You are on page 1of 14

ENGL 3355 Business Team 8

The University of Texas


TeleCampus System
Case Study Analysis
Matthew Guay and David Lopez

Spring 09
THE PURPOSE OF THIS CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
The Chancellor of the UT TeleCampus system, Dr. Francisco G. Cigarro, his staff, the professors
who participate in the TeleCampus program, as well as their predecessors, should be commended
for their incredible work, as through the years they have received a copious number of awards
for online education. However, serious problems within the system have also caused this shining
star, the TeleCampus, to begin to lose its luster. As the thousands of TeleCampus students can
confirm, the University of Texas’ online college has been invaluable to their lives as students. By
being able to study online, these students are freed to study whenever, wherever, and however
they want to. TeleCampus enables students to choose to study from the University of Texas even
if they are geographically distant from it. These students have been the beneficiaries of the hard
work of the staff at UT TeleCampus, the chancellor of the UT system, and the professors in the
UT campuses that provide the classes. However, these same students are also subjected to some
of the pitfalls and discontinuities in the system that has become increasingly apparent as
TeleCampus approaches the conclusion of its 10th year of operation. The authors of this report
have experienced these problems firsthand, and believe that ignoring these problems may be
disastrous for TeleCampus in the future. In light of the recent economic trends around the world,
many students will be flocking to online classes to advance their education in order to secure
their jobs. In order to benefit from this, TeleCampus needs to revisit some of its policies to
enhance its communication strategies throughout the system. Only by doing this can TeleCampus
hope to continue being a leader in the online education arena.

To better understand the recommendations delineated below, it is necessary to approach the


forthcoming analysis from the stand point that the TeleCampus system lives in a world of
“Competitive Strategy and International Competitiveness.” Dr. Michael E. Porter, Professor of
Business Communication at the Harvard Business School has written about this topic
extensively, and he describes situations such as that of the UT TeleCampus system, which is a
system that risks diminishing its effectiveness. If easy-to-overlook pit-falls that are inherent in its
processes are not kept in check to prevent a “falling through the cracks” effect, TeleCampus will
lose the competitive edge.

The purpose of this report is therefore to demonstrate that there is a need for an improved forum
of communication between TeleCampus administrators, between TeleCampus and participant
campuses, and between TeleCampus and the participant students. TeleCampus’ main problem is
that it needs to establish a more effective environment for communication particularly for its
participant students.
A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF THE PROBLEM
An increased demand for online classes has obviously not gone unnoticed by colleges and
universities across America. Some are just getting started with online programs, while others
have vast portfolios of classes and available Majors for students to pursue fully online. These
universities are continuing to vigorously develop and refine their programs. Competition plays a
big part in this. A quote from the author of the above source recognizes this as he makes the
following point:

“Competition is dynamic and rests on innovation and the search for strategic differences. Close linkages with
buyers, suppliers, and other institutions are important, not only to efficiency but also to the rate of improvement and
innovation.” (Location & Competition, Dr. Michael E. Porter)

“Close linkages with buyers, suppliers, and other institutions” can most certainly be interpreted
as simply “Effective Communication”. This communication is most important at the grassroots
where the “Buyers” are the principal source of revenue. In this case, the students are the Buyers;
thus the students should be the focal point when determining which avenues of improvement are
most necessary. Teachers and professors who provide access to TeleCampus classes are the next
level of ‘users’ who can also be identified as ‘Buyers’. They too are a vital source for the revenue
of the TeleCampus, as they are the value generators that bring in revenue. If the TeleCampus is
not user-friendly to them, the next online college or university might offer a better alternative for
online courses for their students, their “Buyers.”

Universities are gravitating towards a holistic approach to electronic distance learning. The UT
TeleCampus is on the right track as it utilizes what is now an ever growing concept held by Dr.
Michael E. Porter, and is also featured in his various books: “Local Clusters in a Global
Economy.” The TeleCampus is in fact a cluster of resources through various campuses. However,
as more choices in online education become available, the UT TeleCampus is falling behind and
if it lacks in vital communication avenues, it risks the loss of potential students as it becomes
desensitized to their needs. Any lack of homogeneousness in TeleCampus’ products such as
varying amounts in costs for courses taken at different campuses, and the lack of sufficient
courses to complete certain Majors, and the lack of user-friendliness within the system will cause
students to deflect to a better equipped university that will make their educational experience
seamless.

A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF TELECAMPUS


The University of Texas TeleCampus is the University of Texas System’s award winning foray
into the world of online education. It is an organization at the administrative level within the UT
System, and it serves as a central support unit for the online initiatives of all UT System
campuses. Classes offered by UT TeleCampus are taught by faculty members at any of the
University of Texas’ 15 member institutions, and are accredited by the Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools. Its mission is not actually to grant degrees or credits, but to simply
facilitate communication between campuses to allow students to take online courses from
various UT campuses seamlessly. It works to provide a central system for developing, enrolling,
supporting, and maintaining online courses. Through this it preserves a vision of expanding the
University of Texas’ outreach to many more students throughout Texas and the world.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF TELECAMPUS


UT TeleCampus was formed in response to a report on information technology that Andersen
Consulting prepared for the UT system in November of 1996. Among other suggestions,
Andersen Consulting recommended that they “develop a technical and applications infrastructure
to support distance education for UT System components and link to national and international
initiatives.” It suggested that UT could expand its reach to more students by offering online
classes, and that a delay to offer them could lead students to choose another college over the
University of Texas. Acting on these recommendations, The Distance Education/Virtual
University Task Force was then created. It researched and visited other distance education
organizations across the country, and then drafted recommendations based on its findings in the
“Master Plan” document which was released in August of 1997. This document contained
suggestions that the Task Force felt would help UT’s online campus to be successful. They found
that running an online college could be an expensive undertaking, but also realized that by
pooling the efforts of all 15 UT campuses it could have the economy of scale that TeleCampus
would need to thrive.

The University of Texas took a unique approach in forming its online campus through the
pooling of resources. Since courses were presumed to be taught by existing instructors that were
already teaching within the 15 UT campuses, TeleCampus’ was designed to serve as a support
center for organizing the distance education initiatives of the UT system. During the year
between the presentation of the Master Plan and the first semester of operation, TeleCampus
worked to build a digital library, central course management system, student help services, and
equipping the campuses with the materials they needed to get their courses online. Instead of
each campus having to support all of these services themselves, a costly and time-consuming
activity, TeleCampus organized support services that would be used by each campus. This saved
the system money overall and it also freed each to do what they were best at: TeleCampus as
support services, and campuses at teaching quality courses.

Any fears that remained over whether students would be willing to take online classes were
thoroughly quenched when the system received 189 enrolments in its first semester of operation,
the fall of 1998. Even before the first class began, prospects of starting UT’s first online degree,
an MBA online, were already being fielded. Demand for online classes has been growing at a
10.4% rate year after year, and there were over 6,000 enrollments in the spring semester of 2009.
TeleCampus today offers 10 degree programs and over 330 individual courses fully online. The
dreams of expanding the University of Texas’ outreach have definitely been seen, for the
TeleCampus enrollment has included the citizens of 37 other states and 46 foreign countries. It
has received dozens of awards during its years of operation, and most recently the WECT
Outstanding Work award from the Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications,
and the Best Practices Award for Distance Learning Teaching Online from the United States
Distance Learning Association.

A SWOT ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT TELECAMPUS MODEL


Below is an overview of four important considerations that the current UT TeleCampus
administrators should review while contemplating changes to the system. This program, as it
exists, has a tremendous amount of positive effects upon its participants, but it also contains
pitfalls that are potentially threatening to its status as a leader and innovator within the family of
“Clusters” of online education. The following is a short SWOT analysis which describes the UT
TeleCampus’ Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and potential Threats:

1) Strengths – TeleCampus’ is a wonderful program. Its current model which provides


online support and student services for classes offered by various campuses is a strong
support system. The biggest strength in this system is that it frees the TeleCampus staff
from the burden of having to develop quality courses, since the courses are already there.
The support system allows students to select courses from a wide range of professors who
are already teaching in the UT system. This model has empowered the University of
Texas to start a “new” college venture that is already accredited through the colleges that
offer them through TeleCampus. These courses are already primed for use and are funded
with the enrolled student’s existing financial aid. Additionally, students are able to benefit
from student services such as advising, registration, and billing since they are already in
place at the existing colleges. All of these strengths were the impetus that gave
TeleCampus a great head-start during its inception as it entered a competing “Cluster” of
resources, a ‘Distance Learning’ market.

2) Weaknesses – The TeleCampus is a decentralized method of Distance Education which


by its nature creates problems that can generate system weaknesses. This “Cluster” of
resources requires an efficient and effective communication system between various
campuses. This is a challenge and a difficult task to achieve even in our digital age. Also,
the variations in everything from course prices to course selections to start dates can be
confusing and frustrating for students and faculty alike. These problems stem from the
fact that courses are taught from different campuses. Additionally, since TeleCampus is
simply a support division, it has much less control on policies that directly affect their
distance students in other campuses with separate policies.

3) Opportunities – Online education is a booming phenomenon in today’s world of higher


education. It is experiencing double-digit growth every year at a time when overall
college enrollment is only growing moderately. Almost twenty percent of American
college students in 2006 had taken an online class, and in the fall semester of 2007
around 3.94 million students were taking an online class in the US. These numbers are
expected to grow as more and more students seek an education and need to save time and
fuel. Online education enables students to take classes that are not offered near their
residence, and enables them to take classes when they are out of state or in another
country. The recent global economic downturn will cause many people to want to retrain
or gain additional education for better employment opportunities. Online classes will be
especially helpful for working adults. Finally, as TeleCampus has already seen, there is a
demand for American education for Americans overseas and for citizens of other
countries who cannot come to the US. These indicators demonstrate that TeleCampus has
a huge opportunity at an advantageous time in history to offer distance education and to
become a leading “Cluster” of sources for education.

4) Threats – The increased demand for online classes has not gone unnoticed by colleges
and universities across America. Some are just getting started, but others have vast
portfolios of classes and Majors available fully online. Universities are gravitating
towards a holistic approach to electronic Distance Learning. As more choices in online
education become available, the UT TeleCampus risks falling behind and losing potential
students to other universities if it becomes desensitized to student needs. Any lack of
homogeneousness in TeleCampus’ offerings, such as courses that cost substantially varied
amounts, and the lack of sufficient courses to complete a Major, and a technically non
user-friendly system will also cause students to deflect to better equipped universities.

TELECAMPUS’ COMMUNICATION CHALLENGE


Although there has been a phenomenal growth in the TeleCampus system, there are still a few
cracks in the basic infrastructure of the program. TeleCampus has excelled at offering high-
quality online classes for thousands of students across the globe, but students have expressed
difficulty in using it. The TeleCampus has thus evidently struggled to fulfill its part in the ‘online
deal’: the creation and the implementation of quality student services for online classes. As the
saying goes, ‘Water takes the path of least resistance’, and so do students who seek just the right
college that offers the easiest turn-key end-to-end solution for online learning. The real ‘deal’
here is that the TeleCampus’ weaknesses in student services, and in its limited course selections,
will severely hurt its globalization progress in the years to come and if it continues on the same
trend will result in a weakening of a once strong “Cluster” of resources. Dr. Porter’s wisdom
offers a glimpse as he writes the following prophetic analysis:

“Economic geography during an era of global competition involves a paradox. It is widely


recognized that changes in technology and competition have diminished many of the traditional
roles of location. Yet clusters, or geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, are a
striking feature of virtually every national, regional, state, and even metropolitan economy,
especially in more advanced nations. The prevalence of clusters reveals important insights about
the microeconomics of competition and the role of location in competitive advantage………….
Clusters represent a new way of thinking about national, state, and local economies, and they
necessitate new roles for companies, government, and other institutions in enhancing
competitiveness.

Dr. Porter defines a cluster a follows:

“A cluster is a geographically proximate group of interconnected companies and associated


institutions in a particular field, linked by commonalities and complementarities. The geographic
scope of clusters ranges from a region, a state, or even a single city to span nearby or
neighboring countries.”

In an increasingly tight and inter-connected world of global economies, this concept is becoming
increasingly more real, and more vital to the survival of its participants. This is a race of the
survival of the fittest, and only the fittest will win. Our “Cluster” – the UT TeleCampus system –
as a part of a global economy, is currently going in the right direction. But so are other clusters
around the world, and most certainly and most competitively those in the United States. Let’s
take a closer look at the problems with our very own cluster the UT TeleCampus.

Many of the UT TeleCampus’ problems regarding student services stem from underlying
communication problems. TeleCampus is supposed to offer direction and guidance with regard to
online education initiatives. In that capacity, it should also address needed policy changes that
should ultimately streamline online education. The program itself is also supposed to
communicate or translate policy changes to students in order to enable them to, for example,
understand how to enroll and how to navigate through online classes. Ideally it should make the
process of taking online classes easy and as simple as taking on-campus classes. This dream,
however, has not yet been fulfilled. Some of the pit-falls that have created communication break-
downs are technical in nature and are more specifically described as follows:

• TeleCampus students are currently charged tuition and student fees for each course
that is taken at different UT system campuses. This means that if a student takes
courses from various campuses, student fees such as registration, athletic activities, and
foreign exchange fees are charged to the student at each campus from which they take a
TeleCampus class. This is confusing, costly, and it is time consuming for students as they
have to decipher charges and solicit reimbursements when applicable.

TeleCampus could improve its services dramatically by negotiating and developing a


policy that would enhance communication between TeleCampus and the participating
campuses. Primary communication would involve communicating what fees have already
been charged to the student by other campuses to prevent fees from being double
charged. In the mean time, students should be forewarned about the possibility of being
double charged, and a person (not a computer screen) should be assigned as a liaison
between TeleCampus and the students and any professor who wishes to discuss these
matters or who need questions answered regarding what to expect in terms of charges
from the various participating campuses.

• Financial aid and scholarships that students are authorized to receive are also
impacted by the system’s double-charge pitfall. Financial aid, grants, and scholarships
are sent to the campus listed as the student’s home campus. When financial aid is given to
the student, the home campus is electronically and automatically paid for any tuition and
student service fees incurred at the home campus from the student’s grant(s) and/or
scholarship(s). Any remainder amount is then paid out to the student. However, if a
student takes classes from other UT campuses through TeleCampus, the tuition for those
classes and student fees incurred at the other campuses is billed separately. The fees at
these other campuses must be paid out-of-pocket by the student. If their grants and/or
scholarships cover the class, they can reimburse themselves for this class when the
remainder of their financial aid is paid out to them. This is inconvenient for students who
are short on funds and can be a severe financial burden on those who more severely need
the financial aid. If the student gets reimbursed for duplicated student fees, it happens
only if the student initiates a billing research which usually takes place after classes have
already begun, further defraying concentration on the primary goal of studying.

TeleCampus could resolve this scenario by working to improve communication between


campuses and finding a way to streamline its financial process. TeleCampus should also
establish better communication avenues to resolve issues such as these and would provide
a better service by coordinating the billing and payments process of all TeleCampus
classes. TeleCampus needs also to forewarn students as to what to expect when paying
for TeleCampus classes.

• Students are required to have separate email addresses, user names, and passwords
for each school’s website when they take classes through TeleCampus from multiple
UT campuses. The inconvenience and time consuming nature of this requirement does
not require any further elaboration to describe the counter-productiveness of the policy
behind it. Students who take many TeleCampus classes end up with numerous online IDs
for UT, and this is very difficult for students to keep up with.

TeleCampus could resolve this situation by working to improve communications between


campuses in the UT system so that web credentials can be used at any college that offers
a TeleCampus class. Until this policy can be implemented, TeleCampus needs to better
inform students of what they should expect with online Passwords, User names, and ID’s
from the various UT campuses. The ideal solution would be to consolidate each into only
one TeleCampus ID for each student who uses the system.

• Getting approved for classes that require prerequisites is another very difficult
endeavor for the student. The burden is on the student to research and determine which
classes can or cannot be taken when a prerequisite is involved. There currently exists a
complete breakdown in direct communication processes between TeleCampus and the
various campuses in the UT System regarding accessible information that can make a
course available for a student.

TeleCampus can resolve this problem by developing a policy that would require
campuses to more easily share student information for TeleCampus purposes. The
campuses should be able to easily see what classes a student has taken in the past to be
able to determine eligibility for the class. They should additionally have a system for
sharing overrides when a professor has overridden prerequisite requirements for a
student. Students should also be able to see exactly what those prerequisites are based on
with all of the composite possibilities from all the campuses participating in the UT
TeleCampus system.

• The TeleCampus Blackboard’s email feature is not synchronized with all the
available email options that it offers. The participating student usually has an email
address through the home university. TeleCampus also has several options of using email
communication. Some connect to the student’s university email and some do not. For
example, there is an “Email” tab at the left side of the Blackboard class screen where
students can follow a string of sub tab selections to reach the email feature. There is also
another way in the same screen to access email options with the “Communication” tab.
Another way of accessing email capabilities is through the “Send Email” tab under
“Business Teams” for example (if the professor offers this tab). The “Course Map”
selection tab also offers an email capability. There are too many tabs for emails, and
additionally, some of these features do not always work. When they do, they do not
function as indicated. This is the case of the “Communication” tab, where it indicates
“In” and “Out” email, but sometimes does not log when an email is sent out, and does not
log nor have a means to receive “In” mail. Some students have experienced a system
where email communication can happen within the usage screen, both through “In” and
“Out” going mail, but does not link to the student’s home university email.
An ideal scenario would be to link all email features, whether they be at the “Discussion
Board” tab, or at the “Business Team” tab, or at the “Communication” tab, with the
students ‘home’ email address. Regardless of where the email is sent or received, each
source should keep a history of emails sent and/or received. The system, and the students
and professors who teach through TeleCampus, would be better off with an ideal scenario
where there is hypothetically speaking only one main tab as is indicated in the usage
screen that is labeled “Email”. This email source could link with the student’s and
professor’s university email when prompted, and also logs the “In” and “Out” going
email there at the usage screen as well as at the Students and Professor’s university email
address. This could easily be accomplished by linking all of these links with the student’s
Live@EDU account, which most UT campuses already use as their student’s main email
provider.

SOLUTIONS TO COMMUNICATION PROBLEMS


The above communication problems can be resolved in phases. These issues range from easier
policy changes, to the more difficult ones. Policies, procedures, and break-downs in
communication must be troubleshot, revisited, and revised. The current program, as all resource
“Clusters”, has the propensity to focus on funding and to ensure survival. With this in mind, the
following points, as determined by actual students in UT TeleCampus, should be addressed and
viewed as essential ingredients for an effective and meaningfully improved UT TeleCampus:

• An increased selection of classes would greatly enhance the TeleCampus system. More
Majors of study should be included in TeleCampus’ portfolio. Students who cannot
physically attend a specific campus find themselves at a loss because of the inability to
orchestrate a specific Major for their studies through TeleCampus. Sometimes students
will end up choosing other universities over the UT system – as is the case with one of
our current TeleCampus classmates – because of unavailability of classes of their choice.
If this is not addressed, it can have grave long term implications for TeleCampus’ future.

• Increased and more effective communication with students is vital. The student
participant and professors would benefit from better more effective communication
channels through TeleCampus. As is the case with any other venture or “Cluster” as large
as, it is unacceptable that these communication problems be passed on to the student.
Students should understand in simple terms exactly what they will be faced with
concerning enrollment, financing, and participation in the course. The student needs to
know, for example, potential funding obstacles and potential pitfalls such as those
described above concerning double charges. Communicating with the students about
inter-campus differences in enrollment procedures and policies would eliminate much
strife in the TeleCampus experience.
Clear communications with the students and with the campuses that the student is taking
classes from can clear these problems up. Without these communications the student has
to navigate through a time-consuming maze of information that makes it hard to figure
out what is correct and what isn’t because of flaws in the system. TeleCampus has
improved in this area greatly over the years, and the many iterations of its website are a
testimony of this. However, more can still be done to enhance user friendliness of
TeleCampus by increasing communications with students. A good start would be for
TeleCampus to designate enrollment counselors who would take students through a
virtual orientation of TeleCampus individually through the internet, phone, or even in
person if possible. They could explain the differences that the student will experience
when dealing with various campuses, as well as how to approach online learning from
TeleCampus. These orientation sessions would also be an ideal source for TeleCampus to
gather valuable information for future development.

• A special Student Manager through a “TeleComputer” electronic communications


system would be an ideal feature to coordinate and to help manage the student’s personal
educational profile. This system would consolidate and coordinate each TeleCampus
student’s financial, course, and personal information. It would be strictly dedicated for
use by administration of the 15 UT campuses currently offering TeleCampus services for
accessing information about students taking courses that are taught through that particular
campus.

The communication channel would employ user-friendly menus to enable each campus –
thru a TeleCampus administrator – to sort the students profile with the courses taken, the
availability of courses the student is eligible to take, the courses that still need to be
taken. Additionally, it would have capabilities that would identify the problems discussed
above such as double charges to the student profile. A staffed central command station –
probably in the TeleCampus Information Technology department – could host the
database for such a system.

• A complete “Virtual UT TeleCampus” system that would run as a university within the
university, which is a concept that has already been proposed in the Master Plan but
never implemented. This would be a dream come true for the participating campuses.
This “Virtual Campus” would provide all of the necessary student services for students
taking classes through TeleCampus. Students would receive a TeleCampus Student ID
number, username, email address, and password. The TeleCampus Virtual Campus would
handle all of that student’s financial aid, and students would only have to pay tuition to
TeleCampus. Courses would still be taught by the individual campuses, but this process
would be invisible to the students and they would simply be TeleCampus students. The
only remaining challenge would be for the UT TeleCampus program to equally divide
courses and majors between campuses in order to ensure that each campus had an equal
work load and received and equal number of graduates.
Obviously, compared to the other recommendations, this ‘Virtual Campus’ would be the
most difficult to achieve. However, with this goal as the beacon of light, policy should be
developed and formulated to reflect the necessary changes to create a system that would
emphasize communication between the various participating campuses and its
participating students. Perhaps this is not a goal that can be achieved over-night, but
neither was the UT TeleCampus network when it was first envisioned. If in the first 10
years TeleCampus has grown from an enrollment of just 189 to over 6,000, what does the
future for the next ten years hold? Perhaps it could see enrolment up to 500,000 students!
What an accomplishment for UT, what an accomplishment for Texas!

A system such as the one described above would reap many valuable benefits for the
students as well as for the professors involved and for the university. It would enhance
the university’s goals of furthering education and reaching out beyond the physical
barriers of the classroom. Obtaining an online education will be much more seamless
when the student’s entire online education is handled and reconciled by a central
TeleCampus communications center. The campuses will also benefit by having freer
classrooms for on-campus students as more students choose to study online. This very
clearly translates into tremendous savings to the university as they will not have to build
larger facilities, but will still get the additional student revenue that will come from the
increase in online students.

IN CONCLUSION:
The current UT TeleCampus system is a wonderful program which serves students in a vast and
diverse geographical area. Its services have produced invaluable life changing results for its
participants. However, as any large institution or “Cluster” of resources in a world of
competition, there have been and there will continue to be growing pains. This report should
therefore be viewed as part of that unfolding evolution. It offers sincere but critical
recommendations that must be addressed to fully develop an ideal, efficient, and competitive
service. This report sheds light on various vastly intricate and neglected communication
problems which if solved will thrust the current TeleCampus into a posture of leadership within
the family of “Competing Clusters” of online education..

The problems and the solutions outlined above are a well intended gesture, but they are also
offered from the hands-on experience and hindsight of students who have already worked with
and navigated through the TeleCampus system. It is with great enthusiasm and honor, but also
with much expectation that the above solutions will be considered and often be visited and
revised, and that that these suggestions may be considered as they have been offered with much
hindsight and actual experience. Solving these problems will not only greatly enhance the quality
of education for TeleCampus’ students, but will also enhance the quality of work of the
professionals who run it and teach through it. More importantly, solving these problems will not
only “Sharpen-the-tool,” but will refine the warhead necessary to maintain the competitive edge
over other electronic classroom systems around the country and around the world.

The idea of enhancing the university’s goals of furthering education by reaching out beyond the
physical barriers of the classroom with ease is the key of success for the University of Texas’
TeleCampus program. This “Cluster” of resources that exists within a family of competing
clusters of online education can successfully excel and gain a complete competitive edge if the
above issues are addressed properly. The authors hope that these recommendations will be
thoughtfully implemented in the TeleCampus system in the coming days and years.
Works Cited

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007, October). Online Nation - Five Years of Growth in Online Learning.
Retrieved March 25, 2009, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/online_nation.pdf

Chmura, M. (2008, November 12). Strong Growth in Online Education; New Study Shows Enrollment up
12 Percent to Nearly 4 Million. Retrieved March 25, 2009, from
http://www3.babson.edu/Newsroom/Releases/sloanc2008onlinelearning.cfm

Hardy, D., & Robinson, R. (2002, January). The University of Texas System TeleCampus: A Statewide
Model for Collaboration. Retrieved March 24, 2009, from
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewFile/53/111

Porter, M. E. (2002). Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy.
Retrieved from Economic Development Quarterly, Vol. 14, No.1, 1534:
http://edq.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/1/15

The University of Texas System. (1997, August). Master Plan - UT TeleCampus. Retrieved March 23,
2008, from http://forms.telecampus.utsystem.edu/index.cfm/4,503,c,html/masterplan.pdf

The University of Texas TeleCampus. (2008). Annual Report 2008. Retrieved March 24, 2009, from
http://telecampus.utsystem.edu/aboututtc/dataandinfo/~/media/Files/About%20UTTC/Reports/AR2008/U
TTCAnnualReport2008.ashx

The University of Texas TeleCampus. (n.d.). Awards. Retrieved March 24, 2009, from
http://telecampus.utsystem.edu/aboututtc/dataandinfo/awards.aspx