Enthusiasts, in California and elsewhere, have been quick to point out that the closure was due to particular local factors - to the relative lack of muscle of CVU compared to its component parts - and in no way suggests a lessening of interest in virtual campuses as a whole. Indeed, in the USA, the number of strong players in the field continues to grow (see box).

But it will do little for public confidence. Learners have always worried that a provider might fail or disappear, that they will not be able to complete their course, or that the "qualification" they obtain will become worthless if the awarding institution dies, fears not helped by a number of high-profile closures in the past. No-one is suggesting that this is true in the case of CVU. But long-term continuity is one of the worries people have about Virtual Universities.

Another is that training over the internet may not be as good as more traditional types of learning. It is new, and relatively untested. The UK University for Industry, for one, who plan to make online support a key feature of their provision, has made quality one of its central aims, as is clear from the new UfI document ("A new way of learning: The Ufi Network - developing the University for Industry Concept", published in March).