Turning to a virtual campus for a real education
Editor’s note: James Fong is the director of Penn State University’s Outreach Office of Marketing Research.
The Age of Technology and the impact of the Internet and global telecommunications have dramatically changed the face of education. In addition, demographic shifts have created a new demand for continuing education or "lifelong learning." The non-traditional student, typically over 25 years of age and not living on a college campus, is now a mouse-click away from earning college credits, advanced degrees, and certificates of achievement via the Internet. These students now have access to on-line courses and programs from hundreds of colleges, universities, and private institutions, including Penn State University. The Penn State system consists of 24 campuses, including a medical and law school, located throughout Pennsylvania. Its newest campus is the World Campus, the university’s entry into the virtual campus arena.
Two years ago, Penn State began developing a strategy for how it would compete for students in this brave new world. The university chose not to offer typical programs - which would be subject to significant competition - but to offer signature programs in which it could be a dominant player.
Given the drastic changes in education and the Internet, many pitfalls stood before Penn State in launching its World Campus. Poor marketing, developing an ineffective product, or not meeting the customers’ needs could hurt the university’s national reputation, as well as demoralize the faculty and staff in future efforts to provide on-line education. There were also limited marketing dollars. In short, good decisions were essential.
A single mode of research wouldn’t be sufficient to answer the many questions facing the university. There were questions on customer demand, technical readiness of the audience, faculty readiness, the ability of the student to pay, the competitive environment, program reputation, partnership potential with corporations and associations, marketing reach, and program pricing. In-depth interviews with associations and business leaders, need assessment surveys, and industry and competition studies helped guide the way. Measuring internal readiness was especially critical, since favorable market conditions were useless without a willing and ready faculty.
High quality instruction
In the spring of 1997, faculty submitted 23 programs for consideration, including programs in anesthesia, turfgrass management, chemical dependency counseling, engineering, geographic information systems (GIS), dietary systems and nutrition, material sciences, and child care. With a goal of developing three programs for January 1998 and at least three for fall 1998, the plan was to deliver an interactive, high quality mode of instruction through World Campus.
Figure 1 shows the market research system to assess which programs would be delivered through the World Campus. The deans of the Penn State academic colleges worked together and, using a rating system, reduced the number of programs from 23 to nine for consideration for January or September 1998 delivery (Figure 1, Phase I).
Phase II of the research consisted of identifying Penn State’s program strengths and finding information and demographics on Internet trends. It was also critical to understand the needs of the independent learner. Prior to the World Campus, the independent learner at Penn State would take correspondence courses via textbook, audio or videotape, CD-ROM, or videoconferencing.
Telephone surveys were conducted with students completing an independent learning certificate program. While e-mail survey software is now readily available, few quality packages were available in early 1997, therefore, listserv surveys were used. These electronic questionnaires were posted on a listserv (an e-mail list centered around an interest or field), inviting students who were already taking courses with Penn State through the Internet on a pilot basis to take a survey about education via the Internet.
In late 1997, an e-mail survey using a package designed by Decisive Software was issued to recent inquirers to Penn State’s independent learning program. Of the 1,403 inquirers who gave e-mail addresses, 297 returned the survey. A significant percentage of non-responses were a result of incorrect or expired e-mail addresses, or lack of interest.
These electronic and telephone surveys provided information on why students chose an independent learning mode of study, why they chose Penn State, whether they had access to technology, and did they or their employers have ability to pay for continued education. In addition to their desire to continue their education, independent learners often were seeking convenience of study (82 percent), a Penn State education (53 percent), and had access to technology (85 percent) and received some sort of reimbursement from their employers (43 percent).
As shown in Figure 1, Phase V consisted of major marketing research activity on the nine programs selected by academic deans of Penn State. Specifically, three major questions needed to be answered through marketing research.
1. What is the institution’s reputation? Internal assessments, secondary research, Internet searches, rankings by national media, and interviews with other universities and associations, showed that Penn State rates high in the fields of engineering, agriculture, health care, business and science. Therefore, in terms of World Campus and the university’s traditional strengths, Penn State would look strongly at offering turfgrass management, GIS, and engineering via the World Campus. Penn State would most likely encounter lower levels of competition and higher levels of awareness on these programs (Figure 1, Phase III).
One method Penn State staff used to measure reputation was to ask the faculty of a department proposing a World Campus program what other schools or institutions offered similar programs. Staff from Penn State’s Office of Marketing Research (OMR) then interviewed these organizations to ask them who they thought their competition was. If Penn State was named by these organizations, then these findings, as well as data from other sources, was used to measure reputation and levels of competition.
2. How ready are faculty, the departments, or those providing the instruction? World Campus leaders quickly learned that delivering education through the Internet was new to most faculty. Many had perceptions that on-line instruction would be text-heavy and have limited graphics or interactive capabilities. Many did not realize that the delivery environment had multimedia capability, allowed for group projects, and used a lot of e-mail interaction.
In-depth personal interviews with faculty quickly revealed that faculty from turfgrass management and a number of engineering courses would be most ready, while those in the material sciences and nutrition would be least ready. Staff from OMR and Penn State’s Distance Education Department interviewed faculty to discuss departmental readiness, commitment to the program, whether the course content was prepared, whether the course was delivered through other modes of distance education, and how likely would the proposed program enhance or meet the strategic goals of the academic college.
3. What are the conditions of the population? Serious consideration was made regarding the size and demand of the market, whether marketing can reach them, but more importantly, whether they have access to technology and the ability to pay. Surveys of each population yielded data suggesting that Penn State turfgrass management, engineering, GIS, and chemical dependency counseling programs would be most successful. Approximately 100 surveys were conducted with professionals in each of the fields. They were asked whether other professionals in their industry would be interested in or need the proposed program. While access to technology was low for those in the chemical dependency counseling profession (Figure 2), interest and need in this program was highest among the five programs studied.
Surveys also revealed that, although potential demand would be highest for chemical dependency counseling, technical readiness would be a concern (Figure 3). Representatives from each industry surveyed were asked whether they or employees who might benefit from the proposed program had access to computers at work or at home or had access to the Internet. Plastics engineering showed low demand and the potential audience also had low access to technology, thus making it less attractive. Both GIS and nutrition professionals had high levels of access to computers and the Internet.
Although access to technology was lowest for those interested in chemical dependency counseling, demand for counselors was expected to double by 2005, thus making the true market size slightly more attractive. In addition, it was expected that lower priced computers would play a large part in the adoption of technology for this population at a later date.
Other critical factors were the ability to pay and the willingness of employers to reimburse its employees. Figure 4 shows that reimbursement possibilities were highest for those in the plastics, nutrition, and GIS professions. These professions typically have a larger number of employees compared to chemical dependency clinics or golf courses.
The chemical dependency industry, given major changes in health care policy and governance, had lower levels of employee reimbursement for education. Counseling organizations also varied greatly in size, ranging from independent counseling organizations to large regional treatment facilities.
In-depth interviews
Other data were collected including demographic profiles of Internet users, industry outlooks, and interviews with major associations. In-depth interviews were conducted with associations in the chemical dependency counseling, GIS, engineering, and turfgrass fields. Strong partnership potential with associations or major corporations also contributed to support of a program. For example, the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America was interviewed and later partnered with Penn State to deliver courses to their members.
Using many data sources, final recommendations were made to launch certificate programs in turfgrass management, chemical dependency counseling, and noise control engineering in the spring of 1998. Inferences were made on demand for engineering courses and additional research was conducted to support the addition of noise control engineering to the spring offering. In total, 37 students registered and were accepted out of the 73 who applied to these three programs. Since the first three programs were offered, Penn State has received over 1,000 World Campus inquiries from 46 states, two territories, and 26 nations on six continents.
In the fall of 1998, a masters degree in reliability engineering will be offered, as well as a certificate in GIS. Programs such as anesthesia and child care were moved farther down the consideration list due to a number of factors (willingness and ability to pay).
Other courses added to the 1998/1999 schedule include business logistics, fundamentals of engineering, and nutrition/dietary systems. Other programs for consideration in the spring of 1999 currently undergoing marketing research include statistics, illumination and lighting, agricultural economics, and landscape contracting.
Wide range
A wide range of research processes were used to prioritize Penn State World Campus educational offerings, but more importantly, research helped to guide a path of low risk and brand equity maximization of the Penn State name. Penn State’s use of marketing research has made the likelihood of making mistakes such as poor pricing decisions or entry into a highly competition or technology deficient market unlikely.
As technology continues to change and greater educational offerings become more prevalent through the Internet, marketing research will help assess Penn State’s current offerings and expand to other programs and degrees. While competition will no doubt increase, Penn State’s programs are unlikely to incur many attacks due to the university’s signature program positioning and constant use of marketing research to reach new customers.