Policy Perspectives on Selected Virtual Universities in the United States

The use of the Internet to teach distance education courses has transcended from a type of distance education course to new types of institutions that provide greater access to higher education. Institutions of higher education and state legislatures have created virtual collaborations as an opportunity to extend the benefits of higher education beyond its traditional boundaries. Although there have been a number of consortiums developed that could be titled virtual universities, Western Governors University was the first virtual university in the United States to attract attention from the mass media (WGU, 2000). By March of 1999, the State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO) published a report that stated that 33 state or regional consortia had developed virtual universities (Council of Higher Education Accreditation, 1999).

Due to the newness of the virtual university, there is little research in this area, particularly research with a focus on policy development. In an article published in the Technology Source in March 1999, Trevor Thrall argued that virtual universities have bypassed some of the traditional decision-making processes due to their lack of a brick and mortar mindset. A great deal of public funding has been directed towards virtual universities without a comprehensive examination of the policy characteristics of these institutions. This article reports on a policy analysis that examined the development process of public virtual universities. The study first classified existing public virtual universities in the United States using Wolf and Johnstone's (1999) taxonomy, then, using a content analysis approach, examined policy development for institutions falling under selected classifications. A focus on public virtual universities was chosen because private institutions do not have the same government-mandated policy requirements as public institutions. Eighteen public virtual institutions were identified as operating at the time of this study (2000). One additional public virtual institution that had recently ceased operation (in 1999) was also included.

In May 1999, David B. Wolf and Sally M. Johnstone published an article in Change entitled “Cleaning up the Language of Electronically Delivered Academic Programs.” They argued that the language used to refer to new forms of electronically delivered programs was disorganized and chaotic, pointing to the fact that there are several meanings for the same phrase. The authors cited the use of the phrase “virtual university” as an example. The authors noted, “We sometimes use one term to refer to very different types of arrangements” (Wolf & Johnstone, 1999, p. 1).

In order to provide clarification to this issue, the authors “developed a taxonomy to help make the variety of organizational arrangements used to administer electronic offerings more explicit” (Wolf & Johnstone, 1999, p. 2). The institutional taxonomy was created to take advantage of conventional terms that align with accepted existing structures of higher education. The Institutional Taxonomy is as follows:

Virtual University/College—academic degree granting with no campus.

Virtual University Consortium—no degree granted but accredited academic institutions are linked online and supply centralized or coordinated services to students with mutual articulation among consortium members.

Academic Services Consortium—no degree granted but accredited academic institutions are linked online and supply centralized or coordinated services to students with no articulation among consortium members.

University Information Consortium—no degree granted and no centralized or coordinated services to students but accredited academic institutions are linked electronically.

Virtual Program—degree granted without coming to a campus from a traditional accredited academic institution where the majority of services are still offered in a face-to-face environment.

Virtual Commercial Certification Institution—Certification granted but no academic credit awarded.

Traditional Accredited Institution with Some Electronic Courses—Credit is awarded but there is no coherence among electronically offered courses that could lead to a degree (Wolf & Johnstone, 1999, p.2-3).

A “public virtual university classification matrix” (Table 1) was developed as part of this study to assist in the process of differentiating between the different types of public virtual universities using the Wolf and Johnstone criteria. The matrix was created using the seven distinctive characteristics Wolfe and Johnstone described in their classification system. An eighth characteristic was added to identify independent institutions or non-for-profit institutions:

• Institutions of origin linked by a virtual university,

• Independent institutions or non-for-profit virtual universities,

• Centralized or coordinated student services,

• Includes mutual course articulation and/or transfer agreements,

• No mutual course articulation and/or transfer agreement,

• Degree granted by institution of origin

• Degree granted by virtual university, and

• Competency-based credit processes in place.

Information for each of the nineteen public virtual universities was examined and the presence or absence of these characteristics noted. Institutions were then classified based on these characteristics into one of the seven categories in the Wolfe and Johnstone Institutional Taxonomy.

A review of the matrix reveals that Western Governors University was the only public virtual university in the United States that could be classified under the Virtual University/College typology. Two public virtual universities were classified under the Virtual University Consortium typology: the SUNY Learning Network and the University of Texas Telecampus. Five public virtual universities were classified under the Academic Services Consortium typology: the California Virtual University, the Florida Virtual Campus, the Kentucky Virtual University, the Michigan Virtual University and the Minnesota Virtual University. The University Information Consortium typology contained the largest number of public virtual universities. This typology contained ten institutions. The institutions that were classified in this category included the Arizona Regents University, the Georgia GLOBE, the Illinois Virtual Campus, the Indiana College Network, MarylandOnline, the New Jersey Virtual University, the Ohio Learning Network, the Online College of Oklahoma, the South Dakota Electronic University Consortium, and the Southern Regional Electronic Campus. Each of the remaining three virtual university typologies from the Wolf and Johnstone Institutional Taxonomy did not contain any of the public virtual universities in the United States.

Following the review of the public virtual institutions using the Wolf and Johnstone criteria, the institutions classified as “Virtual University Consortium” and “Academic Services Consortium” were selected to examine more closely. The public virtual universities that were included in the policy analysis component of this study were all virtual universities that were created as a collaborative virtual institution that linked accredited academic institutions online, supplied centralized or coordinated services to students, provided either a direct or indirect articulation among consortium members, and provided degree granting opportunities at an institution of origin within the consortium of participating institutions. Seven institutions met these criteria. Of these, one institution was identified to be operating as a private entity and was deleted from the mix (Michigan Virtual University). This choice resulted in the selection of six institutions for further policy analysis. These six institutions included: the California Virtual University (CVU), the Florida Virtual Campus (FVC), the Kentucky Commonwealth Virtual University (KYVU), the Minnesota Virtual University (MNVU), the SUNY Learning Network (SLN), and the University of Texas Telecampus (UT:Telecampus). It should be noted that the CVU ceased operations in 1999. The CVU was included in this study in order to examine the differences between surviving and non-surviving public virtual universities.

To examine their policies more closely, it was important to first select a policy analysis framework to use as a lens through which to look at these institutions.

A policy analysis framework can provide guidance in looking at policy structures and identifying essential policy areas, activities and processes that may be fundamental to the operation of a public institution of higher education. Four analysis frameworks found in the literature were reviewed, culminating in the development of a framework for use in this study. The components of the four frameworks are compared in Table 2. Berg's (1998) study, Public Policy on Distance Learning in Higher Education: California State University and Western Governors Association Initiatives, utilized a policy analysis framework that consisted of seven constructs. Berg's study was conducted in 1998, during the early stages of the virtual university development process. A number of the constructs in the Berg study were clearly focused on the feasibility of a virtual university. It should also be noted that the Berg study was focused specifically on the policy differences between Western Governors University and the California Virtual University.

In 1998, Gellman-Danley and Fetzner published an article in the Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration entitled “Asking the Really Tough Questions: Policy Issues for Distance Learning.” In this article, Gellman-Danley and Fetzner proposed a seven element model to assist distance education decision-makers with policy issues. In an article published later in 1998, entitled “Barriers to Online Teaching in Post-Secondary Institutions: Can Policy Changes Fix It?,” Berge added two areas to the policy framework that was developed by Gellman-Danley and Fetzner.

In the spring of 2000, a team of faculty members and graduate students from the University of Nebraska published a paper in the Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration entitled “Policy Frameworks for Distance Education: Implications for Decision Makers.” This policy framework was designed to assist decision-makers with the growing number of policy issues in the distance education arena (King, Nugent, Russell, Eich, & Lacy 2000). This group adapted policy frameworks of Gellman-Danley and Fetzner (1998) and Berge (1998) hoping to create a policy analysis framework for distance education that could be adapted and generalized for a variety of post-secondary environments including four-year colleges, community colleges, private universities, and public universities.

The policy categories that were selected to be included in this study were present in at least three of the four distance learning frameworks that had been previously developed (see Table 2). The exceptions to this rule are the “Private Industry” policy category and the “Access to Education” policy category. The “Private Industry” policy category was included in the Public Virtual University Policy Analysis Framework based on the Rosevear's (1999) examination of the virtual university and the need to develop partnerships with private industry. Rosevear (1999) argued that virtual universities need to develop partnerships with the private sector in order to be successful in meeting the needs of the community and the industries that the virtual universities serve.

The “Access to Education” policy category was added to examine the issue of access to education, an element appearing in public venues as a primary reason for developing and marketing online education such as that offered through virtual universities. The resulting policy analysis framework used in this study is described below.

Academic—Admission Standards, Admissions Process, Course/Program/Degree Availability, Course Integrity, Curriculum/Course Approval, Accreditation, Course Logistics, Faculty Development and Resources Access to Education—Access to Technology, Access to Internet Resources, Scholarships, Policies that Support Learner-Centered Instruction and the Needs of Diverse Students, Instruction Models that Allow Students to Work in Small Groups, and Curriculums Organized Around Central Concepts

Funding/Fiscal—Fees, State Fiscal Regulations, Tuition Disbursement, Tuition Rate Adjustments, Legislative Funding, Financing, Grants

Governance/Administration—Staffing, Institutional Communication, Technology, Institutional Technical Support, Faculty and Personnel Issues, Board Oversight, Union Contracts, Mission, Planning

Private Industry—Partnerships, Support, Research

Student Services—Availability, Library Services, Registration, Financial Aid, Student Accounts, Counseling, Academic Advising, Assessment Testing, Test Proctoring, Student Records, Student Technical Support

Six types of policy documents were selected to be included in this examination.

These were common documents that appeared to be readily available from the majority of public virtual universities. The policy documents collected from each of the selected public virtual universities included: enabling legislation, funding legislation, institutional/operational documents, statewide or regional governing board documents, internal and external press releases, and journal/magazine articles. The list below defines the selected documents.

Enabling Legislation. Documents related to the creation of the virtual university. These policy documents may be from either state legislation or regional consortia.

Funding Legislation. Documents related to the funding of a virtual university can originate from a state legislature, a regional consortium of states, public institutions of higher education, a state board of higher education, state/federal granting agencies, private funding agency, or private partnerships.

Institutional/Operational Documents. Documents related to the operational policies and procedures of the virtual university. Examples of these documents would include the mission statement, goals, strategic planning documents, student handbook or any other document related to the operation of the virtual university.

Statewide or Regional Governing Board Documents. Documents originating from a statewide or regional governing board. These documents may focus on the development or operation of the virtual university.

Internal and External Press Releases. Documents released in the general press regarding a specific virtual university or an examination of a group of virtual universities. These documents may originate from an independent press agency or from the public relations department of a virtual university.

Journal and Magazine. Documents originating from either a journal or magazine article. These articles may be either technical in nature or descriptive. These articles many also originate from a professional news source.

Several processes were used to collect these policy documents, including a detailed examination of the Web sites related to the public virtual universities, including the web sites for the state or regional governing boards, and a review of all online distance-learning journals. Primary library databases, including LexisNexis, were searched for any references to the virtual universities included in the study. A policy document request letter was sent to the public relations contact for each public virtual university requesting all previously outlined policy documents. This was followed up when necessary with sending a policy document request letter to the chief executive officer or president at each public virtual university. Qualitative document analysis procedures were used to further examine the collected documents. Data from the six public virtual universities examined in this study were grouped according to the policy categories.

The policy documents were reviewed and highlighted according to the themes of the policy categories from McCoy's Public Virtual University Policy Analysis Framework (p. 8). Tables of policy categories were then created for each institution. These tables were then used to discover the existence of patterns in policy characteristics within each of the public virtual universities and across institutions. The researcher determined that a pattern existed if three or more institutions contained the same emphasis on a specific policy characteristic.

A single finding emerged from an examination of the text data related to the academic policy category. This finding is related to the availability of faculty development and training resources and emerged from the policy documents from three of the six public virtual universities included in this study.

Three of the institutions included in the study developed and provided faculty development, faculty training opportunities, and faculty resources: the UT TeleCampus, SLN, and the KYVU. These three public virtual universities also reported high levels of enrollments. Therefore, this finding may suggest a relationship between the availability of faculty resources and increased annual enrollments. Patterns in policy characteristics from the academic policy category are summarized in Table 3.

The text data collected from all six virtual universities revealed that five of the six virtual universities had data that supported a central theme of providing increased access to education. The data for the CVU was lacking a foundation in the concept of providing increased access to education. This finding suggested a potential relationship between virtual universities that contained a central theme of providing increased access to education and surviving virtual universities.

In CVU policy documents, the three issues that drove the development of the CVU included economic development, exporting to global market, and dealing with influx of new students in California rather than expanding access to new groups of students. Table 4 summarizes the access to education policies found in the policy documents.

Three patterns emerged from the policy analysis process related to the funding/fiscal policy category. The first was related to the initiating agency providing the funding sources and the variation of funding sources among the individual virtual universities. This finding indicated that funding sources and the availability of alternative funding for the public virtual universities might differ based on the type of statewide postsecondary structure. The second finding indicated a potential relationship between the level of funding at the public virtual universities and increased enrollments. The third finding was related to the funding of CVU. This finding indicated that while the funding level for CVU was comparable to the funding that the other public virtual universities received, there were differences in funding sources that may have implications for policy.

First, initial funding sources for the public virtual universities appeared to vary based on the type of statewide postsecondary structure. Four of the public virtual universities included in this study were based on an open postsecondary system. These institutions included CVU, MNVU, the FVC, and KYVU. The public virtual universities in these states were initiated by a legislative act. The annual funding levels for these public virtual universities varied from $350,000 to $3.5 million. These institutions were all classified as Academic Services Consortiums based on the Wolf and Johnstone (1999) Institutional Taxonomy.

Two of the public virtual universities included in this study were based on integrated statewide systems for postsecondary education. These institutions include the UT TeleCampus and the SLN. The public virtual universities in these states were initiated by the boards of regents that represented all of the public postsecondary institutions of higher education in the specific states. Funding in these cases relied heavily on institutional contributions. The annual funding levels for these public virtual universities varied from $1.2 million to $3.4 million. These two institutions were classified as Virtual University Consortia based on the Wolf and Johnstone (1999) Institutional Taxonomy. While the initiating agencies differed by postsecondary structure, the funding level for each of the public virtual universities included in the study appears to depend on neither the type of postsecondary system that existed in each of the states nor the type of virtual institution (Academic Service Consortium or Virtual University Consortium).

Four of the public virtual universities included in this study received alternative funding for the sale of services, from corporate partnerships, or from education foundations. The funding from these sources was added to the overall operational budget of each of these institutions. The levels of alternative funding varied from $4.1 million at the SLN to in-kind contributions at the MNVU. Alternative funding for the public virtual universities did not appear to depend on the type of postsecondary educational structure in the sponsor state and neither did the survival of the institution seem to depend on the level of alternative funding.

A second finding indicated a possible relationship between the annual level of funding for the public virtual universities and increased enrollments. The three virtual universities included in this study that reported the highest levels of institutional and/or alternative funding are also the three institutions that reported the highest levels of annual enrollments. The KYVU reported an annual operational budget of $8 million and an annual enrollment of 3,014 for the Spring 2001 term. The SLN reported an annual operational budget of $1.5 million from state funds and $4.1 million from the Sloan Foundation. The SLN reported an annual enrollment of 5,600 for the Fall 2000 term. The UT Telecampus reported an annual operational budget of $3.4 million and an annual enrollment of 2,000 for the Fall 2000 term.

A third finding relates to CVU. The California state legislature initially provided funding comparable to the level of funding that the other public virtual universities received. Although the state funding for CVU was discontinued during the second year of operation, CVU was able to generate alternative sources of revenue that were as large as the state funding levels for the FVC or MNVU.

While the funding level does not seem to be the key to understanding the fate of CVU, examining the source of the funding might provide better insights. When CVU's state funding was withdrawn during the second year of operation, the virtual institution was reliant upon corporate sources of funding and grants from foundations and was told to operate as a nonprofit institution without state funds. The SLN was the only other virtual institution included in the policy analysis component of this study that had significant reliance upon foundation sources of support. However, unlike CVU, the SLN was able to maintain the core support from the state in addition to the funding it received from the Sloan Foundation. CVU was the only virtual institution whose operational budget was primarily funded through corporate and foundation contributions after the initial support from the state.

What is not documented in these policy documents from CVU is the requirements or constraints connected to the alternative funding that CVU received from the corporations. Additional research related to the dissolution of CVU might investigate the contingencies placed on CVU by the corporations and foundations that provided the alternative funding once CVU became a not-for-profit entity. The issue of generating revenue from advertising and book sales adds to the concern about the status of the corporations that had provided alternative funding for CVU.

Among the six institutions studied, four were initially supported from state revenues. Two, the SLN and the UT TeleCampus, were initially supported institutionally or from the Board of Regents with additional sources of funding provided from foundations or sales of services. Amounts of funding for these institutions varied widely. Among the six, CVU was the only public virtual institution whose funding from the state was eliminated and the institution became funded through corporate and foundation donations. These data indicate that the fiscal factor in the dissolution of the CVU was not due to the lack of financial support but perhaps due to the lack of state commitment. The difference between hard money (state revenue supported) and soft money (corporate and foundation supported) may have provided unique challenges to CVU. These data may indicate a need to examine the commitment of public legislative or governing bodies as a policy area connected to the success of virtual institutions. Table 5 summarizes findings related to the funding/fiscal policy area.

Three significant findings emerged from the examination of documents related to the governance/administration policy category. First, five of the six public virtual universities utilized some form of strategic planning process during the development phase of the virtual university, and completed similar steps during the development phase.

Second, each of these five public virtual universities utilized some sort of planning committee to develop a strategic or master plan. The CVU Design Team, established by executive order, developed a blueprint for the CVU. Florida Distance Learning Institute established the Virtual Design Team to develop the recommended structure and design of the FVC. The Council of Postsecondary Education was responsible for the development of KYVU. The Kentucky Council of Postsecondary Education developed the organizational structure, policies, and procedures related to the development of KYVU. Four design committees were responsible for the development of MNVU, a coordinating board, student services design team, a quality-in-learning team, and a technology team. The UT system developed the Distance Education/Virtual University Master Plan Organization to prepare the UT TeleCampus Master Plan.

Each public virtual university established a committee or council to develop the strategic plans or master plans that led to the development of these institutions. Although the process utilized by each institution was unique, they were all similar in that they utilized key academic and political stakeholders to guide the development of the virtual university. The process that CVU utilized for planning and development was similar to comparable public virtual universities.

The third finding pointed to the importance of a mission statement or an institutional goal statement. Each of the institutions included in the study created and operationalized some form of mission statement or institutional goal during the development phase of the virtual university.

The contrast between the mission and goal statements for the six public virtual universities is also notable. Three of the institutions, the FVC, KYVU, and MVU, had similar mission statements in that they each promoted availability of resources and increased access to postsecondary educational opportunities. The mission and goal statements from CVU, the SLN, and the UT TeleCampus were based on the concepts of technology, innovation, and the economies of scale inherent in distance-learning initiatives. Although there is considerable contrast in the content of the mission statements or the institutional goal statements, the significance of this finding is the fact that each of the public virtual universities completed the mission or goal-setting process. This finding is also important in that it establishes that CVU completed a similar institutional goal-setting process as the other five public virtual universities. Table 6 summarizes findings related to governance and administration.

An examination of the data related to the private industry policy category did not reveal any patterns related to the private industry policy category. Although a pattern did not emerge, there was one noteworthy finding related to the private industry policy category. Five of the six public virtual universities did not maintain significant partnerships with private industry corporations. The CVU was the only public virtual university that maintained partnerships with private corporations; the CVU also received funding related to the partnerships from private corporations.

The role of private industry as related to the virtual university was an ongoing theme in the literature reviewed for this study. It may be an important finding in that five of the six public virtual universities examined in this study did not rely on developing or maintaining relationships with private industry beyond the relationships that they had developed with the vendors who provided the technological means for the delivery of courses and services. It may also be a useful finding that only the non-surviving public virtual university developed dynamic partnerships with private industry that had been designed to provide revenue models for the corporate sponsors and partners.

Two significant findings emerged from the examination of the data related to the student service policy category. The first finding revealed that the number of references to student services that emerged from the CVU policy documents was significantly smaller than those from the documents of the other five virtual universities included in this study. The second finding revealed that four out of the six public virtual universities provided quality, comprehensive student services in a “one-stop shop” environment. The data related to this finding suggest that this “one-stop shop” format for providing student services may be critical to the success of distance-learning initiatives.

When compared to the other five virtual universities included in the policy analysis, it was evident that CVU had a less clear focus on the development of comprehensive student services. Although the CVU policy documents demonstrated intent to develop comprehensive student services, it is also clear that the development of student services was not a priority at CVU. In fact, CVU student services were not yet operational at the time of the dissolution. Comparably, the UT TeleCampus developed the student service functions of the TeleCampus before it began to provide access to distance-learning courses.

An analysis of data related to student services from the other five virtual universities demonstrated a commitment to the development of comprehensive student services and a focus on quality of services. Each of the remaining five virtual universities included in this study developed a method or means to deliver comprehensive student services to their distance-learning students.

The second finding pointed to a theme of providing access through a one-stop, single-point-of-access model. FVC was designed to “ensure one-stop shopping for distance-learning students.” KYVU has a policy of “providing one-stop services on the Worldwide Web” to students. MNVU was designed to “offer streamlined access to financial aid information and services; one-stop registration and tuition services.” The UT TeleCampus “worked to give the distance education student every available chance to succeed, along with the equivalent of one-stop shopping.” Four of the six public virtual universities concluded that providing quality, comprehensive student services in a “one-stop shop” environment was critical to the success of their distance-learning initiative. Table 7 summarizes findings in the student services area.

This study generated eight noteworthy conclusions. These conclusions are important in that they provide a better understanding of the elements of the policies of the public virtual universities when examined as a whole. These key conclusions are both independent findings generated from the study and general conclusions that can be made based on the collective examination of the findings from this study.

The application of the Wolf and Johnstone Institutional Taxonomy provided a useful means for the classification of the 19 public virtual universities. The application of the Wolf and Johnstone Institutional Taxonomy resulted in the classification of one institution as a virtual university/college, three as virtual university consortia, four institutions as academic services consortia, and 11 institutions as university information consortia.

The second conclusion is that there may be a relationship between faculty development resources and the success of a public virtual university. Three of the public virtual universities included in this study developed and provided opportunities for faculty development, faculty training in distance education methods, and access to instructional technology resources. These three institutions were the UT Telecampus, SLN, and KYVU. These three institutions also reported the highest enrollments of the institutions included in the study. The KYVU reported an annual enrollment of 3,014 for the Spring 2001 term. The SLN reported an annual enrollment of 5,600 for the Fall 2000 term. The UT Telecampus reported an annual enrollment of 2,000 for the Fall 2000 term.

The third conclusion is that there appeared to be no significant difference in the funding levels of surviving virtual universities and a non-surviving virtual university. However, CVU was the only public virtual institution whose funding from the state was eliminated and which then became funded through corporate and foundation donations. The data indicated that the fiscal factor in the dissolution of CVU was not due to the lack of financial support but perhaps due to the lack of state commitment. CVU was no longer supported via hard money (state revenue supported) and became dependent on soft money (corporate and foundation supported) to continue operation. Although the data demonstrated that the amount of soft money was equal to or greater than the annual funding of comparable institutions, the requirements or constraints of soft money funding may have provided unique complications for CVU in addition to the lack of stability.

This conclusion is important in that it supports the explanation of the failure of CVU provided by its former CEO, Stanley A. Chodorow. In an issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education, Chodorow (cited in Young, 2000) commented on the financial plan of CVU, saying, “The original plan for the CVU did not include an adequate financial structure.” He went on to say that “there was a plan to raise funds from corporate sponsors, and the governor [Pete Wilson] had helped to do that, but he had only gotten 5 or so out of 10 that were required for the original financial plan. And once the governor was out of office, these corporations were not very interested in continuing their support...” (Young, 2000, p. 1).

The fourth conclusion is that there is a possible relationship between the development of comprehensive student services and the viability of public virtual universities. This conclusion supports the argument that comprehensive student services are necessary to support the efforts of distance learners. In the case of CVU, the strategic plan provided for the development of online student services, but these services had not yet come to fruition at the time of the dissolution of CVU. In comparison, the UT TeleCampus developed the online student services portion of the virtual university before it began to provide access to distance-learning courses.

In addition to the development of comprehensive student services, this finding also indicated that the manner in which the student services were provided can be a significant factor. Four of the six public virtual universities provided quality, comprehensive student services in a “one-stop shop” environment. Each of these four institutions argued that this “one-stop shop” format was critical to the success of their distance-learning initiative.

The fifth conclusion is that there may be a relationship between the level of funding of a public virtual university and the annual student enrollment of a public virtual university. The three public virtual universities that reported the highest levels of annual funding from both primary and alternative sources also reported the highest levels of annual enrollments. This conclusion points to a potential relationship between the level of annual funding and the level of annual student enrollment at a public virtual university.

The sixth conclusion is that the central theme of providing access to education may be critical to the development, growth, and success of a public virtual university. All surviving public virtual institutions had a focus on expanding access to previously unserved or underserved populations, as opposed to CVU, which was more focused on economic development and managing population growth.

The seventh conclusion is that relationships with private industry do not seem linked to success. Five of the six public virtual universities examined in this study did not rely on developing or maintaining a relationship with private industry beyond the relationships that they have developed with the vendors who provide the technological means for the delivery of courses and services. The only non-surviving public virtual university was the only public virtual university to develop dynamic partnerships with private industry. These partnerships had been designed to provide revenue models for the corporate sponsors and partners. This finding supports the argument that the lack of hard money support from the state and reliance on corporate sponsorship may be significant in the dissolution of CVU.

The eighth conclusion that can be extrapolated from this study is that the failure of CVU does not appear to have been caused by the lack of primary or alternative funding sources or amount of resources provided. Neither does the failure of CVU seem to have been caused by the lack of a comprehensive strategic planning process. Based on this research study, it may be possible that the failure of CVU resulted from the model that was created by the stakeholders. When compared to the other public virtual universities included in this study, CVU was found to differ on several fundamental characteristics that the more successful public virtual universities contained.

CVU did not provide comprehensive student services. CVU did not provide comprehensive faculty training and resources. The motivation for the development of CVU was not based on a central theme of providing access to education for the residents of the state of California but rather the development of a nationally focused revenue-generating institution that would be the “Amazon.com” of the education community. CVU was forced to rely on non-state revenue for survival. In contrast, the surviving public virtual universities were based on a central theme of providing access to education via the academic and student services components of the institution. These defining elements of the policies of CVU appear to set it apart from the surviving public virtual universities.

Four significant implications for practice emerged from this study. These implications for practice can be applied independently or as a whole.

The first implication for practice was that faculty development resources and faculty training opportunities are an integral element in the development and operation of a successful comprehensive public virtual university. It seems apparent that the creation of these types of resources for the faculty both motivates and encourages faculty members to participate in the development and instruction of online courses.

The second implication for practice is that comprehensive student services that support the academic offerings of an institution are essential in the development of a successful public virtual university. As demonstrated by the institutions included in this study that provide online student services, comprehensive student services enable a student to successfully meet academic goals in an online environment. In addition, online student services that are provided in a “one-stop shop” method seemingly enhance the availability of these resources to the students. It is a logical expectation that virtual universities that allow a student to apply online, register for a class online, manage their student account, or process their financial aid application in a “one-stop shop” environment would experience more success compared to their counterparts.

The third implication for practice is that the level of annual funding for a public virtual university may be directly related to the success of a public virtual university. This implication is critical for stakeholders in public virtual universities that are experiencing low student enrollments. It should be noted that this finding may not be isolated in that it was directly related to an institution's ability to provide faculty development resources or comprehensive student services. Therefore, it is a logical conclusion that a virtual university with increased levels of funding and state-level support would be able to provide additional resources for students and faculty and, therefore, experience significant increases in annual student enrollment.

The fourth and final implication for practice is that each successful and surviving public virtual university maintained a commitment to the core concept of providing access to education in the host state that it served. These concepts and themes included access to technology, access to Internet resources, scholarships, policies that support learner-centered instruction, instruction models that allow students to work in small groups, and curricula organized around central concepts. The institutions that have demonstrated the ability to survive and be successful have also demonstrated a commitment to one or more of these themes and concepts. The general idea that these institutions were designed to increase access to education is seemingly fundamental to the success of a public virtual university.

The first limitation of this study is related to the policy documents collected from each of the public virtual universities included in the study. This limitation is based on the fact that a researcher can never be certain that all institutional policy documents have been collected from each of the participating public virtual universities. Although the data collection methodology was an exhaustive process, the process relied on the stakeholders from the participating institutions to cooperate in the collection and sharing of the policy documents.

The second limitation was also related to the collection of the institutional policy documents. The researcher could not be certain of the credibility of the policy documents that were collected for the study. The majority of policy documents examined in this study were internal institutional documents that were not published or shared in a public format. Additionally, policy documents collected for this study included articles from newspapers, journals, and magazines. The credibility of the various documents collected remains an untested variable of the study.

The findings from this study can be extrapolated to provide guidelines for educational and legislative stakeholders who are involved in the development or operation of a public virtual university. The following six recommendations are based on the findings from this study. These recommendations are presented in a manner that is applicable for the educational or legislative stakeholder who is directly involved with the development of a new public virtual university. However, these recommendations can also be applied to an existing public virtual university in that these recommendations can be utilized in the process of evaluating or redeveloping an existing institution. The recommendations for policy makers are as follows:

1. Develop comprehensive student services in a “one-stop shop” environment. Students should be able to apply, register, make tuition payments, and complete the financial aid application process in a virtual student center that provides all of the same resources as a traditional student center.

2. Develop integrated faculty development resources. The faculty who develop and teach online courses should have access to training opportunities and instructional technology resources.

3. Maintain an institutional focus on providing increased access to educational resources. This theme should be present in institutional goals and mission statements.

4. Develop a financial plan that is based on state-appropriated hard money. Be careful of private partnerships and sponsors who want to participate in the operation and potential revenues from the institution. If a public virtual university is going to be successful, it will require a strong commitment from the state board of regents or legislative bodies.

5. Review the various methods for the classification of a virtual university and develop the virtual university with the intention of creating an institution that meets the needs of the constituents in a manner that is consistent with the type of virtual institution the educational stakeholders require.

6. Carefully project the annual budget for the virtual university. Remember that there is a potential relationship between the level of annual funding and the success of the institution. Projecting fiscal needs adequately can have a dramatic impact on the success of the virtual university.

The findings and conclusions of this study support the claim that additional research needs to be completed in this field to continue the examination and evaluation of the distance-learning initiatives and distance-learning distribution models that are currently being developed for the statewide or regional distribution of Web-based instruction. Five recommendations emerged from this study as focal points for additional research in this field.

The first recommendation for further research is that an examination of public virtual university policy documents be conducted and then compared to private virtual university policy documents. The research design developed for this study focused specifically on the elements of the policies of public virtual universities. Additional research that examines the elements of the policies of comparable public virtual universities and private virtual universities would add to the findings of this study in that it would provide additional insight into the elements of the policies of virtual universities.

The second recommendation for further research is that an examination be conducted with a specific focus on bridging the digital divide via the development of public virtual universities. A research project of this magnitude would have to first define the effects of the digital divide within a specific population or region. The study would then have to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the impact of a public virtual university on the digital divide within the same region.

The third recommendation for further research that emerged from this study would be to examine the long-term success or evolution of the public virtual universities. This study focused primarily on the elements of the policies of the public virtual universities during the development and early operational stages of the institutions. A long-term analysis of comparable public virtual universities would provide insight into the elements of the policies of the public virtual universities that are able to meet their institutional goals and missions over a longer period of time. A long-term analysis could also provide additional insight into the ability of the various types of public virtual universities to meet the defined educational goals within a host state.

The fourth recommendation for further research that emerged from this study would be to conduct an examination of the elements of the policies of the public virtual universities that fall under the University Information Consortium classification of the Wolf and Johnstone (1999) taxonomy, which describes the most common form of public virtual university that exists in the United States. These institutions neither grant degrees nor provide centralized student services. These virtual universities simply link accredited academic institutions electronically (Wolf & Johnstone, 1999). A comprehensive analysis of this type of public virtual university would provide distance education stakeholders with a detailed summary of the elements of the policies of the public virtual universities that fall under this classification.

The fifth and final recommendation for further research based on the research completed in this study is that an examination be conducted with a specific focus on the dissolution of CVU. This study might investigate the contingencies placed on CVU by the corporations and foundations that provided the alternative funding once CVU became a not-for-profit entity. This study might also investigate the impetus for the development of CVU and, in doing so, compare the political origins of CVU to the needs of the academic community for a comprehensive, integrated virtual university in the state of California. As presented in this study, the CVU was the only public virtual institution whose funding from the state was eliminated. The data provided indicated that the fiscal factor in the dissolution of CVU was not due to the lack of financial support but due to the lack of state or legislative commitment. Future research may be focused to examine the commitment of public legislative or governing bodies as a policy area connected to the success of virtual institutions.

Each of the five surviving public virtual universities that were included in the policy analysis component of this study demonstrated the ability to redefine itself as it continued to develop toward the goals and missions that were set forth during the design phase of the institutions. In many ways, the ability to reinvent and to adapt has been critical to the success of each of the five surviving public virtual universities. However, in the midst of this sea of constant change, each of the five surviving public virtual universities maintained three central themes that appear to be the key to the survival of these institutions. The three themes include a central focus on access to education, a commitment to providing integrated faculty resources, and maintaining comprehensive student services. These three central themes repeatedly emerged in the context of this study during various phases of the research process.

This analysis of the elements of the policies of the public virtual universities has revealed a number of noteworthy findings. Each of these findings has a potential implication for the distribution of distance-delivered courses via a public virtual university. However, of the eight conclusions that were generated by this study, the three central themes of access to education, providing integrated faculty resources, and maintaining comprehensive student services appear to be the most readily applicable to the various models of distance education distribution that existed at the time of this study.