Examining the Challenges of IIUM Students in Developing Social Solidarity in a Multicultural Muslim Community: A Phenomenological Study

Examining the Challenges of IIUM Students in Developing Social Solidarity in a Multicultural Muslim Community: A Phenomenological Study

Nor Athiah Mohd Noor

Department of Social Foundation and Educational Leadership

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90300057

Received: 20 February 2025; Accepted: 06 March 2025; Published: 28 March 2025

ABSTRACT

IIUM, an institution of higher education rooted in Islamic principles, aims to establish itself as a hub of academic distinction with a strong focus on promoting Islamic values and global engagement. The vision and mission of the institution reflect a commitment to embracing the Ummatic concept. The study aims to investigate the experiences of students at IIUM regarding this matter, focusing on the challenges of Muslim students at IIUM in developing social solidarity within the diverse Muslim community during their academic journey. The study employed the phenomenological research design, where ten participants were selected using purposive sampling. The data were then analyzed using thematic analysis. Research findings of the study showed that participants had some challenges in developing social solidarity with a multicultural community of students through several themes namely university policy, psychological matters, and sociological well-being. It emphasizes the need to improve the curriculum, co-curriculum, and learning environment that considers the multicultural background of the students. The study highlights the necessity for collaboration between educators and university administrators in enhancing curriculum, pedagogy, and administrative procedures that foster social solidarity among multicultural student populations in Islamic educational institutions like IIUM.

Keywords— Multicultural students, Islamic higher education, challenges, social solidarity, Muslim.

INTRODUCTION

Islam perceives multiculturalism as people should be able to be compassionate, cooperative, and supportive of one another despite their differences. Throughout the life of the Prophet Muhammad SAW, he demonstrated respect for adherents of different religions; in Islam, this is a core principle. Islam views variety in ethnicity as an opportunity to come to know one another and support one another in deeds of kindness (Rabiu & Modibbo, 2018). However, several issues arise in multicultural communities, including multicultural violence related to racism, prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping (Kunesh & Noltemeyer, 2019; Youngju, 2022). These issues also arise in several sectors, including the education sector (Bruckner et al., 2022). According to Sherwani (2005), discrimination and divisiveness are problems that affect the Muslim world as well. The issues of division within the Muslim community have led to discussions about social integration and social solidarity within the Muslim community (Cameron, 2015; Cobb et al., 2015; Nollert & Sheikhzadegan, 2016; Chua et al., 2022) as well as religious entities (Draper, 2014). Throughout human history, religious affiliation has undoubtedly been one of the most significant markers of social inclusion and exclusion. This issue brought to light the importance of holistic education, which places a strong emphasis on the role that excellent akhlak plays in helping students develop their character. Good akhlak is necessary to bolster the endeavor of fostering social solidarity and unity, particularly in multicultural societies. Therefore, the Islamic educational institution plays a critical role in creating a good man who can navigate the challenges of living in a multicultural environment.

Therefore, in order to find a solution to this specific problem, multicultural communities must build a social construct through social solidarity. However, there is little concern in particular discussions with the concept of social solidarity in multicultural Muslim atmospheres in educational institutions, particularly in Islamic higher education, in keeping with the mission to achieve social justice and equality in a multicultural setting. In contrast, other fields, such as geopolitics and the sociology of religion, have mainly discussed transnational Muslim solidarity (Cobb et al., 2015). Consequently, current research aims to examine IIUM Muslim students’ challenges in developing social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community. This objective is to know what kind of challenges are faced by multicultural students to develop the spirit of social solidarity among multicultural Muslim students. The development of the spirit of social solidarity is important as it can contribute to the unity of Muslims in tertiary education, particularly in Islamic education. This study is significant because it provides an in-depth look into the lived experience of multicultural university students and their interaction with a multicultural community of friends through phenomenology research. Several research works have examined the challenges of multicultural and multiracial university students (Alanay & Aydin, 2016; Ong et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2015; Chen et al., 2020). Nonetheless, the primary focus of this research, which aims to investigate social solidarity, will be Muslim postgraduate students at IIUM. While examining the challenges of the Muslim community of students of multiple nationalities and cultural differences in developing social solidarity, this study points out the role of Muslim identity (faith) as the backbone of the development of social solidarity in the community of multicultural Muslim students in IIUM. Therefore, religion or the sense of spirituality is the main contributing factor that the researcher explores in developing social solidarity in the multicultural Muslim community of students. Other than that, the role of higher education, particularly in the Islamic university, has been explored in how its educational system helps the development of social solidarity among multicultural Muslim students.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This study is supported by intergroup contact theory, particularly Allport’s hypothesis of intergroup contact (1954). Following World War II, several social scientists started to postulate about intergroup contact (Watson, 1947; William, 1947). Due to racial segregation and the unabated hostility between races in the United States, Gordon Allport (1954) advocated it. UNESCO, for instance, emphasizes the element of contact between different groups as an alternative to improve the progress of social relations (Amir, 1969; Lee, 2020). This theory was developed to reduce the sense of prejudice and intergroup conflict. As a result, the idea of contact between different types of groups helps both directly and indirectly to overcome the issue of prejudice and, at the same time, improve social relations, contributing to policy-making globally. According to Choma, Haji, Hodson, and Hoffarth (2016), the idea of intergroup contact is also helping to improve interfaith relations in addition to politics. In Northern Ireland, for instance, apart from enacting a more inclusive society policy toward Apartheid South Africa, the relationship between Protestants and Catholics has improved (Lloyd & Robinson, 2011).  Therefore, as the subject of the study is between many national groups, this theory is deemed pertinent to this study.

Allport (1954) proposed the intergroup contact hypothesis to examine the element of contact between various groups. Four key concepts—i) equal status, ii) intergroup cooperation, iii) shared goals, and iv) the support of law and institutional authorities—are suggested as positive effects of intergroup contact. Effective contact circumstances require these ideas in order to reduce prejudice against other groups (Pettigrew, 1998). Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that good contact experiences decrease self-reported prejudice toward both a minority group and the outgroup (Works, 1961; Caspi, 1984; Vonofako, Hewstone, & Voci, 2007; Christ & Kauff, 2019).

In fact, contact under Allport’s concept is most successful at reducing prejudice, even under unstructured contact, according to a meta-analysis that followed (Pettigrew & Troop, 2011). The researcher believes that reducing prejudice is one of the important factors in creating a sense of social solidarity, while Allport’s hypothesis focuses on reducing prejudice among intergroups (Kotzur, Schäfer & Wagner, 2019). This is because prejudice is one of the salient conflicts in achieving social solidarity. To elaborate, the four core ideas of Allport’s hypothesis are as follows:

Equal status

Allport (1954) emphasized the importance of equal status in contact settings. Most research agrees that equal status reduces prejudice, even though it is too subjective to describe (Riordan, 1978; Cohen & Lotan, 1995; Cohen, 1982; Robinson & Preston, 1976; Bourhis, 2020). According to one study (Jackman & Crane 1986), lower-status outgroup members suffered adverse consequences in contact circumstances.

Nonetheless, a study found that a school or other multicultural community institution was failing to demonstrate equal status as a fundamental issue in contact circumstances (Patchen, 1982). In light of this, the concept of law and institutional authority support—which also helps to reduce prejudice—needs to be emphasized. For example, in schools, all of the students are seen as having the same identity, uniform, purpose, and ambitions although their familial backgrounds and economic levels vary. At the same time, they are governed by the established norms and regulations of the school administration.

Nevertheless, Islam does not view social status as a criterion for distinguishing between people or how people of different statuses interact. Different statuses should thus not be a barrier to implementing equality for all students, regardless of ethnicity, culture, gender, position, or nationality, as the university bears the name of Islam. According to Syed (2008) and Curtis (2012), Islam views all people as having equal status, regardless of their differences.

Law and Institution Authorities Support

Pettigrew (1998) asserts that new norms and acceptance may emerge with the authority’s cooperation. The military, politics, commerce, education, and religion are just a few of the institutions that can help the authorities gain support. These organizations demonstrate that institutional authorities’ assistance can reduce prejudice (Kende, Tropp & Lantos, 2017). For instance, civil rights legislation in Western civilization includes an act about anti-prejudice principles (Allport, 1958; Elliott, 2017). Another illustration is how a school, as an educational establishment with policies and procedures to oversee student activities, can promote good relationships between students of all races and religions. This study examines how Islamic universities can be a significant authority support to affect positive contact among multicultural students, even though many studies have used educational institutions, such as schools and universities, as the institution authorities’ support (Patchen 1982; Chavous, 2005; Rivas Drake, Saleem, Schaefer, Medina & Jagers, 2019). Therefore, one of the ideas in Allport’s hypothesis about the support of the law and institution authority is supported by this study.

Intergroup Cooperation

Intergroup cooperation, another idea mentioned in Allport’s hypothesis, could be seen as a good outcome in the setting of institutional authority support, such as schools and universities (Rabbie & De Brey, 1971). This idea was demonstrated by Aronson’s jigsaw classroom technique, a psychological strategy in which students are arranged in the classroom to work together to accomplish common objectives (Aronson & Patnoe, 1997). After that, this method’s goal of studying various child groups in both Western and Eastern schools yielded noteworthy results (Walker & Crogan, 1998; Eppler & Hubber, 1990; Araragi, 1983; Aronson & Gonzalez, 1988; Pettigrew, 1998). According to Allport’s hypothesis, the researcher thus investigates the types of cooperation practices and the challenges encountered by multicultural Muslim students at IIUM based on their lived experiences in the Islamic university in order to foster social solidarity among the Muslim ummah.

Common Goals

According to Aronson’s Jigsaw classroom method, students cooperate to accomplish common goals (Aronson & Patnoe, 1997). According to Allport’s hypothesis, a common goal is therefore essential to achieving the beneficial effects of intergroup contact. This idea is comparable to mechanical solidarity, which has to do with shared values and objectives, according to classical scholar Emile Durkheim (Durkheim, 1984). Therefore, the shared value is essential for lowering prejudice and generating other favorable results, such as cooperation and bringing people together while fostering social solidarity.

Thus, it can be argued that IIUM, as an international Islamic educational institution, is one of the most significant institutions where there is an opportunity to cultivate and develop a positive attitude toward other groups.  It is also an arena where quality intergroup contact can be made compulsory, mediated, and guided. If the effort is made to establish equal status between the groups in contact, this effort is encouraged and reinforced by institutional authorities such as IIUM. In that case, it can help to reduce intergroup prejudice. Additionally, social solidarity can be significantly achieved if groups are interdependent, i.e., encouraged to cooperate, work together, and depend on each other to achieve their goals (Simmons et al., 2011; Dale & Moyer-Gusé, 2020). Thus, Figure 1.0 below shows how the hypothesis acts as an intergroup contact accelerator to reduce prejudice for a vision of social solidarity. To promote social solidarity among multicultural Muslim students, educational institutions—particularly Islamic higher education institutions like IIUM—are incorporating Islamic principles into their policies and practices.

Therefore, this study aims to investigate what are the challenges faced by IIUM Muslim students in fostering social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community. To promote social solidarity among varied Muslim students, challenges and obstacles must arise throughout the implementation of the Islamic university’s policies and practices. The researcher employs intergroup contact theory to examine what factors contribute to positive interactions between intergroup to reduce the impression of prejudice as one of the barriers and challenges to promoting social solidarity. Positive interactions between groups, according to the study, can support initiatives aimed at fostering social solidarity within IIUM’s diverse Muslim students. Assume that the key ideas in Allport’s contact theory hypothesis are feasible. In that situation, it should be easier to build social solidarity despite different conflicts and difficulties.

Fig 1 Causal Model for Allport’s Hypothesis of Intergroup Contact (1954)

LITERATURE REVIEW

Social solidarity in education

In Western contexts, social solidarity has primarily been examined in terms of inclusivity, equality, and educational human rights (Mayorga & Picower, 2018; Gelepithis & Giani, 2020). Additionally, social solidarity in education has been analyzed in other vital sectors, such as the economy (Zambeta & Kolofousi, 2014; Gelepithis & Giani, 2020). This relationship compels society to foster social solidarity through education to achieve the goals of a stronger national economy and sustainable development. Consequently, social solidarity has been employed not only to cultivate a peaceful environment but also to attain specific objectives and visions of communities, such as social justice and national economic achievement (Zambeta & Kolofousi, 2014). Social solidarity has been studied not only in Western and Southeast Asian contexts but also in the educational sector of multicultural and multi-ethnic countries (Liu et al., 2017; Patras et al., 2022). For these countries, fostering a sense of social solidarity is essential to establishing peaceful relationships among multi-ethnic residents, while also enhancing national integration and patriotism. In nations such as South Korea, China, and Malaysia, discussions on national integration and social solidarity have been progressively aligned with their national policy visions, recognizing the diverse ethnic and cultural composition of their populations (Liu et al., 2017; Patras et al., 2022). This policy is crucial for national stability and has the potential to influence other vital sectors, such as the economy and political conditions. Previous studies have demonstrated that social solidarity stems from specific motives and shared goals, including national integration, economic prosperity, and political stability. Therefore, the researcher intends to investigate the concept of social solidarity at an Islamic university (IIUM), with a focus on the motives and vision of Muslim unity.

Social solidarity in the Muslim community

The Muslim world is not exempt from issues of prejudice and disunity (Sherwani, 2005). In response to the disunity within the Muslim community, discussions have emerged regarding social integration and social solidarity (Redekop, 1967; Cameron, 2015; Cobb et al., 2015; Nollert & Sheikhzadegan, 2016; Chua et al., 2022) as well as religious entities (Draper, 2014). Throughout history, religious affiliation has undoubtedly been one of the most significant indicators of social inclusion and exclusion, with numerous instances of religious persecution (Schachner et al., 2019). The traumatic experiences of the World Wars and the Civil and Human Rights movements in the second half of the 20th century led to substantial initiatives in Western countries to institutionalize a culture of tolerance (Grant & Gibson, 2015). However, with the rise of Islamic consciousness in the Muslim world and its spread to Western countries over the past two decades, there have been increasing calls to emphasize the limitations of tolerance (Evans, 2011). Consequently, Muslim solidarity has gained unprecedented political significance (Nollert, 2016). Most Western studies have focused primarily on the perceptions of native populations regarding the Muslim community residing within their territories (Cameron, 2015; Nollert, 2016). The perception of Muslims themselves on social solidarity remains largely under-researched (Siddiqi, 2014). According to the World Values Surveys and European Values Survey, these studies examined the attitudes of native populations toward Muslims but did not explore the values and attitudes of Muslims themselves toward social solidarity (Davidov et al., 2009). However, some research has addressed the extent of tolerance among multi-faith communities, including Muslims, such as the studies by Inglehart and Norris (2012) and Tausch (2015), which examine the tolerance levels within Muslim communities across different states. However, the studies by Tausch and Karoui (2011) and Tausch (2015) indicate that the Salafist position in Europe is marginalized within the broader Muslim community. This lack of solidarity is attributed to divergent interpretations of Islamic thought. Milligan, Andersen, and Brym (2014) observed that European tolerance varies not only between nations but also among Muslims and Christians, as well as between religious practitioners and non-practitioners. Furthermore, Koopmans (2015), based on a survey of Muslims of Turkish and Moroccan origin in six European countries, contended that religious conservative attitudes are more prevalent among Muslims than among indigenous Christians. Despite this, the aforementioned studies and data from the European and World Values Studies are of limited relevance to this particular study, as they do not examine actions or elucidate what social solidarity means to Muslims and the kind of solidarity they prefer.

Higher education as a social agent

Like lower education, higher education is also a significant institution with ample opportunities to prepare future citizens. Universities foster attitudes of comfort with diversity and skills in interpersonal problem-solving (Thomas, 1997). Educational institutions are regarded as places for studying not only the content of the syllabus but also values, opinions, and even behaviors. Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, and Gurin (2002) proposed that young people should experience a psychosocial moratorium, as defined by Erik Erikson’s concept of identity development, where they can explore multiple social roles before committing to any one role. This approach ensures that young people, especially those pursuing higher education, make informed choices based on a broad range of experiences rather than unexamined prior experiences. Therefore, universities must ensure that they provide the optimal environment and setting for the development of young adults into upright members of society who can become its strong pillars (Klafter, 2020). Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, and Gurin (2002) have highlighted that young adults have the potential to influence long-established behaviors. This argument underscores the responsibility of educational institutions to cultivate successful students who can positively nurture good values in one another. Hence, universities become the focal point for teaching students that diversity is valuable in promoting social solidarity.

In this context, universities, as institutions of higher education, play a crucial role in fostering attitudes and values that encourage the younger generation to embrace diversity and reduce prejudice against individuals from different communities, ethnicities, sects, faiths, or skills. One of the key mechanisms for achieving this is intergroup communication among students (Green, 2019). According to a theory proposed by Allport (1958), when individuals from different groups interact supportively, their prejudice toward one another diminishes. Therefore, educational institutions should provide ample opportunities for meaningful contact to facilitate student socialization. Previous research indicates that such approaches in schools and universities have consistently reduced discrimination in intergroup interactions (Mäkinen et al., 2019; Tropp et al., 2022).

In the context of intercultural communication, Simmons et al. (2011) regarded educational institutions as venues for promoting positive attitudes towards out-groups (i.e., communities to which one does not belong). For instance, in addressing racism, the United States has targeted schools to reduce discrimination between Whites and African Americans (Pettigrew, 2011). The importance of intercultural interaction in educational institutions has also been emphasized in Northern Ireland, where it has consistently positively impacted group attitudes among opposing Christian groups (Everett, 2013). Additionally, educational researchers have provided evidence supporting diverse academic interactions by comparing survey responses from students and teachers who believe that students value contact with various races and ethnicities. Such interactions have been linked to improved performance on different educational outcomes, benefiting both students and the community (Gurin et al., 2002; Tropp et al., 2022).

AIM OF THE STUDY

The current study examines the challenges of IIUM Muslim students in developing social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community. Through this aim, the study has one research question: 1) What challenges do IIUM Muslim students face in fostering social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community?

METHOD

Participant

Ten people participated in this study: two were chosen by a snowball technique for dyadic interviews, and eight were chosen for one-on-one interviews. Candidates must meet the following requirements in order to be considered for the study.

A participant who had spent a minimum of three years as a post-graduate student at IIUM.

A participant holding a position as a committee member of an academic/co-curricular society in IIUM (for a dyadic interview) and a student without any post in an academic/co-curricular society in IIUM (one-to-one interviews).

Instrument

The main instrument for this study is the interview questions. The interview questions are constructed based on the research question of the study. The researcher uses semi-structured interviews to obtain the required data. The interview starts with investigating the student’s background. Next, the researcher examines the experiences with the multicultural community of students in their curricular/co-curricular activities which they are joining. Then, the researcher examines the challenges faced by the multicultural Muslim community of students in fostering social solidarity based on their lived experiences. Therefore, the study provides a set of rules for the interview protocol based on the research theory shown in Table I.

Table 1:- Interview Protocol

One-to-one Interviews. To gather primary data for this study, the researcher interviewed eight participants one-on-one. The eight participants are postgraduate students who are not affiliated with any academic or extracurricular organizations at the university. They are interviewed to answer the challenges IIUM Muslim students face in fostering social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community. Typically, face-to-face interviews take place. This approach may help the interviewer better grasp what is being said by allowing the researcher to decipher non-verbal signs by observing body language, facial expression, and eye contact. Depending on their schedule and venue availability, they are questioned at different times and locations.

Dyadic Interview. In contrast to focus groups and one-on-one interviews, which require three or more participants, dyadic interviews only involve two people (Morgan, Ataie, Carder, & Hoffman, 2013). This method has been investigated in-depth, especially with partners and couples (Taylor & de Vocht, 2011). In order to conduct this study, the researcher needs two participants who are representatives of the university’s academic society and co-curricular club committees. They should have extensive experience participating in various university-sponsored events and programs, both those run by the university and those run by the students themselves.

Study Design

Since the researcher explores the challenges IIUM Muslim students face in fostering social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community, intergroup contact theory (Allport, 1958) is used to explain their interaction to develop a sense of social solidarity among the Muslim community of students. Therefore, the researcher uses qualitative research to interpret the students’ challenges through their lived experiences to answer the following questions: What are the challenges faced by IIUM Muslim students in fostering social solidarity in a multicultural Muslim community? The researcher uses a phenomenological technique to gain a deeper understanding and analysis from the participants because the phenomenon is being investigated via the students’ lived experiences. Participants’ experiences are, therefore, interpreted according to the meaning they discover.

DATA COLLECTION

Triangulation is carried out to ensure the qualitative study is reliable, especially regarding its credibility. According to Denzin (1978) and Patton (2002), method triangulation verifies the coherence of results produced by several data collection techniques. For instance, this study uses in-depth dyadic and one-on-one interviews to gather participant data. Only eight individuals were interviewed one-on-one by the researcher to gather the primary data for the study. The eight participants are postgraduate students without any official university positions in academics or extracurricular activities. Face-to-face interviews are usually conducted. By enabling the researcher to interpret non-verbal cues through body language, facial expressions, and eye contact, this method may assist the interviewer in better understanding what is being stated. Their schedule and the availability of the venue determine the times and places at which they are questioned. For a different approach, a dyadic interview, the researcher needs two participants who are representatives of the university’s academic society and co-curricular club committees. They are required to have a wide range of experience taking part in different programs and events at the university, both those run by the university and those run by the students themselves.

DATA ANALYSIS

Following data collection, Moustakas’ transcendental phenomenological model was used for the analysis of this study. This analysis reduced phenomenology, textual explanation, and analysis synthesis (Moustakas, 1994; Patton, 2002). The researcher manages a sizable amount of raw data by using the phenomenological reduction method. By reviewing each transcription and making any required modifications, the researcher ensures that the transcriptions are accurate during the initial coding cycle. Data organization is the main goal of this step. The researcher arranges the data by reviewing the interview data. The first cycle method referred to as provisional coding by Atkinson (2013) and Saldana (2014), allows the researcher to find relevant data and establishes the framework for interpretation and conclusion-making. “The mechanics of the subtle process of having ideas and concepts of data” refers to the first coding of the raw data (Atkinson, 2013, p. 27). The researcher can create recurrent themes into the appropriate categories of the research topic with the aid of this process of recognizing a phenomenon of experiences. The core meaning is preserved, while any overlapping meanings are ignored. The coding process becomes fluid as the researcher continuously reviews the data, leading to enhanced analysis and interpretation. Additionally, the emerging themes are systematically categorized under the research question of the study.

The second step involves identifying and organizing participants’ ideas and concepts pertinent to the research question. The researcher developed the category based on the interview questions, with the primary questions designed to minimize potential bias and establish common themes. To ensure the accuracy of transcriptions, the researcher listens to each response and compares the transcription with the audio recordings of participants’ responses. In the third step, the researcher employs the process of ‘horizontalization’ as described by Moustakas (1994). The researcher looks for every significant statement about their challenges in developing social solidarity. Any irrelevant responses are sorted out into a separate sheet to be determined later for use in the analysis process. The researcher also observes over-arching themes in the data. The fourth stage involves the development of clusters of meanings from the themes. For this process, Moustakas (1994) and Van Manen (1990) affirmed removing any unsupported statements from the main responses. Thus, the researcher creates textual descriptions developed from a cluster of themes of the research question. The researcher also revises all the themes and the research question to ensure the validity of data and interpretation of the results. Finally, the researcher identifies the entire big picture of the challenges faced by the students based on their lived experiences, including their curricular and co-curricular activities.

RESULTS

In this section, the researcher presents the qualitative results addressing the research question: the challenges of IIUM students in developing social solidarity in the multicultural Muslim community.

Question 1: What are the challenges in building social solidarity among our students at IIUM in the multicultural Muslim community?

This section presents the one-to-one and dyadic interview results to explore students’ challenges in developing social solidarity. The researcher divides the students’ challenges into three main themes: university policy, psychological matters, and sociological well-being. Table II below shows the main themes and their sub-themes that have emerged:

Table 2 :- Themes And Subthemes Emerged

University policy. The sub-theme of this theme is one of the student’s challenges in fostering social solidarity which is the university program. In dealing with student activities in such university programs, there are still challenges in achieving them. One of the student committees shared,

“I think the biggest challenge is when we have no clear objective in our program in our university as long as in our kulliyyah. For example, the committee member itself not clear and understand with the objective of the program. We just focus to finish and run the activities as long as it can fulfill the Kulliyyah/university schedule. Then the participants as well as the committee member finished the program without consciously understood the objective of the program such as to achieve social solidarity among multicultural Muslim students.” (Ina:DU29)

Other than the issue of the unclear objective of the program, she added another issue: funding for the university program. She said,

“For me, we must have good funding. Because to encourage and build a good relationship among multicultural students we have to conduct a good program. And a good program always needs good funding such as a program of ummatic week, we need a lot of funds to make the program more effective and get a good response from students and staff.” (Ina: DU37)

As a student who has conducted numerous university programs, she also recommended an evaluation of the program to make sure the next one, particularly the university’s yearly program, will be more impactful and effective. She proposed as,

“In uia we have ummatic week every single year. So, from that, we can evaluate through that kind of program is this successful enough to build social solidarity among multicultural Muslim students here.” (Ina:DU39)

Nevertheless, according to Ina (the student committee), student involvement and activities alone cannot ensure the goal of fostering social solidarity among IIUM’s heterogeneous Muslim student body. This is because she brought attention to certain problems, like the university program’s ambiguous goals and the funding for it. After that, an assessment of the university’s current programs should be made available in order to address any shortcomings and make the upcoming program more effective and significant, particularly for multicultural students. These problems are regarded as a component of the difficulties in fostering social solidarity among multicultural Muslim students at IIUM via an academic program. However, it is believed that these issues can be surmounted with the appropriate measures.

The next theme is psychological matters. One of the sub-themes of this particular theme is attitudes. Answering the study’s research question, negative attitude is one of the main ideas of the sub-theme of attitudes. Two types of negative attitudes are mentioned by the participants of the study as their challenges in fostering social solidarity, which are discrimination and prejudice. The issue of discrimination is rooted in the problem of in-group favouritism (Grimm, Utikal & Valmasoni, 2017). For example, the student prefers to communicate only with someone in their group, such as their ethnicity or nationality, and tries to avoid someone not in their ‘in-group’ community. It can be seen through what has been shared by Kas when she said,

“People who avoid interacting with foreigners who are not from their community.” (Kas: DU23)

People are subtly offended, uncomfortable, marginalized, and subjected to discrimination because of this circumstance. Individuals who exhibit “in-group” favoritism are more likely to harbor discriminatory views toward others who are not “in-group” as they are. The majority of participants, however, solely mentioned the administrative staff’s treatment of multicultural students—particularly international students—when discussing the issue of discrimination at IIUM.

For Man, he specifically mentioned those who are committing discrimination based on his observation. He also clarified that he never sees the academic staff have that kind of attitude. He said,

“The least favor when I went to some office, I feel sometimes very sad when I look some discrimination happened in front of my eyes. Especially from the admin staff, not from academic staff..”(Man:DU23)

Another participant, who is an international student, shared her bad experience with the administrative staff. She also received poor treatment from the administrative staff, as she shared,

“About the discrimination, I have faced related to the process of renewing visa, sometimes they are not really understanding when we ask for any documents, they get mad if I request the letters many time” (Fat: DU30)

The last participant, Kam, shared his experience and disappointment with the attitude of some administrative staff. According to him, they act unfairly towards international students, while the services given are not the same as those given to the local students.

“Many of them said the officer/admin staff are not so friendly to them (international students) and not treating them like to the local student.” (Kam: DU47)

He added that their attitudes disappointed him because they are not ashamed to show their unfair attitudes at difficult times, such as during the last COVID-19 lockdown. He observed how the staff treats the local students, which contradicts how they treat him as an international student. It makes him feel very sad about being discriminated against by the staff while he comes to this country alone without his family or relatives.

“, I also heard so many complaints during this period of lockdown even I also experienced that the staff acted unfairly toward us (foreigners) compared to how they treated the local students. They should be more empathetic to us because most of us are coming from far away here alone and leaving our families and children to seek knowledge here and not being harsh to us. It’s disappointed us. They should not make us feel uncomfortable without our family members but they should make us happy here.” (Kam: DU47)

Accordingly, Kam suggested a recommendation to the university based on his own experiences,

“And I think lots of improvement can be done by the university especially this lockdown period which is many people get pressure. They wanted to go out but can’t. If local student, they can go back their home for the time being, but for international students like us, we get pressure day by day and sometime we feel that we have been discriminated by the university because getting different treatment compared with the locals. And I heard so many complaints about this.” (Kam: DU49)

He then added that the attitudes of those staff should be changed for better attitudes in line with the good values taught by Islamic principles. He worried that the other universities or institutions that bring the name of secular are better at promoting good values taught by Islam than those that carry the name of Islam, such as the Islamic university. He said,

“The officer also should be friendly to the international students not treating bias to international students with the locals. I think this is very important because it relates to the Islamic identity while IIUM is the Islamic university. We were so upset when heard people say the secular university is far better in terms of student fees and how the staff treats the students.” (Kam: DU53)

According to him, a university that bears the name of Islam should be more merciful to its students—for example, paying fees that do not put too much pressure on students from poor countries like his. He saw that other universities do not carry the name of Islam but promote secular values that are more merciful to all groups of students. For example, they provide special assistance or assistance to students in need. Apart from that, they also promote good values to everyone, regardless of students or staff. It is because everyone is considered worthy of receiving good treatment as a human being. In fact, social solidarity requires positive attitudes, for instance, to be kind to others and concerned about the problems of others, such as the issue of lack of ability to settle recitation dues. This also aligns with the theme of collective commitment, where a collective of individuals in departments, faculty, student society, etc., proactively cooperate to help and cover others’ weaknesses, especially for those in need. Therefore, Kam expects this improvement from an institution that carries the name of Islam in line with the mission of social solidarity of one ummah in the multicultural Muslim community in IIUM.

Another participant, a local student, Ina, shared almost the same thing about the discrimination between local and international students. She said,

“Yes. I have a friend who expressed her dissatisfaction when the local and international students have a same question but different response. So, they felt discriminated by the administrators. Especially when registration and financial process”. (Ina: DU45)

Her response shows that as a local student, she did not get any dissatisfaction from the administrative staff services, considering she did not share any dissatisfaction in that matter. However, she only shared her dissatisfaction with her international student friends.

Meanwhile, the researcher also has the same experience. In this case, the researcher not only heard the same problem complained about by international friends but also saw how the administrative staff scolded the international friends just because of small problems. It is even sadder that the same problem occurs among local students, but the response given by the admin staff is not as bad as that given to international students.

Other than discrimination, prejudice is another negative attitude shared by the participants of the study. According to Kai, he has the issue of trust with his multicultural friends. At the same time, he believes mutual trust is crucial to building social solidarity in a multicultural community. He said,

“The biggest challenge to build solidarity in our Muslim multicultural community is perhaps how to trust each other.” (DU14)

The problem of difficulty trusting others might happen because of the feeling of prejudice against certain kinds of people or races. The feeling of prejudice might be rooted in the problem of stereotyping. For example, when the person has an early assumption that negatively influences how they see people, interact, and treat them. It can be seen through the experience shared by Kas as she said,

“People who avoid interacting with foreigners who are not from their community because they are scared of certain behaviour, they assume the international community have.” (Kas: DU23)

In other words, they are generalizing that all international students have certain kinds of behaviour which are unpleasant and scary. Furthermore, this problem of stereotyping that leads to the feeling of prejudice is caused by unpleasant experiences. For example, Kai shared that he has bad experiences with international students which makes him feel afraid to communicate with other international students. He shared,

“well, I have involved in some kind misunderstanding between me and my international friends that lead small quarrel between us. From that event, I feel afraid to communicate with the other international friend.” (Kai: DU9)

The same goes for Kak when she raised her feelings of prejudice to other certain kinds of ethnicities with some prediction of their negative responses. She said,

“I always be careful when interacting with the friends who are different race with me especially from certain ethnics and races because I can predict their responses if they do not satisfy with my statement.” (Kak: DU34)

This feeling can make people lose their sense of trust in each other. People may have doubts about each other. This feeling will remain if it is not removed with respect and try to learn and understand the differences between different cultures and races. Thus, positive values such as openness, respect, tolerance, equal service, and being kind are needed to overcome these negative feelings and attitudes.

Another theme contributing to the students’ challenges is sociological well-being. The selected sub-theme answering the research question of the study is cultural adaptation. The researcher found that all participants revealed that they faced cultural adaptation with their friends from different cultural backgrounds. Cultural adaptation, or the other name, for acculturation, is the process by which people or groups fit in and adapt to a new cultural setting (Berry, 2005). People may experience this when they relocate to a new environment, or neighbourhoods with different cultural norms, beliefs, and customs. They have to acquire the knowledge, abilities, attitudes, and behaviours required to successfully and comfortably navigate a new cultural environment in cultural adaptation. This process is not only a common practice among the multicultural community of students in IIUM, but some of the participants of the study also expressed it as one of the challenges. The cultural adaptation they faced during their interaction with the community of multicultural Muslim students allowed them to face cultural and language barriers as their biggest challenges. Therefore, the process of cultural adaptation needs the ongoing process of learning about differences due to cultural and language barriers.

In the process of cultural adaptation, the students faced several phases. One of the phases is miscommunication. Miscommunication is a normal phenomenon in the learning process during cultural adaptation. The gap of differences in cultural matters tends to cause misunderstanding and miscommunication when one party cannot clearly and accurately understand the message from the other party. As Kak and Wis shared,

“Sometimes there may be miscommunication or misunderstanding of the message, which requires clarification.” (Kak: DU27)

“I think the barriers to foster close relationship with my multicultural friends is misunderstanding.” (Wis: DU27)

The problem of miscommunication or misunderstanding needs to be overcome through cultural adaptation. In cultural adaptation, they have to adapt to the differences, such as the differences in habits and their approach to communication, whether verbal or gesture. These differences with significant gaps are based on their own cultures, which the out-group may view as weird. There is no denying that adapting to a significant gap of differences is quite challenging. Still, several quality values can overcome it, such as tolerance, trust, understanding, etc. Ivo shared her obstacles as,

“The obstacles I experience when building relationships with multicultural friends are adapting to friends’ habits, and adapting to good communication with them, both verbally and gesture.” (Ivo: DU27)

Unfortunately, the problem of misunderstanding may lead to conflict between different races, for example, leading to small quarrels, as shared by Kai,

“Well, I have been involved in some kind of misunderstanding between me and my international friends that led small quarrel between us.” (Kai: DU9)

Based on the sharing of Kai above, although it is just a small quarrel between them, it may create a negative perception of each other as the consequence of such conflict. Thus, that perception would make the other suitable values, such as trust and tolerance, more challenging to develop between different races. Anyway, understanding each other is very important. Although people do not understand other cultures enough, they must learn to know and understand to avoid any conflicts due to miscommunication. As shared by Kam,

“If have no understanding you would be fighting on each other. For example, if we look at culture here, if someone pointing the finger like this (showing his finger) you are considered as rude. But for my culture, doing that action is normal when you did to someone for telling something to him/her.” (Kam: DU17)

The sharing of Kam indicated that understanding others effectively resolves conflicts that can contribute to strengthening social bonds and developing a more resilient and cohesive community (Hogan, 2020; Suleimany, Mokhtarzadeh & Sharifi, 2022). Therefore, the key lies in addressing conflicts constructively through fostering understanding, and working towards shared goals and values (Aronson & Patnoe, 1997; Durkheim, 1984; Hogan, 2020; Suleimany, Mokhtarzadeh & Sharifi, 2022) can make a conflict as one of the tools along the journey of cultural adaptation.

Meanwhile, Nai revealed that he has a communication problem with the community of multicultural friends particularly the problem of a language barrier. Language barriers may also be one of the reasons for miscommunication. When the language, especially English, a medium language in the university, cannot be understood well, it would affect the communication between two parties. As he said,

“The barrier to developing close relationships with multicultural friends, as in my experience, is language. Communication is sometimes not very good because of this language barrier” (Nai: DU27)

Unsurprisingly, the language spoken is sometimes unclear and challenging to understand. It is because some students are not native speakers of English, and most of them struggle to learn and practice that foreign language daily. Some of them feel inferior in speaking English because they worry about grammatical and language errors in their communication with the multicultural community. However, it can be overcome by the awareness that the key to communication is understanding the message, not the grammar itself. As shared by Fat,

“Previously, I quit worrying about grammatical mistakes, but later I always tell myself that the key in communication is the understanding of the message, grammar is not the most important compared to the content of the communication itself.” (Fat: DU30)

Thus, the issue of miscommunication occurred due to factors such as the clash of ideas in terms of language and culture. If they fail to understand different cultures and their language correctly, it would lead to miscommunication. Thus, it indicates the significance of effective communication. Effective communication is crucial for resolving conflicts within a community when facing a conflict (Muluken, 2020). Effective communication is needed to solve such conflicts since the salient conflict can decrease social solidarity (Molm et al., 2007). Conflicts, such as misunderstandings and disagreements, can be addressed through dialogue, allowing for compromises and solutions that contribute to harmony and solidarity (Iwabuchi, 2021). Meanwhile, inclusive communication practices ensure that all community members feel heard and valued, and at the same time, the value of social equality and justice can be practised (Logan, 2021). When diverse voices are acknowledged and included, it promotes a sense of belonging and solidarity among different groups. Communication allows for expressing and celebrating cultural diversity within a society while appreciating and understanding different cultural perspectives, which can contribute to a more inclusive and solidary community. If the issue of miscommunication is not solved here, developing the spirit of social solidarity in IIUM will become more challenging.

Based on the issues of cultural and language barriers, especially in the communication among multicultural Muslim communities of students, the alternative to gaining appreciation and understanding of different cultural perspectives needs some effort through a collective commitment to having positive attitudes such as learning about other cultures, learning new things about others, and knowing others. Based on the responses of the participants of the study, learning culture has been portrayed in their experiences. For example, Kam is interested in learning more about other cultures as his manifestation of appreciation for the diversity created by God as he shared,

“the environment here reminds me the ayah of Quran which Allah says, “…We created you from a male and a female, and made you into peoples and tribes so that you may ˹get to˺ know one another….” I experienced myself with this ayah here where I see so many nations and cultural difference and I do not hate the differences besides I feel interested to know and learn more.” (Kam: DU9)

For Ivo, she has expressed her alternative to gain understanding by learning other cultures to understand them and try to accept the differences. As she shared,

“I learned to understand and accept the differences of each different individual. Because in fact, different ethnicities and cultures certainly have different perceptions, views and opinions.” (Ivo: DU13)

The effort to understand is not an easy way. It even requires an adaptation that requires people to study patiently, as shared by Man,

“Adapting to a foreign environment/difference was not easy at first. But if we want to study patiently, everything will be beautiful.” (Man: DU11)

Thus, according to all the explanations above, three main themes namely university policy, psychological matters, and sociological well-being contribute to answering the study’s research question: the challenges of IIUM students to foster social solidarity in the multicultural Muslim community.

DISCUSSION

This study examined students’ challenges to foster social solidarity, as this concept can potentially develop a sense of Muslim solidarity among multicultural communities. The concept of social solidarity is chosen to overcome the issue of Muslim disunity and multicultural violence that has occurred for a long time. However, the challenges to fostering social solidarity should be addressed first in order to make the effort to foster social solidarity work more effectively. According to the study findings, university policy, psychological matters, and sociological well-being represent the students’ challenges to foster social solidarity in multicultural Muslim students. University policy, particularly through the selected sub-theme, university program is one of the students’ challenges to foster social solidarity. This issue may arise because the students, encompassing both committee members and program participants, lack the ummatic personalities and dispositions necessary to embody the essence of the program. Regrettably, they remain predominantly individualistic, focusing solely on their gains. If the students had polished the qualities of Muslim characters with the ummatic personalities and attitudes in their hearts and minds, this problem would not have arisen. According to Othman (2011), “Ummatic personality” describes characteristics that align with Islamic spirituality as described in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. According to Al-Isra’:85 in the Qur’an, “The spirit is from the command of my Lord.” Therefore, to foster a sense of social solidarity among multicultural Muslim participants in such programs, they must heavily include the spirit of Islamic spirituality in all types of events and programs, whether they are academic or extracurricular.

Another theme, psychological matters, highlights the consequences of negative attitudes as another student’s challenge to foster social solidarity. The negative attitudes stemmed from two primary issues: acts of discrimination and feelings of prejudice. According to participants’ responses, these problems occurred among both students and administrative staff. For instance, one participant noted that some students exclusively communicate with peers belonging to their ‘in-group,’ such as friends who share the same nationality or culture. This behavior reflects a sense of ‘in-group’ favoritism in various university activities. When they have a sense of in-group favouritism, they discriminate against someone considered an ‘out-group’ (Grimm, Utikal & Valmasoni, 2017), such as someone with a different nationality, language, and culture. Previous literature approved that in-group favouritism may lead to discrimination to out-group (Grimm, Utikal & Valmasoni, 2017; Dickinson, Masclet & Peterle, 2018; Abbink & Harris, 2019). Generally, group affiliations play a significant role in social interactions. Accordingly, various studies have shown that human behaviour is affected by the membership to a group, for which membership can be based on multiple dimensions such as ethnicity (Verkuyten, 2007; Shi & Tang, 2015; Meier, Pierce, Vaccaro & La Cara 2016; Lewis & Bates, 2017; Ji & Bates, 2021), or affiliation to a university (Ockenfels &Werner, 2014). Group identity can also be based on activities (Eckel &Grossman, 2005) and still substantially influence behaviour.

Nevertheless, only one participant mentioned the experience of discrimination among students. However, the majority of the participants did mention the problem of discrimination that they experienced by themselves, which involved the administration staff. They voiced their dissatisfaction with the poor treatment given by the university administration staff. As far as the researcher is concerned, all the administration officers and staff who deal with the students are local staff members who have only one kind of ethnicity.

The researcher also had the experience of seeing a staff member treat local and international students differently, even though the questions given by both students were the same. The staff seemed more emotional when answering questions from the international students (especially certain kinds of ethnicity) but polite when serving local students. The majority of the participants also share this kind of experience. In line with previous literature, the researcher found that individuals tend to be more generous toward in-group members than out-group members (Dickinson, Masclet & Peterle, 2018; Abbink & Harris, 2019).

Another problem highlighted in the idea of a negative attitude is the feeling of prejudice. Although most participants do not mention this issue, it should also be considered as one of the challenges since one participant mentions it. The participant shared that he has a problem with trusting his multicultural friends, especially for certain ethnicities, even though he knows that trust is vital to building good relationships with a multicultural community. It happens due to the participant’s bad experiences that caused a conflict with his friend of a specific ethnicity. Molm et al. (2007) have proved through their Causal Model for the reciprocity theory of social exchange (Molm et al., 2007) that salient conflict is the element that can decrease the level of social solidarity.

Thus, that conflict leads to another problem which is the feeling of prejudice. According to Baldwin (2017), prejudice is a broad social phenomenon and area of research, complicated by intolerance in internal cognitions but manifest in symbol usage (verbal, nonverbal, mediated), law and policy, and social and organisational practice. It is based on group identification (i.e., perceiving and treating a person or people regarding outgroup membership). However, that outgroup can range from the more commonly known outgroups based on race, sex, nationality, or sexual orientation.

The last theme is sociological well-being through one of its sub-themes, cultural adaptation. This sub-theme emerged from the ideas of cultural barriers and language barriers. Both ideas lead to the problem of miscommunication between different cultures. Literature indicates that miscommunication is familiar in the intercultural community of tertiary education (Chick, 1989; House, 2014; Shishavan, H. B., & Sharifian, 2016; Matsumoto, 2018). Due to the various types of cultures and languages present in multicultural communities, miscommunication is a common problem. Accordingly, a varied population will interpret languages, signs, and other means of communication differently. Thus, their communication, decision-making, and approach to the conflict are all impacted by this.

According to the participants, most of them shared that miscommunication tends to happen due to the language barrier. For example, the culture of pointing the finger may portray different interpretations that contradict meaning on each other. The problem would start when they misunderstand the meaning of a specific culture, which contradicts their own culture and norms. One culture may interpret it as a usual symbol, for example, to show something, but the other may interpret it as offensive behaviour. Thus, when that culture is misinterpreted, it can lead to negative feelings and, worst, it would lead to negative behaviour, such as causing fights between different ethnicities. Thus, it would lead to negative expressive value as positive expressive value is proven to increase the level of social solidarity based on the Causal Model for the reciprocity theory of social exchange (Molm et al., 2007).  As a result, the effort to develop social solidarity will be more complex and challenging when the multicultural student community lacks the openness to learning about different cultures and respect for other cultures.

Thus, according to all the explanations above, three main themes namely university policy through its sub-theme, university program, psychological matter through its sub-theme attitudes, and sociological well-being through its sub-theme cultural adaptation contribute to answering the research question of the study: the challenges of IIUM students to foster social solidarity in multicultural Muslim communities.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, findings indicate that the themes of university policy, psychological matters, and sociological well-being are the main challenges for multicultural Muslim students in fostering social solidarity. Thus, the community of multicultural Muslim students requires a collective commitment to practising positive attitudes and values guided by their spiritual motivation to boost the spirit of social solidarity in the multicultural Muslim community of students. They should be clear and aware of the ummatic mission and vision in fostering social solidarity in Muslim ummah by strengthening their ummatic personalities to be implemented in university activities. Islamic principles should be utilized to acquire the practical skills necessary for success in an increasingly technological society. Consequently, Islamic teachings on social relations and interactions are essential. Muslim students must first cultivate positive attitudes and become good human beings before striving to be good Muslims.

Therefore, these findings highlight the necessity of enhancing the curriculum, co-curriculum, and learning environment to accommodate students’ multicultural backgrounds. The study underscores the need for collaboration between educators and university management to develop curricula, teaching methodologies, and management practices that can cope with the challenges faced by students and foster social solidarity among multicultural students in Islamic universities such as IIUM.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia for funding this study under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS17-014-0580). We would also like to thank all the participants who volunteered their time and participated in this study, without whom the research would not have been possible.

REFERENCES

1. Abbink, K., & Harris, D. (2019). In-group favouritism and out-group discrimination in naturally occurring groups. PloS one, 14(9), e0221616
2. Achmad, W. (2022). Social Action and Social Solidarity: Community Empowerment in the Digital Age. Neo Journal of economy and social humanities, 1(3), 30-35.
3. Alanay, H., & Aydin, H. (2016). Multicultural education: The challenges and attitudes of undergraduate students in Turkey. Egitim ve Bilim, 41(184).
4. Allport, G. W., Clark, K., & Pettigrew, T. (1954). The nature of prejudice.
5. Allport, G. W. (1958). The nature of prejudice: Abridged. Doubleday.
6. Araragi, C. (1983). The effect of the jigsaw learning method on children’s academic performance and learning attitude. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology.
7. Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997). The jigsaw classroom: Buildings cooperation in the classroom. University Michigan: Longman.
8. Atkinson, P. A. (2013). Ethnography and craft knowledge. Qualitative Sociology Review, 9(2), 56-63.
9. Berry, J. W. (2005). Acculturation. In Culture and human development (pp. 263-273). Psychology Press.
10. Bourhis, R. Y. (2020). A journey researching prejudice and discrimination. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 61(2), 95.
11. Brown, E. C. F., Lawrence, M. B., McCuskey, E. Y., & Wiley, L. F. (2020). Social Solidarity in Health Care, American-Style. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 48(3), 411-428.
12. Bruckner, B., Hubacek, K., Shan, Y., Zhong, H., & Feng, K. (2022). Impacts of poverty alleviation on national and global carbon emissions. Nature Sustainability, 5(4), 311-320.
13. Cameron, G. (2015). Integration of Muslims into Western Liberal Countries. The Review of Faith & International Affairs, 13(1), 83-87.
14. Caspi, A. (1984). Contact hypothesis and inter-age attitudes: A field study of cross-age contact. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74-80.
15. Chen, S. Y., Basma, D., Ju, J., & Ng, K. M. (2020). Opportunities and challenges of multicultural and international online education. Professional Counselor, 10(1), 120-132.
16. Chua, B. L., Al-Ansi, A., Han, H., Loureiro, S. M. C., & Guerreiro, J. (2022). An examination of the influence of emotional solidarity on value cooperation with international Muslim travellers. Journal of Travel Research, 61(7), 1573-1598.
17. Cobb, R. J., Perry, S. L., & Dougherty, K. D. (2015). United by faith? Race/ethnicity, congregational diversity, and explanations of racial inequality. Sociology of Religion, 76(2), 177-198.
18. Curtis, E. E. (2012). Islam in Black America: identity, liberation, and difference in African-American Islamic thought. Suny Press.
19. Dale, K. R., & Moyer-Gusé, E. (2020). Interdependence in Mediated Intergroup Contact. Journal of Media Psychology.
20. Davidov, E., Schmidt, P., & Schwartz, H. (2009). Value orientations of Muslims in Europe. Paper presented at the 3rd ESRA Conference, Warsaw, June/July 2009.
21. Denzin, N. K. (1978). Triangulation: A case for methodological evaluation and combination. Sociological methods, 339-357.
22. Dickinson, D. L., Masclet, D., & Peterle, E. (2018). Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market. European Economic Review, 104, 220-236.
23. Draper, S. (2014). Effervescence and solidarity in religious organizations. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 53(2), 229-248.
24. Durkheim, E. (1984). The division of labor in society.
25. Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2005). Managing diversity by creating team identity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 58(3), 371-392.
26. Elliott, C. A. (2017). PS Don’t Tell My Mother: American Children Debate Race and Civil Rights,    1946-1991. The College of William and Mary.
27. Eppler, R., & Huber, G. (1990). Wissenserwerb im Team: Empirische Untersuchung von Effekten des Gruppen-Puzzles. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 37(3), 172-178.
28. Evans, T. (2011). The limits of tolerance: Islam as counter-hegemony? Review of International Studies, 1751-1773.
29. Everett, T. J. (2015). Peer disagreement and two principles of rational belief. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 93(2), 273-286.
30. Gelepithis, M., & Giani, M. (2022). Inclusion without solidarity: education, economic security, and attitudes toward redistribution. Political Studies, 70(1), 45-61.
31. Grant, C. A., Brown, K. D., & Brown, A. L. (2015). Carter G. Woodson Against the World: A Racial Project of Freedom and Resistance. In Black Intellectual Thought in Education (pp. 100-140). Routledge.
32. Green, J. (2019). Cross-cultural confusions amongst diverse colleagues: what teachers’ narratives reveal about intergroup communication. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(3), 386-398.
33. Grimm, V., Utikal, V., & Valmasoni, L. (2017). In-group favoritism and discrimination among multiple out-groups. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 143, 254-271.
34. Groody, D. G. (2008). Globalizing solidarity: Christian anthropology and the challenge of human liberation. Theological studies, 69(2), 250-268.
35. Gurin, P., Dey, E., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330-367.
36. Hameed, K. S. (2016). The Implications of Social Solidarity in Islam. Journal of College of Education for Women, 27(1).
37. Hall, P. A. (2017). The political sources of social solidarity. The strains of commitment: The political sources of solidarity in diverse societies, 201-232.
38. Harkness, S. K., Cheshire, C., Cook, K. S., Stoica, C., & State, B. (2022). Exchange and the Creation of Trust and Solidarity across Cultures. Social Psychology Quarterly, 85(4), 351-373.
39. Hogan, M. J. (2020). Collaborative positive psychology: Solidarity, meaning, resilience, wellbeing, and virtue in a time of crisis. International Review of Psychiatry, 32(7-8), 698-712.
40. House, J. (2014). Misunderstanding in intercultural university encounters. In Misunderstanding in social life (pp. 30-64). Routledge.
41. Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2012). Muslim integration into Western cultures: Between origins and destinations. Political Studies, 60(2), 228-251.
42. Klafter, C. E. (2020). Undergraduate Education and the Maturation of Students. Academic Questions, 33(1), 34-45.
43. Ji, Y., & Bates, B. R. (2021). Testing “racial fetish” in health prevention messages: Chinese evaluation of ethnicity-(in) congruent messages as a function of out-group favoritism. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 14(1), 21-40.
44. Kende, A., Tropp, L., & Lantos, N. A. (2017). Testing a contact intervention based on intergroup friendship between Roma and non‐Roma Hungarians: Reducing bias through institutional support in a non‐supportive societal context. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47(1), 47-55.
45. Klafter, C. E. (2020). Undergraduate Education and the Maturation of Students. Academic Questions, 33(1), 34-45.
46. Koopmans, R. (2015). Religious fundamentalism and hostility against out-groups: A comparison of Muslims and Christians in Western Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 4(1), 33-57.
47. Kotzur, P. F., Schäfer, S. J., & Wagner, U. (2019). Meeting a nice asylum seeker: Intergroup contact changes stereotype content perceptions and associated emotional prejudices, and encourages solidarity‐based collective action intentions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(3), 668-690.
48. Krzyzowski, L., & Nowicka, M. (2021). European solidarity as boundary-making: A conjoint analysis of attitudes towards Islam in the context of the ‘refugee crisis’. Journal of Sociology, 57(2), 305-324.
49. Kunesh, C. E., & Noltemeyer, A. (2019). Understanding disciplinary disproportionality: Stereotypes shape pre-service teachers’ beliefs about black boys’ behaviour. Urban Education, 54(4), 471-498.
50. Lichterman, P. (2015). Religion and social solidarity: A pragmatist approach. Religion and volunteering: Complex, contested and ambiguous relationships, 241-261.
51. Liu, O. P., Hoon, O. P., Selvadurai, S., Radzi, M. M., & Saibeh, B. (2017). The making of Malaysian solidarity: A historical look at education and social cohesion in Sarawak. Geografia-Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 10(1).
52. Logan, N. (2021). A theory of corporate responsibility to race (CRR): Communication and racial justice in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 33(1), 6-22.
53. Mäkinen, V., Liebkind, K., Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., & Renvik, T. A. (2019). A teacher-led vicarious contact intervention in culturally mixed classrooms with in-and outgroup role models of intergroup friendship. Journal of school psychology, 75, 27-40.
54. Matsumoto, Y. (2018). Functions of laughter in English-as-a-lingua-franca classroom interactions: A multimodal ensemble of verbal and nonverbal interactional resources at miscommunication moments. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 7(2), 229-260.
55. Mayorga, E., & Picower, B. (2018). Active solidarity: Centering the demands and vision of the Black Lives Matter movement in teacher education. Urban Education, 53(2), 212-230.
56. McIntosh, P. (2018). White privilege and male privilege. In Privilege (pp. 28-40). Routledge.
57. Miligan, S., Andersen, R., & Brym, R. (2014). Assessing variation in tolerance in 23 Muslim-majority and Western Countries. Canadian Review of Sociology, 51(3), 239-261.
58. Molm, L. D., Collett, J. L., & Schaefer, D. R. (2007). Building solidarity through generalized exchange: A theory of reciprocity. American journal of sociology, 113(1), 205-242.
59. Morgan, D. L., Ataie, J., Carder, P., & Hoffman, K. (2013). Introducing dyadic interviews as a method for collecting qualitative data. Qualitative health research, 23(9), 1276-1284.
60. Morrow, J. A. (2020). Alone together: Finding solidarity in a time of social distance. Space and Culture, 23(3), 315-319.
61. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage publications.
62. Muluken, T. K. (2020). The role of indigenous conflict resolution mechanisms in the pastoral community: an implication for social solidarity in Somali region, Shineli woreda. Open Access Library   Journal, 7(2), 1-16.
63. Nollert, M., & Sheikhzadegan, A. (2016). Participation and sharing, or peaceful co- existence? Visions of integration among Muslims in Switzerland. Cogitatio, 95- 106.
64. Redekop, C. (1967). Toward an understanding of religion and social solidarity. Sociological Analysis, 28(3), 149-161.
65. Ockenfels, A., & Werner, P. (2014). Beliefs and ingroup favoritism. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 108, 453-462.
66. Ong, P. L., Ong, P. H., Selvadurai, S., Mohd Radzi, M., & Saibeh, B. (2014). The Making of Malaysian solidarity. A historical look at the education and social cohesion in Sarawak. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 10(1), 36–48.
67. Othman, N. (2011). Exploring the ummatic personality dimensions from the psycho-spiritual paradigm. International journal of psychological studies, 3(2), 37.
68. Patchen, M. (1982). Black-White contact in schools: Its social and academic effects. Purdue University Press.
69. Patras, Y. E., Hidayat, R., Maksum, A., & Nurhasanah, N. (2022). Understanding Multiculturalism Education from Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. Kelola: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan, 9(2), 125-135.
70. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: A personal, experiential perspective. Qualitative social work, 1(3), 261-283.
71. Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of psychology, 49(1), 65-85.
72. Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp, L. R., Wagner, U., & Christ, O. (2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International journal of intercultural relations, 35(3), 271-280.
73. Rabbie, J. M., & De Brey, J. H. (1971). The anticipation of intergroup cooperation and competition under private and public conditions. International Journal of Group Tensions.
74. Rabiu, A. A., & Modibbo, Y. (2018). Understanding the Islamic Viewpoint on Religious Pluralism in Nigeria with Special Reference to Ahl Al-Kitab. IIUM Journal of Religion and Civilisational Studies, 1(1), 31-60.
75. Redekop, C. (1967). Toward an understanding of religion and social solidarity.Sociological Analysis, 28(3), 149-161.
76. Riordan, C. (1987). Intergroup contact in small cities. International journal of intercultural relations, 11(2), 143-154.
77. Rivas‐Drake, D., Saleem, M., Schaefer, D. R., Medina, M., & Jagers, R. (2019). Intergroup contact attitudes across peer networks in school: Selection, influence, and implications for cross‐group friendships. Child development, 90(6), 1898- 1916.
78. Rosati, M. (2012). Solidarity and difference: Reflections on the enigma of Durkheim and Judaism. Religion, 42(1), 21-40.
79. Saldana, J. (2014). Thinking qualitatively: Methods of mind. SAGE publications.Schneider, G. (2002). Ungläubig sind immer die anderen. Weltreligionen zwischen Toleranz und Fanatismus. Stuttgart, Germany: Klett-Cotta.
80. Schachner, M. K., Schwarzenthal, M., Van De Vijver, F. J., & Noack, P. (2019). How all students can belong and achieve: Effects of the cultural diversity climate amongst students of immigrant and nonimmigrant background in Germany. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(4), 703.
81. Siddiqi, D. M. (2014). Solidarity, sexuality, and saving Muslim women in neoliberal times. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 42(3/4), 292-306.
82. Simmons, S. J., Wittig, M. A., & Grant, S. K. (2011). A mutual acculturation model of multicultural campus climate and acceptance of diversity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(4), 468.
83. Sherwani, M.K. (2005). Internal Conflicts and Disunity within Muslim Ummah with Special Reference to India. International Journal of Muslim Unity, 3(1), 61-89.
84. Shishavan, H. B., & Sharifian, F. (2016). The refusal speech act in a cross-cultural perspective: A study of Iranian English-language learners and Anglo-Australian speakers. Language & Communication, 47, 75-88.
85. Suleimany, M., Mokhtarzadeh, S., & Sharifi, A. (2022). Community resilience to pandemics: An assessment framework developed based on the review of COVID-19 literature. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 103248.
86. Suwidiyanti, S., & Anshori, I. (2021). School Strategy to Build Students’ Social Solidarity During Online Learning. AL-TANZIM: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, 5(1), 28-41.
87. Syed, J. (2008). A context-specific perspective of equal employment opportunity in Islamic societies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(1), 135-151
88. Tausch, A., & Karoui, H. (2011). Les musulmans: Un cau-chemar ou une force pour l’Europe? Paris, France: L’Harmattan.
89. Tausch, A. (2015). Hofstede, Inglehart and beyond. New directions in empirical global value research. MPRA Paper No. 64282. Munich, Germany.
90. Taylor, B., & De Vocht, H. (2011). Interviewing separately or as couples? Considerations of authenticity of method. Qualitative Health Research, 21(11), 1576-1587.
91. Thomas, G. (1997). Inclusive schools for an inclusive society. British journal of special education, 24(3), 103-107.
92. Tropp, L. R., White, F., Rucinski, C. L., & Tredoux, C. (2022). Intergroup contact and prejudice reduction: Prospects and challenges in changing youth attitudes. Review of General Psychology, 26(3), 342-360.
93. Van Manen, M. (1990). Beyond assumptions: Shifting the limits of action research. Theory into practice, 29(3), 152-157.
94. Walker, I., & Crogan, M. (1998). Academic performance, prejudice, and the jigsaw classroom: New pieces to the puzzle. Journal of community & applied social Psychology, 8(6), 381-393.
95. Youngju, H. (2021). Impact of Experience of Victimization from Parent, Teacher and Peer Violence on Discrimination Behaviors: Focusing on the Mediating Effects of Depression and Self-esteem. NVEO-NATURAL VOLATILES & ESSENTIAL OILS Journal| NVEO, 239-252.
96. Zambeta, E., & Kolofousi, A. (2014). Education and Social Solidarity in times of Crisis: the case of voluntary shadow education in Greece. Education Inquiry, 5(1), 69– 88.