Teachers’ Use of Technology for 

School and Homework Assignments: 

2018–19

First Look

A Publication of the National Center for Education Statistics at IES

Fast Response 

Survey System

NCES 2020-048

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Teachers’ Use of Technology for 

School and Homework Assignments: 

2018–19 

First Look 

MAY 2020 

Lucinda Gray

Laurie Lewis

Westat

Christopher Chapman

Associate Commissioner

National Center for Education Statistics

NCES 2020-048

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
U.S. Department of Education

Betsy DeVos

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences

Mark Schneider

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

James L. Woodworth

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. Unless specifically noted, all information contained herein is in the public domain.

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

NCES, IES, U.S. Department of Education

Potomac Center Plaza (PCP)

550 12th Street SW

Washington, DC 20202

May 2020

The NCES Home Page address is http://nces.ed.gov. 

The NCES Publications and Products address is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 

This publication is only available online. To download, view, and print the report as a PDF file, go to the NCES 

Publications and Products address shown above.

This report was prepared for the National Center for Education Statistics under Contract No. ED-IES-13-D-0005

with Westat. Mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Suggested Citation

Gray, L., and Lewis, L. (2020). Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments: 2018–19

(NCES 2020-048). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Retrieved [date] from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020048. 

Content Contact

Christopher Chapman

(202) 245-7103

chris.chapman@ed.gov
Acknowledgments

The authors would like to recognize the public school teachers who provided data on their use of technology 

for school and homework assignments upon which the report is based. We would also like to recognize the 

public schools and districts that provided the information needed to select a national sample of teachers for the 

study.

iii
Contents 

Page

Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ v 

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 

Selected Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 3 

Appendix A: Standard Error Tables ..................................................................................................... A-1 

Appendix B: Technical Notes .............................................................................................................. B-1 

Appendix C: Questionnaire .................................................................................................................. C-1 

iv
List of Tables

Table Page 

1. Percent of public school teachers reporting on various types of access to 

computers and/or the Internet provided to their students by the district or school, 

by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................................... 5 

2. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on their level of 

knowledge about their students’ access to computers and the Internet at home, 

and percent of teachers reporting on the source(s) of that information, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................................................... 6 

3. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to 

which their students use various locations for computer and/or Internet access to 

work on school assignments, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 ..................... 7 

4. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated 

percentage of their students who have access to a computer at home, the 

availability of those computers for students to use for school assignments, and 

the likelihood that those computers have reliable Internet access from home, 

by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................................... 9 

5. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated 

percentage of their students who have access to a smartphone at home, the 

usefulness of those smartphones for completing school assignments, availability 

of those smartphones for school assignments, and the likelihood that those 

smartphones have reliable Internet access from home, by school characteristics: 

School year 2018–19 ........................................................................................................... 10 

6. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the amount of 

influence that their students’ access to technology and the Internet outside of 

school has on the homework they assign, the frequency they assign any type of 

homework, and the frequency they assign technology-based homework, 

by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................................. 12 

7. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to 

which their students have difficulty completing technology-based homework 

because the students are not familiar with how to use technology, and how 

prepared their students are to use the technology required for online or 

computerized assessments given by the state, district, or school, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................................................. 13 

8. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the extent to which 

they provide various types of assistance for doing technology-based homework 

to students who have limited access to technology and the Internet outside of 

school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 ..................................................... 14 

v 
Appendix A

Table Page 

A-1. Standard errors for table 1: Percent of public school teachers reporting on various 

types of access to computers and/or the Internet provided to their students by the 

district or school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................. A-1 

A-2. Standard errors for table 2: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting on their level of knowledge about their students’ access to computers 

and the Internet at home, and percent of teachers reporting on the source(s) of that 

information, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .......................................... A-2 

A-3. Standard errors for table 3: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting on the extent to which their students use various locations for computer 

and/or Internet access to work on school assignments, by school characteristics: 

School year 2018–19 ........................................................................................................ A-3 

A-4. Standard errors for table 4: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting the estimated percentage of their students who have access to a 

computer at home, the availability of those computers for students to use for 

school assignments, and the likelihood that those computers have reliable Internet 

access from home, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 ................................ A-5 

A-5. Standard errors for table 5: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting the estimated percentage of their students who have access to a 

smartphone at home, the usefulness of those smartphones for completing school 

assignments, availability of those smartphones for school assignments, and the 

likelihood that those smartphones have reliable Internet access from home, by 

school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................................... A-6 

A-6. Standard errors for table 6: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting on the amount of influence that their students’ access to technology and 

the Internet outside of school has on the homework they assign, the frequency 

they assign any type of homework, and the frequency they assign technologybased homework, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................. A-8 

A-7. Standard errors for table 7: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting on the extent to which their students have difficulty completing 

technology-based homework because the students are not familiar with how to use 

technology, and how prepared their students are to use the technology required for 

online or computerized assessments given by the state, district, or school, 

by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 ............................................................... A-9 

A-8. Standard errors for table 8: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting the extent to which they provide various types of assistance for doing 

technology-based homework to students who have limited access to technology 

and the Internet outside of school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 ...... A-10 

Appendix B 

B-1. Number and percentage of responding public school teachers in the study sample, 

and estimated number and percentage of public school teachers the sample 

represents, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 .................................................. B-3

vi
Introduction 

This report is based on the 2018–19 survey “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework 

Assignments.” This survey was conducted in response to a request from Congress about the educational impact 

of students’ access outside the classroom to digital learning resources, such as computers and the Internet. The 

survey responds to the congressional request by collecting data such as the location and types of devices and 

technologies that students use for educational purposes, the impact that students’ access to technology outside 

of school has on teachers’ homework assignments, and ways that schools and teachers address challenges that 

students with limited access to technology face in completing homework assignments. It focuses on 

information that can best be provided by teachers from their perspective and direct interaction with students. 

The survey provides nationally representative data of public school teachers who taught at least one regularly 

scheduled class in grades 3–12 and taught either self-contained classes or departmentalized classes in one or 

more of the core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science.1 Teachers 

were asked to respond about the students they were teaching during the 2018–19 school year. Computers were 

defined to include desktop and laptop computers, as well as tablets with a virtual or physical keyboard. 

Smartphones were not included in the definition of computers, but separate information was collected for 

smartphones. 

The report presents information about various ways that teachers’ students can access school computers and 

the Internet outside of class time. It also presents data on methods teachers use to find out about their students’ 

access to computers and the Internet at home and how knowledgeable they consider themselves about this 

access. Teachers’ estimates of the extent to which their students access computers and/or the Internet in 

various locations outside of school to work on school assignments are reported. The report includes 

information on the access and availability of computers, smartphones, and the Internet to students at home. 

Data are presented on the extent that teachers’ homework assignments are influenced by their students’ access 

to technology and the Internet outside of school. The report includes information on ways that teachers provide 

assistance to their students who have limited access to technology and the Internet outside of school. It also 

provides information on the extent to which students have difficulty completing technology-based homework 

and how prepared students are to use the technology required for online or computerized assessments given by 

the state, district, or school. 

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in the Institute of Education Sciences, conducted this 

survey during the 2018–19 school year using the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). FRSS is a survey 

system designed to collect small amounts of issue-oriented data from a nationally representative sample of 

districts, schools, or teachers with minimal burden on respondents and within a relatively short period of time. 

The survey included a sample of 2,000 public schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia for which 

sampling lists of eligible teachers were sought. Questionnaires were mailed to about 4,320 teachers selected 

from the sampling lists. Teachers were offered options of completing the survey on paper or online. 

The base-weighted list collection response rate was 86 percent. The base-weighted teacher response rate was

75 percent. This results in an overall response rate of 64 percent.2

 The survey weights were adjusted for list 

collection and questionnaire nonresponse, and the data were then weighted to yield national estimates that 

represent all eligible teachers in regular public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. Tables 

of standard error estimates are provided in appendix A. The results of a nonresponse bias analysis conducted 

for the survey, along with additional details about the survey methodology, response rates, and data reliability, 

 

1 Self-contained classes were defined as teaching multiple subjects to the same class of students all or most of the day, and departmentalized 

classes were defined as teaching the same subject to multiple classes of students. Teachers who taught only special education, bilingual 

education, or English as a Second Language (ESL) were excluded. 2 The weighted list collection response rate was calculated using the initial school base weight. The weighted teacher response rate was calculated 

using a teacher base weight that was the product of the (nonresponse-adjusted) school weight and the reciprocal of the probability of selecting the 

teacher within the school. The overall weighted response rate was calculated as the product of the weighted list collection and weighted teacher 

response rates.

1 
are presented in appendix B. Appendix B also includes definitions of the analysis variables (i.e., school 

characteristics) used in the report. The questionnaire is located in appendix C. 

Because the purpose of this report is to introduce new NCES data from the survey through tables containing 

descriptive information, only selected national findings are presented. These findings have been chosen to 

demonstrate the range of information available from the FRSS study rather than to discuss all of the data 

collected; they are not meant to emphasize any particular issue. Readers are cautioned not to make causal 

inferences about the data presented here. The findings are based on self-reported data from public school 

teachers. Many of the variables examined are related to one another, and complex interactions and 

relationships have not been explored. All results have been weighted to reflect the sample design and to 

account for nonresponse. Comparisons drawn in the selected findings have been tested for statistical 

significance at the .05 level using Student’s t statistics to ensure that the differences are larger than those that 

might be expected due to sampling variation. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.

2 
Selected Findings

This section presents selected findings based on public school teachers’ survey responses on their use of 

technology for school and homework assignments in grades 3–12 during the 2018–19 school year.

• Twenty-six percent of teachers reported that their students have district- or school-provided computers for 

students to take home on a long-term basis during the school year (table 1). However, of these teachers, 

40 percent reported that some of their students are not able to take these computers home. 

• Thirty-six percent of teachers reported that the school has an additional academic period when their 

students can use school computers and the Internet for homework or assignments from other classes, and 

8 percent reported that the district or school provides mobile hotspots for students to take home (table 1). 

• Of the 74 percent of teachers whose students do not have district- or school-provided computers to take 

home, 81 percent reported that students can access school computers outside of class time, and 8 percent 

reported that students can borrow computers to take home on a short-term basis (table 1).

• Among the 74 percent of teachers whose students do not have a district- or school-provided computer to 

take home, 21 percent reported being very knowledgeable and 50 percent reported being somewhat 

knowledgeable about their students’ access to computers at home (table 2). Among all teachers, 23 percent 

reported being very knowledgeable and 51 percent reported being somewhat knowledgeable about their 

students’ access to the Internet at home.

• Teachers reported that they find out about their students’ access to computers and the Internet at home in 

the following ways: do a survey of all students or parents (51 percent), talk to students or parents 

individually (84 percent), and develop a sense while working with students (90 percent; table 2). 

• Teachers estimated that many of their students access computers or the Internet to work on school 

assignments in their own homes (60 percent large extent and 27 percent moderate extent), and in the homes 

of relatives, friends, or neighbors (11 percent large extent and 43 percent moderate extent; table 3). 

Teachers estimated that various public and commercial locations are used to a large or moderate extent by 

smaller percentages of their students (from 1 percent to 10 percent). 

• Teachers estimated the percentage of their students who have access to a computer at home, including 

district- or school-provided computers for students who take them home. About two-thirds of teachers 

estimated that 75 percent or more of their students have access to a computer at home. This is composed of 

the 30 percent of teachers who estimated that almost all (95–100 percent) of their students have computer 

access at home, the 12 percent of teachers who estimated 90–94 percent of students, and the 22 percent of 

teachers who estimated 75–89 percent of students have computer access at home (table 4).

• While computers and Internet service might exist in students’ households, computer availability for 

homework and the reliability of computer connections to the Internet can vary considerably. About a third 

(35 percent) of teachers estimated that their students’ home computers were very available for school 

assignments (table 4). Twenty-nine percent of teachers thought it very likely that their students’ home 

computers had reliable Internet access. 

• Teachers estimated the percentage of their students with access to a smartphone at home. About one-third 

(34 percent) of teachers estimated that 95–100 percent of their students have access to a smartphone at 

home and three-quarters of teachers estimated that 80 percent or more of their students have access to a 

smartphone at home (table 5). Twelve percent of teachers thought smartphones were very useful and 

32 percent thought they were somewhat useful for school assignments. 

• About half of the teachers reported that their students’ access to technology and the Internet outside of 

school has a moderate (28 percent) or large (20 percent) influence on the homework they assign to them 

(table 6). 

3 
• About a fifth (19 percent) of teachers reported that they often assign technology-based homework and an 

additional 28 percent reported doing so sometimes (table 6). The 77 percent of teachers who assign 

technology-based homework, at least rarely, were asked the extent that their students have difficulty 

completing this type of homework because they are not familiar with how to use technology. Most reported 

not at all (34 percent) or small extent (52 percent; table 7).

• Among the 98 percent of teachers whose students are given online or computerized assessments by the 

state, district, or school, 44 percent reported that their students were very prepared and 39 percent reported 

students to be somewhat prepared to use the technology required for these assessments (table 7). 

• Teachers who assigned technology-based homework reported the extent to which they provided various 

types of assistance for doing technology-based homework to students who have limited access to 

technology and the Internet outside of school. About three-fourths reported that they do the following to a 

large or moderate extent: provide hardcopy homework assignments (53 percent large extent and 23 percent 

moderate extent) and/or give time in class to use school technology for homework (50 percent large extent 

and 26 percent moderate extent; table 8).

4 
Table 1. Percent of public school teachers reporting on various types of access to computers and/or the Internet provided to their 

students by the district or school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

All teachers Teachers whose

students take home a 

district- or schoolprovided computer

who have some

students not able to

take computer home1

Teachers whose students do not have a districtor school-provided computer to take home2

School has additional

academic period when

students can use

computers and Internet

for homework

District or 

school provides 

mobile hotspots 

students take home

Students take home a

district- or schoolprovided computer 

on long-term basis

Students can 

borrow school 

computers to 

take home on 

short-term basis

Students can access 

school computers 

outside of class time 

(e.g., before or after 

school, at lunch, in 

special periods)

All teachers 36 8 26 40 8 81

Instructional level3

Primary school 23 6 9 49 4 69

Middle school 43 9 30 48 7 87

High school 45 11 42 32 15 96

Other school 48 ‡ 20 48 9 ! 86

Enrollment size

Less than 300 49 5 ! 23 59 13 83

300 to 499 29 6 ! 20 44 5 76

500 to 999 34 7 22 47 6 76

1,000 or more 40 12 36 28 12 93

Community type

City 31 7 19 38 7 81

Suburban 34 11 31 33 9 79

Town 46 4 ! 29 54 7 85

Rural 44 7 26 49 9 83

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent4 42 9 35 32 9 84

35 to 49 percent 41 6 29 45 11 81

50 to 74 percent 28 9 21 44 6 80

75 percent or more 32 7 14 54 6 78

Students take home school computers

Yes 49 18 100 40 † † 

No 32 5 † † 8 81

† Not applicable.

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater.

1 Based on the 26 percent of teachers who reported that their students have a district- or school-provided computer that the student takes home on a long-term basis during the school year. 2 Based on the 74 percent of teachers who reported that their students do not have a district- or school-provided computer that the student takes home on a long-term basis during the school year. 3 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools.

4 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the 

core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.

5 
Table 2. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on their level of knowledge about their students’ access to 

computers and the Internet at home, and percent of teachers reporting on the source(s) of that information, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Among teachers whose students do not take home 

school- or district-provided computers, teachers’

knowledge of students’ access to home computers1

All teachers’ knowledge of students’ 

access to Internet at home

Sources of information about 

students’ access at home

Very 

knowledgeable

Somewhat 

knowledgeable

Slightly 

knowledgeable

Not 

knowledgeable

Very 

knowledgeable

Somewhat 

knowledgeable

Slightly 

knowledgeable

Not 

knowledgeable

Survey all 

students or 

parents 

Talk to 

students or 

parents individually 

Develop a 

sense while 

working 

with 

students Other2

All teachers 21 50 22 8 23 51 19 7 51 84 90 2 

Instructional level3

Primary school 22 49 22 7 23 51 20 7 54 86 89 2 

Middle school 23 52 19 6 25 51 18 6 54 85 89 2 

High school 17 49 24 10 21 51 19 8 47 82 90 2 

Other school 25 47 21 7 ! 24 53 19 4 ! 42 85 92 ‡ 

Enrollment size

Less than 300 17 53 21 9 18 55 19 8 42 80 91 ‡

300 to 499 16 51 26 7 21 50 23 5 54 86 89 2 !

500 to 999 25 48 19 8 25 50 18 7 52 86 91 2 

1,000 or more 20 51 22 7 23 52 18 7 51 82 88 2 

Community type

City 21 50 22 8 23 51 18 8 51 87 88 2 

Suburban 24 52 19 5 26 52 17 5 56 84 91 2 

Town 15 44 28 12 18 47 26 9 42 84 88 1 !

Rural 18 50 23 9 20 51 21 7 49 82 90 1 ! 

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent4 25 50 19 7 26 51 17 7 49 82 91 2 

35 to 49 percent 20 50 23 7 21 53 20 6 53 85 90 2 

50 to 74 percent 17 47 26 10 20 48 25 7 49 86 88 1 ! 

75 percent or more 21 53 19 6 24 54 15 7 56 86 89 1 ! 

Students take home school computers

Yes † † † † 25 53 16 5 52 82 89 2 

No 21 50 22 8 22 50 20 7 51 85 90 2 

† Not applicable.

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater. 1 Based on the 74 percent of teachers who reported that the students they teach do not have a district- or school-provided computer that the student takes home. 2 Examples of “other” responses include monitoring student use of online resources and receiving information from other school staff. 3 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools. 4 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the 

core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.

6 
7 

Table 3. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to which their students use various locations for 

computer and/or Internet access to work on school assignments, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Public library Public locations other than public library1 Commercial locations

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 32 56 10 2 47 46 7 1 50 40 9 1 

Instructional level2

Primary school 40 51 7 2 61 34 4 1 ! 68 29 3 ‡

Middle school 27 59 13 2 44 48 8 1 ! 51 41 6 1 ! 

High school 28 60 10 2 33 57 10 ‡ 28 51 19 2 

Other school 33 53 12 ‡ 42 47 9 ! ‡ 45 47 8 ! ‡

Enrollment size

Less than 300 32 55 12 ‡ 52 42 7 # 64 30 6 #

300 to 499 39 50 9 2 ! 56 38 5 ‡ 63 32 4 ‡

500 to 999 32 56 10 2 48 44 6 1 53 39 6 1 

1,000 or more 28 61 9 1 ! 36 55 10 ‡ 31 50 18 2 

Community type

City 33 54 11 2 43 47 9 1 ! 48 40 11 1 !

Suburban 30 59 9 2 46 47 6 1 ! 47 43 9 1 !

Town 31 56 11 2 ! 47 44 8 ‡ 53 37 9 ‡

Rural 35 55 7 2 53 41 5 ‡ 56 36 7 1 ! 

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent3 30 61 7 1 44 50 6 ‡ 43 45 11 1 ! 

35 to 49 percent 29 59 11 1 ! 46 47 6 ‡ 44 44 10 1 !

50 to 74 percent 36 52 10 2 51 40 8 1 ! 54 37 8 2 ! 

75 percent or more 33 53 12 3 45 45 8 1 ! 59 33 7 ‡

Students take home school computers

Yes 30 57 11 2 32 55 12 # ! 31 51 17 2 ! 

No 33 56 9 2 52 42 5 1 56 36 7 1 

See notes at end of table.
8 

Table 3. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to which their 

students use various locations for computer and/or Internet access to work on school 

assignments, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19—Continued

School characteristic

Homes of relatives, friends, or neighbors Student’s own home

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 6 41 43 11 1 12 27 60

Instructional level2

Primary school 9 47 36 8 2 17 32 49

Middle school 4 41 43 12 1 ! 11 24 65

High school 3 34 50 13 1 ! 7 24 68

Other school ‡ 41 41 14 ‡ 10 29 60

Enrollment size

Less than 300 5 ! 41 40 14 1 ! 17 32 50

300 to 499 8 44 38 10 3 17 33 48

500 to 999 6 41 43 10 1 13 27 59

1,000 or more 3 39 46 13 ‡ 6 21 73

Community type

City 5 36 46 13 1 ! 15 31 53

Suburban 6 45 41 9 1 ! 8 21 70

Town 7 42 42 9 3 ! 16 30 51

Rural 6 41 41 12 2 12 29 56

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent3 7 47 37 9 1 ! 4 12 83

35 to 49 percent 6 38 44 12 1 ! 7 25 67

50 to 74 percent 5 39 45 11 2 ! 16 34 49

75 percent or more 4 36 47 13 1 ! 23 43 32

Students take home school computers

Yes 3 40 44 14 1 ! 3 14 82

No 6 41 42 10 2 15 31 52

# Rounds to zero.

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater.

1 Examples of public locations other than public library include parks and community centers. 2 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 

11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools. 3 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; 

or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes 

those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of 

Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” FRSS 109, 2019.
9 

Table 4. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated percentage of their students who have access to a 

computer at home, the availability of those computers for students to use for school assignments, and the likelihood that those 

computers have reliable Internet access from home, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19

School characteristic

Percentage of teacher’s students with 

access to a computer at home 

Availability of computers at home

for school assignments1

Likelihood computers at home

have reliable Internet access1

0 to 49 

percent

50 to 74 

percent

75 to 89 

percent

90 to 94 

percent

95 to 100 

percent

Very 

available

Somewhat 

available

Slightly 

available

Not 

available

Don’t 

know

Very 

likely

Somewhat 

likely

Slightly 

likely

Not 

likely

Don’t 

know

All teachers 13 22 22 12 30 35 47 10 # 8 29 45 15 3 7 

Instructional level2

Primary school 17 26 24 11 22 22 53 15 1 ! 9 26 43 20 4 8 

Middle school 12 21 22 13 32 37 48 9 ‡ 6 32 45 14 4 6 

High school 9 19 20 13 39 48 40 6 ‡ 7 32 48 11 2 7 

Other school 13 27 22 12 25 33 46 11 # 11 23 44 21 6 ! 6 ! 

Enrollment size

Less than 300 15 27 22 13 22 31 47 11 ‡ 10 19 46 18 6 10

300 to 499 19 27 22 9 23 24 51 15 ‡ 10 22 49 18 3 8 

500 to 999 13 23 22 12 29 32 49 11 1 ! 7 28 44 18 3 7 

1,000 or more 7 17 22 15 40 46 42 5 ‡ 6 40 44 9 2 6 

Community type

City 19 25 24 9 22 28 51 12 ‡ 8 26 46 17 4 7 

Suburban 7 18 20 15 40 43 45 9 ‡ 4 39 44 11 1 4 

Town 17 26 22 10 26 34 42 14 ‡ 10 22 46 19 4 9 

Rural 13 24 23 13 27 30 48 9 1 ! 12 22 45 17 5 10

Percent of students 

eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent3 2 10 19 19 50 52 39 4 ‡ 4 51 38 5 # ! 5 

35 to 49 percent 6 20 28 15 31 34 51 6 ‡ 8 26 52 13 1 ! 8 

50 to 74 percent 19 31 22 7 21 25 50 14 ‡ 10 17 47 22 5 9 

75 percent or more 29 33 22 6 10 19 53 18 1 9 14 47 24 8 8 

Students take home 

school computers

Yes ‡ 3 10 13 74 75 21 2 # 2 36 51 9 1 4 

No 17 29 27 12 15 21 56 13 1 9 27 43 18 4 8 

# Rounds to zero.

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater.

1 Based on the 99.9 percent of teachers who reported that some of their students have access to a computer at home. 2 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools.

3 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the 

core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
10 

Table 5. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated percentage of their students who have access to a 

smartphone at home, the usefulness of those smartphones for completing school assignments, availability of those smartphones 

for school assignments, and the likelihood that those smartphones have reliable Internet access from home, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Percentage of teacher’s students with access to a smartphone at home Usefulness of smartphones for school assignments1

0 to 

49 percent

50 to 

79 percent

80 to 

89 percent

90 to 

94 percent

95 to 

100 percent

Very 

useful

Somewhat 

useful

Slightly

useful

Not

useful

All teachers 6 20 18 23 34 12 32 35 20

Instructional level2

Primary school 10 26 18 19 26 5 25 39 32

Middle school 5 23 22 22 28 11 32 38 19

High school 1 ! 9 16 27 47 23 41 28 8 

Other school 5 ! 26 19 20 30 14 34 41 11

Enrollment size

Less than 300 7 22 23 22 26 10 25 41 23

300 to 499 8 27 20 21 24 7 25 39 28

500 to 999 7 24 17 22 31 9 31 37 23

1,000 or more 2 ! 9 17 25 47 21 41 28 10

Community type

City 6 21 17 22 33 14 32 35 19

Suburban 5 17 18 21 38 13 32 34 20

Town 6 28 19 19 28 10 32 36 23

Rural 6 18 20 27 29 10 33 36 21

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent3 3 13 16 24 44 13 34 34 19

35 to 49 percent 7 18 18 22 35 13 32 34 20

50 to 74 percent 7 23 23 22 26 11 30 37 22

75 percent or more 7 28 17 22 26 13 32 35 19

Students take home school computers

Yes 3 ! 14 19 25 40 10 34 38 18

No 7 22 18 22 32 13 32 34 21

See notes at end of table.
11 

Table 5. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated percentage of their students who have access to a 

smartphone at home, the usefulness of those smartphones for completing school assignments, availability of those smartphones 

for school assignments, and the likelihood that those smartphones have reliable Internet access from home, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19—Continued

School characteristic

Availability of smartphones for school assignments1 Likelihood smartphones have reliable Internet access from home1

Very

available

Somewhat

available

Slightly

available

Not 

available

Don’t

know

Very 

likely

Somewhat 

likely

Slightly

likely

Not

likely

Don’t

know

All teachers 31 38 19 2 10 35 41 14 3 8 

Instructional level2

Primary school 9 39 31 4 17 29 40 17 3 11

Middle school 31 43 16 2 8 36 41 14 2 7 

High school 54 33 7 1 ! 4 42 42 10 2 4 

Other school 36 40 18 ‡ 5 ! 39 36 18 4 ! ‡

Enrollment size

Less than 300 22 39 21 2! 15 24 40 17 6 13

300 to 499 18 38 27 4 13 26 45 17 3 9 

500 to 999 23 40 22 2 12 34 40 15 3 8 

1,000 or more 52 33 8 1 ! 5 47 38 9 1 ! 4 

Community type

City 32 38 20 1 9 35 41 16 3 5 

Suburban 35 37 17 3 9 45 37 10 1 7 

Town 25 36 24 2 ! 13 27 45 13 4 10

Rural 24 40 19 3 14 24 45 16 4 11

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent3 36 38 13 3 10 52 34 6 ‡ 7 

35 to 49 percent 31 40 18 1 ! 10 34 45 11 2 7 

50 to 74 percent 27 36 24 2 11 27 43 19 4 8 

75 percent or more 26 38 24 2 ! 10 22 44 21 5 8 

Students take home school computers

Yes 38 38 12 3 10 44 41 9 1 ! 5 

No 28 38 21 2 11 32 41 15 3 8 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater.

1 Based on the 99.6 percent of teachers who reported that some of their students have access to a smartphone at home. 2 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools. 3 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the 

core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
12 

Table 6. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the amount of influence that their students’ access to technology 

and the Internet outside of school has on the homework they assign, the frequency they assign any type of homework, and the 

frequency they assign technology-based homework, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Influence that students’ access to technology and 

Internet outside of school has on homework 

teachers assign

Frequency that teachers assign 

any type of homework

Frequency that teachers assign 

technology-based homework

No 

influence

Small 

influence

Moderate 

influence

Large 

influence Never Rarely

Sometimes Often Never RarelySometimes Often

All teachers 16 35 28 20 3 17 27 53 23 31 28 19

Instructional level1

Primary school 24 37 22 16 3 13 20 64 37 32 21 11

Middle school 13 33 31 24 3 22 36 39 20 30 29 21

High school 10 35 33 22 2 18 30 50 9 30 35 25

Other school 15 38 25 22 ‡ 17 30 51 22 41 19 18

Enrollment size

Less than 300 25 32 25 18 3 ! 21 28 48 29 35 20 16

300 to 499 21 36 27 17 3 16 25 56 32 33 23 13

500 to 999 17 36 27 20 3 16 28 53 25 30 30 16

1,000 or more 10 35 32 23 2 ! 19 28 52 11 31 31 28

Community type

City 15 36 29 20 3 18 27 51 23 31 29 17

Suburban 14 35 29 22 2 15 25 58 17 29 30 23

Town 21 31 28 20 3 19 29 49 30 32 24 13

Rural 21 36 24 18 2 20 30 48 29 34 23 15

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent2 13 39 29 19 2 13 27 58 13 28 34 25

35 to 49 percent 16 36 28 20 3 18 30 49 21 32 29 19

50 to 74 percent 20 31 29 20 3 24 26 47 29 33 23 14

75 percent or more 18 34 26 22 4 14 26 55 31 32 23 13

Students take home school computers

Yes 12 34 32 22 2 ! 17 28 53 7 26 34 33

No 18 36 27 19 3 17 27 53 28 33 25 13

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater. 

1 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools.

2 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the 

core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
13 

Table 7. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to which their students have difficulty completing 

technology-based homework because the students are not familiar with how to use technology, and how prepared their students 

are to use the technology required for online or computerized assessments given by the state, district, or school, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Extent of difficulty students have with technology-based homework

due to unfamiliarity with technology1

Level of student preparation to use technology for

online or computerized assessments2

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Very 

prepared

Somewhat 

prepared

Slightly

prepared

Not 

prepared

All teachers 34 52 11 2 44 39 13 4 

Instructional level3

Primary school 34 50 12 3 39 38 18 5 

Middle school 35 53 9 2 50 37 10 3 

High school 33 53 12 2 46 40 11 3 

Other school 31 54 13 ‡ 32 51 12 4 ! 

Enrollment size

Less than 300 30 55 12 ‡ 42 34 20 4 ! 

300 to 499 36 50 13 2 ! 41 43 13 3 

500 to 999 34 53 10 3 41 39 15 4 

1,000 or more 34 53 12 2 51 38 9 3 

Community type

City 31 50 15 3 38 39 17 6 

Suburban 38 51 9 2 50 38 10 2 

Town 29 57 13 2 ! 39 42 15 4 !

Rural 33 57 9 ‡ 45 39 13 2 

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent4 39 53 7 1 ! 53 35 10 3 

35 to 49 percent 33 56 9 2 ! 47 40 12 2 !

50 to 74 percent 31 50 16 4 38 43 16 3 

75 percent or more 30 50 15 4 35 40 18 7 

Students take home school computers

Yes 43 49 8 1 ! 59 33 7 1 ! 

No 30 54 13 3 39 41 16 4 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

‡ Reporting standards not met. The coefficient of variation for this estimate is 50 percent or greater. 

1 Based on the 77 percent of teachers who reported that they assign technology-based homework to their students. 2 Based on the 98 percent of teachers who reported that there are online or computerized assessments given by the state, district, or school to the students they teach. 3 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools. 4 Includes schools with missing values. 

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the 

core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
14 

Table 8. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the extent to which they provide various types of assistance for 

doing technology-based homework to students who have limited access to technology and the Internet outside of school, 

by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Students download homework at school 

to work on computer without Internet

Provide hardcopy homework 

assignments and material

Give extended time or later 

deadline for homework

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 35 28 21 16 6 18 23 53 14 31 31 25

Instructional level1

Primary school 50 23 15 13 8 17 19 57 20 28 29 23

Middle school 30 29 24 17 3 16 25 56 8 30 33 29

High school 27 31 24 18 6 21 24 49 12 34 32 23

Other school 36 30 20 14 7 ! 18 21 54 17 31 34 18

Enrollment size

Less than 300 32 29 21 18 4 ! 14 25 58 14 29 35 21

300 to 499 43 23 21 12 5 20 20 56 12 31 31 26

500 to 999 37 26 20 17 6 16 23 55 15 30 29 26

1,000 or more 29 32 22 17 6 22 23 49 12 32 33 23

Community type

City 38 26 21 15 6 16 21 57 13 28 31 28

Suburban 36 29 20 16 6 20 22 51 14 31 31 23

Town 30 29 25 15 5 20 25 50 11 32 35 23

Rural 32 28 21 20 4 18 26 52 14 33 31 22

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent2 33 30 20 17 7 21 22 50 15 34 30 21

35 to 49 percent 32 27 26 15 6 17 27 50 15 31 33 21

50 to 74 percent 40 26 19 15 5 19 22 55 11 32 32 25

75 percent or more 36 27 20 17 5 13 21 61 13 21 33 33

Students take home school computers

Yes 24 30 24 22 5 25 26 44 11 35 32 22

No 40 27 19 14 6 16 21 57 15 29 31 26

See notes at end of table.
15 

Table 8. Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the extent to which they 

provide various types of assistance for doing technology-based homework to students 

who have limited access to technology and the Internet outside of school, by school 

characteristics: School year 2018–19—Continued

School characteristic

Give time in class to use school 

technology for homework

Give alternate homework

not requiring technology

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 6 18 26 50 24 30 23 23

Instructional level1

Primary school 7 18 27 49 20 22 25 33

Middle school 6 16 21 56 20 34 22 25

High school 5 18 28 48 30 34 22 14

Other school 8 ! 15 24 53 30 34 19 16

Enrollment size

Less than 300 3 ! 17 25 55 27 26 28 18

300 to 499 6 16 27 51 24 26 24 25

500 to 999 6 16 25 52 22 29 22 26

1,000 or more 7 19 27 47 26 35 21 18

Community type

City 5 16 23 55 23 25 24 28

Suburban 9 19 28 44 25 33 21 21

Town 2 ! 15 26 57 24 32 23 20

Rural 5 17 26 53 26 30 24 20

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent2 9 20 26 46 28 33 21 18

35 to 49 percent 4 23 23 50 28 31 23 18

50 to 74 percent 4 12 27 57 21 28 25 26

75 percent or more 5 16 26 53 18 26 23 33

Students take home school computers

Yes 6 19 28 48 28 39 21 13

No 6 17 25 52 23 26 24 27

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is at least 30 percent but less than 50 percent.

1 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 

11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools. 2 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Based on the 77 percent of teachers who reported that they assign technology-based homework to their students. Includes public school 

teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained classes; or (2) departmentalized 

classes in one or more of the core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or science. Excludes those who teach only 

special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of 

Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” FRSS 109, 2019.
Appendix A

Standard Error Tables
A-1 

Table A-1. Standard errors for table 1: Percent of public school teachers reporting on various types of access to computers and/or the 

Internet provided to their students by the district or school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

All teachers Teachers whose 

students take home a 

district- or schoolprovided computer 

who have some 

students not able to 

take computer home

Teachers whose students do not have a districtor school-provided computer to take home

School has additional 

academic period when 

students can use 

computers and 

Internet for homework

District or 

school provides 

mobile hotspots 

students take home

Students take home a 

district- or schoolprovided computer 

on long-term basis

Students can 

borrow school 

computers to 

take home on 

short-term basis

Students can access 

school computers 

outside of class time 

(e.g., before or after 

school, at lunch, in 

special periods)

All teachers 1.0 0.7 1.2 2.2 0.7 0.9

Instructional level

Primary school 1.7 1.4 1.9 8.2 0.9 1.8

Middle school 1.8 1.2 2.1 3.0 1.2 1.4

High school 2.2 1.1 2.1 3.0 1.9 0.8

Other school 4.5 † 4.4 12.2 3.6 4.1

Enrollment size

Less than 300 4.2 2.0 3.3 8.8 3.2 2.7

300 to 499 2.2 2.1 3.3 5.2 1.4 2.4

500 to 999 1.3 0.9 1.4 3.4 0.9 1.4

1,000 or more 2.3 1.4 2.4 3.1 2.0 1.2

Community type

City 1.8 1.3 1.7 4.4 1.1 1.9

Suburban 1.6 1.4 2.7 3.1 1.3 1.8

Town 3.4 1.4 2.7 6.6 1.5 2.5

Rural 2.3 1.3 2.3 3.8 1.4 1.7

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.8 1.1 2.2 3.2 1.5 1.6

35 to 49 percent 2.7 1.2 2.4 4.0 1.8 2.4

50 to 74 percent 2.0 1.8 2.9 5.9 1.1 2.1

75 percent or more 2.0 1.5 1.8 6.1 1.4 2.3

Students take home school computers

Yes 2.1 1.9 # 2.2 † † 

No 1.2 0.6 † † 0.7 0.9

† Not applicable.

# Rounds to zero.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
A-2 

Table A-2. Standard errors for table 2: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on their level of knowledge about 

their students’ access to computers and the Internet at home, and percent of teachers reporting on the source(s) of that 

information, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Among teachers whose students do not take home

school- or district-provided computers, teachers’ 

knowledge of students’ access to home computers

All teachers’ knowledge of students’ 

access to Internet at home

Sources of information about 

students’ access at home

Very 

knowledgeable

Somewhat 

knowledgeable

Slightly 

knowledgeable

Not 

knowledgeable

Very 

knowledgeable

Somewhat 

knowledgeable

Slightly 

knowledgeable

Not 

knowledgeable

Survey all 

students 

or parents 

Talk to 

students 

or parents 

individually

Develop a 

sense 

while 

working 

with 

students Other

All teachers 1.1 1.3 1.1 0.6 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.2

Instructional level

Primary school 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.1 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 0.4

Middle school 1.8 2.0 1.7 0.9 1.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 1.7 1.2 1.1 0.5

High school 1.7 2.2 2.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.0 1.9 1.3 1.0 0.4

Other school 4.6 5.0 4.1 2.7 3.9 4.3 3.6 1.7 4.4 3.1 2.4 † 

Enrollment size

Less than 300 2.1 2.7 2.8 1.6 1.7 2.1 2.2 1.5 3.3 2.7 1.8 †

300 to 499 2.0 3.1 2.8 1.6 1.9 2.6 2.5 1.2 2.3 1.7 1.6 0.5

500 to 999 1.7 1.9 1.4 0.9 1.4 1.6 1.1 0.8 1.5 1.2 0.9 0.4

1,000 or more 1.8 2.4 2.2 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.0 1.8 1.4 1.2 0.5

Community type

City 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.1 1.7 1.8 1.8 0.9 1.9 1.2 1.3 0.5

Suburban 1.8 2.1 1.7 1.0 1.5 1.7 1.3 0.9 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.4

Town 2.4 3.6 3.2 2.4 2.2 2.8 2.6 1.8 2.7 2.2 1.8 0.4

Rural 1.7 2.5 2.1 1.5 1.5 1.9 1.6 1.0 2.1 1.4 1.4 0.5

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 2.2 2.4 2.1 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.3 0.9 1.8 1.5 1.1 0.5

35 to 49 percent 2.4 2.8 2.6 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.0 1.1 2.1 1.6 1.6 0.5

50 to 74 percent 1.6 2.3 2.1 1.4 1.6 1.9 1.9 0.9 2.3 1.4 1.4 0.5

75 percent or more 2.2 2.4 1.7 1.2 2.1 2.4 1.5 1.2 2.5 1.9 1.4 0.4

Students take home school computers

Yes † † † † 1.5 1.8 1.3 0.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 0.5

No 1.1 1.3 1.1 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.0 0.7 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.3

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
A-3 

Table A-3. Standard errors for table 3: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to which their students 

use various locations for computer and/or Internet access to work on school assignments, by school characteristics: School 

year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Public library Public locations other than public library Commercial locations

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.3 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.2 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.2

Instructional level

Primary school 2.2 2.1 1.0 0.5 1.9 1.9 0.7 0.3 1.8 1.8 0.6 † 

Middle school 1.8 1.9 1.4 0.4 1.6 1.6 0.9 0.3 1.8 1.6 0.8 0.4

High school 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.5 1.6 1.7 1.1 † 1.5 1.8 1.3 0.4

Other school 4.6 4.4 2.9 † 4.4 4.3 3.0 † 4.4 4.2 2.8 †

Enrollment size

Less than 300 3.1 3.0 2.0 † 3.3 3.4 1.7 † 3.7 3.7 1.3 † 

300 to 499 2.9 2.9 1.4 0.5 2.6 2.4 0.9 † 2.3 2.4 1.0 † 

500 to 999 1.6 1.7 1.0 0.5 1.6 1.6 0.7 0.4 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.3

1,000 or more 1.6 1.7 1.1 0.4 1.8 1.7 1.1 † 1.6 1.8 1.4 0.5

Community type

City 2.0 1.9 1.4 0.6 2.1 2.0 1.1 0.3 1.8 1.7 1.0 0.4

Suburban 1.7 1.7 1.0 0.4 1.7 1.6 0.8 0.3 1.6 1.7 0.9 0.3

Town 2.9 3.1 1.8 0.8 3.0 2.9 1.6 † 2.4 2.6 1.6 † 

Rural 1.8 1.8 1.1 0.6 2.2 2.2 1.1 † 2.5 2.3 1.1 0.4

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.4 1.6 1.7 0.9 † 1.7 1.7 1.1 0.3

35 to 49 percent 2.3 2.3 1.3 0.5 2.5 2.5 1.1 † 2.1 2.2 1.5 0.4

50 to 74 percent 2.3 2.2 1.0 0.6 2.3 2.1 1.0 0.4 2.3 2.3 0.8 0.5

75 percent or more 2.2 2.1 1.7 0.8 2.2 2.1 1.3 0.6 2.4 2.0 1.2 † 

Students take home school computers

Yes 2.2 2.2 1.1 0.5 2.5 2.5 1.2 † 2.4 2.3 1.4 0.5

No 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.3 1.3 1.2 0.5 0.2 1.2 1.1 0.6 0.2

See notes at end of table.
A-4 

Table A-3. Standard errors for table 3: Percentage distribution of public school teachers 

reporting on the extent to which their students use various locations for computer 

and/or Internet access to work on school assignments, by school characteristics: School 

year 2018–19—Continued

School characteristic

Homes of relatives, friends, or neighbors Student’s own home

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.3 0.7 1.0 1.1

Instructional level

Primary school 1.2 2.0 1.8 1.0 0.6 1.5 1.8 2.2

Middle school 0.7 1.9 1.9 1.1 0.3 1.1 1.4 1.8

High school 0.6 1.5 1.6 1.1 0.2 0.9 1.4 1.6

Other school † 4.9 5.0 3.0 † 2.7 3.9 4.4

Enrollment size

Less than 300 1.5 3.2 3.1 2.4 0.7 2.3 2.4 2.7

300 to 499 1.5 2.4 2.4 1.3 0.7 1.8 2.4 2.9

500 to 999 0.9 1.5 1.5 0.9 0.4 1.2 1.6 1.6

1,000 or more 0.6 1.9 1.9 1.4 † 0.9 1.4 1.5

Community type

City 0.8 2.0 1.7 1.3 0.3 1.5 1.8 2.1

Suburban 0.9 1.9 1.8 1.0 0.3 1.1 1.8 2.0

Town 1.8 3.0 2.9 1.6 1.1 2.0 3.0 2.9

Rural 1.2 2.0 1.9 1.6 0.5 1.6 1.9 2.4

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.0 2.0 1.7 0.9 0.4 0.9 1.2 1.5

35 to 49 percent 1.1 2.2 2.3 1.3 0.5 1.1 2.2 2.5

50 to 74 percent 1.1 1.9 2.2 1.2 0.5 1.5 2.1 2.5

75 percent or more 0.9 1.9 1.8 1.6 0.5 1.8 2.1 2.1

Students take home school computers

Yes 0.7 1.7 2.0 1.2 0.2 0.6 1.3 1.3

No 0.7 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.3 0.9 1.2 1.2

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of 

Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” FRSS 109, 2019.
A-5 

Table A-4. Standard errors for table 4: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated percentage of their 

students who have access to a computer at home, the availability of those computers for students to use for school 

assignments, and the likelihood that those computers have reliable Internet access from home, by school characteristics: 

School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Percentage of teacher’s students with 

access to a computer at home

Availability of computers at home

for school assignments

Likelihood computers at home

have reliable Internet access

0 to 49 

percent

50 to 74 

percent

75 to 89 

percent

90 to 94 

percent

95 to 

100 

percent

Very 

available

Somewhat 

available

Slightly 

available

Not 

available

Don’t 

know

Very 

likely

Somewhat 

likely

Slightly 

likely

Not 

likely

Don’t 

know

All teachers 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.6 1.2 1.1 1.3 0.6 † 0.5 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.3 0.6

Instructional level

Primary school 1.4 1.9 1.6 1.1 2.1 2.2 2.4 1.3 0.3 1.1 1.7 2.1 1.7 0.6 1.2

Middle school 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.1 † 0.8 1.5 1.8 1.2 0.7 0.8

High school 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.7 0.8 † 0.8 1.6 1.8 1.2 0.5 0.8

Other school 3.0 3.9 3.4 3.1 4.3 4.8 4.6 2.8 † 2.7 4.7 4.9 3.7 2.4 2.5

Enrollment size

Less than 300 2.4 3.3 3.2 2.1 2.7 3.2 3.5 1.9 † 2.1 2.8 3.8 2.1 1.3 1.7

300 to 499 2.0 2.4 2.0 1.5 3.2 3.1 3.0 1.8 † 1.3 2.3 2.9 2.2 0.7 1.4

500 to 999 1.0 1.6 1.3 1.0 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.2 0.7 1.4 1.6 1.2 0.5 0.8

1,000 or more 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.3 2.1 2.1 2.2 0.9 † 0.9 1.9 1.9 0.9 0.5 0.8

Community type

City 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.1 † 1.1 1.5 1.9 1.6 0.7 1.1

Suburban 0.9 1.5 1.6 1.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 1.3 † 0.7 1.8 2.1 1.3 0.3 0.8

Town 2.0 2.2 2.3 1.7 2.2 3.2 3.0 1.7 † 1.8 2.6 2.9 2.1 1.0 1.8

Rural 1.5 2.1 2.0 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.3 1.3 0.4 1.6 2.0 2.3 1.5 0.9 1.2

Percent of students 

eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 0.4 1.1 1.5 1.4 2.2 1.7 1.6 0.7 † 0.9 1.7 1.8 0.8 † 1.0

35 to 49 percent 1.2 2.1 2.0 1.7 2.4 2.5 2.5 1.4 † 1.2 2.1 2.4 1.8 0.6 1.3

50 to 74 percent 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.1 2.7 2.7 2.5 1.5 † 1.1 1.7 2.5 2.0 0.7 1.2

75 percent or more 2.0 2.3 2.0 1.1 1.5 1.6 2.4 1.8 0.4 1.3 1.2 2.3 1.9 1.1 1.2

Students take home 

school computers

Yes † 0.5 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.5 0.5 † 0.5 2.1 2.1 1.1 0.4 0.6

No 0.9 1.3 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.4 0.9 0.2 0.7 1.1 1.4 1.1 0.4 0.7

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
A-6 

Table A-5. Standard errors for table 5: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated percentage of their 

students who have access to a smartphone at home, the usefulness of those smartphones for completing school assignments, 

availability of those smartphones for school assignments, and the likelihood that those smartphones have reliable Internet 

access from home, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Percentage of teacher’s students with access to a smartphone at home Usefulness of smartphones for school assignments

0 to 

49 percent

50 to 

79 percent

80 to 

89 percent

90 to 

94 percent

95 to 

100 percent

Very 

useful

Somewhat 

useful

Slightly

useful

Not

useful

All teachers 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.7 1.0 0.6 0.9 1.1 0.8

Instructional level

Primary school 1.2 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.6 0.7 1.5 2.1 1.8

Middle school 0.8 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.8 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.5

High school 0.3 1.0 1.1 1.5 1.6 1.2 1.5 1.4 0.8

Other school 1.9 3.6 3.9 3.3 4.2 3.1 4.4 4.2 2.5

Enrollment size

Less than 300 1.4 2.4 2.7 2.4 2.5 2.0 3.9 3.7 3.1

300 to 499 1.5 2.6 2.3 1.6 2.1 1.2 2.0 2.7 2.3

500 to 999 0.9 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.6 0.9 1.4 1.6 1.3

1,000 or more 0.5 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.3 1.6 1.8 1.0

Community type

City 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.8 1.2 1.7 1.8 1.5

Suburban 1.0 1.5 1.6 1.3 1.5 0.9 1.5 1.8 1.5

Town 1.4 2.6 1.8 1.9 2.7 1.8 3.0 2.6 2.7

Rural 0.9 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.2 1.1 2.1 2.1 1.9

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.4

35 to 49 percent 1.2 2.0 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.6 2.1 2.3 1.8

50 to 74 percent 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.7 2.3 1.9

75 percent or more 1.2 1.8 1.6 1.9 2.3 1.7 2.2 2.2 1.9

Students take home school computers

Yes 0.9 1.4 1.8 1.7 2.3 1.1 1.6 1.8 1.8

No 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.0

See notes at end of table.
A-7 

Table A-5. Standard errors for table 5: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the estimated percentage of their 

students who have access to a smartphone at home, the usefulness of those smartphones for completing school assignments, 

availability of those smartphones for school assignments, and the likelihood that those smartphones have reliable Internet 

access from home, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19—Continued

School characteristic

Availability of smartphones for school assignments Likelihood smartphones have reliable Internet access from home

Very

available

Somewhat

available

Slightly

available

Not 

available

Don’t

know

Very 

likely

Somewhat 

likely

Slightly

likely

Not

likely

Don’t

know

All teachers 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.3 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.3 0.6

Instructional level

Primary school 1.0 1.9 1.7 0.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.7 0.5 1.5

Middle school 1.7 1.8 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.7 1.7 1.2 0.6 0.9

High school 1.6 1.4 0.9 0.3 0.6 1.6 1.5 1.1 0.4 0.6

Other school 3.7 3.7 3.2 † 2.2 4.6 4.3 3.8 2.1 † 

Enrollment size

Less than 300 2.1 3.4 2.8 1.0 3.7 2.7 3.4 2.5 1.2 2.7

300 to 499 1.7 2.2 2.2 0.8 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.3 0.7 1.4

500 to 999 1.3 1.4 1.5 0.5 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.5 1.0

1,000 or more 1.9 1.8 1.1 0.4 0.8 1.9 1.9 1.0 0.4 0.8

Community type

City 1.6 1.7 1.5 0.4 1.1 2.0 1.8 1.6 0.6 0.8

Suburban 1.5 1.6 1.2 0.6 1.0 1.7 1.9 1.2 0.3 0.9

Town 2.4 2.5 2.3 0.8 1.9 2.7 2.7 1.9 1.0 2.0

Rural 1.6 1.8 1.8 0.5 2.2 2.0 2.4 1.6 0.8 1.6

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.7 1.7 1.2 0.6 1.4 2.0 1.8 0.9 † 1.3

35 to 49 percent 2.1 2.4 1.9 0.4 1.4 2.1 2.4 1.4 0.5 1.1

50 to 74 percent 2.0 2.1 1.9 0.6 1.3 1.8 2.0 2.1 0.6 1.0

75 percent or more 2.2 2.1 1.8 0.7 1.3 2.2 2.1 1.7 1.0 1.4

Students take home school computers

Yes 2.1 2.0 1.3 0.6 1.1 2.0 1.9 1.3 0.3 0.8

No 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.3 0.9 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.4 0.7

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
A-8 

Table A-6. Standard errors for table 6: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the amount of influence that their 

students’ access to technology and the Internet outside of school has on the homework they assign, the frequency they assign 

any type of homework, and the frequency they assign technology-based homework, by school characteristics: School year 

2018–19 

School characteristic

Influence that students’ access to technology and 

Internet outside of school has on homework 

teachers assign

Frequency that teachers assign 

any type of homework

Frequency that teachers assign 

technology-based homework

No 

influence

Small 

influence

Moderate 

influence

Large 

influence Never Rarely

Sometimes Often Never RarelySometimes Often

All teachers 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.9 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9

Instructional level

Primary school 1.7 1.9 1.5 1.7 0.9 1.1 1.6 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.3

Middle school 1.1 1.7 1.7 1.5 0.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5

High school 0.9 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.5 1.3 1.7 1.7 0.9 1.6 1.8 1.6

Other school 3.5 4.3 4.1 3.7 † 3.3 3.9 4.6 3.5 4.2 2.8 3.9

Enrollment size

Less than 300 2.4 3.0 2.7 2.7 1.1 2.4 3.1 3.3 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.7

300 to 499 1.8 2.7 2.1 2.2 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.8 2.5 2.3 1.9 1.6

500 to 999 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.2 0.7 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.2

1,000 or more 0.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 0.5 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.1 2.0 1.7 1.8

Community type

City 1.3 1.8 1.6 1.4 0.9 1.5 1.5 2.3 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.4

Suburban 1.0 1.9 1.5 1.4 0.5 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.6

Town 1.9 2.6 2.4 2.3 0.8 1.9 2.4 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.2 1.6

Rural 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.8 0.6 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.4 0.5 1.3 1.6 1.8 1.3 1.7 1.6 1.7

35 to 49 percent 1.7 2.2 2.0 1.7 0.7 1.9 2.2 2.6 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.0

50 to 74 percent 1.7 2.0 1.8 1.7 0.6 1.5 1.8 2.3 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.4

75 percent or more 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.2 1.6 1.7 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.8 1.5

Students take home school computers

Yes 1.3 2.0 1.5 1.8 0.6 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.0 1.8 1.7 1.8

No 0.9 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.9

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
A-9 

Table A-7. Standard errors for table 7: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting on the extent to which their students 

have difficulty completing technology-based homework because the students are not familiar with how to use technology, and 

how prepared their students are to use the technology required for online or computerized assessments given by the state, 

district, or school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19 

School characteristic

Extent of difficulty students have with technology-based homework

due to unfamiliarity with technology

Level of student preparation to use technology for

online or computerized assessments

Not 

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Very 

prepared

Somewhat 

prepared

Slightly

prepared

Not 

prepared

All teachers 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.4 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.4

Instructional level

Primary school 2.3 2.5 1.5 0.7 1.9 1.8 1.5 0.8

Middle school 1.9 2.1 1.3 0.5 1.9 1.7 1.0 0.5

High school 1.6 1.8 1.1 0.5 1.8 1.8 0.9 0.6

Other school 5.2 4.4 3.4 † 4.9 4.8 3.0 1.8

Enrollment size

Less than 300 3.7 3.8 2.6 † 3.3 3.6 1.9 1.3

300 to 499 3.0 3.2 2.3 0.7 2.7 2.9 1.7 0.8

500 to 999 1.9 1.8 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.6

1,000 or more 1.9 2.0 1.2 0.5 2.0 1.8 1.0 0.7

Community type

City 2.2 2.3 1.4 0.7 2.1 2.0 1.5 0.9

Suburban 1.7 1.9 1.0 0.5 1.7 1.7 1.0 0.6

Town 3.0 3.1 2.3 0.7 3.1 3.0 2.4 1.1

Rural 2.7 2.6 1.4 † 2.3 2.4 1.4 0.5

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.3 1.6 1.7 1.0 0.6

35 to 49 percent 2.3 2.3 1.4 0.7 2.2 2.2 1.8 0.6

50 to 74 percent 2.4 2.2 1.7 0.8 2.2 2.0 1.4 0.6

75 percent or more 2.8 2.6 1.9 1.1 2.4 2.2 1.8 1.2

Students take home school computers

Yes 1.9 2.0 1.0 0.4 1.8 1.7 1.0 0.3

No 1.3 1.5 0.8 0.5 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.5

† Not applicable.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” 

FRSS 109, 2019.
A-10 

Table A-8. Standard errors for table 8: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting the extent to which they provide 

various types of assistance for doing technology-based homework to students who have limited access to technology and the 

Internet outside of school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19

School characteristic

Students download homework at school 

to work on computer without Internet

Provide hardcopy homework 

assignments and material

Give extended time or later 

deadline for homework

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.5 1.0 0.9 1.2 0.8 1.1 1.1 0.9

Instructional level

Primary school 2.5 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.2 2.2 1.9 2.5 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.9

Middle school 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.7 0.6 1.2 1.8 1.9 1.0 1.8 1.8 1.8

High school 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.5 0.8 1.5 1.4 1.9 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.6

Other school 5.1 4.7 4.5 3.8 2.6 4.0 3.8 6.1 3.5 5.5 4.7 3.5

Enrollment size

Less than 300 3.5 3.8 3.1 3.4 1.4 2.9 3.2 3.9 2.9 2.8 3.4 3.3

300 to 499 2.9 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.4 2.9 2.4 2.8 2.4 2.8 3.0 2.7

500 to 999 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.4 0.9 1.5 1.5 2.1 1.3 1.7 1.4 1.5

1,000 or more 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.0 1.8 1.6 2.1 1.1 2.1 1.9 1.7

Community type

City 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.8 1.7 2.5 1.5 2.1 1.7 1.8

Suburban 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.4 0.9 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.2 1.9 1.9 1.6

Town 3.0 2.7 3.0 2.5 1.4 2.5 3.0 3.4 2.0 3.0 3.2 2.5

Rural 2.4 2.3 1.9 2.0 1.1 2.0 2.3 2.3 1.7 2.0 2.1 1.9

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.5 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.0 1.6 1.5 2.0 1.2 1.8 1.7 1.6

35 to 49 percent 2.5 2.0 2.2 1.8 1.2 1.7 2.2 2.4 2.0 2.6 2.5 2.2

50 to 74 percent 2.2 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.1 2.1 2.0 2.2 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.1

75 percent or more 3.1 2.6 2.1 2.0 1.2 2.0 2.3 3.2 2.2 2.4 2.1 2.4

Students take home school computers

Yes 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.8 0.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.2 1.9 1.9 1.8

No 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 0.7 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.2

See notes at end of table.
A-11 

Table A-8. Standard errors for table 8: Percentage distribution of public school teachers reporting 

the extent to which they provide various types of assistance for doing technology-based 

homework to students who have limited access to technology and the Internet outside of 

school, by school characteristics: School year 2018–19—Continued

School characteristic

Give time in class to use school 

technology for homework

Give alternate homework

not requiring technology

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate

extent

Large

extent

All teachers 0.5 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.1

Instructional level

Primary school 1.1 1.9 2.4 2.4 2.0 1.8 2.3 2.3

Middle school 0.9 1.3 1.5 1.9 1.6 2.0 1.7 1.9

High school 0.7 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.4 1.2

Other school 2.7 3.8 5.3 5.5 4.9 5.6 3.9 3.9

Enrollment size

Less than 300 1.4 2.7 3.8 4.1 4.3 3.7 4.1 3.2

300 to 499 1.3 2.5 3.0 2.8 2.7 2.1 3.0 2.7

500 to 999 0.8 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5

1,000 or more 0.9 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.7

Community type

City 0.8 1.8 1.8 2.2 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.0

Suburban 1.0 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.7

Town 0.8 2.4 2.4 3.1 3.2 3.4 2.8 2.6

Rural 0.9 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.0 1.9 2.1

Percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

Less than 35 percent 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.5

35 to 49 percent 0.9 2.3 2.1 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.9

50 to 74 percent 1.0 1.3 2.4 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.1

75 percent or more 1.4 2.1 2.6 2.9 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.7

Students take home school computers

Yes 0.9 1.4 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.4

No 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of 

Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” FRSS 109, 2019.
Appendix B

Technical Notes
Technical Notes

Fast Response Survey System

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 issue-oriented data within a 

relatively short time frame. FRSS collects data from state education agencies, local education agencies, public 

and private elementary and secondary schools, public school teachers, and public libraries. To ensure minimal 

burden on respondents, the surveys are generally limited to three pages of questions, with a response burden of 

about 30 minutes per respondent. Sample sizes are relatively small (usually about 1,200 to 1,800 respondents 

per survey) so that data collection can be completed quickly. Data are weighted to produce national estimates 

of the sampled education sector. The sample size permits limited breakouts by analysis variables. However, as 

the number of categories within any single analysis variable increases, the sample size within categories 

decreases, which results in larger sampling errors for the breakouts by analysis variables. 

Sample Design 

The sample for the FRSS survey “Teachers’ Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments” 

consisted of approximately 4,320 teachers from public schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. A 

stratified multistage sample design was used to select teachers for the survey.

At the first stage of sampling, 2,000 regular public schools were selected from a sampling frame constructed 

from the 2015–16 Common Core of Data (CCD) Public School Universe file, which was the most current file 

available at the time of selection. The sampling frame for the survey included only regular schools; vocational 

education, special education, alternative/other nonregular schools, and schools operated by the Department of 

Defense or Bureau of Indian Education were ineligible for the survey. Schools with a high grade lower than 3, 

ungraded schools, and schools in the outlying U.S. territories were also ineligible for the survey. The school 

sample was stratified by instructional level (primary, middle, high, and other) and enrollment size class (less 

than 300, 300 to 499, 500 to 999, and 1,000 to 1,499, and 1,500 or more) to create 20 primary strata. Within 

each category of instructional level, the specified number of sample schools was distributed to the five

enrollment size classes in proportion to the estimated number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers in the size 

class. Within each primary sampling stratum, schools in the sampling frame were sorted by community type 

(city, suburban, town, rural) and categories of poverty level based on the percentage of students eligible for 

free/reduced-price lunch (missing, under 35 percent, 35 to 49 percent, 50 to 75 percent, 75 percent or more) to 

induce additional implicit stratification. The sample of schools was selected with probabilities proportionate to 

the number of FTE teachers in the school. 

In the second stage of sampling, a nationally representative sample of approximately 4,320 teachers were 

selected from the approximately 1,650 schools for which usable teacher lists were obtained. Eligible teachers 

were those who taught at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and taught either self-contained 

classes or departmentalized classes in one or more of the core subjects of English/language arts, social 

studies/social science, math, or science. Self-contained classes were defined as teaching multiple subjects to 

the same class of students all or most of the day, and departmentalized classes were defined as teaching the 

same subject to multiple classes of students. Teachers who taught only special education, bilingual education, 

or English as a Second Language (ESL) were excluded. Also excluded were student teachers, teachers’ aides, 

itinerant teachers who taught at more than one school, substitute teachers (including short-term and long-term), 

library media specialists or librarians who taught only library skills or how to use the library, and unpaid 

volunteers. On average, two to three teachers were randomly selected from each participating school.

B-1 
Data Collection and Response Rates

Data collection for the study was conducted in two stages. The first stage was the collection of teacher 

sampling lists. Prior to contacting schools, informational letters were sent to the superintendents of the school 

districts where the sampled schools were located, and study staff implemented any special procedures required 

by school districts. Materials for the study were mailed to the principal of each sampled school in September 

2018. The materials introduced the study and requested that a list of eligible teachers be provided for the study. 

The package included instructions for preparing the list and a form to be returned with the list of teachers. 

Telephone follow-up for nonresponse and clarification of information on the lists was initiated in early October 

2018. When a sampling list was not received from the school, two other sources were used to obtain teacher 

lists. These included teacher lists from district or school websites and teacher lists purchased from a vendor. 

Lists from all sources were reviewed and edited based on the survey criteria for eligible teachers. Collection of 

lists and clarification of information on the lists was completed in April 2019. 

Of the 2,000 schools in the sample, about 40 were found to be ineligible for the survey because they were 

closed, merged, or did not meet the eligibility requirements for inclusion (e.g., they were special education, 

vocational, or alternative schools, or only enrolled students below grade 3). For the eligible schools, the 

weighted response rate for list collection was 86 percent, where the weight used in the response rate 

calculations was the initial school base weight. Of the approximately 1,650 teacher lists used for sampling, 

32 percent were provided by the school or district, 41 percent came from district or school websites, and 

26 percent came from the vendor. 

For the second stage of collection, questionnaires and cover letters for the teacher survey were mailed to 

sampled teachers at their school addresses. Sampling and mailing were conducted in batches, as teacher lists 

were collected and processed, beginning in November 2018 and ending in April 2019. Teachers were asked to 

respond about the students they were teaching during the current 2018–19 school year. Respondents were 

offered options of completing the survey on paper or online. Telephone and e-mail follow-up for survey 

nonresponse and data clarification was initiated in December 2018 and completed in June 2019. 

Of the approximately 4,320 teachers in the sample, about 460 were found to be ineligible for the survey 

because they did not meet the eligibility requirements for inclusion (e.g., were no longer teaching at the school, 

were not teaching the eligible grades or subject, or were not teaching at least one regularly scheduled class). 

For the eligible teachers, a weighted response rate of 75 percent was obtained for the survey. This rate was 

calculated using an initial teacher base weight that was the product of the (nonresponse-adjusted) school 

weight and the reciprocal of the probability of selecting the teacher within the school. Of the teachers who 

completed the survey, 77 percent completed it online, 22 percent completed it on paper (sent by mail, e-mail, 

or fax), and 1 percent completed it by telephone. 

The overall response rate was calculated as the product of the list collection and teacher response rates, which 

results in an overall response rate of 64 percent. The final weighted count of responding teachers in the survey 

after nonresponse adjustment represents the estimated universe of eligible teachers in regular public schools in 

the 50 states and the District of Columbia—approximately 1.3 million teachers (table B-1).1

 

1 For more details about the development of survey weights, see the section of this report on weighting and sampling errors.

B-2 
Table B-1. Number and percentage of responding public school teachers in the study sample, and 

estimated number and percentage of public school teachers the sample represents, 

by school characteristics: School year 2018–19

School characteristic

Respondent sample 

(unweighted) National estimate (weighted)1

Number Percent Number Percent

All teachers 2,940 100 1,272,400 100

Instructional level2

Primary school 860 29 481,800 38

Middle school 930 32 328,000 26

High school 1,010 34 423,700 33

Other school 140 5 38,800 3 

Enrollment size

Less than 300 290 10 121,700 10

300 to 499 560 19 256,900 20

500 to 999 1,260 43 523,600 41

1,000 or more 820 28 370,200 29

Community type

City 840 28 413,000 32

Suburban 1,040 35 465,300 37

Town 370 13 130,400 10

Rural 690 24 263,700 21

Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price 

lunch

Less than 35 percent3 980 33 420,600 33

35 to 49 percent 570 19 234,000 18

50 to 74 percent 810 28 351,600 28

75 percent or more 570 20 266,100 21

Students take home school computers

Yes 820 28 327,400 26

No 2,110 72 945,000 74 1 Weighted count of responding teachers using the final nonresponse-adjusted weights. The weighted count is an estimate of the number of 

eligible teachers in the study universe (see note below for definition of the types of teachers included in the study). 2 Primary school has low grade 3, high grade 3–8; middle school has low grade 4–7, high grade 4–9; high school has low grade 7–12, high grade 

11–12, or grade 9 only; other school is all other schools. 3 Includes schools with missing values.

NOTE: Includes public school teachers who teach at least one regularly scheduled class in grades 3–12 and teach either (1) self-contained 

classes; or (2) departmentalized classes in one or more of the core subjects of English/language arts, social studies/social science, math, or 

science. Excludes those who teach only special education, bilingual education, or English as a Second Language (ESL). Detail may not sum to 

totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Teachers’ Use of 

Technology for School and Homework Assignments,” FRSS 109, 2019.

Imputation for Item Nonresponse

Teachers with missing survey data were contacted by e-mail and telephone to collect the missing information. 

However, for cases in which this data retrieval was unsuccessful, missing data were imputed. Although item 

nonresponse was very low (1 percent or less for any item), missing data were imputed for the 32 items with a 

response rate of less than 100 percent. The missing items included both numerical data such as the estimated 

percentage of students with access to a computer at home, as well as categorical data such as whether the 

school allows students to borrow computers on a short-term basis. The missing data were imputed using a 

“hot-deck” approach to obtain a “donor” teacher from which the imputed values were derived. Under the hotB-3 
deck approach, a donor teacher that matched selected characteristics of the teacher with missing data (the 

recipient teacher) was identified (Kalton 1983, pp. 65–104). The matching characteristics included whether the 

teacher’s students take home district- or school-provided computers, and characteristics of the teacher’s school, 

including instructional level, community type, and percent of students in the school eligible for free/reducedprice lunch. In addition, other relevant questionnaire items were used to form appropriate imputation 

groupings. Once a donor was found, the imputed value was simply the corresponding value from the donor 

teacher. 

Data Reliability

Although the survey was designed to account for sampling error and to minimize nonsampling error, estimates 

produced from the data collected are subject to both types of error. Sampling error occurs because the data are 

collected from a sample rather than a census of the population, and nonsampling errors are errors made during 

the collection and processing of the data. 

Weighting and Sampling Errors 

The responses were weighted to produce national estimates (table B-1). The weights were designed to reflect 

the probabilities of selection of the sampled schools and teachers, and were adjusted for differential unit 

(teacher sampling list and questionnaire) nonresponse. List collection nonresponse weighting adjustments were 

made within classes defined by school-level variables correlated with response propensity: instructional level, 

categories of school enrollment size, community type, and categories for percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch. Teacher base weights were the product of the (nonresponse-adjusted) school weight and 

the reciprocal of the probability of selecting the teacher within the school. Questionnaire nonresponse 

weighting adjustments were made within classes defined by the same school-level variables used for list 

collection nonresponse plus survey release group. Within the final weighting classes, the teacher base weights 

were inflated by the inverse of the weighted response rate for the class. Such weights are appropriate for 

analysis of the types of data collected in the survey.

The findings in this report are estimates based on the sample selected and, consequently, are subject to 

sampling variability. Because the survey data were collected using a complex sampling design, the variances 

of the estimates from the survey (e.g., estimates of proportions) are typically different from what would be 

expected from data collected with a simple random sample. Not taking the complex sample design into account 

can lead to an under- or overestimation 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 (Levy and Lemeshow 1991). 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. A form of jackknife replication referred to as the JK2 method was used to 

construct the replicates. 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, 100 variance strata, each 

consisting of teachers in two subsets of schools referred to as variance units, were created. Subsamples of the 

full sample were created by dropping one variance unit at a time from each variance stratum to define 100 

jackknife replicates. Estimates of standard errors can be computed using statistical packages such as SAS or 

WesVar.

The standard error is a measure of the variability of an estimate 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. 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 percent of teachers whose students take home a 

B-4 
district- or school-provided computer is 26 percent, and the standard error is 1.2 percent (tables 1 and A-1). 

The 95 percent confidence interval for the statistic extends from 26 – (1.2 x 1.96) to 26 + (1.2 x 1.96), or from 

24 to 28 percent. The 1.96 is the appropriate percentile from a standard normal distribution corresponding to a 

two-sided statistical test at the p < .05 significance level (where .05 indicates the 5 percent of all possible 

samples that would be outside the range of the confidence interval). 

Comparisons can be tested for statistical significance at the p < .05 level using Student’s t statistic to ensure 

that the differences are larger than those that might be expected due to sampling variation. Student’s t values 

are computed to test the difference between estimates with the following formula: 

2

2

2

1

21

sese

EE

t

+

− =

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1 and se2 are their corresponding standard errors. 

Nonsampling Errors 

Nonsampling error is the term used to describe variations in the estimates that may be caused by population 

coverage limitations and data collection, processing, and reporting procedures. The sources of nonsampling 

errors are typically problems such as unit and item nonresponse, differences in respondents’ interpretations of 

the meaning of questions, response differences related to the particular time the survey was conducted, and 

mistakes made during data preparation. It is difficult to identify and estimate either the amount of nonsampling 

error or the bias caused by this error. To minimize the potential for nonsampling error, this study used a variety 

of procedures, including a pretest of the questionnaire with teachers who were part of the eligible population. 

The pretest provided the opportunity to check for consistency of interpretation of questions and definitions and 

to eliminate ambiguous items. The questionnaire and instructions were also extensively reviewed by NCES. In 

addition, extensive editing of the teacher sampling lists and questionnaire responses was conducted to check 

the data for accuracy and consistency. Respondents with questionnaires that had missing, inconsistent, or outof-range items were contacted by e-mail or telephone to resolve problems. Survey responses received by mail, 

fax, or telephone were entered into the web survey application. Responses were entered a second time to 

ensure accuracy of entry. 

One potential source of nonsampling error is nonresponse bias. NCES statistical standards and guidelines 

require a nonresponse bias analysis if the weighted unit response rate at any stage of data collection is less than 

85 percent (Seastrom 2014). For this survey, unit nonresponse occurred at the school level when no teacher 

sampling list was obtained for a school and at the teacher level when an eligible sampled teacher did not 

complete the questionnaire. The weighted list collection response rate was 86 percent. The weighted teacher 

response rate was 75 percent. Though not required at the school level, nonresponse bias analyses were 

produced for the school-level component of the collection as well as the teacher-level component. 

Bias due to survey nonresponse was estimated for characteristics known for most respondents and 

nonrespondents. These characteristics include school-level variables available from CCD. Five variables with a 

total of 20 categories were used to analyze at the school level. The same set of variables was used to analyze at 

the teacher level. Bias was estimated before and after nonresponse weight adjustment in order to examine the 

impact of the nonresponse adjustment. The bias was estimated for each category of each characteristic as the 

difference between the unadjusted weighted means (proportions) reported by the respondents and the 

corresponding nonresponse-adjusted weighted means reported by the respondents. 

Several categories of the instructional level, community type, enrollment size class, and percent of students 

eligible for free or reduced-price lunch variables were significantly correlated with response rates at the school 

level. Several categories of the school community type taught in and the region taught in were significantly 

B-5 
correlated with response rates at the teacher level. For the selected questionnaire items, statistically significant 

differences between the unadjusted respondent mean and the corresponding nonresponse-adjusted respondent 

mean were eliminated by the nonresponse adjustment at both levels. For more information on the bias 

analyses, refer to the FRSS:109 Data File Documentation (Gray and Lewis forthcoming).

NCES statistical standards and guidelines also require a nonresponse bias analysis if item-level response rates 

are below 85 percent. No items in the study had response rates below this threshold. 

Definitions of Analysis Variables

Many of the school characteristics described below may be related to each other. For example, school 

instructional level and enrollment size are related, with high schools typically being larger than primary 

schools. Other relationships between these analysis variables may exist. However, this First Look report 

focuses on national estimates and bivariate relationships between the analysis variables and questionnaire 

variables rather than more complex analyses.

School instructional level—Schools were classified according to their grade span in the 2015–16 CCD Public 

School Universe file, revised based on any updated grade span information obtained during survey collection. 

Primary school—low grade of PK through 3 and high grade of 3 through 8 

Middle school—low grade of 4 through 7 and high grade of 4 through 9 

High school—low grade of 7 through 12 and high grade of 11 through 12, or grade 9 only 

Other school—all other schools with at least one grade 3 or higher and not falling in the above three 

categories

School enrollment size—This variable indicates the total number of students enrolled in the school based on 

data from the 2015–16 CCD Public School Universe file. The variable was collapsed into the following 

categories: 

Less than 300

300 to 499

500 to 999

1,000 or more

School community type—This variable indicates the type of community in which the school is located, as 

defined in the 2015–16 CCD Public School Universe file. These codes are based on the location of school 

buildings. This classification system has four major locale categories—city, suburban, town, and rural—each 

of which is subdivided into three subcategories. This variable was based on the 12-category urban-centric 

locale variable from CCD and collapsed into the four categories below. 

City—Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city 

Suburban—Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area 

Town—Territory inside an urban cluster 

Rural—Territory outside an urbanized area and outside an urban cluster 

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch— Based on the 2015–16 CCD Public 

School Universe file data on the students in the school who are eligible to participate in the Free Lunch and 

Reduced Price Lunch Programs under the National School Lunch Act of 1946. The category for “Less than 35 

percent” includes schools with missing data. 

B-6 
Less than 35 percent

35 to 49 percent

50 to 74 percent 

75 percent or more

Students take home school computers—Based on the responses to survey question 1, this indicates whether 

the teacher’s students have a district- or school-provided computer that the students take home. These are 

computers provided to students on a long-term basis during the school year. 

Yes

No

Definitions and Instructions Provided in This Survey

The following definitions and instructions were provided to respondents in the questionnaire. 

• Please respond about the students you are teaching during the current 2018–19 school year. 

• For purposes of this survey, computers include desktop and laptop computers, as well as tablets with a 

virtual or physical keyboard. Smartphones are not included in the definition of computers. 

• Information is collected separately for computers and smartphones. 

• For questions 17 through 21, technology includes devices such as computers and smartphones, software 

such as computer programs and digital apps, and the Internet. Technology-based homework is homework 

designed to be completed using technology. 

Contact Information

For more information about the survey, contact Christopher Chapman, National Center for Education 

Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Potomac Center Plaza, 550 12th

Street SW, Washington, DC 20202; e-mail: chris.chapman@ed.gov; telephone: (202) 245-7103. 

References

Gray, L. and Lewis, L. (forthcoming). Restricted-Use Data Files and Documentation (FRSS 109): Teachers’ 

Use of Technology for School and Homework Assignments. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, 

DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Kalton, G. (1983). Compensating for Missing Survey Data. Survey Research Center, Institute for Social 

Research: University of Michigan.

Levy, P., and Lemeshow, S. (1991). Sampling of Populations. New York: J. Wiley & Sons. 

Seastrom, M. (2014). NCES Statistical Standards (NCES 2014-097). U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved September 24, 2018, from 

https://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2012/. 

B-7 
Appendix C

Questionnaire
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006–5651

TEACHERS’ USE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR SCHOOL 

AND HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENTS 

FAST RESPONSE SURVEY SYSTEM

O.M.B. No.: 1850–0857

EXPIRATION DATE: 03/2021

NCES is authorized to conduct this survey by the Education Science Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA 2002, 20 U.S.C. §9543). 

While participation in this survey is voluntary, your cooperation is critical to make the results of this survey comprehensive, 

accurate, and timely. All of the information you provide may be used only for statistical purposes and may not be disclosed, or 

used, in identifiable form for any other purpose except as required by law (20 U.S.C. §9573 and 6 U.S.C. §151).

This survey is being conducted in response to a request from Congress about the educational impact of students’ access 

outside the classroom to digital learning resources such as computers and the Internet. The survey focuses on 

information that can best be provided by teachers from their perspective and direct interaction with students.

• Please respond about the students you are teaching during the current 2018–19 school year.

• For purposes of this survey, computers include desktop and laptop computers, as well as tablets 

with a virtual or physical keyboard. Smartphones are not included in the definition of computers.

• Information is collected separately for computers and smartphones.

Name of person completing this form: ___________________________________________________________________ 

Name of school: ____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Telephone number: ___________________________________ E-mail:______________________________________ 

Best days and times to reach you (in case of questions): ___________________________________________________ 

THANK YOU. PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS SURVEY FOR YOUR RECORDS.

PLEASE RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO:

Mail: Cindy Gray (6197.04.01.03)

Westat, RB3103

1600 Research Boulevard

Rockville, Maryland 20850-3129

Fax: 800-254-0984 (toll-free)

Email: FRSSTeacherSurvey@westat.com

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, CONTACT:

The Westat FRSS Study Team

855-813-4337 (toll-free)

FRSSTeacherSurvey@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 collection is 1850–0857. The time required to complete this information collection is 

estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and 

complete and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate, suggestions for improving this 

form, or any comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, please write directly to: Quick Response Information 

System (QRIS), National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), PCP, 550 12th Street, SW, 4th floor, Washington, DC 20202.

FRSS Form No. 109, 11/2018

Information Copy – Please do not complete. C-1 
For purposes of this survey, computers include desktop and laptop computers, as well as tablets 

with a virtual or physical keyboard. Smartphones are not included in the definition of computers.

1. Do the students that you teach have a district- or school-provided computer that the student takes home? (These are 

computers provided to students on a long-term basis during the school year.)

Yes ... (Continue with question 2.) No.... (Skip to question 3.)

2. Are there some students who are not able to take their district- or school-provided computer home?

Yes ... (Skip to question 5.) No.... (Skip to question 5.)

3. Does your school allow students to borrow computers to take home on a short-term basis?

Yes ... No ..... 

4. Can students access school computers outside of class time (for example, before or after school, at lunch, or during 

special periods during the school day)? (School computers may be located in computer labs, library media centers, or 

classrooms.)

Yes ... No ..... 

5. Does your school have an additional academic period for all students during the school day (for example, a study or 

academic support period) when students can use computers and the Internet to work on homework or assignments 

from other classes?

Yes ... No ..... 

6. Does your district or school provide mobile hotspots for students to take home for Internet access? 

Yes ... No ..... 

7. How knowledgeable are you about your students’ access to (a) computers and (b) the Internet for doing school 

assignments at home? (Select one in each row.) 

Technology

Knowledge of students’ access at home

Very 

knowledgeable

Somewhat 

knowledgeable

Slightly 

knowledgeable

Not 

knowledgeable

a. Computers (leave row blank if students take 

district- or school-provided computers home)..

b. The Internet...................................................... 

8. How do you find out information about your students’ access at home to computers and/or the Internet? (Indicate yes 

or no for each item.)

 Yes No

a. Do a survey (verbal, written, or online) of all your students and/or their parents about 

access at home (Include surveys conducted by you or by your district or school.)........................ 

b. Talk to students and/or parents individually about access at home ............................................... 

c. Develop a sense of what students have as you work with them .................................................... 

d. Other (Specify): ______________________________________________________________ 

9. In your estimation, to what extent do your students use the following locations for computer and/or Internet access to 

work on school assignments? (Select one box on each line.)

Locations

Extent location is used for school assignments

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large 

extent

a. Public library.................................................................................. 

b. Other public locations (e.g., parks, community centers)............... 

c. Commercial locations (e.g., bookstores, cafes)............................ 

d. Homes of relatives, friends, or neighbors ..................................... 

e. Student’s own home ..................................................................... 

f. Other (Specify) ______________________________________ 

Information Copy – Please do not complete. C-2 
10. In your estimation, about what percentage of the students you teach have access to a computer at home? (Include 

district- or school-provided computers for those students who take them home.) _______%

If none of your students have access to a computer at home (that is, if question 10 equals zero), skip to question 13.

11. For your students who have access to a computer at home (including a district- or school-provided computer if students 

take it home), in your estimation how available are those computers for the students to use for school assignments? 

(Availability may be affected by things such as having to share the computer with parents or siblings.) (Select one box.)

Very available: students can almost always use it when needed .... 

Somewhat available: students can usually use it when needed...... 

Slightly available: students can rarely use it when needed.............. 

Not available: students are not allowed to use it.............................. 

Don’t know........................................................................................ 

12. For your students who have access to a computer at home (including a district- or school-provided computer if students 

take it home), in your estimation how likely is it that the computer has reliable Internet access from home? (Select one 

box.) 

Very likely .... Somewhat likely ... Slightly likely .... Not likely .... Don’t know.... 

13. In your estimation, about what percentage of the students you teach have access to a smartphone at home? _____%

If none of your students have access to a smartphone at home (that is, if question 13 equals zero), 

skip to question 17.

14. For your students who have access to a smartphone at home, in your estimation how useful are those smartphones 

for completing the assignments you give your students? (Select one box.) 

Very useful... Somewhat useful ... Slightly useful .. Note useful .. 

15. For your students who have access to a smartphone at home, in your estimation how available are those smartphones 

for the students to use for school assignments? (Availability may be affected by things such as having to share the 

device with parents or siblings.) (Select one box.) 

Very available: students can almost always use it when needed .... 

Somewhat available: students can usually use it when needed...... 

Slightly available: students can rarely use it when needed.............. 

Not available: students are not allowed to use it.............................. 

Don’t know........................................................................................ 

16. For your students who have access to a smartphone at home, in your estimation how likely is it that the smartphone 

has reliable Internet access from home? (Select one box.) 

Very likely.... Somewhat likely ... Slightly likely .... Not likely .... Don’t know.... 

For questions 17 through 21, technology includes devices such as computers and smartphones, software such as 

computer programs and digital apps, and the Internet. Technology-based homework is homework designed to be 

completed using technology.

17. How much influence does your students’ access to technology and the Internet outside of school have on the 

homework assignments that you give them? (Select one box.) 

No influence... Small influence .. Moderate influence ... Large influence . 

18. How often do you assign technology-based homework to your students? (Select one box.) 

Never .... Rarely.... Sometimes ... Often .. 

19. How often do you assign any type of homework to your students? (Include both technology-based and non-technologybased homework.) (Select one box.) 

Never.... Rarely.... Sometimes ... Often .. 

If you never give technology-based homework to your students (that is, if question 18 is “never”), 

skip to question 22.

Information Copy – Please do not complete. C-3 
20. To what extent do your students have difficulty completing technology-based homework because they are not familiar 

with how to use technology? (Select one box.)

Not at all ... Small extent..... Moderate extent.... Large extent .. 

21. For your students who have limited access to technology and the Internet outside of school, to what extent do you 

provide the following types of assistance for doing technology-based homework? (Select one box on each line.)

Assistance for students with limited technology outside of school

Extent you provide assistance

Not

at all

Small

extent

Moderate 

extent

Large 

extent

a. Have students download homework assignments and materials 

while they are at school so they can work on the homework 

assignments on a computer without access to the Internet.......... 

b. Provide hardcopy homework assignments and materials for 

students to use at home................................................................ 

c. Give students extended time or a later deadline to turn in 

homework assignments ................................................................ 

d. Give time during class for students to use school technology to 

work on homework assignments................................................... 

e. Give alternate homework assignments that don’t require 

technology to complete (e.g., make a poster by hand rather than 

a computer presentation).............................................................. 

22. How prepared are your students to use the technology required for online or computerized assessments given by your 

state, district, or school? (Select one box.)

Very prepared......................................................................... 

Somewhat prepared ............................................................... 

Slightly prepared .................................................................... 

Not prepared........................................................................... 

Not applicable (no online or computerized assessments

are given by the state, district, or school) ...................... 

23. Which statement best describes the way your classes at this school are organized? (Select one box.)

Self-contained classroom: you instruct the same group of students 

all or most of the day in multiple subjects .................................................................. (Skip to question 25.)

Departmentalized instruction: you instruct several classes of different students 

all or most of the day in one or more subjects ........................................................... (Continue with question 24.)

24. Which of the following subjects do you teach at this school? (Select all that apply.) 

English/language arts............................................................. 

Social studies/social science.................................................. 

Math........................................................................................ 

Science................................................................................... 

25. What grades do you currently teach at this school? (Circle all that apply.)

PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Ungraded

THANK YOU. PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS SURVEY FOR YOUR RECORDS.

Information Copy – Please do not complete. C-4