State Virtual Programs Expand Opportunity: But Access Determines Who Benefits

By Mark Colwell, Executive Director, Mission Telecom

The Community Advancing Digital Learning (DLAC) recently issued a report titled The Value of State Virtual Programs, which reinforces something many education leaders have long understood: state virtual programs are no longer experimental. They are durable public infrastructures designed to expand educational opportunities.

For more than two decades, these programs have helped states aggregate demand and extend access to Advanced Placement courses, dual credit pathways, career and technical education, and professional learning, particularly in rural and small districts that cannot sustain these offerings independently. As the report makes clear, state virtual programs are not replacements for local schools. They are strategic, statewide tools that fill gaps and expand access.

The expansion of online curriculum and resources creates real opportunity. But access to these opportunities depends on something even more foundational: devices and reliable connectivity.

National data underscores the challenge. Federal estimates suggest that broadband infrastructure is now available to more than 96 percent of U.S. households. Yet adoption still lags among lower-income Americans, many of which have students in the household. According to the Pew Research Center, only 57 percent of adults in households earning under $30,000 per year subscribe to home broadband, compared with more than 90 percent of those in higher-income households. Gaps also affect the education workforce: surveys conducted during and after the pandemic found that a meaningful share of teachers—often around one in ten—report inadequate or unreliable home internet access for professional responsibilities such as remote instruction, grading, and communication with students.

In some districts, virtual coursework is structured primarily for use during the school day, on campus, using school-provided devices and networks. That model works for certain students and certain communities. 

But all should be able to treat virtual programs as supplemental and flexible, allowing students to engage asynchronously, outside traditional hours, and often from home. That flexibility is part of the promise. It allows students balancing work, athletics, transportation constraints, or family responsibilities to access advanced courses and career pathways that would otherwise be unavailable.

Yet that flexibility only works if students have reliable access beyond the school building.  If a student cannot log in from home, the opportunity becomes conditional. If connectivity is inconsistent, advanced coursework becomes harder to complete. If devices are limited or shared, participation is uneven.

As states invest in expanding virtual course catalogs and digital learning pathways, implementation models matter, and so does infrastructure.

The report rightly positions state virtual programs as essential infrastructure within public education systems. But digital learning infrastructure rests on physical infrastructure, such as broadband networks and student devices. Without them, the promise of statewide access becomes dependent on geography and household resources.

Importantly, connecting students to these opportunities does not diminish local control. State virtual programs succeed because they complement local schools, not replace them. Connectivity operates in the same way. It enables districts to offer flexibility while preserving the local school’s role as an anchor institution.

If we believe that a student’s ZIP code should not determine access to advanced coursework, career preparation, or AI literacy, then we must ensure that access extends beyond the classroom walls.

At Mission Telecom, we see firsthand how connectivity and device access determine whether digital learning fulfills its promise. As a nonprofit telecommunications provider, we partner with schools, libraries, and nonprofit organizations to expand affordable broadband access in communities that are too often left behind.

As states continue expanding virtual programming, working with mission-aligned connectivity providers like Mission Telecom, alongside investments in devices and digital literacy, ensures that opportunity does not stop at the school building. Infrastructure and instruction must advance together.