Barbee 1

Stephanie A. Barbee
EDTC 650-9040
October 7, 2014
Assignment 1
Models, Forms and Types of Virtual Schools
Introduction
As the current education system comes into question, a greater emphasis is being placed
on alternative forms of education, including virtual schools. More are embracing the idea of
virtual schools, and finding that online education offers unique opportunities that traditional
brick-and-mortar schools are incapable of emulating. Barbour and Reeves (2009) state that
online learning provides educational advantages for students who struggle in traditional schools,
such as those with behavioral issues, those with physical or mental disabilities or those who are
at a geographical disadvantage. Matthew Wicks and Associates (2010) explain that teachers are
discovering new ways to reach students, and administrators are exploring ways to offer a wider
range of courses for students and development opportunities for teachers. These advantages
have resulted in the progressive upsurge of virtual schools across the nation, and states are
finding that concerns relating to funding, administration, and overall liability need to be
addressed with acceptable policy. With such a strong need for policy in support of virtual
schools, officials are finding it increasingly difficult to develop effective policy because of the
varying terminology that exists for the equally diverse array of models, forms and types of
virtual schools.

Barbee 2

Matthew Wicks and Associates (2010) explains that one reason for the multitude of
varying terms is that the field of online learning is rapidly changing with educators combining
various aspects of online learning with that of the traditional classroom. This makes evaluating
and classifying the different models, forms and types of virtual schools an overwhelming task for
all involved. Since virtual schools are still not widely accepted, practitioners are forced to
translate traditional views of learning and education and apply this knowledge to teaching and
learning approaches associated with a virtual school movement (Hassel & Terrell, 2004). To
make classification easy, it is important to keep terminology consistent so those involved in
development, research, policy generation, and funding can communicate successfully between
departments. Currently, there are several methods of categorizing and classifying virtual schools
and this paper will dissect these methods in order to identify a single system that effectively
illustrates the different models, forms and types of virtual schools coherently and consistently.
Models of Virtual Schools
Student eligibility, attendance difficulties, and variety of programs are only a few factors
to consider when deciding if an online education is appropriate for a student or not. It is equally
as important when it comes to legislation and allocating funding, and classifying virtual schools
by model helps determine how and where virtual courses are ultimately delivered. When
classifying virtual schools by model, there are three types, as described by Hassel and Terrell
(2004), which meet the practical and legislative requirements of districts and virtual school
options: off-site online learning, on-site virtual school and third-place virtual school. While all
models involve costs, each model has its own cost structure that helps districts and parents
decide which type of education is best for a student. Developing consistent terminology for the
various models helps to define program structure, allocate funding and improve legislation.

Barbee 3

Hassel and Terrell (2004) describe the first model, off-site online learning, as the more
traditional form of the virtual school, where students access their educational materials and
receive instruction via online learning at a site of their choosing. This form of learning is for
students that are able to work with very little or no supervision, but is probably not suitable for
students who are at the elementary level. It is additionally important that students who use this
model of virtual school have reliable Internet access and a suitable work environment.
The on-site virtual school is often referred to as a school within a school, and offers the
benefits of the off-site virtual school with the benefits of a brick-and-mortar school. Students go
to school and attend elective courses, like art, physical education and music, much as they would
for a brick-and-mortar school, but are provided academic instruction in an online fashion on the
school site (Hassel and Terrell, 2004). The classroom is supervised by administrators or certified
teachers, and legislation supports this model as long as it is located within a distinct school and
has its own governance structure (Hassel and Terrell, 2004).
The third model is the third-place virtual school, and this is where all learning is done in
an online environment outside of the home or district-level school. Hassel and Terrell (2004)
explain that with this model student travels to an offsite facility in conjunction with a nonprofit
organization for their education, like their local community center or public library. A certified
teacher or administrator is onsite with the student for guidance, but the bulk of the instruction is
done with little assistance. This model of virtual school is often hosted by the nonprofit
organization that offers a facility for an educational environment, and contributes to funding
outside of the provision of the facility (Hassel and Terrell, 2004).
Forms of Virtual Schools

Barbee 4

In order to discuss the various forms of virtual school, it is important to understand

exactly what form is referring to. According to Hassel and Terrell (2004), form is a
characterization of virtual schools indicating governance and geographic attendance zones.
There are many different forms proposed by multiple practitioners, but all seem to have a similar
organization to the list suggested by Hassel and Terrell (2004), which include regional agencies
and consortia-operated, state education-operated, university-operated, public school districtoperated, and charter school-operated. These forms are discussed in detail in Figure 1 below.

and/or
Consortia-Operated

This form includes members from the local, district, regional or

state
level, who pool their resources and instructional staff together.
Enrollment is
limited and depends on staff available (Barbour & Reeves, 2008).

State
Education-Operated

This form encompasses state-operated schools that embrace

established
standards and enforces an open admissions policy for all
enrolled students
(Hassel & Terrell, 2004).

Regional Agency

University-Operated

Public School
District-Operated

Charter
School-Operated

This form provides advanced and enrichment courses to rural

and low-income
students to help them compete for admission to leading
universities
(Hassel & Terrell, 2004).
This form is operated by a single or multi-district school as a
supplement to
identified needs of students. This forms allows credit to be
applied towards
diplomas and extends participation to those who are
homeschooled.
(Barbour & Reeves, 2008).
This is the most prolific form of virtual school and performs well.
Policy
determines regulatory oversight and autonomy, supplements
homeschooled
students and are often commercially-run (Barbour & Reeves,
2008).

Barbee 5

Figure 1, Forms of Virtual Schools

The Watson et al. classification of forms of virtual schools, in Barbour and Reeves
(2008), is somewhat different from the classification model presented by Hassel and Terrell
(2004) but is outlined similarly. It organizes forms into the following categories: statewide
supplemental programs, district-level supplemental programs, single-district cyber schools,
multi-district cyber schools and cyber charters. Ultimately, both organizational models outline
the institutional entities that manage and administer virtual schools. In addition, they both offer a
comprehensive profile of the various forms of virtual schools that are currently available to
students. For the purpose of this paper, the forms of virtual schools will be divided into three
categories: state-led, single district and consortium. The categories in the classification outlined
by both Hassel and Terrell (2004) and Watson (2008) can be divided up easily into the three
categories, as shown in Figure 2.
Types of Virtual Schools
One of the most compelling benefits of online education is that it is able to meet the
various needs of a diverse population of students. Barbour and Reeves (2008) add that benefits
of virtual schools also include flexibility in scheduling and geography, the opportunity to meet
the needs of those who cannot attend traditional schools, and to receive an advanced level of
instruction. Whether online courses are needed to supplement an already established education
or take on the roll as a full-time source of education, virtual schools are able to address concerns
that traditional brick-and-mortar are unable to. Matthew Wicks and Associates (2010) state that
one important distinction is whether the online program provides a full set of courses for
students enrolled full-time or provides a small number of supplemental courses to students

Barbee 6

enrolled in another school. Ultimately, types of virtual schools can be categorized as

supplemental programs or full-time programs.
Supplemental programs are typically courses that are not available at a students place of
learning. Oftentimes, these courses can be advanced placement courses, credit-recovery courses
or specialized courses. Schools providing a supplemental program are not responsible for the
students overall academic performance, as their central place of learning bears that
responsibility. On the other hand, full-time programs are much different from supplemental
programs as they are accountable for a students performance and grant diplomas in the same
was as a public school would be. Full-time programs are often referred to as cyberschools, and
students enroll in virtual courses and do not physically attend a place of learning.
According to Barbour and Reeves (2009), full-time public virtual schools are state
approved and regionally accredited and offer courses through distance learning with an Internetbased delivery system. Full-time programs are funded the same as brick-and-mortar public
schools, which is provided by the public education funds and the occasional grant. However,
there is a difference in funding when it comes to supplemental programs. Watson et al., in the
article by Barbour and Reeves (2009), explains that supplemental programs are often funded
through state appropriations, and depend on grants or funding generated through course fees
charged to students to offset the high costs associated with virtual schools. Regardless of
whether it is a full-time or supplemental program, funding formulas can differ from state to state
and differ between supplemental and full-time programs.
To take this classification a step further, type of virtual school can include the grades
extended to specific courses available. Every course taken with either virtual school type can be

Barbee 7

for a grade or not, but what matters is that students are given the chance to prepare for life after
secondary school. For parents or school districts that are searching for an alternative form of
education, this classification could be crucial when examining potential opportunities for their
students. Whether searching for a full-time or supplemental program, schools and parents are
becoming progressively attuned to the benefits of online education; allowing each student
unparalleled equity and access to high quality education unconstrained by time and place
(Matthew Wicks and Associates, 2010). Virtual schools can be beneficial to those who need
assistance meeting graduation standard, to those enrolled in homeschool, or those who need
more challenging courses.

Barbee 8

Figure 2, Virtual School Classification Framework

Conclusion
Virtual schools are growing at a rapid pace, and it is becoming increasingly important for
there to be a classification system that is consistent from department to department and state to
state. According to Matthew Wicks and Associates (2010), online programs may operate within
a school district, across multiple school districts, across a state, or in a few cases, nationally or
internationally. With steady growth is an increasing need for a consistent classification system
that describes the many components of virtual schools. The framework presented in this paper,
as seen in Figure 2, can help students, parents and districts as they search for opportunities
provided by virtual schools. In addition, this framework can assist in the creation of more
supportive legislation and increased funding, and serve as a guide to further develop this
framework as changes or additions arise.

Barbee 9

Resources
Barbour, M., Reeves, T. (2009). The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature.
Computers and Education, 52(1), 402-416. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/2311478/Barbour_M._K._and_Reeves_T._C._2009_._The_re
ality_of_virtual_schools_A_review_of_the_literature._Computers_and_Education_52_2_
402-416
Hassel, B., & Terrell, M. (2004). How can virtual schools be a vibrant part of meeting the choice
provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act [White Paper]. Retrieved from
http://www.ed.gov/index.jhtml
Matthew Wicks and Associates (2010). National primer on K-12 online learning. Washington
DC: iNacol. Retrieved from
http://www.inacol.org/cms/wpcontent/uploads/2012/11/iNCL_NationalPrimerv22010web1.pdf