Research essay methodology and practice

Muslim Women/VeilREVISED

The purpose of research is to gather new information that adds to a body of understanding about a particular topic or theory. Educational research often examines the beliefs of educators; results can inform teaching practice (Panjares, 1992, p. 307). This paper examines the paradigms, ethics, research approaches, methodology and methods used by authors of two studies about the perceptions of Muslim women who veil. When perceptions of non-Muslims are recognized and understood, only then can people acknowledge any biases they may have and address them. Conducting research on biases is challenging since there are no objective measures and researchers often rely on subjects' self-reported data. Researchers can have their own biases, which they must be careful to recognize and then discard to the extent possible. People come to their ideas in certain ways, which are bound by cultural and social norms and parameters. For this reason, we need to acknowledge and understand there are different views of the world and different ways of gathering knowledge (Grix 2002, p. 178).

The two studies will be discussed in this paper in terms of the research process; methodology and methods; validity, reliability, and credibility, and ethical considerations. Paradigm will be discussed with respect to both studies since they are so similar in that regard. For the remaining factors, mentioned above, the studies will be discussed separately. The papers reviewed for this project are as follows:

Cole, D & Ahmadi, S 2003 'Perspective and Experiences of Muslim Women Who Veil

On College Campuses', Journal of College Student Development, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 47-66.

Paradigms

The choice of paradigm sets down the intent, motivation and expectations for the research (Mackenzie & Knipe, 2006, p. 194). The research by Cole and Ahmadi and Seggie and Sanford intended to gather anecdotal evidence from Muslim women who chose to veil on college campuses. The researchers began with the supposition that the veiled women would report incidence of prejudicial behavior towards them. The researchers brought some personal feelings about the topic since three out of the four are women; it is the rare woman who has not experienced some kind of gender bias at least once in her life.. Additionally, two of the researchers -- one on each team -- are Muslim women, bringing their unique perspective to the studies.

Educational ethnographers "describe, interpret, analyse and represent the lived experiences of schools, classrooms and workplaces" (Methodologies and Methods). Although the study had an element of ethnography in that in constructed a portrait of cultural life, ethnographers typically make their observations over a prolonged period of time. Neither research team did this. Instead, they interviewed very small samples and based their conclusions on their limited findings.

The researchers expected to find evidence of bias against veiled women and were not surprised their subjects reported it existed. The purpose of the study was not so much to determine whether or not bias existed, but how it is manifest on a college campus and how Muslim women reacted to it. The researchers were interested in whether bias ultimately affected women's decisions to unveil or remain veiled. They wanted to know how others' perceptions influenced Muslim women's feelings of belonging on campus, whether they felt ostracized, even to a degree, and whether that impacted their abilities to be successful academically and socially.

The paradigm of these two studies is an interpretivist/constructivist approach, having the intent to understand the world of human experience. As Mackenzie and Knipe (2006, p. 196) point out, researchers under this paradigm tend to rely upon the participants' views of the situation being studied, recognizing the impact of the background and experiences they, as researchers, also bring to the study. The researchers seek to broaden their understanding of veiled Muslim women and share the information they discover. The studies also hint at a political agenda, which extends them into the realm of the transformative paradigm. Transformative researchers "believe that inquiry needs to be intertwined with politics and a political agenda" (Cresswell, 2003, cited in Mackenzie & Knipe). A research study such as this one is necessarily transformative; to explore the perceptions of Muslim women may be of personal interest to the researchers, but without some belief that the results will support a higher purpose, it is merely an academic exercise. All four researchers seem too impassioned about the study and the women with whom they spoke for this to be the case.

Both studies discussed in this paper cite links between campus climate and educational outcomes, retention, and attrition of minority groups. It makes sense that the experiences of marginalized groups, in the words of the group members themselves, would resonate with educators and administrators intent on providing the best possible experience for all students.

Cole, D & Ahmadi, S

'Perspective and Experiences of Muslim Women Who Veil On College Campuses'

The Research Process

Cole and Ahmadi conducted their study to fulfill a need to add to the existing scanty body of literature on the topic of Muslim women who veil on college campuses. They were not interested, for the purpose of their studies, in exploring non-Muslim's attitudes from the non-Muslim perspective. They were interested in finding out how Muslim women who veiled perceived the attitudes of the non-Muslims around them. It is an interesting approach and one that goes directly to the heart of the matter. Boyer and Sedlacek (1995, cited in Cole & Ahmadi, 2003, p. 50) found "an ability to understand racism [was] significantly correlated to [grade point average]." On college campuses, where the researchers' study took place, it would be expected that there would be an intellectual understanding of prejudice. It is probable that most white students would state they were not biased against any group, including veiled Muslim women. Academic culture fosters an appreciation of diversity and students would most likely want to give the impression of religious tolerance, even if they did not really believe in it. Biases are often evidenced in subtle ways, institutionalized and unintentional. The researchers thus sought to eliminate so-named "white bias" and talk to the Muslim women directly, to learn their thoughts about their veiling practices and the impact of choosing to veil as minorities on the college campus. They did not want to know how non-Muslim students felt; they wanted to know the perceptions of the Muslim women who veiled.

Methodology and Methods

Methodology is defined as "the collection of methods or rules by which a particular piece of research is undertaken" and the "principles, theories and values that underpin a particular approach to research" (Somekh & Lewin, 2005, cited in Mackenzie & Knipe, 2006, p. 196). 'Methodology' and 'method' are sometimes used interchangeably by new researchers, indicating these concepts are not fully understood. Simply put, methodology has a broader context and refers to an overarching approach to a project. Methods are specific tools used, such as surveys and interviews. Methods can be said to be a sub-set of methodology; the reverse is not true.

Cole and Ahmadi conducted qualitative studies of the perceptions and experiences of veiled Muslim women on a college campus. Qualitative research is the perfect "fit" for social research; prejudice can only be scaled according to the perceptions of either the perpetrator or the individual affected, and in both cases the measurement is highly subjective.

Cole and Ahmadi devised a set of five open-ended interview questions. They asked interviewees to define 'veiling,' tell why they do (or did) veil, the extent to which they had considered not veiling, what the interviewees' thought veiling meant to their peers on campus, and what they thought people perceived of them and/or their veils on campus.

Research about prejudice can be uncomfortable. Prejudice against gender, ethnic, racial and religious groups is nothing new, but a research project that explores the origins, manifestations and/or consequences of prejudice forces the researchers to confront the realities in ways they had perhaps not previously done. Prejudice is emotionally charged, with elements of ignorance and fear. Beliefs held by one group about another can become part of the identity of the first group when there are long-standing traditions that shape the culture and the society. Research about prejudice can also be uncomfortable when the researcher has an emotional investment. Cole and Ahmadi are a Christian-Muslim team who investigated the experiences of Muslim women on college campuses. Their work took place before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 although the results were not published until early 2003 when there was heightened awareness of Muslim students on predominantly Christian college campuses and, in fact, in predominantly Christian societies as well.

Validity, Reliability and Credibility

Validity in a research study determines if the construct being used actually measures what it is designed to measure. The study by Cole and Ahmadi did not attempt to quantify the results obtained from interviewing the subjects. They did not, for example, ask subjects to rate their experiences on any kind of scale. The evidence collected was merely anecdotal.

Reliability refers to the nature of the study and whether it could be replicated with comparable results. It seems plausible that the study by Cole and Ahmadi is reliable. Seggie and Sanford conducted a similar study, for example, and reported the same kind of experiences in their subjects. It is likely that on any college campus where veiled Muslim women are a small minority, results would be much the same.

Credibility refers to the believability from the perspective of the participants in the research. Cole and Ahmadi did not have much to go on when they began their study. Their literature review relied on exploring the experiences of international students because there was no research that specifically examined the population of veiled Muslim women. The anecdotes shared by the Muslim women seem believable and realistic, but there is no literature with which to compare their stories.

Ethical Considerations

The researchers approached their subjects with sensitivity. This was important, as subsequent interviews showed that veiled Muslim women did perceive that they were treated differently. Cole & Ahmadi (2003, p. 51) found that participants feared being misquoted to fit stereotypical images. Potential participants also feared they would be questioned in ways that were insensitive or even prejudicial. To provide reassurance for their subjects, the researchers relied on referrals from personal acquaintances and participants for the selection of the sample (snowball sampling). In doing this, the researchers demonstrated an understanding of their subjects' perspective, even without knowing the specifics of the encounters on which the subjects would eventually report. Such sensitivity is essential in a study such as this one, in which subjects must divulge personal information, discuss thoughts and feelings, and risk being judged for expressing opinions with which the researchers may or may not agree. Without trust, the results would be questionable. One would wonder if subjects tailored their answers to fit researchers' supposed expectations; one would wonder if subjects either exaggerated or omitted details because they distrusted or disliked the interviewers. Establishing a trusting relationship with the subjects to be interviewed was thus an important part of the study.

The researchers' own experiences were acknowledged in their studies. Cole and Ahmadi realized their experiences, and thus their subjectivity, "formed a lens of cultural and ethnic difference" (2003, p. 53) through which they viewed the women with whom they spoke. One researcher (we can guess this is Ahmadi) was well versed in Island and both Western and non-Western women's issues. Her worldview, the research team believed, enabled her to identify nuances within common experiences, helping to build a bridge between Muslim and non-Muslim understanding. The other researcher (Cole) had limited contact and exposure to Muslim women who veil, but extensive contact with traditional minority groups. Each, then, brought their own knowledge and sensitivity to the work of the team. They felt, and this writer agrees, that their combined strengths were advantageous in dealing with the sensitive nature of the project and the subjects interviewed.

Seggie, FN & Sanford, G

'Perceptions of Female Muslim Students Who Veil:Campus Religious Climate'

The Research Process

Seggie and Sanford conducted a small qualitative case study. As Methods and Methodology point out, "case studies can be about specific individuals, about specific contexts, or about a specific practice " (p. ) This study incorporates all three of these elements. Muslim women who veil were the specific individuals enlisted for the study. The specific context the researchers looked at was a college campus. The specific practice was veiling and the choices women made about veiling based on their experiences as minorities on campus.

Methodology and Methods

Seggie and Sanford conducted face-to-face interviews with their subjects, in interviews that were generally twice as long as those of Cole and Ahmadi. The first two questions in their 75-90 minute interviews were designed to obtain some demographic and background information such as age, parents' job, and educational and career philosophies. Seggie and Sanford did not attempt to draw any correlations between any of these responses with the responses they got on the questions that followed. Seggie and Sanford devised eight open-ended questions to gain information about participants' campus experiences; relationships with peers, faculty, and administrators; feelings about campus religious climate; and improvements the interviewees would like to see. The women were also asked to describe the best and worst events they had experienced within and outside the classroom, and elaborate on their role as Muslim women. They were asked if their religious practices had changed since they came to campus. Finally, three binary (yes-no) questions were asked to get interviewees' opinions about their academic success and intentions to survive at the school (Seggie & Sanford, 2010, p. 65).

Validity, Reliability and Credibility

The study by Seggie and Sanford did not quantify the results obtained from interviewing the subjects. Evidence was anecdotal and, like the study of Cole and Ahmadi, based on a very small sample size. One can assume there would be veiled Muslim women on the campus studied (as well as other college campuses) who would share stories of similar experiences. However, since not all veiled women were interviewed, it cannot be said definitively that the experiences of the participants are shared by everyone..

As stated in the discussion of the reliability of the study by Cole and Ahmadi, the anecdotes shared by the participants of Seggie and Sanford seem believable and as though they could be replicated on other campuses. Without more data, however, it is impossible to know for certain.

Ethical Considerations

Seggie and Sanford did not specifically refer to their experiences or potential biases in their study. One can draw some conclusions from their regional identification: Fatma Nevra Seggie was affiliated with Bogazici University in Istanbul, Turkey, while Gretchen Sanford was with Michigan State University in the U.S. One can reasonably assume they had different amounts of exposure to Muslim women and a different cultural frame of reference for collaborating on this project. Seggie and Sanford (2010, p. 59) expressed the opinion that there is much higher education institutions can do to support Muslim women, who represent a portion of a population of culturally and ethnically diverse students who share similar stories of prejudice against them. In expressing this opinion, they clearly empathized with the Muslim women and, it would seem, expected to find evidence of bias when they interviewed their subjects.

Conclusion

Seggie and Sanford wrote in their conclusion that the findings "have significant implications for university administrators and student affairs practitioners" (2010, p. 75). Cole and Ahmadi believe their findings will add to a broader understanding of college student populations, an understanding which is "at the core of student affairs administration" (2003, p. 47). Clearly, in both instances, this is not research for its own sake but an effort to add information on which policy-makers can act to effect positive change.

Both studies captured the same kind of information. Participants in the studies (seven in the study of Cole and Ahmadi, thirteen in the study of Seggie and Sanford) recounted personal experiences and offered opinions about veiling and perceptions about veiling by non-Muslim students on their college campuses. The studies selected students from different Muslim countries and who practiced veiling in different ways, from the modest 'chador', which still allows women to show some hair and neck, to the 'hajib', which covers hair and neck completely, to the 'nahqab', which leaves only the eyes uncovered. The researchers did not want nationality or culture to be a focus in the study, but the veiling itself as a part of Muslim religious practice. Most non-Muslims would not be able to make the distinction among veils and their wearers anyway, so it would have been a moot point in the data-collection process. The important part of the studies was to identify women as Muslims. Their faith, and the wearing of the veil, were the commonalities that brought them together.