1. HSG 604 – ASSIGNMENT 1 DANA HABAYEB HEBA MOHAMED SARAH SOUSA MSA Pilot Evaluation

2. Presentation Outline Presentation Background  Who is the MSA?  What is Friday Prayer? Methods  Planning & recruitment  Focus group analysis  Sample characteristics Focus group findings Reflection Recommendations Next steps

3. Background

4. Background on MSA Muslim Student Association Islamic services/guidance/education  Friday Prayer service  Weekly halaqas (religious lessons)  Awareness endeavours  Islamic social events  Orphan sponsorship program

5. 5 3 Friday Prayers on UW Campus 12:30 p.m in MC & CPH/AL  Controversial – limited number of students pray here  Early afternoon (1:30 or 2:30) – Dhur time  1:30 p.m SLC (Multi-Faith Prayer Room)  2:30 p.m SLC (Multi-Faith Prayer Room)

6. 6 MSA Contacts  Syed Muhammad Ali (President)  Mohamed Kahiye (Education Officer)

7. Purpose of the Evaluation Process evaluation  Program stage: routine operation  What is the usage/participation rate?  Who discontinues?  What are the barriers to using the program? Objectives  To obtain feedback regarding the Friday Prayer service organized by the MSA  To determine the needs of those using the program  To determine why past users do not currently use the program (barriers to use)

8. Map

9. Multi-Faith Prayer Room Schematic

10. Multi-Faith Prayer Room

11. Friday Prayer Mandatory prayer for all male Muslims To be conducted in a group (jama’a) Begins with ablution (wudu) before entering room  Mandatory for both genders  Washing station only used by males

12. 12 Friday Prayers Continued Sermon (Khutbah) – 15 minutes  Combination of English & Arabic  Given by Khatib (undergraduates)  Verses from Quran and hadith (the prophet Mohamed’s sayings) Moment of silence observed (1 min), then Khutbah continues (5 min) Khatib recites the dua’a (prayers of supplication) MSA announcements & donation collection follow

13. Other Friday Prayer Considerations Females  Must pray behind (when praying with males)  Separated by chair (in SLC)  Mosque – separate room Facing Mecca  Effect on females Khatib training  Mandatory pre-req

14. PLANNING & EXECUTION The Process Evaluation

15. Preconceived Notions We were aware of the overcrowding situation We assumed the low participation rate for women was due to religious reasons Recruitment at the location led us to see in person what some of the issues were Courtesy of MSA: Jan 14 2010

16. Methods - Planning Focus groups  Detailed feedback on perceived barriers to participation  Suggestions on expanding/reducing services  Encourages differences of opinion  Interaction among participants: hear the opinions/impressions from other individuals Group composition  Planned three focus groups  1 group only male users  1 group only female users  1 group mixed non-users  We wanted to get the view from females alone in case there was information that they would not share in front the males

17. Methods - Planning Book rooms and equipment  SLC 2134  Recorder from AHS & a Mac Notebook Develop protocol and script Develop consent forms  For participation in focus group & audiotaping Advertise & recruit Prepare for session

18. Protocol

19. Script

20. Consent Forms

21. Background Questionnaire

22. Advertisement/ Recruitment

23. Current Users Past Users Announcement after Friday Prayer KW Brothers email list KW Sisters email list Newsletter announcement Presence outside of room (day of recruitment) Email to MSA email list Convenience sample  Dana Habayeb  Muhamed Kahiye Recruitment Strategy

24. Focus Group Sessions Email sent within 24 hours to confirm attendance & remind  Final reminder email sent 48 hours before scheduled day User group 1: Tuesday October 4 th 6:00-7:00 Past users group: Wednesday October 5 th 12:00-1:00 User group 2: Wednesday October 5 th 5:30-6:30 Facilitators/Recorders  User group 1: Dana (F) & Sarah (R)  User group 2: Heba (F) & Dana (R)  Past users: Sarah (F) & Heba (R)  So Dana (who recruited some members) was not recognized Debrief

25. Focus Group Analysis

26. Analysis Transcription of focus groups Background questionnaire  Age  Gender  Usage patterns  Education level/department  Session time attended most Quantitative & qualitative data  Background questionnaire, etc  Transcription feedback

27. Focus Group Composition

28. Current Users Past Users Males = 72% (2 females) Mean age = 23.8 Undergraduates = 71.4% Used the prayer room for more than a year = 71.4% Moderately satisfied with the room = 42.9% Males = %100 Mean age = 23.7 Undergraduates = 14.3% All used at least once in the past Extremely dissatisfied with the room = 71.4% Characteristics of the groups

29. IMPRESSIONS OF THE MULTI-FAITH PRAYER ROOM PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS & KHUTBAH COMPONENT Focus Group Findings

30. Current Users Drop-outs Room is too small Both genders identified lack of room for females  Little room in the corner  Females could not come late, they would have to step over men Position of room in relation to Mecca, led to unacceptable contact Felt very strong about the ‘horrible’ small room Felt the space was too small for females Preferred the male & female arrangement at the local mosque Size & Layout

31. Overcrowding

33. Washing Station Background One washing station at entrance of room 2 sinks on third floor (SLC) in men’s and women’s washrooms Females should not be seen washing by males – separate stations needed “132 people, 1 station, 5 minutes to wash, see the problem?” - Mohamed Kahiye

34. Current Users Drop-outs Not enough stations Long lines causes people to be late Cannot access wash station after a certain time due to overcrowding Females concerned using public washrooms  Privacy and amount of sinks Located in the wrong spot The long lines were a big barrier to use "In reality there is only one washing station. Over 100 people for one washing station. Most people have to prepare beforehand, at least half a n hour beforehand. If you're coming from class, there is no way you're gonna be able to take wudu'. Even if you need to use the bathroom, it is inconvenient." Washing Station

35. Bag and Shoe ‘Storage’

36. “Shelving”

37. No Mats

38. Current Users Drop-outs Poor ventilation, especially in wet weather Cleanliness (multi- purpose) Lack of security for belongings  Interfered with concentration Lack of organization and storage  Worse in winter (coats & wet boots) Not very well ventilated Mostly concerned with cleanliness of the room  Discussed how other locations use mats Lacks organization outside Also recognized the difficulties in the winter Environment inside & outside the room

39. IMPRESSIONS OF THE KHUTBAH (SERMON) COMPONENT Focus Group Findings

40. Users Past Users Understandable and easy to hear  Announcements were difficult to hear Wanted the service to be more consistent across prayer times Khutbahs not relevant to the challenges of the university student Felt it was not appropriate to get involved in Khutbah titles Liked the mix of English and Arabic Main concern was the need an adequate speaker  Undergraduates are not knowledgeable to give a proper Khutbah  “It is flawed in the sense that Master students are training the undergraduate students who are training on us." Want relevant messages to the current events Either increase length of sermon or add more Arabic Khutbah Component

41. Where were the drop-outs praying? The two locations identified were the local Mosque and the MC location: Local Mosque:  Proper space  Correct timing  Proper length of Khutbah  Quality sermon MC location:  More spacious size  Mature crowd  More knowledgeable and trained Khatib  Better Khutbah topics  Cleaner (provides clean mats for praying)  Downfall = invalid prayer time

43. Findings Summary Current users:  Most common point was regarding the dissatisfaction with the location size and the overcrowding  Concerned for their personal belongings  Felt it was essential to address the issues surrounding the washing station (for females and males)  Wanted a Khutbah tailored more to the challenges students face (more relevance) Barriers to use (past users):  Khutbah was the most important (it’s quality and validity)  Size of the room (overcrowding)

44. Strengths Limitations Data collection methods standardized  Protocol, script, background questionnaire, etc. Collaboration with MSA  Initial consultations  Advertisement & recruitment ** Two members sharing same faith Neutrality of evaluation team members Lack of female voice in past users Small sample size Provided fixed times & dates to sign up for Convenience sample Reflection

45. Recommendations Develop a monitoring and tracking system  We found it difficult to compare our data to the guesses that they provided us  Can monitor user rates and high vs low usage periods  User rates are easy to record  Will help future evaluations Revise the Khatib training/Khutbah program  Use findings regarding the topics of the Khutbahs to supplement future sermons  Majority or users and non-users agreed they needed topics which were less controversial and more appropriate to the challenges of students  Consider using Scholars as ‘guest Khatibs’ or as mentors  Consider adding more Arabic to the program  Consider developing a way to monitor the ‘quality’ of the Khutbahs (sermons) across sessions and times

46. Recommendations It is important to remember that we only collected information from a total of 7 users and 7 past-users We do not recommend drastic changes without further evaluation with a larger, more representative sample

47. Lessons Learned Over sample Use new recording technology Book more time  Late arrivals  Set-up Make sure there is a lot of time to recruit the sample Have participants enter their email/phone numbers themselves

48. JAZAKUM ALLAH KHAIR (MAY ALLAH REWARD YOU WITH GOOD) Thank You