Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994-2005

November 1, 2006

Highlights
Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools and
Classrooms: 1994–2005
U.S. Department of Education
NCES 2007-020
Internet Access in
U.S. Public Schools and
Classrooms: 1994–2005
U.S. Department of Education
NCES 2007-020
Highlights
November 2006
John Wells
Laurie Lewis
Westat
Bernard Greene
Project Officer
National Center for
Education Statistics
U.S. Department of Education
Margaret Spellings
Secretary
Institute of Education Sciences
Grover J. Whitehurst
Director
National Center for Education Statistics
Mark Schneider
Commissioner
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing,
and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional
mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in
the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance
of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and
review and report on education activities in foreign countries.
NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable,
complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high
quality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers,
practitioners, data users, and the general public.
We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a
variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating
information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product
or report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to
National Center for Education Statistics
Institute of Education Sciences
U.S. Department of Education
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
November 2006
The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is http://nces.ed.gov.
The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
Suggested Citation
Wells, J., and Lewis, L. (2006). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–2005
(NCES 2007-020). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics.
For ordering information on this report, write:
U.S. Department of Education
ED Pubs
P.O. Box 1398
Jessup, MD 20794–1398
Or call toll free 1-877-4ED-PUBS or order online at http://www.edpubs.org.
Content Contact:
Bernard Greene
(202) 502–7348
Bernard.Greene@ed.gov
iii
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the many individuals who contributed to the development of the survey
and this report. The survey was requested and financially supported by the Office of Educational
Technology. Bernard Greene was the NCES Project Officer. Westat’s project director was Laurie Lewis,
and the survey manager was John Wells. Debbie Alexander directed the data collection efforts, assisted
by Ratna Basavaraju and Anjali Pandit. Alla Belenky was the programmer, Carol Litman was the editor,
and Sylvie Warren was responsible for formatting the report.
The NCES staff who reviewed the report include Bruce Taylor, Shelley Burns, Val Plisko, Edie
McArthur, and Carl Schmitt. The reviewer outside of NCES was Bernadette Adams-Yates of the Office
of the Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education. This report was also reviewed by Mary
McLaughlin, Juliet Diehl, Steve Hocker, Stephen Mistler, Jed Tank, and Xiaolei Wang of the Education
Statistics Services Institute, American Institutes for Research. In addition, the report was reviewed by
Duc-Le To of the Institute of Education Sciences.
We would also like to acknowledge the respondents, without whom this survey would not have
been possible.
iv
This page intentionally left blank.
v
Contents
Page
Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... iii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ vii
List of Figures.......................................................................................................................... xi
Summary.................................................................................................................................. 1
Background ........................................................................................................... 1
Selected Findings .................................................................................................. 3
School Connectivity................................................................................. 3
School and Instructional Room Access.................................... 4
Type of Connection .................................................................. 5
Student Access to Computers and the Internet ........................................ 6
Students Per Instructional Computer With Internet Access ..... 6
Provision of Hand-Held Computers ......................................... 7
Laptop Computer Loans........................................................... 8
Technologies and Procedures to Prevent Student Access to
Inappropriate Material on the Internet ................................................ 8
Teacher Professional Development on How to Integrate the Use of the
Internet Into the Curriculum ............................................................... 9
Use of the Internet to Provide Opportunities and Information for
Teaching and Learning ....................................................................... 10
References and Related Reports............................................................................................. 11
Tables of Estimates and Standard Errors ............................................................................. 13
Appendix A: Technical Notes................................................................................................. A-1
Appendix B: Questionnaire.................................................................................................... B-1
vi
This page intentionally left blank.
vii
List of Tables
Table Page
1 Percentage of public schools with Internet access, by school
characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005...................................................... 14
1-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access,
by school characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005 ..................................... 15
2 Percentage of public school instructional rooms with Internet access,
by school characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005 ..................................... 16
2-A Standard errors of the percentage of public school instructional rooms
with Internet access, by school characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005 ... 17
3 Percentage of public schools with Internet access using broadband
connections, by school characteristics: Various years, 2000–2005 ................ 18
3-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access
using broadband connections, by school characteristics: Various years,
2000–2005 ....................................................................................................... 19
4 Percentage of public schools using any type of wireless Internet
connection, and of those schools, percentage using broadband wireless
Internet connection, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005............ 20
4-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools using any type of
wireless Internet connection, and of those schools, standard errors of the
percentage using broadband wireless Internet connection, by school
characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005............................................................. 21
5 Percentage of public school instructional rooms with wireless Internet
connections, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005 ....................... 22
5-A Standard errors of the percentage of public school instructional rooms
with wireless Internet connections, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003,
and 2005........................................................................................................... 23
6 Ratio of public school students to instructional computers with Internet
access, by school characteristics: Various years, 1998–2005.......................... 24
6-A Standard errors of the ratio of public school students to instructional
computers with Internet access, by school characteristics: Various years,
1998–2005 ....................................................................................................... 25
7 Percentage of public schools providing hand-held computers to students
or teachers for instructional purposes, by school characteristics: 2002,
2003, and 2005................................................................................................. 26
viii
List of Tables (continued)
Table Page
7-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools providing hand-held
computers to students or teachers for instructional purposes, by school
characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005.............................................................. 27
8 Percentage of public schools providing hand-held computers to teachers
and students for instructional purposes, by school characteristics: 2005......... 28
8-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools providing hand-held
computers to teachers and students for instructional purposes, by school
characteristics: 2005 ........................................................................................ 29
9 Percentage of public schools lending laptop computers to students,
by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05 ......................................... 30
9-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools lending laptop
computers to students, by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05 .... 31
10 Percentage of public schools lending laptop computers to students for
various maximum lengths of time: 2002, 2003, and 2005.............................. 32
10-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools lending laptop
computers to students for various maximum lengths of time: 2002, 2003,
and 2005........................................................................................................... 33
11 Percentage of public schools without laptop computers available for loan
in the current school year planning to make laptop computers available for
students to borrow during the next school year: 2002, 2003, and 2005.......... 34
11-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools without laptop
computers available for loan in the current school year planning to make
laptop computers available for students to borrow during the next school
year: 2002, 2003, and 2005............................................................................. 35
12 Percentage of public schools using technologies or procedures to prevent
student access to inappropriate material on the Internet, and of those
schools, percentage using these measures on all computers with Internet
access used by students, by school characteristics: Various years,
2001–05 ........................................................................................................... 36
12-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools using technologies or
procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet, and of those schools, standard errors of the percentage using
these measures on all computers with Internet access used by students,
by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05 ......................................... 37
ix
List of Tables (continued)
Table Page
13 Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various
technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet, by school characteristics: Various years,
2001–05 ........................................................................................................... 38
13-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access
using various technologies or procedures to prevent student access to
inappropriate material on the Internet, by school characteristics: Various
years, 2001–05 ................................................................................................. 41
14 Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various methods
to disseminate information to students and parents about the technologies
or other procedures used to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet at the school, by school characteristics: 2002,
2003, and 2005................................................................................................. 44
14-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access
using various methods to disseminate information to students and parents
about the technologies or other procedures used to prevent student access
to inappropriate material on the Internet at the school, by school
characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005............................................................. 46
15 Professional development for use of the Internet in the classroom in public
schools, by availability, participation, and selected school characteristics:
2002, 2003, and 2005....................................................................................... 48
15-A Standard errors for professional development for use of the Internet in the
classroom in public schools, by availability, participation, and selected
school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005 .................................................. 49
16 Percentage of public schools using their Internet access to provide various
opportunities and information for teaching and learning, by school
characteristics: 2005 ........................................................................................ 50
16-A Standard errors of the percentage of public schools using their Internet
access to provide various opportunities and information for teaching and
learning, by school characteristics: 2005 ......................................................... 51
A-1 Number of cases with imputed data in the study sample, and number of
cases with imputed data the sample represents, by questionnaire items:
2005 ................................................................................................................. A-5
A-2 Number and percentage of responding public schools in the study sample,
and estimated number and percentage of public schools the sample
represents, by school characteristics: 2005 ...................................................... A-6
x
This page intentionally left blank.
xi
List of Figures
Figure Page
1 Percentage of public school instructional rooms with Internet access:
Various years, 1994–2005 ............................................................................... 4
2 Ratio of public school students to instructional computers with Internet
access: Various years, 1998–2005 .................................................................. 7
xii
This page intentionally left blank.
1
Summary
Background
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has employed its Fast Response Survey
System (FRSS) to track access to information technology in schools and classrooms since 1994. FRSS is
designed to administer short, focused, issue-oriented surveys that place minimal burden on respondents
and have a quick turnaround from data collection to reporting. Each year, with the exception of 2004,
NCES has conducted a new nationally representative survey of public schools to gauge the changes in
computer and Internet availability, based on measures such as student-to-computer ratio and the
percentage of schools and classrooms with Internet connections. As computers and the Internet became
increasingly available in schools, the FRSS surveys were modified to address new issues, such as the use
of new types of Internet connections to enhance connectivity. Recent FRSS surveys on Internet access
have been expanded to address other emerging issues. The 2002 survey, for instance, included items on
the use of technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet
and the availability of teacher professional development on technology use in the classroom. The 2005
survey included items on the use of Internet access to provide various opportunities and information for
teaching and learning.
This report presents key findings from the 2005 FRSS survey on Internet access in U.S.
public schools and selected comparisons with data from previous FRSS Internet surveys. The 2005
survey, designed to update data on the issues addressed in 2003 and ask about a few new issues, covered
the following topics:| school connectivity, including school and classroom access to the Internet, and types of
connections;| student access to computers and the Internet, including student-to-computer ratio, the
provision of hand-held computers to teachers and students, and laptop computers
available for loan to students;| technologies and procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet;| teacher professional development on how to integrate the use of the Internet into the
curriculum; and
2| use of Internet access to provide various opportunities and information for teaching and
learning.
Questionnaires for the survey “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005” were
mailed to a representative sample of 1,205 public schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
The sample was selected from the 2003–04 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) Public
Elementary/Secondary School Universe File, the most current available at the time of selection. The
sampling frame includes about 85,000 regular elementary and secondary/combined schools (a combined
school is one that encompasses instruction at both the elementary and secondary levels). The number of
schools in the survey universe decreased to an estimated 83,000 after some of the schools were
determined during data collection to have been closed or merged with other schools. Data have been
weighted to yield national estimates. The unweighted and weighted response rates were both 86 percent.
Detailed information about the survey methodology is provided in appendix A, and the questionnaire can
be found in appendix B. The focus of this report is twofold: the national estimates for 2005, and
statistically significant findings over time. Selected survey findings are presented by the following school
characteristics:| instructional level (elementary, secondary);| school size (enrollment of less than 300, 300 to 999, 1,000 or more, referred to as small,
medium, and large throughout the report);| locale (city, urban fringe, town, rural);| percent minority enrollment (less than 6 percent, 6 to 20 percent, 21 to 49 percent,
50 percent or more); and| percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (less than 35 percent, 35 to
49 percent, 50 to 74 percent, 75 percent or more), which is used as a measure of poverty
concentration at the school. For the remainder of this report, we will refer to the percent
of free or reduced-priced lunch as poverty concentration.
In general, comparisons by these school characteristics are presented only where measurable
differences were detected and followed meaningful patterns. It is important to note that many of the
school characteristics may also be related to each other, and complex interactions and relationships have
not been explored here. For example, enrollment size and instructional level of schools are related, with
secondary schools typically being larger than elementary schools. Similarly, poverty concentration and
minority enrollment are related, with schools with a higher minority enrollment also more likely to have a
higher concentration of poverty. This report is purely descriptive in nature, and readers are cautioned not
to draw causal inferences based solely on the bivariate results presented in this report. The selected
3
findings are examples of comparisons that can be made using the data and are not designed to emphasize
any particular issue.
All specific statements of comparison made in this report have been tested for statistical
significance through t-tests adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni adjustment,1 and are
significant at the 95 percent confidence level or better. However, only selected findings are presented for
each topic in the report. Throughout this report, differences that appear large (particularly those by school
characteristics) may not be statistically significant. This absence of statistical significance is due in part
to the relatively large standard errors surrounding the estimates and the use of the Bonferroni adjustment
to control for multiple comparisons. A detailed description of the statistical tests supporting the survey
findings can be found in appendix A.
Selected Findings
The findings are organized to address the following issues: school connectivity, student
access to computers and the Internet, technologies and procedures to prevent student access to
inappropriate material on the Internet, teacher professional development on how to integrate the use of the
Internet into the curriculum, and use of the Internet to provide opportunities and information for teaching
and learning.
School Connectivity
The FRSS surveys on Internet access collected information on several key measures of
school connectivity. Schools were asked whether they had access to the Internet. Schools with Internet
access were also asked about the number of instructional rooms that had at least one computer with
Internet access and the types of Internet connections used. Information on the number of instructional
rooms with Internet access was combined with information on the total number of instructional rooms in
the school to calculate the percentage of instructional rooms with Internet access.2
1 The Bonferroni adjustment was also used for previous FRSS Internet reports and is used here for continuity of reporting.
2 Instructional rooms include classrooms, computer and other labs, library/media centers, and any other rooms used for instructional purposes.
4
School and Instructional Room Access| In fall 2005, nearly 100 percent of public schools in the United States had access to the
Internet, compared with 35 percent in 1994 (table 1). In 2005, no differences in school
Internet access were observed by any school characteristics, which is consistent with
data reported previously. There have been virtually no differences in school access to
the Internet by school characteristics since 1999 (Parsad and Jones 2005).| Public schools have made consistent progress in expanding Internet access in
instructional rooms. In 2005, 94 percent of public school instructional rooms had
Internet access, compared with 3 percent in 1994 (figure 1 and table 2). Across school
characteristics, the proportion of instructional rooms with Internet access ranged from 88
to 98 percent.
Figure 1. Percentage of public school instructional rooms with Internet access: Various years,
1994–2005
3
8
14
27
51
64
77
87
92 93 94
0
20
40
60
80
100
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
Year
Percent
NOTE: Percentages are based on all public schools. Information on the number of instructional rooms with Internet access was combined with
information on the total number of instructional rooms in the school to calculate the percentage of instructional rooms with Internet access. All
of the estimates in this report were recalculated from raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, some estimates
presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from results published prior to 2001. See table 2 for detailed data.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,”
FRSS 57, 1995; “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,
Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall
1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,”
FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS
86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
5
Type of Connection
The types of Internet connections used by public schools and the speed at which computers
are connected to the Internet have changed over the years. In 1996, dial-up Internet connections (a type
of narrowband connection) were used by about three-fourths (74 percent) of public schools having
Internet access (Heaviside, Riggins, and Farris 1997). In 2001, 5 percent of public schools used dial-up
connections, while the majority of public schools (55 percent) reported using T1/DS1 lines (a type of
broadband connection), a continuous and much faster type of Internet connection than dial-up (Kleiner
and Farris 2002). Because of the increasing complexity of detailed information on types of connections,
the 2002, 2003, and 2005 surveys directly asked whether schools used broadband and narrowband
connections.3 Schools also reported whether they used wireless connections to the Internet, the types of
wireless connections used, and the number of instructional rooms with wireless connections.| In 2005, 97 percent of public schools with Internet access used broadband connections to
access the Internet (table 3). In 2001 and 2000, 85 percent and 80 percent of the schools,
respectively, were using broadband connections.| In 2005, as in previous years (Parsad and Jones 2005), large schools were more likely
than small schools to use broadband connections. Ninety-four percent of small schools
reported using broadband connections, compared with nearly 100 percent of large
schools (table 3).| Forty-five percent of public schools with Internet access used wireless connections in
2005, an increase from 32 percent in 2003 (table 4).4| Of the schools using wireless Internet connections in 2005, 97 percent indicated that
they used broadband wireless Internet connections, an increase from 92 percent in 2003
(table 4). Across all school characteristics, the percentage of public schools with
wireless connections using broadband wireless Internet connections ranged from 92
percent to 99 percent.| In 2005, 15 percent of all public school instructional rooms had wireless Internet
connections (table 5).
3 In 2000 and 2001, respondents were instructed to circle as many types of connections as there were in the school. The 2002, 2003, and 2005
questionnaires directly asked whether the schools used broadband and narrowband connections. See the questionnaire in appendix B for
definitions of broadband and narrowband connections. These percentages include schools using only broadband connections, as well as schools
using both broadband and narrowband connections. They do not include schools using narrowband connections exclusively. In 2001, 2002,
2003, and 2005, they also included DSL connections, which had not been an option on the 2000 questionnaire.
4 A school could use both wireless and wired Internet connections. Wireless Internet connections can be broadband or narrowband.
6
Student Access to Computers and the Internet
The FRSS surveys on Internet access obtained information on various measures of student
access to computers and the Internet. Schools reported the number of instructional computers with
Internet access; this information was then combined with enrollment data to compute the ratio of students
to instructional computers with Internet access. Schools were also asked about the provision of hand-held
computers to students and teachers and laptop computer loans to students.
Students Per Instructional Computer With Internet Access| The ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet access was computed by
dividing the total number of students in all public schools by the total number of
instructional computers with Internet access in all public schools (including schools with
no Internet access).5 In 2005, the ratio of students to instructional computers with
Internet access in public schools was 3.8 to 1, a decrease from the 12.1 to 1 ratio in
1998, when it was first measured (figure 2 and table 6). The 2005 ratio of 3.8 to 1 also
represents a decrease from 2003, when the ratio of students to instructional computers
was 4.4 to 1.| The ratio of students to instructional computers showed some differences by all school
characteristics in 2005 with the exception of poverty level (table 6). For example, small
schools had fewer students per computer than did medium-sized and large schools (2.4
to 1 compared with 3.9 to 1 and 4.0 to 1, respectively). In addition, schools with the
lowest level of minority enrollment had fewer students per computer than did schools
with higher minority enrollments.
5 This is one method of calculating students per computer. Another method involves calculating the number of students in each school divided
by the number of instructional computers with Internet access in each school and then taking the mean of this ratio across all schools. When
“students per computer” was first calculated for this NCES series in 1998, a decision was made to use the first method; this method continues to
be used for comparison purposes. A couple of factors influenced the choice of that particular method. There was (and continues to be)
considerable skewness in the distribution of students per computer per school. In addition, in 1998, 11 percent of public schools had no
instructional computers with Internet access.
7
Figure 2. Ratio of public school students to instructional computers with Internet access: Various
years, 1998–2005
12.1
9.1
6.6
5.4
4.8
4.4
3.8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
Year
Ratio
NOTE: The ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet access was computed by dividing the total number of students in all public
schools by the total number of instructional computers with Internet access in all public schools (including schools with no Internet access). All
of the estimates in this report were recalculated from raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, some estimates
presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from results published prior to 2001. See table 6 for detailed data.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
Provision of Hand-Held Computers
The FRSS surveys collected information on the provision of hand-held computers to
students and teachers. Hand-held computers are defined as computers, or personal digital assistants, small
enough to be held in one hand. Examples are Palm Pilots or Pocket PCs.| In 2005, 19 percent of public schools provided hand-held computers to students or
teachers for instructional purposes, an increase from 10 percent in 2003 (table 7).6
6 In 2002 and 2003, schools were asked one question about whether they provided hand-held computers to students or teachers. In 2005, schools
were asked separate questions about students and teachers. The responses were combined for 2005 to allow comparisons with previous years.
8| In 2005, public schools were more likely to provide hand-held computers to teachers
than to students. Seventeen percent of schools reported providing hand-held computers
to teachers, compared with 8 percent of schools that reported having provided hand-held
computers to students (table 8).
Laptop Computer Loans
Public schools reported whether they lent laptop computers to students and the maximum
length of time for which they could be borrowed. Schools that did not lend laptop computers to students
were asked about their future plans for such loans; for example, in 2005, schools were asked whether they
planned to lend laptop computers to students in the 2006–07 school year.| In 2005, 10 percent of public schools lent laptop computers to students (table 9).| Forty-seven percent of schools lending laptop computers reported that students could
borrow them for less than 1 week, 17 percent reported that students could borrow them
for a period of 1 week to less than 1 month, 16 percent reported lending laptops for the
entire school year, and 5 percent reported lending laptops for some other maximum
length of time (table 10).| Of the 90 percent of schools without laptop computers available for loan to students in
2005 (calculated from table 9), 3 percent were planning to make laptops available for
students to borrow during the next school year (table 11).
Technologies and Procedures to Prevent Student Access to Inappropriate
Material on the Internet
Given the diversity of the information carried on the Internet, student access to inappropriate
material is a major concern of many parents and teachers. Moreover, under the Children’s Internet
Protection Act (CIPA), no school may receive E-rate7 discounts unless it certifies that it is enforcing a
policy of Internet safety that includes the use of filtering or blocking technology.8 Beginning in 2001, the
FRSS surveys on Internet access asked whether public schools used any technologies or procedures to
prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet, the types of technologies or procedures
used, and whether such technologies were used on all computers with Internet access used by students.
7 The Education rate (E-rate) program was established in 1996 to make telecommunications services, Internet access, and internal connections
available to schools and libraries at discounted rates based upon the income level of the students in their community and whether their location
is urban or rural.
8 More information about CIPA (Public Law 106–554) can be found at the website of the Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
Administrative Company (http://www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/CIPA.asp). The law is effective for funding year 4 (July 1, 2001, to
June 30, 2002) and for all future years. Schools and libraries receiving only telecommunications services are excluded from the requirements of
CIPA.
9
The 2002, 2003, and 2005 surveys also asked about the methods used to disseminate information about
the technologies or procedures to students and parents. (More information on the specific types of
technologies and procedures is listed in appendix A.)|
In 2005, nearly 100 percent of public schools with Internet access used various
technologies or procedures to control student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet (table 12). Across all school characteristics, between 99 and 100 percent of
schools reported using these technologies or procedures. In addition, 98 percent of these
schools used at least one of these technologies or procedures on all Internet-connected
computers used by students.| Among schools using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to
inappropriate material on the Internet in 2005, 99 percent used blocking or filtering
software (table 13). Ninety-six percent of schools reported that teachers or other staff
members monitored student Internet access, 79 percent had a written contract that
parents have to sign, 76 percent had a contract that students have to sign, 67 percent used
monitoring software, 53 percent had honor codes, and 46 percent allowed access only to
their intranet.9| Ninety-five percent of public schools using technologies or procedures to prevent
student access to inappropriate material on the Internet indicated that they disseminated
the information about these technologies or other procedures via their school policies or
rules distributed to students and parents (table 14). Sixty-seven percent did so with a
special notice to parents, 57 percent used their newsletters to disseminate this
information, 40 percent posted a message on the school website or web page, 28 percent
had a notice on a bulletin board at the school, 28 percent had a pop-up message at
computer or Internet log on, and 4 percent used a method other than the ones listed
above.
Teacher Professional Development on How to Integrate the Use of the
Internet Into the Curriculum
Approximately one-half of public school teachers in 1999 reported that they used computers
or the Internet for instruction during class time and/or that they assigned their students work that involved
research using the Internet (Smerdon et al. 2000). One-third of teachers reported feeling well or very well
prepared to use computers and the Internet for instruction. The 2002, 2003, and 2005 FRSS surveys on
Internet access asked public schools whether they or their districts provided teacher professional
development on how to integrate the use of the Internet into the curriculum in the 12 months prior to the
surveys, and the percentage of teachers who attended such professional development.
9 An intranet is a controlled computer network similar to the Internet but accessible only to those who have permission to use it. For example,
school administrators can restrict student access to only their school’s intranet, which may include information from the Internet chosen by
school officials, rather than full Internet access. See appendix A for definitions of technologies and procedures.
10| In 2005, nationwide, 83 percent of public schools with Internet access indicated that
their school or school district had offered professional development to teachers in their
school on how to integrate the use of the Internet into the curriculum in the 12 months
prior to the fall survey (table 15).| Thirty-four percent of the schools that offered professional development in 2005 had 1
to 25 percent of their teachers attending such professional development in the 12 months
preceding the survey (table 15). Sixteen percent of the schools had 26 to 50 percent of
their teachers, 13 percent of the schools had 51 to 75 percent of their teachers, and
36 percent of the schools had 76 percent or more of their teachers attending professional
development on how to integrate the use of the Internet into the curriculum in the
12 months preceding the survey. Less than 1 percent of schools reported not having any
teachers attending such professional development during this time frame.
Use of the Internet to Provide Opportunities and Information for Teaching
and Learning
Public schools reported the various ways in which they used the Internet to provide
opportunities and information for teaching and learning.| Eighty-nine percent of public schools indicated they use the Internet to provide data to
inform instructional planning at the school level (table 16). Eighty-seven percent of
public schools reported using the Internet to provide assessment results and data for
teachers to use to individualize instruction, and 87 percent also reported providing high
quality digital content (i.e., learning materials brought in from the Web, such as digital
libraries and museums, or any text, images, sounds, and video that have been digitized).
Additional uses of the Internet included providing online professional development
courses to teachers (51 percent) and providing access for students to online distance
learning for courses that are otherwise unavailable at the school, reported by 32 percent.| There were some differences in the use of the Internet by school characteristics (table
16). For example, secondary schools were more likely than elementary schools to use
the Internet for providing teacher professional development through online courses (59
vs. 49 percent). Secondary schools were more likely to provide access for students to
online distance learning (57 vs. 24 percent). Rural schools also were more likely to
provide access for students to online distance learning than schools in cities and urban
fringe areas (43 vs. 25 and 24 percent, respectively). In addition, schools with the lowest
level of minority enrollment were less likely than schools with the highest level of
minority enrollment to use the Internet to provide assessment results and data for
teachers to use to individualize instruction (81 vs. 92 percent).
11
References and Related Reports
Bare, J., and Meek, A. (1998). Internet Access in Public Schools (NCES 98–031). U.S. Department of
Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Cattagni, A., and Farris, E. (2001). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–2000
(NCES 2001–071). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
DeBell, M., and Chapman, C. (2003). Computer and Internet Use by Children and Adolescents in 2001
(NCES 2004–014). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Heaviside, S., and Farris, E. (1997). Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Private Schools, K–12, Fall
1995 (NCES 97–394). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Heaviside, S., Farris, E., and Malitz, G. (1995). Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools,
K–12 (NCES 95–731). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Heaviside, S., Farris, E., and Malitz, G. (1996). Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public
Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1995 (NCES 96–854). U.S. Department of Education.
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Heaviside, S., Riggins, T., and Farris, E. (1997). Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public
Elementary and Secondary Schools, Fall 1996 (NCES 97–944). U.S. Department of Education.
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Kleiner, A., and Farris, E. (2002). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–2001
(NCES 2002–018). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Kleiner, A., and Lewis, L. (2003). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–2002
(NCES 2004–011). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Lanahan, L. (2002). Beyond School-Level Internet Access: Support for Instructional Use of Technology
(NCES 2002–029). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Levin, D., Hurst, D., and Burns, S. (2000). Computer and Internet Access in U.S. Private Schools and
Classrooms: 1995 and 1998 (NCES 2000–044). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics.
Newburger, E. (2001). Home Computers and Internet Use in the United States: August 2000. Current
Population Reports (P23–207). U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, DC: U.S. Census
Bureau.
12
Parsad, B., and Jones, J. (2005). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–2003
(NCES 2005–015). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Parsad, B., Skinner, R., and Farris, E. (2001). Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Private Schools:
1998–99 (NCES 2001–037). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.
Rowand, C. (1999). Internet Access in Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–98 (NCES 1999–017).
U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Smerdon, B., Cronen, S., Lanahan, L., Anderson, J., Iannotti, N., and Angeles, J. (2000). Teachers’
Tools for the 21st Century: A Report on Teachers’ Use of Technology (NCES 2000–102). U.S.
Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Williams, C. (2000). Internet Access in Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–99 (NCES 2000–086).
U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
13
Tables of Estimates and Standard Errors
14
Table 1. Percentage of public schools with Internet access, by school characteristics: Various
years, 1994–2005
School characteristic 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools.................................... 35 50 65 78 89 95 98 99 99 1002 1002
Instructional level1
Elementary ................................................. 30 46 61 75 88 94 97 99 99 1002 1002
Secondary ................................................... 49 65 77 89 94 98 1002 1002 1002 100 100
School size
Less than 300.............................................. 30 39 57 75 87 96 96 99 96 100 100
300 to 999................................................... 35 52 66 78 89 94 98 99 1002 1002 99
1,000 or more ............................................. 58 69 80 89 95 96 99 100 100 100 100
Locale
City ............................................................. 40 47 64 74 92 93 96 97 99 100 99
Urban fringe ............................................... 38 59 75 78 85 96 98 99 100 1002 99
Town........................................................... 29 47 61 84 90 94 98 100 98 100 100
Rural ........................................................... 35 48 60 79 92 96 99 1002 98 100 100
Percent minority enrollment3
Less than 6 percent..................................... 38 52 65 84 91 95 98 99 97 100 99
6 to 20 percent ............................................ 38 58 72 87 93 97 100 100 100 100 100
21 to 49 percent .......................................... 38 55 65 73 91 96 98 100 99 99 100
50 percent or more...................................... 27 39 56 63 82 92 96 98 99 100 1002
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch4
Less than 35 percent................................... 39 60 74 86 92 95 99 99 98 100 99
35 to 49 percent .......................................... 35 48 59 81 93 98 99 100 100 100 100
50 to 74 percent .......................................... 32 41 53 71 88 96 97 99 100 100 100
75 percent or more...................................... 18 31 53 62 79 89 94 97 99 99 99
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Estimate is rounded to 100 percent for presentation in table.
3Percent minority enrollment was not available for some schools. In 1994, this information was missing for 100 schools. In subsequent years, the
missing information ranged from 0 schools to 46 schools. In 2005, this information was missing for 20 schools.
4Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for some schools. In the 1994 survey, free and reduced-price lunch
data came from the Common Core of Data (CCD) only and were missing for 430 schools (percentages presented in this table are based on cases
for which data were available). In reports prior to 1998, free and reduced-price lunch data were not reported for 1994. In 1998, a decision was
made to include the data for 1994 for comparison purposes. In subsequent years, free and reduced-price lunch information was obtained on the
questionnaire, supplemented, if necessary, with CCD data. Missing data ranged from 0 schools (2002, 2003, and 2005) to 10 schools (1999).
NOTE: All of the estimates in this report were recalculated from raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, some
estimates presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from results published prior to 2001. For estimates that are 100 percent, the event
defined could have been reported by fewer schools had a different sample been drawn.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,”
FRSS 57, 1995; “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,
Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall
1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,”
FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS
86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
15
Table 1-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access, by school
characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005
School characteristic 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools................................ 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.5 † †
Instructional level
Elementary ............................................. 1.9 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.6 † †
Secondary ............................................... 2.4 2.7 1.8 1.7 2.1 0.8 † † † † †
School size
Less than 300.......................................... 3.4 3.9 4.4 3.8 3.4 1.5 1.7 1.0 1.7 † †
300 to 999............................................... 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.4 † † 0.4
1,000 or more ......................................... 3.0 4.1 3.4 2.5 2.4 1.7 0.6 † † † †
Locale
City ......................................................... 3.1 4.3 4.5 3.8 2.1 1.5 1.1 1.4 0.7 † 0.6
Urban fringe ........................................... 2.9 3.8 3.3 2.8 2.8 1.2 1.2 0.5 † † 0.6
Town....................................................... 2.3 3.7 4.0 4.6 3.2 2.5 1.2 † 2.2 † †
Rural ....................................................... 2.7 3.8 3.3 3.2 3.4 1.4 0.9 † 1.0 † †
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent................................. 2.4 3.2 3.4 2.7 2.9 1.5 1.2 0.9 1.6 † 0.9
6 to 20 percent ........................................ 3.3 4.7 3.0 2.7 2.5 1.2 † † † † †
21 to 49 percent ...................................... 3.2 4.1 3.2 4.1 2.5 1.8 1.2 † 0.7 0.7 †
50 percent or more.................................. 2.9 3.8 4.6 4.7 2.9 1.9 1.2 0.9 0.5 † †
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................... 2.3 2.4 2.2 1.8 2.0 1.1 0.7 0.6 1.0 † 0.5
35 to 49 percent ...................................... 4.6 3.9 4.8 3.9 2.2 0.9 0.7 † † † †
50 to 74 percent ...................................... 5.0 4.6 5.1 4.0 3.0 1.7 1.3 0.5 † † †
75 percent or more.................................. 4.6 4.4 5.4 5.3 3.7 3.1 1.7 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.7
†Not applicable; estimate of standard error is not presented because it is based on an estimate of 100 percent.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,”
FRSS 57, 1995; “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,
Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall
1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,”
FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS
86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
16
Table 2. Percentage of public school instructional rooms with Internet access, by school
characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005
School characteristic 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools............................. 3 8 14 27 51 64 77 87 92 93 94
Instructional level1
Elementary .......................................... 3 8 13 24 51 62 76 86 92 93 93
Secondary ............................................ 4 8 16 32 52 67 79 88 91 94 95
School size
Less than 300....................................... 3 9 15 27 54 71 83 87 91 93 92
300 to 999............................................ 3 8 13 28 53 64 78 87 93 93 94
1,000 or more ...................................... 3 4 16 25 45 58 70 86 89 94 94
Locale
City ...................................................... 4 6 12 20 47 52 66 82 88 90 88
Urban fringe ........................................ 4 8 16 29 50 67 78 87 92 94 96
Town.................................................... 3 8 14 34 55 72 87 91 96 97 98
Rural .................................................... 3 8 14 30 57 71 85 89 93 94 95
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent.............................. 4 9 18 37 57 74 85 88 93 93 96
6 to 20 percent ..................................... 4 10 18 35 59 78 83 90 94 95 97
21 to 49 percent ................................... 4 9 12 22 52 64 79 89 91 95 91
50 percent or more............................... 2 3 5 13 37 43 64 81 89 92 92
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch3
Less than 35 percent............................ 3 10 17 33 57 73 82 90 93 95 96
35 to 49 percent ................................... 2 6 12 33 60 69 81 89 90 93 88
50 to 74 percent ................................... 4 6 11 20 41 61 77 87 91 94 96
75 percent or more............................... 2 3 5 14 38 38 60 79 89 90 91
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for some schools. In 1994, this information was missing for 100 schools. In subsequent years, the
missing information ranged from 0 schools to 46 schools. In 2005, this information was missing for 20 schools.
3Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for some schools. In the 1994 survey, free and reduced-price lunch
data came from the Common Core of Data (CCD) only and were missing for 430 schools (percentages presented in this table are based on cases
for which data were available). In reports prior to 1998, free and reduced-price lunch data were not reported for 1994. In 1998, a decision was
made to include the data for 1994 for comparison purposes. In subsequent years, free and reduced-price lunch information was obtained on the
questionnaire, supplemented, if necessary, with CCD data. Missing data ranged from 0 schools (2002, 2003, and 2005) to 10 schools (1999).
NOTE: Percentages are based on all public schools. Information on the number of instructional rooms with Internet access was combined with
information on the total number of instructional rooms in the school to calculate the percentage of instructional rooms with Internet access. All of
the estimates in this report were recalculated from raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, some estimates
presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from results published prior to 2001.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,”
FRSS 57, 1995; “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,
Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall
1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,”
FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS
86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
17
Table 2-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public school instructional rooms with Internet
access, by school characteristics: Various years, 1994–2005
School characteristic 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools............................. 0.3 0.7 1.0 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.5 1.3
Instructional level
Elementary .......................................... 0.4 1.0 1.5 1.9 2.3 1.8 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.7 1.9
Secondary ............................................ 0.6 1.0 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.6 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9
School size
Less than 300....................................... 0.7 1.6 2.9 4.3 3.7 3.2 2.8 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.9
300 to 999............................................ 0.5 1.0 1.2 2.0 2.2 1.9 1.5 1.1 0.7 0.7 1.9
1,000 or more ...................................... 0.6 1.0 2.1 2.4 3.9 3.0 2.2 1.7 1.7 1.1 1.5
Locale
City ...................................................... 0.8 1.3 1.6 2.2 3.2 2.6 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.0 3.7
Urban fringe ........................................ 0.8 1.4 2.2 2.9 2.9 2.5 2.0 1.3 0.9 0.9 0.8
Town.................................................... 0.6 2.0 1.9 3.9 4.0 3.4 2.6 2.2 1.1 0.9 0.7
Rural .................................................... 0.4 1.5 2.2 3.6 3.6 3.0 1.7 1.3 1.0 1.2 1.8
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent.............................. 0.7 1.4 2.4 3.5 2.7 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.4 1.9 1.1
6 to 20 percent ..................................... 0.8 1.5 1.7 3.0 3.3 3.1 2.1 1.6 1.0 0.7 0.7
21 to 49 percent ................................... 1.0 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.7 3.1 2.3 2.0 1.2 1.1 3.4
50 percent or more............................... 0.3 1.0 1.8 1.8 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.4 1.1 2.2
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................ 0.5 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.3 1.5 1.2 0.8 1.0 0.8
35 to 49 percent ................................... 0.4 1.4 2.2 4.3 5.1 3.4 2.9 2.2 2.1 1.4 4.3
50 to 74 percent ................................... 1.8 1.9 2.8 3.7 3.9 3.1 2.8 2.4 1.4 1.1 0.8
75 percent or more............................... 0.9 1.0 1.8 2.4 4.3 4.4 3.3 2.4 1.9 1.5 2.5
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K–12,”
FRSS 57, 1995; “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,
Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall
1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,”
FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS
86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
18
Table 3. Percentage of public schools with Internet access using broadband connections,
by school characteristics: Various years, 2000–2005
School characteristic 20001 20011 20022 20032 20052
All public schools............................................................................. 80 85 94 95 97
Instructional level3
Elementary .......................................................................................... 77 83 93 94 97
Secondary ............................................................................................ 89 94 98 97 99
School size
Less than 300....................................................................................... 67 72 90 90 94
300 to 999............................................................................................ 83 89 94 96 98
1,000 or more ...................................................................................... 90 96 100 1004 1004
Locale
City ...................................................................................................... 80 88 97 97 98
Urban fringe ........................................................................................ 85 88 92 97 98
Town.................................................................................................... 79 83 97 98 98
Rural .................................................................................................... 75 82 91 90 96
Percent minority enrollment5
Less than 6 percent.............................................................................. 76 81 92 90 96
6 to 20 percent ..................................................................................... 82 85 91 96 97
21 to 49 percent ................................................................................... 84 85 96 98 98
50 percent or more............................................................................... 81 93 95 97 97
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch6
Less than 35 percent............................................................................ 81 84 93 95 98
35 to 49 percent ................................................................................... 82 86 96 96 95
50 to 74 percent ................................................................................... 79 84 93 96 97
75 percent or more............................................................................... 75 90 95 93 98
1Respondents were instructed to circle as many types of connections as there were in the school. The data were then combined to show the
percentage of schools using broadband connections. Percentages include schools using only broadband connections, as well as schools using
both broadband and narrowband connections. They do not include schools using narrowband connections exclusively. Broadband connections
include T3/DS3, fractional T3, T1/DS1, fractional T1, and cable modem connections. In 2001, they also included DSL connections, which had
not been on the 2000 questionnaire.
2The 2002, 2003, and 2005 questionnaires directly asked whether the schools used broadband and narrowband connections. Broadband
connections include T3/DS3, fractional T3, T1/DS1, fractional T1, cable modem, and DSL connections.
3Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
4Estimate is rounded to 100 percent for presentation in table.
5Percent minority enrollment was not available for 9 schools in 2000, 31 schools in 2001, 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools
in 2005.
6Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for two schools in 2000 and 2001. This information was available
for all schools in 2002, 2003, and 2005.
NOTE: Percentages are based on the percent of public schools with Internet access: 98 percent in 2000, 99 percent in 2001 and 2002,
99.8 percent in 2003, and 99.6 percent in 2005. For estimates that are 100 percent, the event defined could have been reported by fewer schools
had a different sample been drawn.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
19
Table 3-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access using
broadband connections, by school characteristics: Various years, 2000–2005
School characteristic 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools............................................................................. 1.5 1.6 1.0 0.8 0.8
Instructional level
Elementary .......................................................................................... 1.9 2.0 1.2 1.1 1.0
Secondary ............................................................................................ 2.0 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.7
School size
Less than 300....................................................................................... 4.4 4.3 2.6 2.7 2.1
300 to 999............................................................................................ 1.8 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.6
1,000 or more ...................................................................................... 2.4 1.4 † † †
Locale
City ...................................................................................................... 3.0 2.4 1.1 1.5 1.0
Urban fringe ........................................................................................ 2.6 2.1 1.9 0.9 1.0
Town.................................................................................................... 4.9 4.6 1.8 1.0 2.2
Rural .................................................................................................... 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.2 1.6
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent.............................................................................. 3.2 3.6 2.4 2.4 1.8
6 to 20 percent ..................................................................................... 2.9 3.0 2.3 1.9 1.3
21 to 49 percent ................................................................................... 2.6 2.7 1.5 1.0 1.0
50 percent or more............................................................................... 2.6 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.1
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................................................................ 2.3 2.6 1.7 1.4 1.0
35 to 49 percent ................................................................................... 4.0 2.8 2.0 2.1 2.2
50 to 74 percent ................................................................................... 3.8 3.8 2.0 1.7 1.5
75 percent or more............................................................................... 3.6 2.7 1.7 2.2 1.0
†Not applicable; estimate of standard error is not presented because it is based on an estimate of 100 percent.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
20
Table 4. Percentage of public schools using any type of wireless Internet connection, and of
those schools, percentage using broadband wireless Internet connection, by school
characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Use any type of wireless
Internet connection1
Use broadband wireless Internet
connection in schools with wireless
Internet connection2
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools......................................................... 23 32 45 88 92 97
Instructional level3
Elementary ...................................................................... 20 29 45 87 93 97
Secondary ........................................................................ 33 42 48 91 89 97
School size
Less than 300................................................................... 17 28 40 ‡ 92 92
300 to 999........................................................................ 23 30 46 91 92 98
1,000 or more .................................................................. 37 51 56 95 92 99
Locale
City .................................................................................. 25 32 50 100 96 98
Urban fringe .................................................................... 23 35 48 93 90 99
Town................................................................................ 23 37 47 82 91 92
Rural ................................................................................ 22 26 39 76 90 95
Percent minority enrollment4
Less than 6 percent.......................................................... 21 31 37 84 90 93
6 to 20 percent ................................................................. 23 36 51 82 88 99
21 to 49 percent ............................................................... 25 35 45 96 92 98
50 percent or more........................................................... 23 28 46 92 95 96
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch
Less than 35 percent........................................................ 24 36 46 87 92 97
35 to 49 percent ............................................................... 25 33 45 88 88 97
50 to 74 percent ............................................................... 23 28 47 87 92 97
75 percent or more........................................................... 20 25 44 93 96 95
‡Reporting standards not met.
1Percentages are based on the 99 percent of public schools with Internet access in 2002, 99.8 percent in 2003, and 99.6 percent in 2005.
Percentages include schools using wireless Internet connections (both broadband and narrowband) only, as well as schools using both wireless
and wired connections.
2Percentages are based on 23 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet access times 23 percent using wireless Internet connections) in
2002, 32 percent of public schools (99.8 percent with Internet access times 32 percent using wireless Internet connections) in 2003, and 45
percent of public schools (99.6 percent with Internet access times 45 percent using wireless Internet connections) in 2005.
3Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
4Percent minority enrollment was not available for 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
NOTE: For estimates that are 100 percent, the event defined could have been reported by fewer schools had a different sample been drawn.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
21
Table 4-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools using any type of wireless Internet
connection, and of those schools, standard errors of the percentage using broadband
wireless Internet connection, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Use any type of wireless
Internet connection
Use broadband wireless Internet
connection in schools with wireless
Internet connection
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools......................................................... 1.5 1.7 2.3 2.9 2.0 0.9
Instructional level
Elementary ...................................................................... 1.7 2.0 2.7 4.3 2.6 1.1
Secondary ........................................................................ 1.9 2.3 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.3
School size
Less than 300................................................................... 3.5 4.1 4.3 † 5.3 3.4
300 to 999........................................................................ 1.8 2.0 2.9 2.4 2.4 0.8
1,000 or more .................................................................. 3.4 3.3 3.6 1.9 3.1 0.8
Locale
City .................................................................................. 2.8 3.3 4.2 † 2.8 1.4
Urban fringe .................................................................... 2.3 2.7 3.4 3.1 3.2 0.8
Town................................................................................ 3.6 5.8 6.6 9.7 4.4 5.6
Rural ................................................................................ 3.1 3.2 3.9 6.8 4.6 2.3
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent.......................................................... 2.6 3.5 4.6 6.8 3.6 4.0
6 to 20 percent ................................................................. 3.2 3.5 3.8 6.3 5.1 0.7
21 to 49 percent ............................................................... 3.6 3.4 4.9 2.6 3.5 1.1
50 percent or more........................................................... 2.3 2.9 3.5 3.8 1.9 1.9
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch
Less than 35 percent........................................................ 2.7 2.7 3.5 5.3 3.3 1.5
35 to 49 percent ............................................................... 4.4 3.7 4.3 5.3 4.6 2.6
50 to 74 percent ............................................................... 2.8 3.6 4.1 5.0 3.3 1.9
75 percent or more........................................................... 3.0 3.1 3.1 4.9 2.5 2.3
†Not applicable.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
22
Table 5. Percentage of public school instructional rooms with wireless Internet connections,
by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005
All public schools.............................................................................................................................. 15 11 15
Instructional level1
Elementary ........................................................................................................................................... 13 11 16
Secondary ............................................................................................................................................. 19 11 14
School size
Less than 300........................................................................................................................................ 12 15 14
300 to 999............................................................................................................................................. 14 10 16
1,000 or more ....................................................................................................................................... 19 11 12
Locale
City ....................................................................................................................................................... 14 9 17
Urban fringe ......................................................................................................................................... 16 12 14
Town..................................................................................................................................................... 14 11 16
Rural ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 12 14
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent............................................................................................................................... 14 14 14
6 to 20 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 13 12 19
21 to 49 percent .................................................................................................................................... 15 10 11
50 percent or more................................................................................................................................ 16 9 16
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................................................................................................................. 15 13 16
35 to 49 percent .................................................................................................................................... 15 12 16
50 to 74 percent .................................................................................................................................... 17 9 12
75 percent or more................................................................................................................................ 11 9 16
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
NOTE: Percentages are based on all public schools.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
23
Table 5-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public school instructional rooms with wireless
Internet connections, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005
All public schools.............................................................................................................................. 1.1 1.1 1.1
Instructional level
Elementary ........................................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.5 1.7
Secondary ............................................................................................................................................. 1.6 1.2 1.3
School size
Less than 300........................................................................................................................................ 2.8 3.7 2.2
300 to 999............................................................................................................................................. 1.4 1.3 1.7
1,000 or more ....................................................................................................................................... 2.6 1.8 1.6
Locale
City ....................................................................................................................................................... 2.0 1.7 2.3
Urban fringe ......................................................................................................................................... 2.0 1.7 1.9
Town..................................................................................................................................................... 2.7 3.1 3.9
Rural ..................................................................................................................................................... 2.2 1.9 1.7
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent............................................................................................................................... 2.2 2.8 2.1
6 to 20 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 2.1 2.2 2.3
21 to 49 percent .................................................................................................................................... 3.1 1.9 2.1
50 percent or more................................................................................................................................ 1.9 1.6 1.9
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................................................................................................................. 1.6 1.7 1.7
35 to 49 percent .................................................................................................................................... 3.1 2.8 2.5
50 to 74 percent .................................................................................................................................... 2.5 2.0 2.1
75 percent or more................................................................................................................................ 2.1 2.0 2.4
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
24
Table 6. Ratio of public school students to instructional computers with Internet access,
by school characteristics: Various years, 1998–2005
School characteristic 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools........................................................... 12.1 9.1 6.6 5.4 4.8 4.4 3.8
Instructional level1
Elementary ........................................................................ 13.6 10.6 7.8 6.1 5.2 4.9 4.1
Secondary .......................................................................... 9.9 7.0 5.2 4.3 4.1 3.8 3.3
School size
Less than 300..................................................................... 9.1 5.7 3.9 4.1 3.1 3.2 2.4
300 to 999.......................................................................... 12.3 9.4 7.0 5.6 5.0 4.7 3.9
1,000 or more .................................................................... 13.0 10.0 7.2 5.4 5.1 4.3 4.0
Locale
City .................................................................................... 14.1 11.4 8.2 5.9 5.5 5.0 4.2
Urban fringe ...................................................................... 12.4 9.1 6.6 5.7 4.9 4.6 4.1
Town.................................................................................. 12.2 8.2 6.2 5.0 4.4 4.1 3.4
Rural .................................................................................. 8.6 6.6 5.0 4.6 4.0 3.8 3.0
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent............................................................ 10.1 7.0 5.7 4.7 4.0 4.1 3.0
6 to 20 percent ................................................................... 10.4 7.8 5.9 4.9 4.6 4.1 3.9
21 to 49 percent ................................................................. 12.1 9.5 7.2 5.5 5.2 4.1 4.0
50 percent or more............................................................. 17.2 13.3 8.1 6.4 5.1 5.1 4.1
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch3
Less than 35 percent.......................................................... 10.6 7.6 6.0 4.9 4.6 4.2 3.8
35 to 49 percent ................................................................. 10.9 9.0 6.3 5.2 4.5 4.4 3.4
50 to 74 percent ................................................................. 15.8 10.0 7.2 5.6 4.7 4.4 3.6
75 percent or more............................................................. 16.8 16.8 9.1 6.8 5.5 5.1 4.0
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for some schools. Over the years, the missing information ranged from 0 schools (1999) to 31
schools (2001). In 2005, this information was missing for 20 schools.
3Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for some schools. Over the years, the missing information ranged
from 0 schools (2002, 2003, and 2005) to 10 schools (1999).
NOTE: The ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet access was computed by dividing the total number of students in all public
schools by the total number of instructional computers with Internet access in all public schools (including schools with no Internet access). All
of the estimates in this report were recalculated from raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, some estimates
presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from results published prior to 2001.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
25
Table 6-A. Standard errors of the ratio of public school students to instructional computers with
Internet access, by school characteristics: Various years, 1998–2005
School characteristic 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools........................................................... 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Instructional level
Elementary ........................................................................ 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1
Secondary .......................................................................... 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
School size
Less than 300..................................................................... 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1
300 to 999.......................................................................... 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1
1,000 or more .................................................................... 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1
Locale
City .................................................................................... 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Urban fringe ...................................................................... 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1
Town.................................................................................. 1.2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2
Rural .................................................................................. 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent............................................................ 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
6 to 20 percent ................................................................... 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
21 to 49 percent ................................................................. 1.1 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
50 percent or more............................................................. 1.7 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch
Less than 35 percent.......................................................... 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
35 to 49 percent ................................................................. 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2
50 to 74 percent ................................................................. 1.4 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
75 percent or more............................................................. 2.5 2.2 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69, 1998; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75, 1999; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
26
Table 7. Percentage of public schools providing hand-held computers to students or teachers for
instructional purposes, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005
All public schools................................................................................................................................ 7 10 19
Instructional level1
Elementary ............................................................................................................................................. 6 9 19
Secondary ............................................................................................................................................... 10 14 17
School size
Less than 300.......................................................................................................................................... 8 5 17
300 to 999............................................................................................................................................... 6 11 20
1,000 or more ......................................................................................................................................... 12 21 15
Locale
City ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 11 22
Urban fringe ........................................................................................................................................... 6 9 17
Town....................................................................................................................................................... 6 10 15
Rural ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 10 20
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent................................................................................................................................. 9 9 21
6 to 20 percent ........................................................................................................................................ 7 10 16
21 to 49 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 5 10 16
50 percent or more.................................................................................................................................. 7 12 23
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................................................................................................................... 9 10 16
35 to 49 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 5 10 18
50 to 74 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 7 9 23
75 percent or more.................................................................................................................................. 5 11 21
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
NOTE: Percentages are based on all public schools.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
27
Table 7-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools providing hand-held computers
to students or teachers for instructional purposes, by school characteristics: 2002,
2003, and 2005
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005
All public schools................................................................................................................................ 0.8 1.2 1.7
Instructional level
Elementary ............................................................................................................................................. 1.1 1.4 2.1
Secondary ............................................................................................................................................... 1.5 1.6 1.9
School size
Less than 300.......................................................................................................................................... 2.4 1.9 3.0
300 to 999............................................................................................................................................... 1.0 1.5 2.1
1,000 or more ......................................................................................................................................... 2.4 3.3 2.4
Locale
City ......................................................................................................................................................... 1.5 2.2 3.2
Urban fringe ........................................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.7 2.3
Town....................................................................................................................................................... 1.8 2.9 3.7
Rural ....................................................................................................................................................... 2.1 1.9 2.6
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent................................................................................................................................. 2.2 2.0 3.3
6 to 20 percent ........................................................................................................................................ 1.5 1.7 3.1
21 to 49 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 1.4 2.7 3.1
50 percent or more.................................................................................................................................. 1.7 2.6 2.5
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................................................................................................................... 1.4 1.4 2.3
35 to 49 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 2.0 3.0 3.5
50 to 74 percent ...................................................................................................................................... 1.9 2.3 3.5
75 percent or more.................................................................................................................................. 1.9 2.4 2.8
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
28
Table 8. Percentage of public schools providing hand-held computers to teachers and students
for instructional purposes, by school characteristics: 2005
School characteristic Teachers Students
All public schools..................................................................................................................................................... 17 8
Instructional level1
Elementary .................................................................................................................................................................. 18 8
Secondary .................................................................................................................................................................... 15 9
School size
Less than 300............................................................................................................................................................... 16 6
300 to 999.................................................................................................................................................................... 19 9
1,000 or more .............................................................................................................................................................. 12 8
Locale
City .............................................................................................................................................................................. 19 9
Urban fringe ................................................................................................................................................................ 15 10
Town............................................................................................................................................................................ 15 6
Rural ............................................................................................................................................................................ 19 7
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent...................................................................................................................................................... 20 9
6 to 20 percent ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 8
21 to 49 percent ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 11
50 percent or more....................................................................................................................................................... 22 6
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent.................................................................................................................................................... 14 9
35 to 49 percent ........................................................................................................................................................... 17 8
50 to 74 percent ........................................................................................................................................................... 22 8
75 percent or more....................................................................................................................................................... 19 6
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for 20 schools in 2005.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
29
Table 8-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools providing hand-held computers
to teachers and students for instructional purposes, by school characteristics: 2005
School characteristic Teachers Students
All public schools..................................................................................................................................................... 1.5 1.0
Instructional level
Elementary .................................................................................................................................................................. 2.0 1.2
Secondary .................................................................................................................................................................... 1.9 1.6
School size
Less than 300............................................................................................................................................................... 3.1 1.8
300 to 999.................................................................................................................................................................... 2.0 1.4
1,000 or more .............................................................................................................................................................. 2.3 1.7
Locale
City .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3.0 2.1
Urban fringe ................................................................................................................................................................ 2.1 2.1
Town............................................................................................................................................................................ 3.8 2.8
Rural ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2.7 1.7
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent...................................................................................................................................................... 3.4 2.4
6 to 20 percent ............................................................................................................................................................. 3.1 2.0
21 to 49 percent ........................................................................................................................................................... 2.3 2.7
50 percent or more....................................................................................................................................................... 2.6 1.2
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent.................................................................................................................................................... 2.3 1.9
35 to 49 percent ........................................................................................................................................................... 3.6 2.3
50 to 74 percent ........................................................................................................................................................... 3.5 2.2
75 percent or more....................................................................................................................................................... 2.8 1.6
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
30
Table 9. Percentage of public schools lending laptop computers to students, by school
characteristics: Various years, 2001–05
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools................................................................................. 10 8 8 10
Instructional level1
Elementary ................................................................................................ 7 5 5 7
Secondary.................................................................................................. 18 18 19 18
School size
Less than 300 ............................................................................................ 15 9 14 11
300 to 999 ................................................................................................. 7 7 6 9
1,000 or more............................................................................................ 13 11 10 11
Locale
City............................................................................................................ 6 6 5 7
Urban fringe.............................................................................................. 7 6 7 9
Town ......................................................................................................... 13 11 9 13
Rural.......................................................................................................... 14 11 12 12
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent ................................................................................... 11 12 11 15
6 to 20 percent .......................................................................................... 9 8 8 13
21 to 49 percent ........................................................................................ 10 7 9 7
50 percent or more .................................................................................... 9 5 6 7
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch3
Less than 35 percent ................................................................................. 10 10 9 11
35 to 49 percent ........................................................................................ 9 10 9 15
50 to 74 percent ........................................................................................ 10 7 9 7
75 percent or more .................................................................................... 10 3 7 6
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for 31 schools in 2001, 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
3Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for two schools in 2001.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
31
Table 9-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools lending laptop computers to
students, by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools.................................................................................. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Instructional level
Elementary ................................................................................................. 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.5
Secondary................................................................................................... 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.1
School size
Less than 300 ............................................................................................. 3.2 2.1 2.7 2.6
300 to 999 .................................................................................................. 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.3
1,000 or more............................................................................................. 1.9 2.3 1.5 1.8
Locale
City............................................................................................................. 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.4
Urban fringe............................................................................................... 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.7
Town .......................................................................................................... 3.1 2.9 2.4 4.7
Rural........................................................................................................... 2.2 1.8 2.1 2.2
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent .................................................................................... 2.1 2.3 2.0 2.5
6 to 20 percent ........................................................................................... 2.4 1.6 2.1 2.7
21 to 49 percent ......................................................................................... 2.7 1.7 2.1 2.0
50 percent or more ..................................................................................... 1.8 1.1 1.7 1.2
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent .................................................................................. 1.4 1.7 1.5 1.8
35 to 49 percent ......................................................................................... 2.6 2.5 2.5 3.0
50 to 74 percent ......................................................................................... 2.7 1.8 2.3 1.6
75 percent or more ..................................................................................... 2.5 1.0 2.4 1.6
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
32
Table 10. Percentage of public schools lending laptop computers to students for various
maximum lengths of time: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Maximum length of time of loan 2002 2003 2005
Less than 1 week ................................................................................................ 59 57 47
1 week to less than 1 month ............................................................................... 19 17 17
1 month to less than 3 months ............................................................................ ‡ 2! 5
3 months to less than 6 months ......................................................................... ‡ ‡ 5
6 months to less than the entire school year....................................................... ‡ # 5
The entire school year ........................................................................................ 16 15 16
Other1 .................................................................................................................. 2! 8 5
#Rounds to zero.
!Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 50 percent.
‡Reporting standards not met.
1For example, more than 1 school year.
NOTE: Percentages are based on the 8 percent of public schools lending laptop computers to students in 2002 and 2003, and 10 percent of public
schools in 2005. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding and not reporting where there are too few cases for a reliable estimate.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
33
Table 10-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools lending laptop computers to
students for various maximum lengths of time: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Maximum length of time of loan 2002 2003 2005
Less than 1 week ................................................................................................ 4.4 4.7 5.6
1 week to less than 1 month ............................................................................... 3.7 4.1 4.5
1 month to less than 3 months ............................................................................ † 1.3 1.9
3 months to less than 6 months ......................................................................... † † 2.2
6 months to less than the entire school year....................................................... † † 1.9
The entire school year ........................................................................................ 3.4 3.4 4.4
Other ................................................................................................................... 1.2 2.6 1.7
†Not applicable.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
34
Table 11. Percentage of public schools without laptop computers available for loan in the current
school year planning to make laptop computers available for students to borrow during
the next school year: 2002, 2003, and 2005
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005
All public schools ........................................................................................ 7 6 3
Instructional level1
Elementary...................................................................................................... 7 5 3
Secondary ....................................................................................................... 8 6 4
School size
Less than 300.................................................................................................. 12 6 4
300 to 999 ....................................................................................................... 6 5 3
1,000 or more.................................................................................................. 6 6 2
Locale
City ................................................................................................................. 5 5 2
Urban fringe.................................................................................................... 6 5 1
Town............................................................................................................... 6 6 2!
Rural ............................................................................................................... 11 7 5
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent ......................................................................................... 12 5 4
6 to 20 percent ................................................................................................ 5 7 1!
21 to 49 percent .............................................................................................. 4 3 2!
50 percent or more.......................................................................................... 7 7 4
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent ....................................................................................... 6 3 2
35 to 49 percent .............................................................................................. 9 7 6
50 to 74 percent .............................................................................................. 6 7 #
75 percent or more.......................................................................................... 10 8 6
#Rounds to zero.
!Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 50 percent.
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
NOTE: Percentages are based on the 92 percent of public schools without laptops available for loan in 2002 and 2003, and the 90 percent of
public schools without laptops available for loan in 2005.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
35
Table 11-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools without laptop computers
available for loan in the current school year planning to make laptop computers
available for students to borrow during the next school year: 2002, 2003, and 2005
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005
All public schools ........................................................................................ 1.1 0.9 0.6
Instructional level
Elementary...................................................................................................... 1.3 1.1 0.7
Secondary ....................................................................................................... 1.6 1.4 1.1
School size
Less than 300.................................................................................................. 3.0 2.2 1.5
300 to 999 ....................................................................................................... 1.0 1.0 0.7
1,000 or more.................................................................................................. 1.7 1.7 0.8
Locale
City ................................................................................................................. 1.5 1.7 1.1
Urban fringe.................................................................................................... 1.6 1.3 0.4
Town............................................................................................................... 2.4 2.9 1.0
Rural ............................................................................................................... 2.4 1.7 1.5
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent ......................................................................................... 3.2 1.6 1.7
6 to 20 percent ................................................................................................ 2.1 2.6 1.0
21 to 49 percent .............................................................................................. 1.7 1.4 1.1
50 percent or more.......................................................................................... 1.6 1.5 1.2
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent ....................................................................................... 1.8 0.9 0.6
35 to 49 percent .............................................................................................. 3.4 2.6 2.6
50 to 74 percent .............................................................................................. 1.9 2.7 †
75 percent or more.......................................................................................... 2.7 1.9 1.7
†Not applicable.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
36
Table 12. Percentage of public schools using technologies or procedures to prevent student access
to inappropriate material on the Internet, and of those schools, percentage using these
measures on all computers with Internet access used by students, by school
characteristics: Various years, 2001–05
Use technologies/procedures to prevent student
access to inappropriate material on the Internet1
Use these measures on all computers with
Internet access used by students2
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools......................... 96 99 97 1004 98 99 99 98
Instructional level3
Elementary ...................................... 96 99 97 1004 98 99 99 99
Secondary ........................................ 97 1004 99 99 98 99 99 98
School size
Less than 300................................... 94 99 96 99 96 1004 1004 96
300 to 999........................................ 97 1004 98 1004 99 99 99 99
1,000 or more .................................. 98 99 98 100 98 99 99 98
Locale
City .................................................. 93 99 98 99 98 99 99 98
Urban fringe .................................... 98 99 98 1004 98 98 99 98
Town................................................ 96 100 100 100 1004 99 99 100
Rural ................................................ 97 1004 96 99 98 1004 99 98
Percent minority enrollment5
Less than 6 percent.......................... 96 99 97 1004 97 1004 99 98
6 to 20 percent ................................. 98 99 98 1004 1004 1004 99 98
21 to 49 percent ............................... 97 100 97 100 99 98 1004 99
50 percent or more........................... 95 99 99 99 98 98 99 97
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch6
Less than 35 percent........................ 99 1004 98 1004 99 99 99 99
35 to 49 percent ............................... 93 1004 98 99 97 1004 99 98
50 to 74 percent ............................... 98 99 97 100 97 98 99 97
75 percent or more........................... 92 98 96 99 98 99 99 98
1Percentages are based on the 99 percent of public schools with Internet access in 2001 and 2002, 99.8 percent in 2003, and 99.6 percent in 2005.
2Percentages are based on 95 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet access times 96 percent of public schools using technologies or
procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2001, on 98 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet
access times 99 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2002, on
97 percent of public schools (99.8 percent with Internet access times 97 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to
inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2003, and on 100 percent of public schools (99.6 percent with Internet access times 99.6 percent using
technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate materials on the Internet) in 2005.
3Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
4Estimate is rounded to 100 percent for presentation in table.
5Percent minority enrollment was not available for 31 schools in 2001, 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
6Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for two schools in 2001.
NOTE: For estimates that are 100 percent, the event defined could have been reported by fewer schools had a different sample been drawn.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
37
Table 12-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools using technologies or procedures
to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet, and of those
schools, standard errors of the percentage using these measures on all computers
with Internet access used by students, by school characteristics: Various years,
2001–05
Use technologies/procedures to prevent student
access to inappropriate material on the Internet
Use these measures on all computers with
Internet access used by students
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools......................... 0.6 0.3 0.7 † 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.5
Instructional level
Elementary ...................................... 0.7 0.4 0.9 † 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.7
Secondary ........................................ 0.9 † 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7
School size
Less than 300................................... 2.1 0.9 1.8 0.7 1.8 † † 1.6
300 to 999........................................ 0.6 † 0.7 † 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5
1,000 or more .................................. 0.9 0.8 1.0 † 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.7
Locale
City .................................................. 1.5 0.5 1.2 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.5 1.1
Urban fringe .................................... 1.0 0.6 0.8 † 1.0 0.9 0.4 1.0
Town................................................ 2.4 † † † † 0.6 0.9 †
Rural ................................................ 1.1 † 1.9 0.4 1.1 † 0.4 0.7
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent.......................... 1.6 0.7 1.9 † 1.6 † 0.4 0.8
6 to 20 percent ................................. 1.4 0.6 1.3 † † † 0.5 1.1
21 to 49 percent ............................... 1.5 † 1.3 † 0.7 1.1 † 0.8
50 percent or more........................... 1.1 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.9 0.7 0.6 1.1
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent........................ 0.7 † 0.9 † 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.6
35 to 49 percent ............................... 2.4 † 1.0 0.6 1.8 † 0.3 1.3
50 to 74 percent ............................... 1.1 0.7 1.4 † 1.5 0.8 0.7 1.4
75 percent or more........................... 1.8 1.1 2.1 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.2
†Not applicable; estimate of standard error is not presented because it is based on an estimate of 100 percent.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
38
Table 13. Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various technologies or
procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet,
by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05
Monitoring by teachers
or other staff
Blocking/
filtering software
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools..................................... 91 91 93 96 87 96 96 99
Instructional level1
Elementary .................................................. 90 91 93 96 85 95 96 99
Secondary .................................................... 93 92 92 95 93 98 98 98
School size
Less than 300............................................... 88 90 92 97 81 97 96 99
300 to 999.................................................... 92 91 93 96 88 95 97 99
1,000 or more .............................................. 93 95 93 96 93 99 96 99
Locale
City .............................................................. 90 88 92 98 83 91 96 99
Urban fringe ................................................ 91 92 93 95 88 96 96 99
Town............................................................ 84 93 94 90 87 99 98 1002
Rural ............................................................ 95 91 92 97 87 98 97 99
Percent minority enrollment3
Less than 6 percent...................................... 92 92 93 98 86 96 97 1002
6 to 20 percent ............................................. 93 92 96 94 86 96 99 98
21 to 49 percent ........................................... 91 94 95 98 86 96 97 1002
50 percent or more....................................... 88 87 89 95 87 95 93 98
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch4
Less than 35 percent.................................... 92 95 94 95 87 95 96 99
35 to 49 percent ........................................... 94 89 95 98 86 98 98 97
50 to 74 percent ........................................... 90 90 94 96 86 97 97 100
75 percent or more....................................... 87 86 89 96 86 95 95 99
See notes at end of table.
39
Table 13. Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various technologies or
procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet,
by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05—Continued
Written contract that parents have to sign Written contract that students have to sign
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools..................................... 80 82 83 79 75 77 76 76
Instructional level1
Elementary .................................................. 78 82 82 78 72 74 72 72
Secondary .................................................... 87 82 84 84 87 84 87 88
School size
Less than 300............................................... 73 82 85 74 69 78 81 75
300 to 999.................................................... 82 82 82 81 76 75 73 76
1,000 or more .............................................. 86 81 82 82 84 81 82 80
Locale
City .............................................................. 78 78 78 76 72 74 70 72
Urban fringe ................................................ 80 79 85 79 76 69 75 71
Town............................................................ 79 84 86 80 76 85 84 79
Rural ............................................................ 82 87 83 83 78 83 78 82
Percent minority enrollment3
Less than 6 percent...................................... 82 83 84 77 77 81 79 76
6 to 20 percent ............................................. 80 82 85 77 75 73 79 74
21 to 49 percent ........................................... 79 83 82 81 77 77 72 75
50 percent or more....................................... 78 80 80 81 72 75 74 78
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch4
Less than 35 percent.................................... 82 82 84 75 77 75 74 72
35 to 49 percent ........................................... 83 86 82 79 78 80 83 77
50 to 74 percent ........................................... 81 83 84 84 79 81 75 79
75 percent or more....................................... 73 76 80 83 64 71 72 78
See notes at end of table.
40
Table 13. Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various technologies or
procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet,
by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05—Continued
Monitoring software Honor code for students Intranet
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools................................. 46 52 57 67 44 41 45 53 26 32 39 46
Instructional level1
Elementary .............................................. 43 51 56 66 44 41 45 52 24 34 40 46
Secondary ................................................ 52 57 60 72 45 43 46 53 33 28 34 45
School size
Less than 300........................................... 42 51 56 64 38 40 43 48 17 19 26 34
300 to 999................................................ 47 52 56 67 46 42 46 54 29 37 43 49
1,000 or more .......................................... 48 59 62 73 46 43 48 54 32 33 44 56
Locale
City .......................................................... 49 45 51 72 51 38 47 58 29 38 39 57
Urban fringe ............................................ 44 53 58 65 43 44 43 56 29 37 47 46
Town........................................................ 37 65 62 67 39 40 36 44 19 24 35 43
Rural ........................................................ 49 51 57 65 42 42 50 48 24 26 32 39
Percent minority enrollment3
Less than 6 percent.................................. 47 51 57 68 41 39 46 46 21 20 35 43
6 to 20 percent ......................................... 44 57 64 65 45 41 50 54 30 37 41 43
21 to 49 percent ....................................... 46 53 55 69 46 50 42 57 29 41 44 40
50 percent or more................................... 45 48 54 69 44 39 43 53 27 35 38 54
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch4
Less than 35 percent................................ 45 54 63 65 48 44 45 51 29 34 43 45
35 to 49 percent ....................................... 40 47 55 63 38 42 40 57 23 28 39 42
50 to 74 percent ....................................... 51 53 49 71 40 40 47 51 22 30 33 44
75 percent or more................................... 46 52 56 69 45 37 48 53 28 35 38 52
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Estimate is rounded to 100 percent for presentation in table.
3Percent minority enrollment was not available for 31 schools in 2001, 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
4Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch was not available for two schools in 2001.
NOTE: Percentages are based on 95 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet access times 96 percent using technologies or procedures
to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2001, on 98 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet access times
99 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2002, on 97 percent of public
schools (99.8 percent with Internet access times 97 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material
on the Internet) in 2003, and on 100 percent (99.6 percent with Internet access times 99.6 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent
student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2005.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
41
Table 13-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access using
various technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet, by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05
Monitoring by teachers
or other staff
Blocking/
filtering software
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools............................................... 1.1 1.2 0.8 0.7 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.4
Instructional level
Elementary ............................................................ 1.4 1.5 1.1 0.8 1.8 0.9 0.9 0.5
Secondary .............................................................. 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.4 0.6 0.8 0.6
School size
Less than 300......................................................... 3.2 2.9 2.2 1.4 3.7 1.8 1.8 0.7
300 to 999.............................................................. 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.5 0.8 0.8 0.5
1,000 or more ........................................................ 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.9 0.5 1.4 0.8
Locale
City ........................................................................ 2.6 2.2 1.6 0.8 3.3 2.6 1.5 0.9
Urban fringe .......................................................... 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3 2.4 1.2 1.4 0.7
Town...................................................................... 4.4 2.1 2.6 3.4 3.6 0.6 1.0 †
Rural ...................................................................... 1.8 2.2 1.9 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.4 0.7
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent................................................ 2.2 2.7 2.0 1.1 2.6 1.7 1.5 †
6 to 20 percent ....................................................... 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.8 2.8 1.3 0.7 1.1
21 to 49 percent ..................................................... 2.5 2.0 1.4 1.2 3.2 1.8 1.7 †
50 percent or more................................................. 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.1 2.4 1.3 1.7 0.9
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch
Less than 35 percent.............................................. 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.2 1.4 1.3 0.6
35 to 49 percent ..................................................... 2.4 2.9 2.4 1.2 2.9 1.3 0.9 1.6
50 to 74 percent ..................................................... 2.6 2.3 1.7 1.4 3.1 1.6 1.4 †
75 percent or more................................................. 2.9 3.0 2.4 1.2 2.9 1.7 0.6 0.6
See notes at end of table.
42
Table 13-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access using
various technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet, by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05—
Continued
Written contract that parents have to sign Written contract that students have to sign
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools............................................... 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6
Instructional level
Elementary ............................................................ 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.0
Secondary .............................................................. 1.7 1.8 1.6 2.0 1.6 1.8 1.4 1.7
School size
Less than 300......................................................... 4.0 3.6 2.8 3.0 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.0
300 to 999.............................................................. 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.7 2.0 2.1
1,000 or more ........................................................ 2.5 3.1 3.1 3.2 2.7 2.9 2.9 3.1
Locale
City ........................................................................ 3.1 3.0 2.8 3.3 3.1 2.7 2.7 3.5
Urban fringe .......................................................... 3.0 2.6 2.5 2.9 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.3
Town...................................................................... 4.4 3.7 3.8 4.2 4.7 3.3 4.3 4.3
Rural ...................................................................... 2.7 2.4 2.7 2.4 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.7
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent................................................ 3.1 3.1 2.9 3.5 3.5 3.1 3.3 3.6
6 to 20 percent ....................................................... 3.1 2.5 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.0 3.3 3.5
21 to 49 percent ..................................................... 4.0 3.4 3.8 2.8 4.1 3.1 3.5 3.7
50 percent or more................................................. 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.6 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.4
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch
Less than 35 percent.............................................. 2.3 2.0 1.9 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.6
35 to 49 percent ..................................................... 3.7 3.7 3.6 4.1 4.0 4.3 3.4 4.1
50 to 74 percent ..................................................... 3.6 3.2 2.8 2.7 3.9 3.3 3.9 2.3
75 percent or more................................................. 3.9 3.0 2.7 2.7 4.5 3.5 3.4 2.9
See notes at end of table.
43
Table 13-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access using
various technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet, by school characteristics: Various years, 2001–05—
Continued
Monitoring software Honor code for students Intranet
School characteristic 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005 2001 2002 2003 2005
All public schools.................................. 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.9 1.5 1.6
Instructional level
Elementary ............................................... 2.4 2.0 2.1 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.4 2.3 1.9 2.4 2.0 1.9
Secondary ................................................. 2.6 2.7 2.2 1.9 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.9 1.6 2.3 2.4
School size
Less than 300............................................ 4.4 4.8 4.7 4.0 4.2 4.6 4.9 4.2 3.7 3.6 4.0 3.5
300 to 999................................................. 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.0 1.8 2.1 2.1 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.3
1,000 or more ........................................... 3.4 3.5 3.2 3.8 3.3 3.7 3.3 3.8 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.5
Locale
City ........................................................... 3.9 3.7 4.6 3.9 3.8 2.9 3.8 4.0 3.2 4.3 3.9 3.7
Urban fringe ............................................. 3.2 3.1 3.0 3.4 3.3 3.0 3.3 3.1 3.0 2.8 3.1 3.4
Town......................................................... 5.1 4.4 4.8 6.5 5.0 5.1 5.8 5.1 4.0 4.5 4.6 6.4
Rural ......................................................... 3.3 3.6 3.8 2.6 3.5 3.6 3.9 3.0 2.8 3.4 3.0 3.0
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent................................... 3.8 3.9 3.7 3.4 3.7 4.2 4.2 3.9 3.6 3.3 3.3 3.5
6 to 20 percent .......................................... 4.0 3.2 4.0 3.8 3.5 3.7 4.1 3.9 3.0 3.3 3.8 3.7
21 to 49 percent ........................................ 4.5 3.7 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.7 4.1 4.1 3.6 3.9 3.6 4.1
50 percent or more.................................... 3.4 3.0 3.6 3.2 4.0 2.8 3.4 3.1 3.2 2.9 2.8 2.9
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent................................. 2.9 2.7 2.5 3.5 2.8 2.9 3.2 3.3 2.9 2.8 3.3 2.8
35 to 49 percent ........................................ 4.2 4.5 4.6 3.8 3.9 4.4 4.6 5.3 3.5 3.8 3.9 4.0
50 to 74 percent ........................................ 4.3 3.7 4.1 3.3 4.1 3.5 4.8 3.7 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.6
75 percent or more.................................... 3.9 3.4 4.2 3.8 4.5 3.6 4.1 3.3 4.1 3.4 3.4 3.2
†Not applicable; estimate of standard error is not presented because it is based on an estimate of 100 percent.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2001,” FRSS 82, 2001; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
44
Table 14. Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various methods to disseminate
information to students and parents about the technologies or other procedures used to
prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet at the school, by school
characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Part of school policy/rules
distributed to students and parents
Special notice
to parents Newsletters
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools........................... 90 95 95 64 66 67 57 58 57
Instructional level2
Elementary ........................................ 89 95 96 65 67 68 58 57 58
Secondary .......................................... 93 98 95 60 63 62 57 62 57
School size
Less than 300..................................... 91 96 92 64 69 72 59 58 59
300 to 999.......................................... 90 95 97 65 65 66 57 57 57
1,000 or more .................................... 93 98 94 64 66 58 59 64 57
Locale
City .................................................... 87 89 94 68 63 66 56 58 56
Urban fringe ...................................... 87 97 96 60 71 66 59 62 57
Town.................................................. 91 97 98 65 58 70 58 53 54
Rural .................................................. 95 97 95 66 68 67 56 56 59
Percent minority enrollment3
Less than 6 percent............................ 91 97 97 59 70 67 62 62 66
6 to 20 percent ................................... 94 96 96 68 68 65 58 60 59
21 to 49 percent ................................. 91 98 94 65 65 59 58 62 47
50 percent or more............................. 85 91 94 66 64 74 53 52 54
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent.......................... 91 96 96 64 69 63 61 65 62
35 to 49 percent ................................. 90 98 94 63 60 55 61 52 48
50 to 74 percent ................................. 93 97 95 69 69 74 52 58 57
75 percent or more............................. 85 89 94 60 64 76 52 49 56
See notes at end of table.
45
Table 14. Percentage of public schools with Internet access using various methods to disseminate
information to students and parents about the technologies or other procedures used to
prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet at the school, by school
characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005—Continued
Posted message on the
school website or
web page
Notice on bulletin
board at school
Pop-up message at
computer or Internet
log on Other1
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools........................... 32 31 40 24 25 28 15 17 28 5 5 4
Instructional level2
Elementary ........................................ 32 30 38 23 22 28 13 17 26 5 5 3
Secondary .......................................... 32 36 45 30 33 30 19 20 30 8 6 7
School size
Less than 300..................................... 24 23 32 26 25 27 8 14 23 8 5 2
300 to 999.......................................... 33 32 41 22 23 28 17 17 29 4 5 4
1,000 or more .................................... 39 46 51 28 33 32 19 26 31 7 8 8
Locale
City .................................................... 29 24 41 25 22 31 16 18 38 8 7 5
Urban fringe ...................................... 38 35 41 24 24 26 16 17 29 4 6 2
Town.................................................. 32 36 48 26 23 32 11 22 23 3! 6 5
Rural .................................................. 27 31 35 23 28 27 14 15 21 6 3 4
Percent minority enrollment3
Less than 6 percent............................ 31 33 43 26 25 24 11 18 18 3 3 4
6 to 20 percent ................................... 33 39 41 21 27 30 14 19 28 7 7 5
21 to 49 percent ................................. 32 28 36 23 23 23 12 16 29 7 5 4
50 percent or more............................. 29 27 40 25 24 33 21 17 35 5 6 2
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent.......................... 36 36 41 24 24 26 14 19 28 6 6 5
35 to 49 percent ................................. 32 27 37 21 23 19 9 20 23 6 4 3
50 to 74 percent ................................. 29 31 41 24 24 30 14 14 27 3 4 3
75 percent or more............................. 24 26 39 28 28 38 23 15 31 6 7 3
!Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 50 percent.
1Respondents could provide their own response.
2Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
3Percent minority enrollment was not available for 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
NOTE: Percentages are based on 98 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet access times 99 percent using technologies or procedures
to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2002, on 97 percent of public schools (99.8 percent with Internet access
times 97 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet) in 2003, and on 100 percent
of public schools (99.6 percent with Internet access times 99.6 percent using technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet) in 2005.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
46
Table 14-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access using
various methods to disseminate information to students and parents about the
technologies or other procedures used to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet at the school, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Part of school policy/rules
distributed to students and parents
Special notice
to parents Newsletters
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools........................... 1.3 0.8 0.8 1.9 1.8 1.6 2.1 1.8 1.9
Instructional level
Elementary ........................................ 1.6 1.0 1.0 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.5 2.3 2.2
Secondary .......................................... 1.8 0.7 1.1 2.7 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.8 2.7
School size
Less than 300..................................... 3.0 1.6 1.9 5.0 3.9 3.1 4.0 4.1 3.8
300 to 999.......................................... 1.6 1.0 0.8 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.2
1,000 or more .................................... 2.0 0.8 2.1 3.1 3.0 3.9 3.4 3.4 3.7
Locale
City .................................................... 2.5 2.3 1.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.0 3.2 3.4
Urban fringe ...................................... 2.2 1.0 1.2 2.8 3.3 3.1 3.5 3.5 4.0
Town.................................................. 3.4 1.9 1.0 4.6 5.4 5.2 5.0 5.2 5.0
Rural .................................................. 1.2 1.2 1.7 3.5 3.2 2.7 3.4 3.2 3.8
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent............................ 2.6 1.4 1.3 4.3 2.9 3.8 4.1 3.8 4.7
6 to 20 percent ................................... 1.8 1.5 1.5 3.5 4.0 2.6 4.0 3.9 4.3
21 to 49 percent ................................. 2.4 1.3 1.9 3.7 3.6 4.6 4.3 3.6 4.0
50 percent or more............................. 2.5 2.0 1.5 2.8 3.3 2.3 3.0 3.4 3.3
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent.......................... 1.7 1.3 1.1 3.1 2.8 2.8 3.4 3.0 3.4
35 to 49 percent ................................. 3.8 0.9 2.1 4.7 4.9 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.6
50 to 74 percent ................................. 1.9 1.1 1.5 3.7 3.8 3.0 4.3 4.1 3.9
75 percent or more............................. 3.4 2.8 1.8 3.2 3.9 2.7 3.4 3.2 3.6
See notes at end of table.
47
Table 14-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools with Internet access using
various methods to disseminate information to students and parents about the
technologies or other procedures used to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet at the school, by school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and
2005—Continued
Posted message on the
school website or
web page
Notice on bulletin
board at school
Pop-up message at
computer or Internet
log on Other
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools........................... 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.3 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.5 0.8 0.7 0.6
Instructional level
Elementary ........................................ 2.3 2.1 2.5 2.1 1.6 2.2 1.6 1.6 1.9 1.0 0.9 0.8
Secondary .......................................... 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.5 1.7 1.7 1.9 2.4 1.4 1.2 1.1
School size
Less than 300..................................... 4.2 3.9 3.7 4.3 3.5 3.0 2.4 3.0 2.8 2.2 1.8 1.1
300 to 999.......................................... 1.7 2.2 2.6 1.9 1.4 2.3 1.5 1.7 2.2 0.9 0.9 0.9
1,000 or more .................................... 3.9 3.5 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.9 2.7 3.2 4.3 1.9 1.8 2.2
Locale
City .................................................... 3.3 3.1 3.6 3.1 2.4 3.3 2.8 2.9 3.3 1.8 1.6 1.6
Urban fringe ...................................... 3.0 3.3 3.1 3.2 2.7 3.2 1.9 1.8 2.9 1.3 1.4 0.9
Town.................................................. 5.6 5.1 5.8 4.7 3.9 4.6 2.5 4.5 5.3 1.8 2.2 2.4
Rural .................................................. 3.4 3.3 3.5 2.7 3.1 3.0 2.4 2.2 2.3 1.7 1.1 1.2
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent............................ 3.7 4.0 4.5 3.1 4.1 3.7 2.7 2.6 3.0 1.2 1.0 1.4
6 to 20 percent ................................... 3.6 4.0 3.6 3.1 3.7 3.5 2.2 3.1 3.4 2.1 2.1 1.6
21 to 49 percent ................................. 3.6 3.9 3.7 3.7 2.7 3.1 2.5 2.6 3.5 1.9 1.7 1.5
50 percent or more............................. 2.6 2.7 3.2 2.7 2.1 2.9 2.5 2.5 2.9 1.2 1.3 0.7
Percent of students eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent.......................... 2.5 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.8 3.0 1.8 2.1 2.6 1.5 1.3 1.4
35 to 49 percent ................................. 3.9 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.9 2.8 3.8 3.8 2.3 1.9 1.4
50 to 74 percent ................................. 3.3 3.2 4.4 3.1 2.8 3.4 2.5 2.4 3.9 1.1 1.3 1.0
75 percent or more............................. 2.8 2.9 3.9 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.0 2.8 3.4 1.7 1.9 1.0
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
48
Table 15. Professional development for use of the Internet in the classroom in public schools,
by availability, participation, and selected school characteristics: 2002, 2003, and 2005
Percent of teachers who have attended professional developmentSchool or district 2
has offered
professional
development1 0 percent 1 to 25 percent 26 to 50 percent 51 to 75 percent 76 to 100 percent
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
[percentage distribution of schools]
All public schools.... 87 82 83 1 1 # 42 38 34 17 18 16 11 13 13 30 30 36
Instructional level3
Elementary ................. 87 80 84 1 2 # 43 39 35 15 17 15 10 13 12 31 30 38
Secondary ................... 86 86 84 # 1! # 42 38 34 20 20 18 12 13 16 26 28 32
School size
Less than 300.............. 82 76 72 # 3! 1! 29 31 33 14 22 14 9 11 12 47 33 40
300 to 999................... 88 82 87 1 1! # 45 41 34 17 17 16 11 12 13 25 29 36
1,000 or more ............. 93 91 89 ‡ # # 51 41 38 19 14 20 8 19 11 21 25 30
Locale
City ............................. 90 84 88 1! 2! 1! 53 42 33 14 18 13 7 11 15 25 27 38
Urban fringe ............... 90 82 83 ‡ ‡ # 40 39 39 18 15 15 11 15 12 30 31 34
Town........................... 82 78 86 ‡ ‡ # 36 34 25 21 20 21 14 11 16 28 33 37
Rural ........................... 84 80 80 ‡ ‡ # 38 37 34 15 20 18 12 12 11 34 29 37
Percent minority
enrollment4
Less than 6 percent..... 86 80 83 ‡ 3! # 30 31 32 16 21 16 13 12 14 40 33 38
6 to 20 percent ............ 85 82 81 ‡ ‡ # 43 44 35 18 17 20 12 11 15 26 26 30
21 to 49 percent .......... 88 81 85 ‡ # # 46 41 41 17 18 14 9 16 11 27 25 34
50 percent or more...... 89 83 84 2! 2! 1! 49 39 31 16 15 14 7 12 12 27 32 42
Percent of students
eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent... 90 82 86 ‡ 1! # 43 38 40 15 19 15 12 13 13 29 29 32
35 to 49 percent .......... 82 77 79 ‡ ‡ # 30 37 39 20 18 15 14 11 16 34 34 30
50 to 74 percent .......... 85 82 83 ‡ ‡ # 42 37 25 21 17 17 7 14 10 30 30 47
75 percent or more...... 88 84 83 ‡ ‡ 1! 51 43 31 11 17 16 9 13 13 27 26 39
#Rounds to zero.
!Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 50 percent.
‡Reporting standards not met.
1Percentages are based on the 99 percent of public schools with Internet access in 2002, 99.8 percent in 2003, and 99.6 percent in 2005.
2Percentages are based on 86 percent of public schools (99 percent with Internet access times 87 percent reporting that they or their district
offered professional development to teachers in the school on how to integrate the Internet into the curriculum in the past 12 months) in 2002, on
82 percent of public schools (99.8 percent with Internet access times 82 percent reporting that they or their district offered professional
development to teachers in the school on how to integrate the Internet into the curriculum in the past 12 months) in 2003, and on 83 percent of
public schools (99.6 percent with Internet access times 83 percent reporting that they or their district offered professional development to teachers
in the school on how to integrate the Internet into the curriculum in the past 12 months) in 2005.
3Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
4Percent minority enrollment was not available for 15 schools in 2002, 28 schools in 2003, and 20 schools in 2005.
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding and not reporting where there are too few cases for a reliable estimate.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003; and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
49
Table 15-A. Standard errors for professional development for use of the Internet in the classroom
in public schools, by availability, participation, and selected school characteristics:
2002, 2003, and 2005
Percent of teachers who have attended professional developmSchool or district ent
has offered
professional
development 0 percent 1 to 25 percent 26 to 50 percent 51 to 75 percent 76 to 100 percent
School characteristic 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005 2002 2003 2005
All public schools.. 1.4 1.3 1.5 0.4 0.6 † 1.5 2.2 2.1 1.4 1.7 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.7 2.0 2.1
Instructional level
Elementary ............... 1.6 1.5 1.8 0.5 0.7 † 1.9 2.8 2.7 1.8 2.2 2.0 1.5 1.7 1.6 2.2 2.6 2.7
Secondary ................. 1.9 1.7 2.1 † 0.7 † 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.1 2.4 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.9 1.8 2.6 2.1
School size
Less than 300............ 4.3 4.0 3.3 † 1.9 0.6 4.1 4.8 4.1 3.8 4.5 3.4 2.7 3.2 2.4 4.3 4.4 4.9
300 to 999................. 1.2 1.8 1.7 0.6 0.5 † 1.7 2.8 2.6 1.7 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.8 2.2 2.4
1,000 or more ........... 2.1 2.1 2.2 † † † 3.3 3.6 4.1 3.1 2.7 2.3 1.6 2.8 3.0 2.5 3.1 3.9
Locale
City ........................... 2.2 2.7 2.1 0.9 1.3 0.8 3.6 3.6 3.6 2.8 3.0 2.6 1.4 2.7 2.8 3.4 3.4 4.2
Urban fringe ............. 1.9 2.5 2.3 † † † 3.4 3.4 3.2 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.0 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.7 2.8
Town......................... 3.8 4.6 4.5 † † † 4.5 5.5 6.0 4.8 4.2 6.1 4.5 2.7 5.0 6.1 5.0 6.8
Rural ......................... 2.8 2.7 2.8 † † † 4.0 4.1 3.9 2.5 2.8 2.2 2.5 2.5 2.1 4.0 3.7 3.3
Percent minority
enrollment
Less than 6 percent... 2.8 3.8 2.9 † 1.5 † 4.0 3.7 4.4 3.2 3.5 2.7 2.9 2.3 3.2 4.6 4.6 4.1
6 to 20 percent .......... 2.6 3.4 3.3 † † † 3.5 4.8 4.4 2.7 3.3 3.2 2.6 2.7 3.3 3.1 4.1 3.7
21 to 49 percent ........ 3.2 3.4 2.9 † † † 4.8 3.6 4.5 3.0 2.9 3.3 2.5 2.9 2.7 3.3 3.7 4.0
50 percent or more.... 2.0 2.5 2.3 0.8 1.0 0.7 3.8 3.4 3.4 2.5 2.7 2.2 1.3 1.9 2.2 3.3 3.4 4.2
Percent of students
eligible for free or
reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent. 1.8 2.1 2.0 † 0.8 † 3.0 3.3 3.1 2.3 2.4 2.4 1.9 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.6 2.7
35 to 49 percent ........ 4.2 3.8 3.4 † † † 4.9 4.1 5.4 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.7 3.0 3.8 5.7 4.5 5.2
50 to 74 percent ........ 2.5 3.4 2.6 † † † 3.8 5.0 3.5 3.2 3.4 3.1 2.0 3.1 2.4 4.4 3.8 4.4
75 percent or more.... 2.4 2.8 2.5 † † 1.0 3.9 3.7 3.4 2.4 3.5 2.6 2.3 2.5 2.6 3.8 3.7 4.5
†Not applicable.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2002,” FRSS 83, 2002; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2003,” FRSS 86, 2003, and “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
50
Table 16. Percentage of public schools using their Internet access to provide various opportunities
and information for teaching and learning, by school characteristics: 2005
School characteristic
Data to inform
instructional
planning at the
school level
Assessment
results and data
for teachers to use
to individualize
instruction
High quality
digital content
Teacher
professional
development
through online
courses taken at
the school
Access for
students to online
distance learning
for courses that
are otherwise
unavailable
at the school
All public schools................................ 89 87 87 51 32
Instructional level1
Elementary ............................................. 90 88 86 49 24
Secondary ............................................... 86 85 91 59 57
School size
Less than 300.......................................... 84 85 83 49 37
300 to 999............................................... 90 88 87 51 28
1,000 or more ......................................... 92 89 96 55 43
Locale
City ......................................................... 89 92 88 53 25
Urban fringe ........................................... 88 85 88 46 24
Town....................................................... 92 92 85 52 37
Rural ....................................................... 88 84 85 55 43
Percent minority enrollment2
Less than 6 percent................................. 88 81 88 53 37
6 to 20 percent ........................................ 87 87 88 52 33
21 to 49 percent ...................................... 90 87 83 51 27
50 percent or more.................................. 90 92 87 50 31
Percent of students eligible for free
or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................... 90 85 89 51 31
35 to 49 percent ...................................... 83 82 85 52 31
50 to 74 percent ...................................... 91 92 87 51 34
75 percent or more.................................. 89 90 85 50 31
1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.
2Percent minority enrollment was not available for 20 schools in 2005.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
51
Table 16-A. Standard errors of the percentage of public schools using their Internet access to
provide various opportunities and information for teaching and learning, by school
characteristics: 2005
School characteristic
Data to inform
instructional
planning at the
school level
Assessment
results and data
for teachers to use
to individualize
instruction
High quality
digital content
Teacher
professional
development
through online
courses taken at
the school
Access for
students to online
distance learning
for courses that
are otherwise
unavailable
at the school
All public schools................................ 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.9 1.6
Instructional level
Elementary ............................................. 1.6 2.0 1.7 2.4 2.1
Secondary ............................................... 1.6 1.8 1.4 2.8 2.1
School size
Less than 300.......................................... 3.4 2.8 2.6 4.0 3.4
300 to 999............................................... 1.3 1.8 1.6 2.4 2.1
1,000 or more ......................................... 2.0 1.7 1.4 3.9 3.7
Locale
City ......................................................... 2.5 2.2 2.4 3.8 2.7
Urban fringe ........................................... 2.3 2.8 2.0 3.2 2.5
Town....................................................... 2.4 2.8 4.2 7.4 5.9
Rural ....................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.2 3.1 2.6
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent................................. 3.1 3.5 3.0 4.4 3.4
6 to 20 percent ........................................ 2.7 2.8 2.7 4.7 3.7
21 to 49 percent ...................................... 2.1 3.3 3.7 4.1 3.9
50 percent or more.................................. 1.8 1.7 2.2 3.0 2.6
Percent of students eligible for free
or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent............................... 2.0 2.5 2.2 3.1 2.7
35 to 49 percent ...................................... 3.2 3.8 3.4 4.5 3.3
50 to 74 percent ...................................... 2.1 2.3 2.7 3.8 3.5
75 percent or more.................................. 2.3 2.2 2.9 4.1 3.2
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
52
This page intentionally left blank.
A-1
Appendix A
Technical Notes
A-2
This page intentionally left blank.
A-3
Technical Notes
The Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) was established in 1975 by the National Center
for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education. FRSS is designed to collect small
amounts of issue-oriented data with minimal burden on respondents and with a quick turnaround from
data collection to reporting.
Sample Selection
The sample of elementary and secondary schools for the “Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 2005” was selected from the 2003–04 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) Public
Elementary/Secondary School Universe File, the most up-to-date file available at the time the sample was
drawn. Over 98,000 schools are contained in the 2003–04 CCD Public Elementary/Secondary School
Universe File. For this survey, regular elementary and secondary/combined schools were selected.
Special education, vocational education, and alternative schools were excluded from the sampling frame,
along with schools with a highest grade below first grade and those outside the 50 states and the District
of Columbia. With these exclusions, the final sampling frame consisted of about 85,000 schools, of
which about 63,000 were classified as elementary schools and about 21,000 as secondary/combined
schools.1
A sample of 1,205 schools was selected from the public school frame. To select the sample,
the frame of schools was stratified by instructional level (elementary, secondary/combined schools),
enrollment size (less than 300 students, 300 to 499, 500 to 999, 1,000 to 1,499, 1,500 or more), and
percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (less than 35 percent, 35 to 49 percent, 50
to 74 percent, 75 percent or more). Schools in the highest poverty category (schools with 75 percent or
more students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch) were oversampled to permit analyses for that
category.
1 During data collection, a number of sampled schools were found to be outside the scope of the survey, usually because they were closed or
merged. This reduced the number of schools in the sampling frame to an estimated 82,482.
A-4
Respondents and Response Rates
The three-page survey instrument was designed by Westat and NCES to address most of the
issues examined in the 2003 survey on Internet access. These issues included access to the Internet in
instructional rooms, the types of Internet connections used, laptop loans, hand-held computers for
students and teachers, teacher professional development on how to integrate the use of the Internet into
the curriculum, technologies and procedures used to prevent student access to inappropriate material on
the Internet, and use of the Internet to provide opportunities and information for teaching and learning.
Questionnaires and cover letters were mailed to the principals of the 1,205 sampled schools
in early October 2005. The letter introduced the study and requested that the questionnaire be completed
by the technology coordinator or person most knowledgeable about Internet access at the school.
Respondents were offered the option of completing the survey via the Web or by mail. Telephone followup
for survey nonresponse and data clarification was initiated in November 2005, and data collection was
completed in March 2006. Thirty-four schools were outside the scope of the survey because they had
closed or merged with other schools, and 1,012 schools completed the survey. Of the schools that
completed the survey, 65 percent completed it by Web, 24 percent completed it by mail, 10 percent
completed it by fax, and less than 1 percent completed it by telephone. The unweighted and weighted
response rates were both 86 percent.
Imputation for Item Nonresponse
The weighted item nonresponse for questionnaire items was less than 1 percent. The
nonresponse rate for a particular item was calculated using the number of responses as the numerator and
the estimated number of eligible cases that should have responded to the item as the denominator.
Although item nonresponse for key items was very low, missing data were imputed for the 14 items listed
in table A-1. No imputation was done for school characteristic variables (e.g., percent minority
enrollment) that were created from CCD data. The missing items included both numerical data such as
counts of instructional rooms and computers, as well as categorical data such as the provision of handheld
computers to students. The missing data were imputed using a “hot-deck” approach to obtain a
“donor” school from which the imputed values were derived. Under the hot-deck approach, a donor
school that matched selected characteristics of the school with missing data was identified. The matching
characteristics included level, enrollment size class, type of locale, and total number of computers in the
school. Once a donor was found, it was used to derive the imputed values for the school with missing
A-5
Table A-1. Number of cases with imputed data in the study sample, and number of cases with
imputed data the sample represents, by questionnaire items: 2005
Questionnaire item
Respondent
sample
(unweighted)
National
estimate
(weighted)
3. Number of computers used for instructional purposes .................................................................. 1 45
11. Number of instructional rooms with wireless Internet connections.............................................. 2 213
12a. Use of the Internet to provide access for students to online distance learning for courses that
are otherwise unavailable at the school.......................................................................................... 1 54
12b. Use of the Internet to provide assessment results and data for teachers to use to
individualize instruction.................................................................................................................
1 54
12c. Use of the Internet to provide data to inform instructional planning at the school level .............. 1 54
12d. Use of the Internet to provide teacher professional development through online courses
taken at the school .......................................................................................................................... 1 54
12e. Use of the Internet to provide high quality digital content............................................................ 2 49
13. Use of technologies or procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet........................................................................................................................................... 3 133
14e. Use of written contract that parents have to sign to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet .................................................................................................................. 3 133
14f. Use of written contract that students have to sign to prevent student access to inappropriate
material on the Internet .................................................................................................................. 2 154
14g. Use of an honor code for students to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet........................................................................................................................................... 3 95
18. Percentage of teachers who attended professional development on how to integrate the use
of the Internet into the curriculum ................................................................................................. 3 95
21. Plans to make laptops available for students to borrow during the 2006-2007 school year ......... 4 180
23. Provision of hand-held computers to students for instructional purposes..................................... 1 25
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
data. For categorical items, the imputed value was simply the corresponding value from the donor school.
For numerical items, an appropriate ratio (e.g., the proportion of instructional rooms with wireless
Internet connections) was calculated for the donor school, and this ratio was applied to available data
(e.g., reported number of instructional rooms) for the recipient school to obtain the corresponding
imputed value. All missing items for a given school were imputed from the same donor.
Sampling and Nonsampling Errors
The survey responses were weighted to produce national estimates (table A-2). The weights
were designed to adjust for the variable probabilities of selection and differential nonresponse. The
findings in this report are based on the sample of schools selected and, consequently, are subject to
sampling variability. The standard error is the measure of the variability of estimates due to sampling. It
indicates the variability of a sample estimate that would be obtained from all possible samples of a given
design and size. Standard errors are used as a measure of the precision expected from a particular sample.
A-6
If all possible samples were surveyed under similar conditions, intervals of 1.96 standard errors below to
1.96 standard errors above a particular statistic would include the true population parameter being
estimated in about 95 percent of the samples. This is a 95 percent confidence interval. For example, the
estimated percentage of instructional rooms with Internet access in 2005 is 94 percent, and the estimated
standard error is 1.3 percent. The 95 percent confidence interval for the statistic extends from 94 – (1.3 x
1.96) to 94 + (1.3 x 1.96), or from 91 to 97 percent. The coefficient of variation (“c.v.,” also referred to
as the “relative standard error”) expresses the standard error as a percentage of the quantity being
estimated. The c.v. of an estimate (y) is defined as c.v. = (s.e./y) x 100. Throughout this report, for any
coefficient of variation higher than 50 percent, the data are flagged with the note that they should be
interpreted with caution, as the value of the estimate may be unstable.
Table A-2. Number and percentage of responding public schools in the study sample,
and estimated number and percentage of public schools the sample represents,
by school characteristics: 2005
Respondent sample (unweighted) National estimate (weighted)
School characteristic
Number Percent Number Percent
All public schools................................................................... 1,012 100 82,482 100
Instructional level
Elementary................................................................................ 489 48 61,923 75
Secondary ................................................................................. 489 48 18,912 23
School size
Less than 300............................................................................ 187 18 20,959 25
300 to 999 ................................................................................. 575 57 53,423 65
1,000 or more............................................................................ 250 25 8,100 10
Locale
City ........................................................................................... 257 25 19,325 23
Urban fringe.............................................................................. 339 34 27,637 34
Town......................................................................................... 101 10 7,920 10
Rural ......................................................................................... 315 31 27,600 33
Percent minority enrollment
Less than 6 percent ................................................................... 204 21 18,575 23
6 to 20 percent .......................................................................... 245 25 21,043 26
21 to 49 percent ........................................................................ 203 20 16,702 21
50 percent or more.................................................................... 340 34 24,192 30
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch
Less than 35 percent ................................................................. 395 39 32,281 39
35 to 49 percent ........................................................................ 166 16 14,348 17
50 to 74 percent ........................................................................ 217 21 18,289 22
75 percent or more.................................................................... 234 23 17,565 21
NOTE: Percent minority enrollment was not available for 20 schools. Thirty-four schools were combined schools and therefore are missing in
the instructional level counts used here, but those cases were included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics. Detail may not
sum to totals because of rounding or missing data.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.
Public Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.
A-7
Differences between two estimates can be examined by comparing the confidence intervals
around the two estimates. If the confidence intervals overlap, then differences in the estimates are likely
due to sampling variability rather than any real differences in values. In instances where a survey
estimate is 100 percent, there is no measured variability around the estimate, and therefore no standard
error or confidence interval can be computed. However, for these estimates of 100 percent, the event
(e.g., whether the school has access to the Internet) could have been reported by fewer schools had a
different sample been selected. When comparing the estimate of 100 percent to another estimate, a
confidence interval around the other estimate that includes the 100 percent indicates that the difference in
the two estimates is likely due to sampling variability.
For example, the percentage of public schools with access to the Internet located in cities
(see tables 1 and 1a) was estimated to be 100 percent in 2003 (with no standard error), and 99.4 percent
(which rounds to 99 percent for presentation in the table) in 2005 (with a standard error of 0.6). The 95
percent confidence interval around the 2005 estimate of 99 percent extends from 98.2 percent to greater
than 100 percent. Thus, the confidence intervals for the 2003 estimate of 100 percent and the 2005
estimate of 99 percent overlap, and the decrease from 2003 to 2005 can be attributed with a high level of
confidence to sampling variability.
Because the data from this survey were collected using a complex sampling design, the
sampling errors of the estimates from this survey (e.g., estimates of proportions) are typically larger than
would be expected based on a simple random sample. Not taking the complex sample design into account
can lead to an underestimation of the standard errors associated with such estimates. To generate accurate
standard errors for the estimates in this report, standard errors were computed using a technique known as
jackknife replication. As with any replication method, jackknife replication involves constructing a
number of subsamples (replicates) from the full sample and computing the statistic of interest for each
replicate. The mean square error of the replicate estimates around the full sample estimate provides an
estimate of the variance of the statistic. To construct the replications, 50 stratified subsamples of the full
sample were created and then dropped one at a time to define 50 jackknife replicates. A computer
program (WesVar) was used to calculate the estimates of standard errors. WesVar is a stand-alone
Windows application that computes sampling errors from complex samples for a wide variety of statistics
(totals, percents, ratios, log-odds ratios, general functions of estimates in tables, linear regression
parameters, and logistic regression parameters).
The test statistics used in the analysis were calculated using the jackknife variances and thus
appropriately reflect the complex nature of the sample design. In particular, Bonferroni adjustments were
made to control for multiple comparisons where appropriate. For example, for an “experiment-wise”
A-8
comparison involving g pairwise comparisons, each difference was tested at the 0.05/g significance level
to control for the fact that g differences were simultaneously tested. The Bonferroni adjustment was also
used for previous FRSS Internet reports and is used here to maintain continuity with prior reporting. The
Bonferroni adjustment results in a more conservative critical value for judging statistical significance.
This means that comparisons that would have been significant with a critical value of 1.96 may not be
significant with the more conservative critical value. For example, the critical value for comparisons
between any two of the four categories of poverty concentration is 2.64 rather than 1.96.
The survey estimates are also subject to nonsampling errors that can arise because of
nonobservation (nonresponse or noncoverage) errors, errors of reporting, and errors made in collection of
the data. These errors can sometimes bias the data. Nonsampling errors may include such problems as
the difference in the respondents’ interpretation of the meaning of the question; memory effects;
misrecording of responses; incorrect editing, coding, or data entry; differences related to the particular
time the survey was conducted; or errors in data preparation. While general sampling theory can be used
in part to determine how to estimate the sampling variability of a statistic, nonsampling errors are not easy
to measure and, for measurement purposes, usually require that an experiment be conducted as part of the
data collection procedures or that data external to the study be used. To minimize the potential for
nonsampling errors, the questionnaire on Internet access in public schools was pretested in 1994, and
again each time it was substantially modified. The full questionnaire was last pretested for the fall 2001
survey, since a few new topics were introduced in the survey. Several items added to or modified in the
2005 survey were also pretested. The pretesting was done with public school technology coordinators and
other knowledgeable respondents like those who would complete the survey. During the design of the
survey, an effort was made to check for consistency of interpretation of questions and to eliminate
ambiguous items. The questionnaire and instructions were intensively reviewed by NCES.
Manual and machine editing of the questionnaire responses were conducted to check the data
for accuracy and consistency. Cases with missing or inconsistent items were recontacted by telephone to
resolve problems. Data were keyed with 100 percent verification for surveys received by mail, fax, or
telephone.
A-9
Definitions of Terms Used in the Questionnaire
Types of Internet connections
T3/DS3—Dedicated digital transmission of data and voice at the speed of 45 MB per second;
composed of 672 channels.
Fractional T3—One or more channels of a T3/DS3 line. Used for data and voice transmission at
the speed of less than 45 MB per second.
T1/DS1—Dedicated digital transmission of data and voice at the speed of 1.5 MB per second;
composed of 24 channels.
Fractional T1—One or more channels of a T1/DS1 line. Used for data and voice transmission at
the speed of less than 1.5 MB per second.
Cable modem—Dedicated transmission of data through cable TV wires at a speed of up to 2 MB
per second.
DSL (Digital Subscriber Line)—Refers collectively to ADSL, SDSL, HDSL, and SDSL. DSLs
have a dedicated digital transmission speed of up to 32 MB per second.
ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network)—Sends voice and data over digital telephone lines
or normal telephone wires at the speed of up to 128 KB per second.
56 KB—Dedicated digital transmission of data at the speed of 56 KB per second.
Dial-up connection—Data transmission through a normal telephone line upon command, at the
maximum speed of 56 KB per second (for example, AOL or Earthlink).
Types of technologies to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet
Blocking software—Uses a list of websites that are considered inappropriate and prevents access
to those sites.
Filtering software—Blocks access to sites containing keywords, alone or in context with other
keywords.
Monitoring software—Records e-mails, instant messages, chats, and the websites visited.
Intranet—Controlled computer network similar to the Internet, but accessible only to those who
have permission to use it. Intranet system managers can limit user access to Internet material.
Definitions of Analysis Variables
Instructional level—Schools were classified according to their grade span in the 2003–04 Common Core
of Data (CCD) Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe File. Data for combined schools are
included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics, but are not shown separately. Thus,
data are reported for the following categories:
Elementary school—Had grade 6 or lower and no grade higher than grade 8.
Secondary school—Had no grade lower than grade 7 and had grade 7 or higher.
A-10
School size—This variable indicates the total enrollment of students based on data from the 2003–04
CCD Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe File. For sampling purposes, schools were grouped
into five enrollment size classes—less than 300 students, 300 to 499, 500 to 999, 1,000 to 1,499, 1,500 or
more. Use of the more detailed size categories ensures greater diversity of schools in the sample with
respect to size, and permits a more nearly optimal allocation of the sample for estimating school-level
characteristics that are correlated with enrollment. Because of the relatively small sample size and large
standard errors associated with small cell sizes, the following three combined categories were used for
analysis purposes:
Less than 300 students
300 to 999 students
1,000 or more students
Locale—This variable indicates the type of community in which the school is located, as defined in the
2003–04 CCD Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe File (which uses definitions based on U.S.
Census Bureau classifications). The variable was based on the eight-category locale variable from CCD
and collapsed into the following four categories for this report.
City—A central city of a Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA) or Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA).
Urban fringe—Any incorporated place, Census-designated place, or non-place territory within a
CMSA or MSA of a large or mid-size city and defined as urban by the Census Bureau.
Town—An incorporated place or Census-designated place with a population greater than or equal
to 2,500 and located outside a CMSA or MSA.
Rural—Any incorporated place, Census-designated place, or non-place territory designated as rural
by the Census Bureau.
Percent minority enrollment—This variable indicates the percent of students enrolled in the school
whose race or ethnicity is classified as one of the following: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or
Pacific Islander; Black, non-Hispanic; or Hispanic, based on data in the 2003–04 CCD Public
Elementary/Secondary School Universe File. The categories are:
Less than 6 percent
6 to 20 percent
21 to 49 percent
50 percent or more
Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch—This variable was based on responses to
question 25 on the survey questionnaire; if it was missing from the questionnaire (2.0 percent of all
cases), it was obtained from the 2003–04 CCD Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe File. This
item served as a measurement of the concentration of poverty at the school. The categories are:
Less than 35 percent
35 to 49 percent
50 to 74 percent
75 percent or more
A-11
It is important to note that many of the school characteristics used for independent analysis
may also be related to each other. For example, school size and locale are related, with city schools
typically being larger than rural schools. Similarly, poverty concentration and minority enrollment are
related, with schools with a higher minority enrollment also more likely to have a higher concentration of
poverty. Other relationships between analysis variables may exist. However, this report focuses on
bivariate relationships between the analysis variables and questionnaire variables rather than more
complex analyses.
For more information about the survey, contact Bernie Greene, Early Childhood,
International, and Crosscutting Studies Division, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of
Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006; e-mail:
Bernard.Greene@ed.gov; telephone: (202) 502-7348.
A-12
This page intentionally left blank.
B-1
Appendix B
Questionnaire
B-2
This page intentionally left blank.
B-3
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FORM APPROVED
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS O.M.B. NO.: 1850-0733
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5651 EXPIRATION DATE: 09/2006
INTERNET ACCESS IN U.S. PUBLIC SCHOOLS, FALL 2005
FAST RESPONSE SURVEY SYSTEM
This survey is authorized by law (P.L. 103-382). While you are not required to respond, your cooperation is needed to make the results of
this survey comprehensive, accurate, and timely.
IF ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE MAKE CORRECTIONS DIRECTLY ON LABEL.
Name of person completing form:______________________________________ Telephone: ________________________
Title/position: _________________________________________________________________________________________
Best days and times to reach you (in case of questions): _______________________________________________________
E-mail:______________________________________________________________________________________________
THANK YOU. PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS SURVEY FOR YOUR RECORDS.
PLEASE RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CONTACT:
WESTAT John Wells
Attention: 8096.06.03 – John Wells 800-937-8281, ext. 2663
1650 Research Boulevard Fax: 800-254-0984
Rockville, Maryland 20850 E-mail: johnwells@westat.com
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid
OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information is 1850-0733. The time required to complete this information collection
is estimated to average 20 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data
needed, and complete and review the information collected. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or
suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202-4651. If you have comments or
concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to: National Center for Education Statistics, 1990 K Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006
FRSS Form No. 90, 10/2005
B-4
1. What is the total number of instructional rooms in your school? (Include all rooms used for any instructional
purposes: classrooms, computer labs and other labs, library/media centers, art rooms, rooms used for vocational or
special education, etc.) __________ instructional rooms
2. How many computers are there in your school? (Do not include laptop computers available for loan. Count all other
computers, including those used by administrators, teachers, and students. If none, please enter “0” and skip to
question 19.) ___________ computers
3. How many of the computers indicated in question 2 are used for instructional purposes? (Do not include computers
used only for administrative purposes. If none, please enter “0.”) ___________ instructional computers
4. Does your school have access to the Internet?
Yes............ 1 (Continue with question 5.) No.............. 2 (Skip to question 19.)
5. How many computers in your school currently have Internet access? (Do not include laptop computers available for
loan. Include all other instructional and noninstructional computers. This number should not exceed the number
reported in question 2. If none, please enter “0” and skip to question 19.) _________ computers
6. How many of the computers with Internet access indicated in question 5 are used for instructional purposes? (This
number should not exceed the number reported in question 5. If none, please enter “0.”)
_________ instructional computers
7. What type(s) of connections does your school use when connecting to the Internet? (See definition box below.
Circle one on each line.)
Yes No
a. Broadband connections (e.g.,T3/DS3, fractional T3, T1/DS1, fractional T1, cable
modem, and/or DSL)........................................................................................ 1 2
b. Narrowband connections (e.g., ISDN, 56KB, and/or dial-up connection) ....... 1 2
Definitions for question 7 and question 10
T3/DS3 – dedicated digital transmission of data and voice at the speed of 45 MB per second; composed of 672 channels.
Fractional T3 – one or more channels of a T3/DS3 line; used for data and voice transmission at the speed of less than 45 MB
per second.
T1/DS1 – dedicated digital transmission of data and voice at the speed of 1.5 MB per second; composed of 24 channels.
Fractional T1 – one or more channels of a T1/DS1 line; used for data and voice transmission at the speed of less than 1.5
MB per second.
Cable modem – dedicated transmission of data through cable TV wires at a speed of up to 2 MB per second.
DSL (Digital Subscriber Line) – refers collectively to ADSL, SDSL, HDSL, and VDSL. DSLs have a dedicated digital
transmission speed of up to 32 MB per second.
ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) – sends voice and data over digital telephone lines or normal telephone wires at
the speed of up to 128 KB per second.
56 KB – dedicated digital transmission of data at the speed of 56 KB per second.
Dial-up connection – data transmission through a normal telephone line upon command, at the maximum speed of 56 KB
per second (for example, AOL or Earthlink).
8. How many instructional rooms have a computer with Internet access? (This number should not exceed the number
reported in question 1. If none, please enter “0.”) ________ instructional rooms
9. Does your school use wireless connections when connecting to the Internet?
Yes............ 1 (Continue with question 10.) No.............. 2 (Skip to question 12.)
10. What type(s) of wireless connections does your school use when connecting to the Internet? (Circle one on each line.)
Yes No
a. Broadband connections (e.g.,T3/DS3, fractional T3, T1/DS1, fractional T1, cable
modem, and/or DSL)................................................................................................ 1 2
b. Narrowband connections (e.g., ISDN, 56KB, and/or dial-up connection) ............... 1 2
B-5
11. How many instructional rooms use wireless connections when connecting to the Internet? (This number should
not exceed the number reported in question 1. If none, please enter “0.”) ___________ instructional rooms
12. Does your school use its Internet access to provide the following for teaching and learning? (Circle one on each line.)
Yes No
a. Access for students to online distance learning for courses that are otherwise
unavailable at the school ......................................................................................... 1 2
b. Assessment results and data for teachers to use to individualize instruction ......... 1 2
c. Data to inform instructional planning at the school level ......................................... 1 2
d. Teacher professional development through online courses taken at the school..... 1 2
e. High quality digital content (i.e., learning materials brought in from the web, such
as digital libraries and museums, or any text, images, sounds, and video that
have been digitized)................................................................................................. 1 2
13. Does your school use any technology or other procedure to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet?
Yes............ 1 (Continue with question 14.) No.............. 2 (Skip to question 17.)
14. What technologies or procedures does your school use to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the
Internet? (See definition box below. Circle one on each line.)
Yes No
a. Blocking/filtering software ........................................................................................ 1 2
b. Monitoring software.................................................................................................. 1 2
c. Intranet..................................................................................................................... 1 2
d. Monitoring by teachers or other staff ....................................................................... 1 2
e. Written contract that parents have to sign ............................................................... 1 2
f. Written contract that students have to sign ............................................................. 1 2
g. Honor code for students .......................................................................................... 1 2
h. Other (specify) ____________________________________________________ 1 2
Definitions for question 14
Blocking software – uses a list of Web sites that are considered inappropriate and prevents access to those sites.
Filtering software – blocks access to sites containing keywords, alone or in context with other keywords.
Monitoring software – records e-mails, instant messages, chats, and Web sites visited.
Intranet – controlled computer network similar to the Internet, but accessible only to those who have permission to use it.
Intranet system managers can limit user access to Internet material.
15. Does your school use these technologies or other procedures to prevent student access to inappropriate material on
all computers with Internet access used by students?
Yes............ 1 No.............. 2
16. What method(s) does your school use to disseminate information to students and parents about the technologies or
other procedures used to prevent student access to inappropriate material on the Internet at your school? (Circle one
on each line.)
Yes No
a. Notice on bulletin board at school.......................................................................... 1 2
b. Newsletters ............................................................................................................ 1 2
c. Special notice to parents ....................................................................................... 1 2
d. Part of school policy/rules distributed to students and parents ............................ 1 2
e. Pop-up message at computer or Internet log on ............................................. ..... 1 2
f. Posted message on the school Web site or Web page......................................... 1 2
g. Other (specify) ____________________________________________________ 1 2
B-6
17. In the past 12 months, has your school or district offered professional development for teachers in your school on how
to integrate the use of the Internet into the curriculum?
Yes............ 1 (Continue with question 18.) No.............. 2 (Skip to question 19.)
18. In the past 12 months, what percentage of teachers in your school attended professional development on how to
integrate the use of the Internet into the curriculum? (Circle only one.)
0 percent ............................................................................................................... 1
1 to 25 percent ...................................................................................................... 2
26 to 50 percent .................................................................................................... 3
51 to 75 percent .................................................................................................... 4
76 to 100 percent.................................................................................................. 5
19. Does your school lend laptop computers to students?
Yes............ 1 (Continue with question 20.) No.............. 2 (Skip to question 21.)
20. What is the longest time for which a student may borrow a laptop? (Circle only one.)
Less than 1 week.................................................................................................. 1
1 week to less than 1 month ................................................................................. 2
1 month to less than 3 months.............................................................................. 3
3 months to less than 6 months............................................................................ 4
6 months to less than the entire school year ........................................................ 5
The entire school year .......................................................................................... 6
Other (specify) __________________________________________________ 7
21. Does your school plan to make laptops available for students to borrow during the 2006–07 school year?
Yes............ 1 No.............. 2
22. Does your school provide any hand-held computers to teachers for instructional purposes? (Examples of hand-held
computers are personal digital assistants such as Palm Pilots or Pocket PCs. Include all hand-held computers
provided for instructional purposes, including those available for loan. Do not include laptop computers.)
Yes............ 1 No.............. 2
23. Does your school provide any hand-held computers to students for instructional purposes? (Examples of hand-held
computers are personal digital assistants such as Palm Pilots or Pocket PCs. Include all hand-held computers
provided for instructional purposes, including those available for loan. Do not include laptop computers.)
Yes............ 1 No.............. 2
24. Which of the following grades are taught at your school? (Circle all that apply.)
PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Ungraded
25. What percent of the students in your school are eligible for the federally funded free or reduced-price lunch program?
_________% (If none, enter “0”.)
THANK YOU. PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS SURVEY FOR YOUR RECORDS.


#

tags