions, and conversational dialogue will be used to assist in creating an
atmosphere that is both productive and comfortable for the participant.
Upon completion of the interview processes, all participants will be thanked and
informed that a summary of findings will be available within a reasonable time period for
their review. Updated contact information will be requested in the event that participants
need clarification, have additional questions, or resolution to future inquiries or concerns.
All students will be assured that data will be kept secure and confidential and used only
for the purpose of this dissertation unless otherwise approved by the participant.
Data Analysis Plan
The purpose of this research is to understand the identity formation of traditional
college age Muslim American women as it exists within the university campus climate.
76
In order to gather the most effective responses (data) that align with the research
questions, the interview and focus group questions have been designed to move the
student through history, and details or reconstruction of experience, toward meaning and
reflection. Appendix C details the interview series and the alignment of research
questions with the scripted interview queries.
The goal of phenomenological research is to discover and understand the lived
experiences of participants; therefore, evolutionary rather than preestablished coding will
be used to select segments of data for organization into common themes (Hatch, 2002).
Although I am grounded in the themes and outcomes of the recent literature and the
common premises and subjects that might lend themselves to apriori coding, my desire is
to refrain from preconceived expectations allowing the data rather than the researcher
(myself) to form commonalities before the data are collected. No qualitative computer
software such as NVivo and MAXqda will be used for coding purposes. My previous
experience with both programs has found them useful, but difficult to negotiate or
appreciate without the assistance of personal instruction.
Creswell (2007) identified a method of phenomenological data analysis that
includes six steps: (a) Describe researcher personal experience in order to identify any
bias, (b) develop a list of significant participant statements, (c) organize these statements
into similar units of meaning, (d) write a description of the context in which the
experience happened, (e) provide a description of how and when the experience
happened, and (f) write a synthesis of the phenomenological meaning or “essence” of the
event (p. 159). I will use this method of analysis as a guideline to align emergent coding
77
from interview transcript data. A copy of the form used to identify, code, and organize
important themes and statements is provided in Appendix D.
Seidman’s (2006) in-depth three-interview or focus group protocol allows data
from each session to be analyzed and used to inform each subsequent contact with a
participant. After each interview I will transcribe and evaluate student responses and
gather together themes, and significant statements to assist in guiding the next interview
process. Although interview questions are listed in Appendix C, modifications or
additions may be made for each student in order to maximize the richness of responses.
At the conclusion of the three-interview cycle, I will again analyze and compare data for
themes, patterns, and significant statements by the participants.
Research into human phenomenon does not always produce predictable or
uniform results. Each and every response is the lived experience or perception of the
participant and deserves to be treated equally. According to Miles, Huberman, and
Saldana (2014) the researcher needs to “find the outliers and then verify whether what is
present in them is absent or different in other, more mainstream examples” (p. 302). The
“outlier” can be a means to test and strengthen the generality of other findings while
protecting the researcher against personal bias. If and when discrepant cases present
themselves in this study, each will be faithfully represented and analyzed within the
context and personal and group experience, and included as a part of the rich tapestry of
human complexity.
Issues of Trustworthiness
Phenomenology seeks to discover and understand the meaning of events by those
who have participated in the experience. At some juncture however, the researcher must
78
have a philosophical understanding of the phenomenon and decide the amount or method
in which his or her personal understandings will be introduced into the study (Creswell,
2007). The challenge for the researcher is to be cognizant of any previously understood
meaning of the phenomenon through personal or literature examination, while separating
this knowledge from the meanings made by the participants.
The credibility of the research can be threatened in two ways: researcher bias and
reactivity (Maxwell, 2013). Selectively including only data that fit a preconceived
outcome or expectation can be avoided by participant verification of accuracy though
data summaries. In terms of reactivity, or researcher influence during an interview
session, this is next to impossible to achieve as the interviewer cannot help but guide or
direct the participants’ responses. The key to avoiding leading the participant only in the
direction of the researcher’s choice is to understand how one might influence the student
at the onset of the investigation (Maxwell, 2013).
Credibility will be accomplished in this research through prolonged contact with
each individual (three interviews) so as to establish a thick description of the
phenomenon under investigation. Any areas of uncertainty will be reported and
speculation labeled as such with “rival” explanations actively considered (Miles et al.,
2014, p. 313). Transferability or the application of the research findings to other contexts
requires careful interpretation of the data, not simply a combination or synthesis of one or
more previous outcomes with the current study. According to Miles et al. (2014) this can
be accomplished through detailed description in order to permit informed comparisons
and a diverse sample from which the data originate. My goal is to select traditional age
Muslim American college women who both wear and refrain from wearing the hijab so
79
as to balance their responses with the relatively small amount of data that exist to provide
information that leads to further research in this area.
Dependability concerns consistency and long-term stability of the research (Miles
et al., 2014). The use of audit trails or reviews by my committee chair and/or
methodologist will assist in reliability assurance. Confirmability in interview protocol is
connected to the reactivity bias risk previously mentioned; this will require reflexivity
and awareness of philosophical assumptions regarding the entire research process
(Maxwell, 2013). Committee member evaluation will assist in assuring coding
reliability.
Ethical Procedures
Ethical guidance for my fieldwork is based on Miles et al.’s (2014) checklist and
includes consideration of the following: (a) Worthiness/contribution of the project, (b)
my competence as a researcher and an interviewer, (c) informed consent and disclosure
of purpose and information, (d) benefits to both the participants and future researchers,
costs, and reciprocity, (e) harm and risk to participants, (f) honesty and trust between
researcher and participants, (g) privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity, (h) intervention
and advocacy, (i) research integrity and quality, (j) ownership of data and conclusions,
and (k) use and misuse of results (pp. 58–66).
Institutional Review Board documents. All research will be performed in
accordance with IRB protocol utilizing proper information and consent forms. Because
this study must be approved by both Walden University and Southern University, these
forms will be filed in accordance with the requirements with each institution. A copy of
my completion of the National Institutes of Health Office of Extramural Research
80
examination certification will be submitted with each application indicating that I am
qualified to conduct human research and understand the limitations and ramifications of
this type of study. All participants will be asked to select a personal pseudonym to
represent their names throughout the study.
Ethical concerns. I do not foresee any ethical problems involving the
recruitment process, interaction with Muslim Student Association members, student-
participants, or university personnel during my research at Southern University. All data
collection will be my sole responsibility and will be stored in my personal computer,
flash drive, and online Dropbox (password protected). Written documentation and
transcriptions will be kept in my personal home office.
The nature of fieldwork involves unpredictability and fluidity; participants may
decide to leave the study before completion, object to questioning, or feel uncomfortable
in a focus group setting. If a student chooses to drop out of the research process, I will
immediately contact the Muslim Student Association or consult with other participants
for a replacement. Any student who raises objections with any question may refuse to
answer and this will be noted as a part of the study’s findings and noted for future
consideration. As stated above, any student who feels any distress with sharing personal
information in a focus group interview will have the option of substituting a personal
interview for this step in the data collection process.
Treatment of data. All data will be kept confidential with the exception of
information shared during focus group sessions. Students collectively respond to
questions and volunteer personal experiences with each other in this setting, and although
they will be instructed not to repeat or relay this data outside of the focus group, this is
81
not enforceable or possible in all circumstances. As with many focus group interviews,
this risk is common and not within the control of the researcher. Participants may also
decide to relay their pseudonyms to one another, thus identifying themselves to others
within the student group.
All data obtained by the researcher will be kept secure and confidential. A
research summary will be provided to each participant upon completion of all interview
transcription for their review. Once the research has been completed, the data will be
securely stored for a period of 5 years and then destroyed. No archival data will be used
in this study. As previously discussed, there is no professional or personal conflict of
interest or power differentials.
Summary
This chapter begins with a reiteration of the central purpose of this study—to
explore the meaning of identity and its formation in traditional college age Muslim
American women. The research questions and subquestions are restated and their
relationship and interaction with the study instrument. My role as a phenomenological
researcher (interviewer-participant) is detailed and Seidman’s (2006) three-interview
methodology is justified and explained as the best system for data collection in this study.
Each interview goal and process is described; the rationale for the use of focus group
sessions to encourage latent experiences is explained. The participant selection, logic,
instrumentation, and interview series and protocol is outlined and justified. The data
analysis plan that includes Creswell’s (2007) methodology of grouping significant
participant statements into themes and relevant codes will be employed. Issues of
trustworthiness including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability
82
have been described with appropriate strategies outlined to insure all standards will be
met. The conclusion of this chapter discussed ethical procedures that described treatment
of human subjects, IRB requirements, data collection and storage, and future handling of
information.
Chapter 4 presents the details and summary of the findings of this study. The
interpretation and analysis process will be explained with portions of the interview
transcripts used to demonstrate the participants reflections and understanding of their
experiences on campus. Interview responses will be correlated and synthesized with the
research questions and supported with data.
83
References
Abu-Ras, W., Ahmed, S., & Arfken, C. L. (2010). Alcohol use among U.S. Muslim college
students: Risk and protective factors. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 9, 206–
220. doi:10.1080/15332640.2010500921
Ahmad, D. (2009). Not yet beyond the veil: Muslim women in American popular literature.
Social Text, 99(2), 105–131. doi:10.1215/01642472-2008-024
Ahmed, L. (1992). Women and gender in Islam. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Ali, A. I. (2013, August 8). A threat enfleshed: Muslim college students situate their identities
amidst portrayals of Muslim violence and terror. International Journal of Qualitative
Studies in Education, 1–19. doi:10.1080/09518398.2013.820860
Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice: 25th anniversary edition. New York, NY:
Perseus Books Publishing. (Original work published 1954)
Al-Saji, A. (2010). The racialization of Muslim veils: A philosophical analysis. Philosophy and
Social Criticism, 36, 875–902. doi:10.1177/0191453710375589
Amer, M. M., & Hovey, J. D. (2012). Anxiety and depression in a post-September 11 sample of
Arabs in the USA. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47, 409–418.
doi:10.1007/s00127–011-0341-4
Antonio, L. A., Milem, J. F., & Chang, M. J. (2012). Approaching diversity work in the
university: Lessons from an American context. Advances in Education in Diverse
Communities: Research, Policy and Praxis, 8, 371–401. doi:10.1108/S1479-
358X(2012)0000008019
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through
the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469– 480. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
84
Aslan, R. (2006). No god but God: The origins, evolution, and future of Islam. New York, NY:
Random House Trade Paperbacks.
Aspers, P. (2009,). Empirical phenomenology: A qualitative research approach. Indo-Pacific
Journal of Phenomenology, 9(2), 1–12. doi:10.1080/20797222.2009.11433992
Astin, A. W., Astin, H. S., & Lindholm, J. A. (2010). Cultivating the spirit: How college can
enhance students' inner lives. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Awad, G. H. (2010). The impact of acculturation and religious identification on perceived
discrimination for Arab/Middle Eastern Americans. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic
Minority Psychology, 16(1), 59–67. doi:10.1037/a0016675
Aziz, S. F. (2012). From the oppressed to the terrorist: Muslim-American women in the
crosshairs of intersectionality. Hastings Race & Poverty Law Journal, 9(1). 1–72.
Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1981777
Beckford, J. A. (2003). Social theory and religion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bilge, S. (2010). Beyond subordination vs. resistance: An intersectional approach to the agency
of veiled Muslim women. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 31(1), 9–28.
doi:10.1080/07256860903477662
Bjorck, J. P., & Maslim, A.A. (2011). The multi-faith religious support scale: Validation with a
sample of Muslim women. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 6(1), 62–80.
doi:10.3998/jmmh.10381607.0006.105
Botz-Bornstein, T. (2013). Can the veil be cool? Journal of Religion and Popular Culture, 25(2),
249–263. doi:2.249 10.3138/jrpc.25
85
Bowman, N. A. (2011). Promoting participation in a diverse democracy: A meta-analysis of
college diversity experiences and civic engagement. Review of Educational Research,
81(1), 29–68. doi:10.3102/0034654310383047
Bowman, N. A., & Small, J. L. (2010). Do college students who identify with a privileged
religion experience greater spiritual development? Exploring individual and institutional
dynamics. Research in Higher Education, 51, 595–614. doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9175-2
Bowman, N. A., & Small, J. L. (2012). Exploring a hidden form of minority status: College
students’ religious affiliation and well-being. Journal of College Student Development,
53, 491–509. doi:10.007/s11162-010-9175-2
Boysen, G. A., Vogel, D. L., Cope, M. A., & Hubbard, A. (2009). Incidents of bias in college
classrooms: instructor and student perceptions. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education,
2(4), 219–231. doi:10.1037/a0017538
Bradbury-‐Jones, C., Sambrook, S., & Irvine, F. (2009). The phenomenological focus group: an
oxymoron? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65, 663–671. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2648.2008.04922.x
Brown, R. K., & Brown, R. E. (2011). The challenge of religious pluralism: The association
between interfaith contact and religious pluralism. Review of Religious Research, 53,
323–340. doi:10.1007/s13644-011-0014-5
Bryant, A. N. (2011a). Ecumenical worldview development by gender, race, and worldview: A
multiple-group analysis of model invariance. Research in Higher Education, 52, 460–
479. doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9206-z
86
Bryant, A. N. (2011b). The impact of campus context, college encounters, and religious/spiritual
struggle on ecumenical worldview. Research in Higher Education, 52, 441–459.
doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9205-0
Bryant, A. N., & Craft, C. M. (2010). The challenge and promise of pluralism: Dimensions of
spiritual climate and diversity at a Lutheran college. Christian Higher Education, 9, 396–
422. doi:10.1080/15363750903182201
Bryant, A. N., Wickliffe, K., Mayhew, M. J., & Behringer, L.B. (2009). Developing an
assessment of college students’ spiritual experiences: The collegiate religious and
spiritual climate survey. Journal of College and Character, 10(6), 1–10.
doi:1639.145210.2202/1940
Butterfield, R. M., & Pemberton, C. L. A. (2011). An exploration of the relationship between
religiosity and retention. Journal of College Student Retention, 12, 443–467.
doi:10.2190/CS.12.4.d
Byng, M. D. (2010). Symbolically Muslim: Media, hijab, and the west. Critical Sociology, 36(1),
109-129. doi:10.1177/0896920509347143
Carvalho, J. P. (2013). Veiling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(1), 337–370.
doi:10.1093/qje/qjs045
Chumley, C. K. (2014, March 14). Iraq mulls law to let men marry 8-year-old girls. The
Washington Times. Retrieved from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/
mar/14/iraq-mulls-law-let-men-marry-8-year-old-girls/
Cole, D., & Ahmadi, S. (2003). Perspectives and experiences of Muslim women who veil on
college campuses. Journal of College Student Development, 44(1), 47–66.
doi:10.1353/csd.2003.0002
87
Cole, D., & Ahmadi, S. (2010). Reconsidering campus diversity: An examination of Muslim
students’ experiences. The Journal of Higher Education, 81(2), 121–139.
doi:10.1353/jhe.0.0089
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Davary, B. (2009). Miss Elsa and the veil: Honor, shame, and identity negotiations. Journal of
Feminist Studies in Religion, 25(2), 47–66. doi:10.2979/FSR.2009.25.2.47
DeLong, M. (2010, August 16). Newt Gingrich compares “Ground Zero mosque” backers to
Nazis. The Washington Post. Retrieved from
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/08/newt-gingrich-compares-ground.html
Dilley, P. (2004). Review essay: Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research. The
Journal of Higher Education, 75(1), 127–132. doi:10.1353/jhe.2003.0049
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2007). Another view of “we”: Majority and minority
group perspectives on a common ingroup identity. European Review of Social
Psychology, 18, 296–330. doi:10.1080/10463280701726132
Dunkel, T. M., Davidson, D., & Qurashi, S. (2010). Body satisfaction and pressure to be thin in
younger and older Muslim and non-Muslim women: The role of Western and non-
Western dress preferences. Body Image, 7(1), 56–65. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.10.003
Ghumman, S., & Jackson, L. (2010). The downside of religious attire: The Muslim headscarf and
expectations of obtaining employment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 4–23.
doi:10.1002/job.601
Gross, N., & Simmons, S. (2009). The religiosity of American college and university professors.
Sociology of Religion, 70(2), 101–129. doi:10.1093/socrel/srp026
88
Gurbuz, M. E., & Gurbuz-Kucuksari, G. (2009). Between sacred codes and secular consumer
society: The practice of headscarf adoption among American college girls. Journal of
Muslim Minority Affairs, 29, 387–399. doi:10.1080/13602000903166648
Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory
and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 330–366.
doi:10.17763/haer.72.3.01151786u134n051
Guven, I. (2010). Globalisation, political Islam and the headscarf in education, with special
reference to the Turkish educational system. Comparative Education, 46, 377–390.
doi:10.1080/03050068.2010.503748
Hamzeh, M. (2011). Deveiling body stories: Muslim girls negotiate visual, spatial, and ethical
hijabs. Race Ethnicity and Education, 14, 481–506. doi:10.1080/13613324.2011.563287
Hatch, A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. New York, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Haw, K. (2010). Being, becoming and belonging: Young Muslim women in contemporary
Britain. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 31, 345–361.
doi:10.1080/07256868.2010.491273
Herzig, B. A., Roysircar, G., Kosyluk, K. A., & Corrigan, P. W. (2013). American Muslim
college students: The impact of religiousness and stigma on active coping. Journal of
Muslim Mental Health, 7(1), 33–42. doi:10.3998/jmmh.10381607.0007.103
Higher Education Research Institute University of California, Los Angeles Graduate School of
Education and Information Studies. (2010). The spiritual life of college students: A
national study of college students’ search for meaning and purpose. Retrieved from
http://spirituality.ucla.edu/publications/research-reports/
89
Hill, J. P. (2011). Faith and understanding: Specifying the impact of higher education on
religious belief. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 50, 533–551.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01587.x
Hogg, M. A., Adelman, J. R., & Blagg, R. D. (2010). Religion in the face of uncertainty: An
uncertainty-identity theory account of religiousness. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 14(1), 72–83. doi:10.1177/1088868309349692
Hopkins, N. (2011). Dual identities and their recognition: Minority group members’
perspectives. Political Psychology, 32(2), 251–270. doi:10.111/j.1467-
9221.2010.00804.x
Hopkins, P. (2011). Towards critical geographies of the university campus: understanding the
contested experiences of Muslim students. Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers, 36(1), 157–169. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2010.00407.x
Hu, C., Pazaki, H., Al-Qubbaj, K., & Cutler, M. (2009). Gender identity and religious practices
of first-generation Muslim women immigrants in the US. Making Connections:
Interdisciplinary Approaches to Cultural Diversity, 11(1), 50–63. Retrieved from
http://makingconnectionsjournal.org/
Hurtado, S., Milem, J. F., Clatyon-Pedersen, A. R., & Allen, W. R. (1998). Enhancing campus
climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The Review of
Higher Education, 21(3), 279–302. doi:10.1353/rhe.1998.0003
Islamia, J. M. (2010, October 16). Conceptual/theoretical framework [Presentation slides].
Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/eishanjuneja/conceptual-theoretical-framework
Jackson, L. (2010). Images of Islam in US media and their educational implications. Educational
Studies, 47, 3–24. doi:10.1080/00131940903480217
90
Johnson, K., & Laurence, P. (2012). Multi-faith religious spaces on college and university
campuses. Religion and Education, 39(1), 48–63. doi:10.1080/15507394.2012.648579
Jones, R. P., Cox, D., Galston, W.A., & Dionne, Jr., E. J. (2011, September 6). What it means to
be an American: Attitudes in an increasingly diverse America ten years after 9/11.
Governance Studies at Brookings. Public Religion Research Institute, 1–41. Retrieved
from http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2011/09/06-american-attitudes
Jung, J. H. (2012). Islamophobia? Religion, contact with Muslims, and the respect for Islam.
Review of Religious Research, 54(1), 113–126. doi:10.1007/s13644-011-0033-2
Kalkan, K. O., Layman, G. C., & Uslaner, E. M. (2009). “Bands of others”? Attitudes toward
Muslims in contemporary American society. The Journal of Politics, 71, 847–862.
doi:10.1017/S0022381609090756
Keddie, A. (2011). Framing discourses of possibility and constraint in the empowerment of
Muslim girls: Issues of religion, race, ethnicity and culture. Race Ethnicity and
Education, 14(2), 175–190. doi:10.1080/13613324.2010.519970
Keddie, A. (2014). Students’ understanding of religious identities and relations: Issues of social
cohesion and citizenship. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 9(1), 81–93.
doi:10.1177/1746197914520652
Kirtley, S. (2012). Rendering technology visible: The technological literacy narrative. Computers
and Composition, 29(3), 191–204. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2012.06.003
Lewis, R. (2010). Marketing Muslim lifestyle: A new media genre. Journal of Middle East
Women’s Studies, 6(3), 58–90. doi:10.1353/jmw.2010.0002
91
Maslim, A. A. & Bjorck, J. P. (2009). Reasons for conversion to Islam among women in the
United States. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1(2), 97–111.
doi:10.1037/a0015735
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mayhew, M. J. (2011). A multi-level examination of college and its influence on ecumenical
worldview development. Research in Higher Education, 53(3), 282–310.
doi:10.1007/s11162-011-9231-6
Mayhew, M. J., & Bryant, A. N. (2013). Achievement or arrest? The influence of the collegiate
religious and spiritual climate on students’ worldview commitment. Research in Higher
Education, 54(1), 63–84. doi:10.1007/s11162-012-9262-7
Mayrl, D. & Oeur, F. (2009). Religion and higher education: Current knowledge and directions
for future research. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48(2), 260–275.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01446.x
McDermott-Levy, R. (2011). Going alone: The lived experience of female Arab-Muslim nursing
students living and studying in the United States. Nursing Outlook, 59, 266–277.
doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2011.02.006
McFarland, M. J., Wright, B. R. E., & Weakliem, D. L. (2011). Educational attainment and
religiosity: Exploring variations by religious tradition. Sociology of Religion, 72(2), 166–
188. doi:10.1093/socrel/srq065
Mernissi, F. (1991). The veil and the male elite: A feminist interpretation of women’s rights in
Islam. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.
92
Milem, J. F., Chang, M. J., & Antonio, A. L. (2005). Making diversity work on campus: A
research-based perspective. Washington, DC: Association American Colleges and
Universities.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.
Mir, S. (2009). Not too “college-like,” not too normal: American Muslim undergraduate
women’s gendered discourses. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 40(3), 237–256.
doi:10.4135/9781412995658
Mir, S. (2011). “Just to make sure people know I was born here”: Muslim women constructing
American selves. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32, 547–563.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2011.601552
Mir-‐Hosseini, Z. (2011). Beyond “Islam” vs “feminism.” IDS Bulletin, 42(1), 67–77.
doi:10.111/j.1759-5436.2011.00202.x
Mishra, S., & Shirazi, F. (2010). Hybrid identities: American Muslim women speak. Gender,
Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 17(2), 191–209.
doi:10.1080/09663691003600306
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications. doi:10.111/j.1548-1492.2009.01043
Muedini, F. (2009). Muslim American youth: Attitudes and responses five years after 9/11. The
Muslim World, 99(1), 39–59. doi:10.1111/j.1478-1913.2009.01252.x
Nadal, K. L., Griffin, K. E., Hamit, S., Leon, J., Tobio, M., & Rivera, D. P. (2012). Subtle and
overt forms of Islamophobia: Microaggressions toward Muslim Americans. Journal of
Muslim Mental Health, 6(2), 15–37. doi:10.3998/jmmh.10381607.0006.203
93
Nasar, S. H. (1991). The Quran as the foundation of Islamic spirituality. In S. H. Nasar (Ed.)
World spirituality: An encyclopedic history of the religious quest (Vol. 19, pp. 3–10).
New York, NY: Crossroads.
Navarro, L. (2010). Islamophobia and sexism: Muslim women in the western mass
media. Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, 8(2), 95–114.
Retrieved from http://scholarworks.umb.edu/humanarchitecture/
Park, J. J. (2012). When race and religion collide: The effect of religion on interracial friendship
during college. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 5(1), 8–21.
doi:10.1037/a0026960
Park, J. J., & Denson, N. (2009). Attitudes and advocacy: Understanding faculty views on
racial/ethnic diversity. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(4), 415–438.
doi:10.1353/jhe.0.0054
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Peek, L. (2005). Becoming Muslim: The development of a religious identity. Sociology of
Religion, 66(3), 215–242. doi:10.2307/4153097
Penning, J. M. (2009). Americans' views of Muslims and Mormons: A social identity theory
approach. Politics and Religion, 2(02), 277–302. doi:10.1017/S1755048309000236
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85.
doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65
Pettigrew, T. F. (2008). Future directions for intergroup contact theory and research.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 187–199.
doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2007.12.002
94
Pevey, C. F., & McKenzie, N. J. (2009). Love, fear, and loathing: A Qualitative examination of
Christian perceptions of Muslims. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 10(1). Retrieved
from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1192/2615
Pew Research Center. (2008). U.S. religious landscape survey. Religious affiliation: Diverse and
dynamic. Retrieved from http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report-religious-landscape-
study-full.pdf
Pew Research Center. (2010, September 28). U.S. religious knowledge survey. Retrieved from
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2010/09/religious-knowledge-full-report.pdf
Pew Research Center. (2011, August). Muslim Americans: No signs of growth in alienation or
support for extremism. Retrieved from http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-
pdf/Muslim%20American%20Report%2010-02-12%20fix.pdf
Rangoonwala, F. I., Sy, S. R., & Epinoza, R. K. E. (2011). Muslim identity, dress code,
adherence and college adjustment among American Muslim women. Journal of Muslim
Minority Affairs, 31(2), 231–241. doi:10.1080/13602004.2011.583517
Read, J. G., & Bartkowski, J. P. (2000). To veil or not to veil? A case study of identity
negotiation among Muslim women in Austin, Texas. Gender and Society, 14, 395–417.
doi:10.1177/089124300014003003
Reda, M. (2010). The sound of students thinking: Strategies for fostering classroom
conversation. Journal of Teaching Writing, 22(2), 21–50. Retrieved from
http://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/teachingwriting/article/view/1343
Ribeiro, M. D., & Saleem, S. (2010). Providing outreach services to Muslim college women.
Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 5(2), 233–244. doi:10.1080/15564908.2010.487739
95
Runnymede Trust. (1991). Islamophobia: A challenge for us all. Summary. Retrieved from
http://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/publications/pdfs/islamophobia.pdf
Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Seedat, F. (2013). Islam, feminism, and Islamic feminism: Between inadequacy and inevitability.
Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, 29(2), 25–45. doi:10.1353/jfs.2013.0026
Seggie, F. N., & Austin, A. E. (2010). Impact of the headscarf ban policy on the identity
development of part-time unveilers in Turkish higher education. Journal of College
Student Development, 51, 564–583. doi:10.1353/csd.2010.0012
Seggie, F. N., & Sanford, G. (2010). Perceptions of female Muslim students who veil: Campus
religious climate. Race Ethnicity and Education, 13(1), 59–82.
doi:10.1080/13613320903549701
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education
and social sciences (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Shahjahan, R. A. (2009). The role of spirituality in the anti-oppressive higher-education
classroom. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(2), 121–131.
doi:10.1080/13562510902757138
Shammas, D. S. (2009). Post-9/11 Arab and Muslim American community college students:
Ethno-religious enclaves and perceived discrimination. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 33(3–4), 283–308. doi:10.1353/lit.2005.0033
Shirazi, F., & Mishra, S. (2010). Young Muslim women on the face veil (niqab): A tool of
resistance in Europe but rejected in the United States. International Journal of Cultural
Studies, 13(1), 43–62. doi:10.1177/136787790934853
96
Sirin, S. R., & Katsiaficas, D. (2011). Religiosity, discrimination, and community engagement:
Gendered pathways of Muslim American emerging adults. Youth and Society, 43(4),
1528–1546. doi:10.1177/0044118X10388218
Starks, H., & Trinidad, S. B. (2007). Choose your method: A comparison of phenomenology,
discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 1372–1380.
doi:10.1177/1049732307307031
Stewart, D. L., Kocet, M. M., & Lobdell, S. (2011). The multifaith campus: Transforming
colleges and universities for spiritual engagement. About Campus, 16(1), 10–18.
doi:10.1002.abc.20049
Stoltzfus, M. J., & Reffel, J. A. (2009). Cultivating an appreciation for diverse religious
worldviews through cooperative learning in undergraduate classrooms. Religious
Education, 104, 539–554. doi:10.1080/00344080903293998
Stubbs, B. B., & Sallee, M. W. (2013). Muslim, too: Navigating multiple identities at an
American university. Equity and Excellence in Education, 46, 451–467. doi:10.1080/1-
665684.2013.838129
Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education. (2013). About student affairs. Retrieved
from http://www.naspa.org/about/student-affairs
Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive aspects of prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 25(4), 79–97.
doi:10.111/j.1540-4560.1969.tb00620.x
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology,
33(1), 1–39. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000245
97
Tinto, V. (1997). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The
Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167–177. Retrieved from
https://www.press.jhu.edu/journals/review_of_higher_education/
Tisdell, E. J. (2003). Exploring spirituality and culture in adult and higher education. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tolaymat, L. D., & Moradi, B. (2011). US Muslim women and body image: Links among
objectification theory constructs and the hijab. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58,
383–392. doi:10.1037/a0023461
Torres, V., Jones, S. R., & Renn, K. A. (2009). Identity development theories in student affairs:
Origins, current status, and new approaches. Journal of College Student Development, 50,
577–596. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0102
Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J, Haslam, S. A., & McGarty, C. (1994). Self and collective: Cognition
and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 454–463.
doi:10.1177/0146167294205002
United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund. (2013, July 2013). Female genital
mutilation and cutting: A statistical overview and the dynamics of change. Retrieved
from http://www.unicef.org/media/files/FGCM_Lo_res.pdf
United States Census Bureau. (2011, September). The White population: 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-05.pdf
United States Census Bureau. (2012). Statistical abstract of the United States: 2012. Table 281.
College enrollment by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin: 1980 to 2009. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0281.pdf
98
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2012). Religion-based charges filed
from 10/01/2000 through 9/30/2011 showing percentage filed on the basis of religion-
Muslim. Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/events/9-11-11_religion_charges.cfm
Wagner, W., Sen, R., Permanadeli, R., & Howarth, C. S. (2012). The veil and Muslim women’s
identity: Cultural pressures and resistance to stereotyping. Culture and Psychology, 18,
521–541. doi:10.1177/1354067X12456713
Whitehead, A. L. (2012). Gender ideology and religion: Does a masculine image of God matter?
Review of Religious Research, 54(2), 139–156. doi:10.1007/s13644-012-0056-3
Ysseldyk, R., Matheson, K., & Anisman, H. (2010). Religiosity as identity: Toward an
understanding of religion from a social identity perspective. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 14(1), 60–71. doi:10.1177/1088868309349693
Zahedi, A. (2011, June). Muslim American women in the post-11 September era: Challenges and
opportunities. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 13(2), 183–203.
doi:10.1080/14616742.2011.560038
Zine, J. (2008). Lost in translation: Writing back from the margins. Journal of Feminist Studies
in Religion, 24(1), 110–116. doi:10.1353/jfs.0.0000
99
Appendix A: Introductory Email/Letter
Greetings:
You are invited to take part in a research study of traditional college age (18–24) Muslim American women in higher education who both choose to or decline to wear the hijab on campus. This message has been forwarded to you by the campus Muslim Student Association (MSA) to protect your privacy. The purpose of this study is to better understand how your campus experiences may or may not impact your identity as a Muslim American woman so that campus policymakers and student affairs personnel can improve your college experience. This study is being conducted by a researcher named Carol Koller, a doctoral candidate at Walden University. Any student who meets all of the following criteria is invited to participate in this study:
• Current full-time female student pursuing a bachelor’s degree at [confidential university]
• Must have completed one full-time academic year of study on campus • Be between the ages of 18–24 • Be an American citizen • Identify yourself as a Muslim
If you agree to be in this study, you will be asked to:
• Meet with the researcher for three sessions of 60 to 90 minutes each that include two individual interviews and one focus group or interview (participant may choose) with other participants during which your responses will be audio recorded
• Meet with the researcher to confirm that the data collected in the interview process accurately conveys your experiences and the meanings you assign to them.
This study is voluntary. If you decide to join the study now, you can still change your mind during or after the study. You may stop at any time. There will be no payment for participation in this study.
Any information you provide will be kept confidential. The researcher will not use your personal information for any purposes outside of this research project. The researcher will not include your name or anything else that could identify you in the study reports. You will be provided with an approved consent form for your signature before any information will be requested.
You may ask any questions you have now. Or if you have questions later, you may contact the researcher via email at: carol.koller@waldenu.edu or at 206-334-6277.
Best Regards,
Carol Koller
100
Appendix B: Consent to Participate in Research
Traditional College Age Muslim American Women Identity Development in Higher Education
Carol Koller, PhD in Education candidate at Walden University is conducting a research study. You were selected as a possible participant in this study because:
• You are a current full-time female student pursuing a bachelor’s degree at this
university
• You have completed one full-time academic year of study on campus
• You are between the ages of 18–24
• You are an American citizen
• You profess to being a Muslim
Your participation in this research study is voluntary. Why is this study being done?
The purpose of this study is to better understand how your campus experiences may or may not impact your identity as a Muslim American woman and how campus policymakers and student affairs personnel can improve your college experience.
What will happen if I take part in this research study? If you volunteer to participate in this study, the researcher will ask you to do the following:
• Meet with the researcher for three sessions of 60 to 90 minutes each that include
two individual interviews and one focus group or interview (participant may
choose) with other participants during which your responses will be audio
recorded.
101
• Meet with the researcher to confirm that the data collected in the interview
process accurately conveys your experiences and the meanings you assign to
them.
• No private, identifiable information will be required. You will select a
pseudonym that will identify your responses throughout the research process
• As a participant, you will interact with the researcher and other members of the
participant group. If you select to forego the focus group interview for a personal
one-on-one interview with the researcher.
• All interviews will be conducted on the campus of Southern University
(pseudonym) unless otherwise agreed upon.
How long will I be in the research study? Participation will take a total of about 1–3 weeks during 2014. Are there any potential risks or discomforts that I can expect from this study?
• Discussion of personal identity formation, religious or spiritual beliefs, and/or negative experience recollection and reflection.
• Students may voluntarily or inadvertently reveal personal information regarding private family, sexual, or other information pertaining to personal life not specified in interview questions.
Are there any potential benefits if I participate?
You will not directly benefit from your participation in this research. The results of the research may potentially impact future Muslim women and their well- being in higher education by providing information that may improve their campus experience. What other choices do I have if I choose not to participate? You will be considered a respected and valuable member of the academic community.
102
Will information about me and my participation be kept confidential? Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can identify you will remain confidential. It will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. • Confidentiality will be maintained by means of personal and institutional pseudonyms
and all data will be kept locked and secure in the researcher’s personal office and computer password protected.
• Only dissertation committee members will have access to this information. • Coding (categorizing) of material will be thematic and not reveal personal data.
All students participating in a focus group will be asked to keep what is said during the group discussion between the participants only; however, complete confidentiality cannot be guaranteed. What are my rights if I take part in this study? • You can choose whether or not you want to be in this study, and you may withdraw
your consent and discontinue participation at any time. • Whatever decision you make, there will be no penalty to you, and no loss of benefits
to which you were otherwise entitled. • You may refuse to answer any questions that you do not want to answer and still
remain in the study. Who can I contact if I have questions about this study? • The research team:
If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the research, please contact: carol.koller@waldenu.edu or 206-334-6277.
You will be given a copy of this information to keep for your records. SIGNATURE OF STUDY PARTICIPANT Name of Participant
Signature of Participant Date
103
SIGNATURE OF PERSON OBTAINING CONSENT Name of Person Obtaining Consent Contact Number
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date
104
Appendix C: Data Collection Instrument and Relationship to Research Questions
Interview One
Interview Question 1: Please state you age and your year of study (sophomore, junior,
senior) for demographic information.
RQ1: How do traditional age Muslim American women seeking bachelor’s degrees
at a Southern California public university perceive their engagement with the
campus environment socially, and individually?
RQ3: How do traditional age Muslim American college women describe experiences
that affect whether they wear or do not wear the veil on campus?
Interview Question 2a: Describe your personal experience as a Muslim woman
who has chosen to wear the veil on campus.
Probing Question: What effect, if any, has this had on your academic,
social, or personal life?
Interview Question 2b: Describe your personal experience as a Muslim woman
who has not chosen to wear the veil on campus?
Probing Question: What effect, if any, has this had on your academic,
social, or personal life?
Interview Question 3a: What are your reasons for choosing to wear the veil?
When did you make this decision?
Interview Question 3b: What are your reasons for not choosing to wear the
veil? When did you make this decision?
Interview Question 4: How, if any, has your experience at XYZ University had
any effect on your religious/spiritual life?
105
Interview/Focus Group Two
RQ2: What campus influences impact traditional age Muslim American college
women identity perceptions?
RQ3: How do traditional age Muslim American college women describe experiences
that affect whether they wear or do not wear the veil on campus?
Focus Group Interview Question 1: What have been your interactions like with
faculty and other students inside the classroom related to your religion or wearing
the hijab?
Focus Group Interview Question 2: Describe the best experience you have had
inside the classroom related to your religion or wearing the hijab?
Focus Group Interview Question 3: Describe the worst experience you have
had inside the classroom related to your religion or wearing the hijab?
Focus Group Interview Question 4: Describe the best experience you have had
on campus (outside the classroom) related to your religion or wearing the hijab?
Focus Group Interview Question 5: Describe the worst experience you have
had on campus (outside the classroom) related to your religion or wearing the
hijab?
Focus Group Interview Question 6: What have your interactions been like with
faculty, staff, and other students on campus (outside the classroom) that you
believe are related to your religion or wearing the hijab?
106
Interview Three
RQ3: How do traditional age Muslim American college women describe experiences
that affect whether they wear or do not wear the veil on campus?
Interview Question 1: What is the meaning of the veil for you, whether you
choose to wear it or not?
Interview Question 2: How do you feel about Muslim women who choose to
wear the veil?
Interview Question 3: How do you feel about Muslim women who choose not
to wear the veil?
Interview Question 4: How do you perceive your role as a Muslim American
woman in light of your experiences on campus and in the classroom?
RQ4: In what ways would traditional age Muslim American college women believe
student services/or academic affairs could support a positive to climate that allows
their engagement and identity development?
Interview Question 5: What suggestions or improvements would you make on
campus if you had the opportunity?
Interview Question 6: What advice would you give to female freshman Muslim
American students?
Interview Question 7: Is there anything you would like to share, add, or discuss
that we have not covered in this interview?
107
Appendix D: Interview Data Analysis Form
Significant Statement, Formulated Meaning, Theme, and Code Form
Significant Statements, Formulated Meaning and Code from Interview Transcripts
Significant
Statement/Response
Formulated Meaning
Theme Code
Note. Adapted from Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (2nd ed.) by J.W. Creswell, 2007, p. 271, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.