Typology of virtual campuses/universities¹

Within a benchmarking approach of virtual campuses and virtual universities, one of the basic elements is the description of each "instance" (concrete realisation) of the virtual campus/virtual university concept in a more or less standardised way. Only then it becomes possible to position various instances and/or to "measure" the performance of each instance in a comparable way. The framework for such standardised description is a typology: a set of key elements and their interrelations.

Such a typology is not a once and for all result. Technology changes constantly, and so do educational concepts and settings. A typology must take such changes into account and the present product should therefore be considered as a typology that will be changed in future in function of the description of the organisations that enter the BENVIC benchmarking exercise.

The concept of a virtual campus refers to a specific format of distance education² and/or online learning in which students, teaching staff and even university administrative and technical staff mainly "meet" or communicate through technological links. The reference to distance education does not apply to typical distance teaching universities only, but also to conventional campuses in their use of flexible learning for students.

Although in the literature references are made to various characteristics of virtual campuses³, a typology is not to be found. Therefore, we have tried to develop one within the BENVIC project.

The typology is focussed deliberately to virtual campuses of the higher education world, although it can eventually be extended after some adaptations to lifelong learning and to continuing education and training as well.

The typology for Virtual Campuses/universities is described in what follows to enable the use of the added questionnaire in such a way that terms/concepts are clear and unambiguous. So, we strongly suggest the throughout reading of the typology dimensions, before filling in the questionnaire. The questionnaire does not result in a benchmarking position in itself, it is merely intended to give a general view of the virtual campus or virtual university that you would like to be benchmarked.

The dimensions

A virtual campus may typologically be described in a multi-dimensional matrix, of which the dimensions are:

the institutional basis and mission
the scope of the offer
the deployed activities
the scale of the partnership
the partnership organisation
the audiences
the used teaching/learning scenarios

institutional basis and mission

The institutional basis encompasses aspects such as:

public / private / mixed organisation
for profit / non profit organisation

It can have three "formats":

a mono mode, "dedicated" institution: a virtual university, conceived and constructed as an independent institution without a campus and/or study centres in which students meet physically with university teaching staff or fellow students
a dual mode institution: the virtual campus as an additional manifestation of an existing conventional university
a networked virtual campus: a virtual environment as the networked collaboration of independent existing conventional universities and/or mono and/or dual mode institutions

Its mission may be laid by

social/access priorities (creating opportunities to education for underrepresented classes)
economic priorities (contributing to economic dynamics of a region or country)

scope of the offer

The scope of the offer should be linked to the stage of development in the total life-cycle of the virtual campus. It can again have three levels, in combination with the section of the institution that is involved:

'age' of the virtual campus (number of years of existence)
life-cycle
- embryonic offer
- established offer
- mature offer
involved sector of the institution
- an individual department, faculty or school
- a group of faculties
- the full scope of the university

Of course, such combination could be different for each institutional sector: whereas the full university could be in an embryonic stage of its full offer, separate individual departments can have evolved already to an established or mature stage (which implies that within this full range, individual parts should be situated at another stage of the life-cycle).

deployed activities

Within virtual university activities, various activity levels can be identified:

virtual classes: teaching and learning in a virtual environment for campus based students or/and distance learners
virtual campus: including virtual classes, but also research communication and collaboration as well as scientific services to the society at large - e.g. contract research and consultancy for companies and governmental bodies
virtual university: including student registration, student and staff administration, and eventually examination and creditation

More or less corresponding activities in a training environment are:

virtual classes: training and learning in a virtual environment in corporate training centres or/and at a distance (on the job, at home)
virtual company:

scale of the partnership

This dimension should distinguish between a:

dedicated institution (no partnership with other institutions)
local/regional partnership
national partnership
transnational partnership

partnership organisation of the virtual campus

This dimension describes the type of partnership, i.e. the kind of collaboration one university has with its partners, and more precisely what aspects are delegated by the university to the partnership.

Virtual campuses serve basically three functions⁴

brokerage function: online catalogues allowing for "one-stop shopping"
forum function: joint course and materials development, virtual student mobility (including joint learner support)
university function: collective venture of institutions

audience

This dimension can be described in a number of aspects:

absolute size of the learners and spread over age and gender groups
open audience or closed audience
classic academic (undergraduate students, graduate/post-graduate students, ph.d. students) and professional audience (continuing education) or non academic and non professional audience (in framework of lifelong learning)
on campus students or off campus students
teachers, trainers and other mediators of the learning process

virtual teaching and learning scenarios

The scenarios that are used in virtual campuses can be positioned in a diagram (Coomey and Stephenson)⁵ according to two axis: the locus of control of learning (teacher controlled versus learner managed) and the task specification (specified tasks versus open-ended, strategic learning) (see figure).

The four quadrants represent each a teaching-learning paradigm:

teacher controlled, specified learning activities (NW quadrant)
teacher controlled, open-ended or strategic learning (SW quadrant)
learner managed specified learning activities (NE quadrant)
learner managed open-ended or strategic learning (SE quadrant).

Coomey and Stephenson identified four major dimensions or themes that are discussed in the literature about online learning: dialogue, involvement, support, control. These four dimensions can be considered as major determinants of the scenarios that will be used in a virtual campus.

To illustrate the specific appearances of each dimension in the four paradigms, a longer citation out of Coomey and Stephenson's contribution is used.

The North West Sector (Teacher determined, task specific)

Dialogue:	Teacher defines /controls online dialogue and interaction Student responds to teacher questions and mini tasks Dialogue with peers specified as part of task Focus of dialogue is usually task oriented problem solving and that problem is set by the instructor
Involvement	Little or no scope for learner to influence content Activity is strictly defined and related to pre-set task Site is structured to lead learner directly to specific information Students can access information from a web site before lecture, during lectures to illustrate points and after lectures to seek support from the instructor
Support	Assumed to come only from the teacher via e-mail or phone calls or 'traditional' face-to-face meetings Time-tabled face to face support by teacher or through e-mail Online tools to help understanding of content Could involve assignments being posted online and read, with feedback by other students but main feedback from instructor
Control	Learner control confined to responses to tasks Some control over sequencing, and level of engagement Teacher controls reading materials, content to be learned, deadlines and time required to work on tasks
Teacher role	Instructor

The North East Corner (Learner determined, task specific)

Dialogue:	Teacher sets out the general responsibilities and procedures, but not the participation, content or usage Scope is confined to the task, but the systems and protocols support student managed dialogue with other students, peers and experts Much use of asynchronous dialogue and frequently asked questions
Involvement	Task focused self-managed groups Groups can be self-selected and/or self-moderated, deciding own agenda and programme Learner able to relate or adapt tasks to own circumstances and aspirations
Support	Online support tools, learning support framework Tutor provides advice on nature of the task, learning goals etc. Tutor feedback available on progress towards task Mainly email contact, or tutor moderated discussion groups Students provide feedback to members of their own groups and others
Control	Conduct of task up to learner Emphasis on navigable links to wide variety of sources Use of resources outside the programme Wide discretion over activities, content, learning outcomes Relates learning to own personal goals
Teacher role	Coach

The South West Sector (Teacher determined open-ended strategic learning activities)

Dialogue:	A combination of dialogue styles found in NW, during the instructor lead segment of the course and SE during the learner managed segment of the course. Could be managed by teacher, focused on the overall direction and purpose of the study Use of asynchronous dialogue but with instructor setting out roles for students, making students participate as leaders or respondents in discussions or asking students to categorise their responses
Involvement	Could start out as solo activity with student learning rules/concepts/theories from online texts and possibly traditional lectures Text may be online but there are also locations for students to write and place their "discoveries", the links that they find, the data and content they discover. Once students have mastered "the basics" , they create something new of their own Group activity mainly confined to course group Discovery, problem solving activities
Support	Tutor support could be online or occasionally face to face Range of support from traditional instructor feedback to assignments in the first phase of the course (NW quadrant), to the instructor reacting as a facilitator, offering suggestions but not answers to student posts during the 'discovery' phase of the course (SE quadrant)
Control	Learner has control of specific learning goals within the generalised goals Manages own unstructured discovery activities within given parameters Free to set own personal goals within the generalised activity
Teacher role	Guide

The South East Sector

Dialogue	*Self or collaboratively (peer-group) directed Wide discretion over choice of discussion groups, from peers to 'public' specialist interest groups Asynchronous dialogue with other specialists External source of specialist assistance, formulation of ideas and exchange of materials
Involvement	Total involvement in the learning activity Could be working alone or in a team Learner relates the learning to own needs - personal, vocational, academic Reflection on progress and meaning
Support	Access to instructor and experts and peers for advice and support Contacts with supervisor initiated and monitored by the learner, facilitated by the system Teacher in background, offering advice on procedures and resources Feedback sought from variety of sources and experts The structure and design of the online learning facilities provide a framework of support within which the learner has considerable discretion
Control	Learner controls the direction and the task Learner determines the goals and outcomes Learner monitors progress
Teacher role	Facilitator

With this information in mind, it should be possible to position a virtual campus through its used teaching and learning scenarios, by indicating a region (a quadrant, or an ellipse that eventually is partly situated in more that one quadrant), as shown in the examples beneath.

¹ an interesting overview of links that were used to make this outline is to be found under the heading The Virtual University, http://www.insead.fr/CALT/Encyclopedia/Education/Advances/Virtual_University/
Use was also made of the text Van der Perre, G., Roosendaal, H. & Van den Branden, J. (in press) The Distributed Virtual University. In Trindade Rocha A. (Ed.) Title still to be definded. Lisbon, Universidad Aberta., and from Van den Branden, J. Ferber, R. & Näslund, H. (2000) Towards a European Virtual University Campus. Internal interim report of the Taskforce EVC for EUNITE's EVU-online. University of Lund.

² for a brief overview of distance education and the position of "virtual mobility", see Van den Branden, J. & Bang, J. (1998) ODL, ICT and the HUMANITIES Model. In: Floor, P. (Ed.) Beyond HUMANITIES: Long Term Strategy for ODL in University Environments and Virtual Mobility. Brussels, Coimbra Group, p. 17-28.

³ see e.g. James, D.L. (1998) Let's Have a Virtual University ? http://www.lmu.ac.uk/lss/staffsup/editor.htm and various contributions in the recent EDEN Research Conference

⁴ Breuker, E. (2000) Discussion paper Taskforce "European Virtual Campus". Internal discussion document for the Taskforce EVC of EUNITE's EVU-online. University Twente

⁵ For more elaboration on this topic, see Coomey, M. & Stephenson, J. (in preparation) Online learning: It's all about Dialogue, Involvement, Support and Control - according to the research. In Stephenson, J. (Ed) Teaching and Learning Online: new pedagogies for new technologies. London, Kogan Page

Typology of virtual campuses/universities1

Typology of virtual campuses/universities¹