Welcome to my #OpenThesis, where I shared my PhD thesis as work-in-progress under an open licence from mid-2020 to June 2023. This is where I shared drafts of my thesis chapters as I completed each one. I also shared some of my working documents, such as my "reference sorter", which I have left on the site in case it inspires anyone else to replicate it for their own research.  

I shared updates on my research via my blog, Art of E-learning. 

I have written extensively about the Capability Approach in my blog and have collated the posts in a single downloadable document, available via Zenodo (Witthaus, 2022).

I welcome your feedback - you can comment on my blog or contact me on LinkedIn. 

Thesis 

My thesis can be accessed via the Lancaster University Library:

Witthaus, G. (2023). Refugees’ Online Learning Engagement in Higher Education:A Capabilitarian Analysis [Phd, Lancaster University]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17635/lancaster/thesis/2010

This journal article offers a shorter synopsis of some of the key findings:

Witthaus, G. (2023). Refugees and Online Engagement in Higher Education: A Capabilitarian Model. Online Learning, 27(2). Available at: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i2.3762  

Abstract

There are almost 90 million forced migrants globally, many of whom could benefit from online higher education; yet evidence suggests extremely low retention rates of displaced people in online learning. Since retention is often seen as being linked to engagement, this study aimed to understand the nature of student engagement by displaced learners in online higher education (HE) and to identify practical ways in which higher education institutions (HEIs) can support displaced learners to engage in online learning. The methodology included both empirical and theoretical components. The empirical study focused on a qualitative analysis of the lived experiences of ten online Sanctuary Scholars enrolled on an online master’s degree with a UK university. The theoretical analysis involved integrating concepts related to online engagement from the HE literature with those from the Capability Approach. A thematic analysis of the empirical data found that, while conversion factors such as trauma and “lifeload” presented obstacles for all the Sanctuary Scholars, some graduated, whereas others withdrew from the programme without completing it. The findings point to a nuanced web of interactions between resources, enablers and constraints (positive and negative conversion factors), capabilities, engagement and personal agency for each research participant. The original contribution of this thesis is that it proposes a Capabilitarian Online Engagement Model, which shows how engagement along four dimensions is underpinned by specific capabilities; it also illustrates how engagement fuels the capability for further engagement and highlights the role of student agency. The study contributes to theoretical understanding of displaced learners’ engagement in online learning, while practically, it offers insights to HEIs for fostering online engagement. Socially, the thesis adds to the growing body of open research in the social sciences.

Research questions

This study has three overarching aims. Theoretically, it aims to contribute to the sector’s understanding of refugees’ and asylum seekers’ engagement in online degree programmes, combining Redmond et al.’s (2018) online engagement framework with notions of capability, well-being and agency from the Capability Approach (Nussbaum, 2011; Sen, 1999). Practically, it aims to generate recommendations for ways in which HEIs can support refugee students to engage effectively in online learning. To achieve these first two aims, the following research questions were explored in the context of a UK university that offers Sanctuary Scholarships to forced migrants for an online master's programme: 

RQ1: What (conversion) factors enable and constrain the Sanctuary Scholars’ progression through the online programme? 

RQ2: How do the Sanctuary Scholars’ descriptions of their online learning indicate and illustrate their (achieved functionings of) online engagement? 

RQ3: What capabilities underpin the scholars’ enactments (i.e., achieved functionings) of online engagement? 

RQ4: How does engagement fuel further engagement (i.e., act as a fertile functioning) in this context?