Technology-Based

Distance Education Courses

for Public Elementary and

Secondary Schools:

2002-03 and 2004-05

NCES 2008-008 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Statistical Analysis Report
Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses 

for Public Elementary and 

Secondary School Students: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Statistical Analysis Report 

JUNE 2008 

Izabella Zandberg 

Laurie Lewis 

Westat 

Bernard Greene 

Project Officer 

National Center for Education Statistics 

NCES 2008–008 

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

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

Mark Schneider 

Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, 

and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional 

mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in 

the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of 

such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and review and 

report on education activities in foreign countries. 

NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, 

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high-quality 

data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public. 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 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Institute of Education Sciences 

U.S. Department of Education 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 

June 2008 

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

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 

Suggested Citation 

Zandberg, I., and Lewis, L. (2008). Technology-Based Distance Education Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary 

School Students: 2002–03 and 2004–05. (NCES 2008–008). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute 

of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

For ordering information on this report, write to 

U.S. Department of Education 

ED Pubs 

P.O. Box 1398 

Jessup, MD 20794-1398 

or call toll free 1-877-4ED-Pubs or order online at http://www.edpubs.org. 

Content Contact

Bernard Greene 

(202) 502-7348 

bernard.greene@ed.gov
iii 

Executive Summary 

Distance education in elementary and secondary grades, defined as credit-granting courses 

offered to elementary and secondary school students enrolled in the district in which the teacher and 

student were in different locations, has become an important element of the contemporary educational 

landscape. Distance education offers a way to help schools and school districts deal with overcrowding, 

student demand for Advanced Placement (AP) and college-level courses, and individualized schedules. 

Online distance education, that is, distance education courses delivered via the Internet, is considered by 

some policymakers as a way of helping schools and school districts address these challenges. A need for 

data on the prevalence, provision, and delivery of distance education in the nation called for a systematic 

study of this phenomenon. 

This report is based on a survey of public school districts conducted by the National Center 

for Education Statistics (NCES), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, using the 

Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). The report presents national estimates of the prevalence and 

characteristics of technology-based distance education courses in public schools nationwide in school 

year 2004–05. The report also compares those data with the baseline data that were collected in an earlier 

survey for 2002–031

 and provides longitudinal analysis of change in the districts that responded in both 

2002–03 and 2004–05 surveys. For the purpose of this study, distance education courses were defined as 

credit-granting courses offered to elementary and secondary school students enrolled in the district in 

which the teacher and student were in different locations. These courses could be delivered via audio, 

video (live or prerecorded), or Internet or other computer technologies. Distance education courses could 

originate from the respondent’s district or from other entities, such as a state virtual school or 

postsecondary institution. Online distance education courses were defined as Internet courses using 

synchronous (i.e., simultaneous) computer-based instruction and Internet courses using asynchronous 

(i.e., not simultaneous) computer-based instruction. 

 

1

The sample for the FRSS survey in 2004–05 consisted of 2,312 public school districts in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The 

weighted response rate was 95.6 percent. The sample for the FRSS survey in 2002–03 consisted of 2,305 public school districts in the 50 states 

and the District of Columbia. The weighted response rate was 96.0 percent. 
iv 

Technology-Based Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Students 

During 2004–05, about one-third (37 percent) of public school districts had students enrolled 

in technology-based distance education courses (table 1). No change was observed in the percentage of 

districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education between the 2002–03 and 2004–05 

school years.2

Ten percent of all public schools nationwide had students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses during 2004–05, an increase from 9 percent in 2002–03 (table 2). Technologybased distance education was more commonly offered by high schools than by schools at any other 

instructional level: 39 percent of public high schools offered technology-based distance education courses 

in 2004–05, compared to 20 percent of combined or ungraded schools, 5 percent of middle or junior high 

schools, and 1 percent of elementary schools. Among all public schools with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education, 72 percent were high schools (table 3). 

Enrollments in Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses 

In 2004–05, there were an estimated 506,950 technology-based distance education course 

enrollments in public school districts (table 4). If a student was enrolled in multiple courses, districts were 

instructed to count the student for each course in which he or she was enrolled. Thus, course enrollments 

may include duplicated counts of students. Of this total number of technology-based distance education 

course enrollments, 61 percent were in high schools, 33 percent were in combined or ungraded schools, 3 

percent were in middle or junior high schools, and 2 percent were in elementary schools (table 5). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses increased by 60 percent overall, from an estimated 317,070 enrollments in 2002–03 to 506,950 

enrollments in 2004–05 (table 4). 

The number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05 

varied considerably among districts, although most districts reported small numbers of distance education 

course enrollments. Twenty-four percent of districts reported between 1 and 5 technology-based distance 

 

2

Significance tests used in this report are based on general sampling theory. The 1.96 critical value was used for the t-tests at the 0.05 significance 

level. 
v 

education course enrollments, 13 percent reported 6 to 10 course enrollments, 20 percent reported 11 to 

20 course enrollments, 24 percent reported 21 to 50 course enrollments, 9 percent reported 51 to 100 

course enrollments, and 9 percent reported more than 100 course enrollments in technology-based 

distance education (table 6). Seventy-one percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses in 2004–05 planned to expand their distance education courses in the future 

(table 8). 

Entities Delivering Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses 

Postsecondary institutions were the leading providers of technology-based distance 

education courses in 2004–05. About half (47 percent) of districts with technology-based distance 

education enrollments had students in distance education courses delivered by a postsecondary institution 

(table 9). A third (33 percent) of districts with students in technology-based distance education had 

courses delivered by another local school district or schools in other districts in their state, 24 percent had 

students enrolled in distance education courses delivered by a state virtual school in their state, and 21 

percent had students enrolled in courses delivered centrally from their district. About one-fifth (21 

percent) of districts offering technology-based distance education courses delivered them to students who 

were not regularly enrolled in the district (table 11). 

Among districts with students in technology-based distance education courses, there was an 

increase between 2002–03 and 2004–05 in the percentage of districts that had those courses delivered to 

their students centrally from their district (16 percent of districts in 2002–03 compared to 21 percent in 

2004–05) (table 9). The percentage of districts with technology-based distance education that had courses 

delivered by state virtual schools within their state also increased over this period, from 18 percent in 

2002–03 to 24 percent in 2004–05. No change took place in the percentage of districts offering 

technology-based distance education courses that delivered them to students not regularly enrolled in the 

district. 
vi 

Advanced Placement and Dual Credit College-Level Courses 

Offered Through Technology-Based Distance Education 

Twenty-five percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education had students enrolled in Advanced Placement (AP) courses offered through distance education 

(table 12), while 40 percent of districts with technology-based distance education had students enrolled in 

dual credit college-level courses offered through distance education (table 14). Thirty-six percent of 

districts with students in AP courses delivered through technology-based distance education had those 

courses delivered by a postsecondary institution, 36 percent by a public school or district, and 35 percent 

by a state virtual school (table 13). Ninety-two percent of districts with students enrolled in dual credit 

college-level courses delivered through technology-based distance education received those courses from 

postsecondary institutions, while 25 percent had these college-level courses delivered by a public school 

or school district (table 15). 

The combined enrollments in AP and dual credit college-level technology-based distance 

education courses accounted for 14 percent of all technology-based distance education enrollments in 

2002–03, and 15 percent of all technology-based distance education enrollments in 2004–05 (table 16). 

Technologies Used for Delivering 

Distance Education Courses 

The survey explored technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for any 

distance education courses and for the greatest number of distance education courses in which students 

were enrolled. Technologies included Internet courses using synchronous (“real-time”) computer-based 

instruction, Internet courses using asynchronous (not simultaneous) computer-based instruction, two-way 

interactive video, one-way prerecorded video, and other technologies. 

In 2004–05, the technology most frequently used as a primary mode of delivery for any 

distance education courses was asynchronous Internet instruction (reported by 58 percent of districts with 

technology-based distance education enrollments), followed by two-way interactive video (reported by 47 

percent of districts with technology-based distance education enrollments) (table 17). Between 2002–03 

and 2004–05, the use of Internet technologies employing asynchronous instruction as a primary mode of 

delivery increased by 11 percentage points, from 47 percent of districts to 58 percent of districts with 

technology-based distance education, making it the technology most commonly used for delivering any 
vii 

distance education courses in 2004–05. At the same time, a decrease took place in the use of two-way 

interactive video, which was the most commonly used technology in 2002–03 for delivery of any distance 

education courses, from 55 percent of districts with technology-based distance education in 2002–03 to 

47 percent of such districts in 2004–05. 

In 2004–05, two-way interactive video and asynchronous Internet-based technologies were 

listed as the primary modes of instructional delivery for the greatest number of technology-based distance 

education courses, with 41 percent of districts with technology-based distance education reporting twoway interactive video and 40 percent of such districts reporting asynchronous Internet technologies (table 

18). Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, the use of two-way interactive video as the primary mode of 

delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses decreased by 8 percentage points, from 49 

percent to 41 percent, and the use of asynchronous Internet technologies increased by 6 percentage points, 

from 34 percent to 40 percent of districts with technology-based distance education. 

Online Distance Education Courses 

Seventy-one percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2004–05 had students enrolled in online distance education courses (table 19). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, the percentage of districts with technology-based distance education 

courses that had students enrolled in online courses increased by 13 percentage points, from 58 percent to 

71 percent. 

In 2004–05, among the districts with students in online distance education courses, 86 

percent had students accessing those courses from school, 59 percent had students accessing online 

courses from home, and 8 percent had students accessing online courses from some other location (table 

19). 

Among the districts with students accessing online distance education from home, 19 percent 

provided or paid for a computer for all students who were doing so, 18 percent of those districts paid for 

the Internet service provider for all of those students, and 8 percent provided or paid for some other item 

for all those students, such as software or phone service for dial-up Internet services (table 20). 

Additionally, 10 percent of those districts provided or paid for a computer for some students who were 

accessing online courses at home, 9 percent paid for the Internet service provider for some students who 

were doing so, and 2 percent provided or paid for some other item for some of those students. 
viii 

Longitudinal Analysis of Change: 2002–03 to 2004–05 

About a quarter (26 percent) of school districts that existed in both 2002–03 and 2004–05 

had students enrolled in technology-based distance education in both school years, while about half (52 

percent) of the districts did not have students enrolled in technology-based distance education in either 

year (table 21). Eleven percent of the districts did not have students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2002–03 but did have such enrollments in 2004–05, and an equal percentage of 

districts (11 percent) had students enrolled in distance education courses in 2002–03 but not in 2004–05. 

The analysis of change in the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses was based on the estimated 7,020 districts that reported having technology-based distance 

education enrollments in 2002–03 or 2004–05, or both, and excluded districts that did not have 

technology-based distance education enrollments in either of the years under study. Thirty-five percent of 

districts that did not have technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03 reported 1 to 5 

such enrollments in 2004–05, while 14 percent of those districts reported 6 to 10 enrollments (table 22). 

Five percent of districts without any technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03 had 

more than 100 such enrollments in 2004–05. About a third of districts with large numbers of technologybased distance education enrollments in 2002–03 tended to maintain the same level of such enrollments in 

2004–05, with 34 percent of districts with 21 to 50 technology-based distance education enrollments in 

2002–03 also reporting 21 to 50 such enrollments in 2004–05, and 32 percent of districts with 51 to 100 

such enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 also reporting 51 to 100 

such enrollments in the year 2004–05. Sixty-three percent of districts with more than 100 technologybased distance education enrollments in 2002–03 reported having more than 100 such enrollments in 

2004–05, and 9 percent of those districts no longer had any technology-based distance education in 2004–

05. 

Analysis of the longitudinal data for districts with technology-based distance education in 

both school years revealed that the majority of districts did not change their most frequently used 

technology between the years. Seventy percent of the districts that used asynchronous Internet 

technologies for the greatest number of distance education courses in 2002–03 continued using this 

technology as their primary mode for the greatest number of distance education courses in 2004–05 (table 

23). Eighty-two percent of the districts that used two-way interactive video for the greatest number of 

distance education courses in 2002–03 continued using this technology for the greatest number of 

distance education courses in 2004–05. 
ix 

Conclusions 

Findings from the 2002–03 and 2004–05 surveys suggest that technology-based distance 

education has established its presence in the nation’s public schools. Rapid technological developments 

and widespread availability of the Internet in public schools has made online education increasingly 

accessible and common among schools and districts. However, more traditional video-based technologies 

remain widely used as well. Also, although postsecondary institutions are the leading providers of 

technology-based distance education to public school districts and schools, districts themselves 

increasingly provide technology-based distance education courses to students, as well as increasingly use 

distance education courses provided by their state virtual schools. 
x 

This page intentionally left blank. 
xi 

Acknowledgments 

The authors would like to thank James Griffith and Gail Mulligan from NCES for their 

valuable reviews of the report. In addition, helpful reviews were conducted by the Office of Educational 

Technology, which requested and financially supported the study. The report was also reviewed by Mary 

Coleman, Molly Fenster, Will Herring, Zoë Tuck, Alexandra Henning, Siri Warkentien, and Alie Slade of 

the Education Statistics Services Institute, American Institutes for Research. 

We would also like to acknowledge the important contributions of Westat staff, including 

Debbie Alexander, the data collection manager; Robert Delfierro, Rachel Jiang, and Alla Belenky, 

programmers; Nina Thomas, research assistant; Carol Litman, editor; and Sylvie Warren, who was 

responsible for formatting the report. Finally, we would like to thank the survey respondents who 

provided the data upon which the report is based. 
xii 

This page intentionally left blank. 
xiii 

Contents 

Page 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. iii 

Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................... xi 

List of Text Tables ................................................................................................................... xvi 

List of Appendix A Tables....................................................................................................... xix 

List of Appendix B Tables....................................................................................................... xx 

List of Figures........................................................................................................................... xxiii

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

Background ................................................................................................................. 2 

Study Methodology and Analyses ................................................................................ 4 

Organization of This Report ......................................................................................... 7 

2. Technology-Based Distance Education Courses for Public School Students ................ 9 

Prevalence of Technology-Based Distance Education Courses in Public School 

Districts............................................................................................................ 9 

Prevalence of Technology-Based Distance Education Courses in Public Schools....... 11 

3. Enrollments in Technology-Based Distance Education Courses.................................... 15 

Technology-Based Distance Education Enrollments by Instructional Level................ 15 

Technology-Based Distance Education Enrollments by Completion Status ................ 21 

Plans for Future Expansion of Technology-Based Distance Education Courses.......... 23 

4. Entities Delivering Technology-Based Distance Education Courses.............................. 25 

Entities Delivering Courses .......................................................................................... 25 

Delivery of Courses to Students Not Regularly Enrolled in the District ...................... 31 

5. Advanced Placement and College-Level Courses Offered Through TechnologyBased Distance Education.................................................................................................. 33 

Advanced Placement Courses....................................................................................... 33 

Dual Credit College-Level Courses .............................................................................. 35 

Advanced Placement and Dual Credit College-Level Courses Combined................... 38 
xiv 

Contents—Continued 

Page 

6. Technologies Used for Delivering Distance Education Courses ..................................... 41

Technologies Used as the Primary Modes of Instructional Delivery for Any 

Technology-Based Distance Education Courses ............................................. 41 

Difference in Technology Use Within District Types ........................ 43 

Technologies Used as the Primary Mode of Instructional Delivery for the Greatest 

Number of Courses .......................................................................................... 44 

Difference in Technology Use Within District Types ........................ 47 

7. Online Distance Education Courses.................................................................................. 49 

Prevalence of Online Distance Education Courses............................................................ 49 

Location Where Students Access Online Distance Education Courses............................. 50 

Districts’ Provision of Infrastructure Needed to Access Online Courses From Home...... 51 

8. Longitudinal Analysis of Change: 2002–03 to 2004–05.................................................. 55 

Change in Prevalence of Technology-Based Distance Education Courses in Public 

School Districts................................................................................................ 55 

Change in the Number of Enrollments in Technology-Based Distance Education 

Courses in Public School Districts................................................................... 57 

Change in Technology Used for the Greatest Number of Distance Education 

Courses ............................................................................................................ 58 

9. Summary and Conclusions................................................................................................. 63 

How Prevalent Is Technology-Based Distance Education in Public School Districts 

and Schools? .................................................................................................... 63 

How Is Technology-Based Distance Education Delivered and by Whom?.................. 64 

How Do Public School Districts and Schools Differ in the Provision and Delivery 

of Technology-Based Distance Education? ..................................................... 66 

What Changes Have Occurred in Technology-Based Distance Education Since 

2002–03?.......................................................................................................... 68

Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 70 

References................................................................................................................................. 71 
xv 

Contents—Continued 

Page 

Appendix A: Technical Notes................................................................................................. A-1 

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

Appendix C: FRSS Questionnaires for 2002–03 and 2004–05............................................ C-1 
xvi 

List of Text Tables 

Table Page 

1 Number of public school districts in the nation, number of public school districts 

with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, and percent 

of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 ......................... 10 

2 Percent of public schools in the nation with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses, by instructional level and district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05................................................................................................... 11 

3 Percentage distribution of public schools with students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses, by instructional level and district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05................................................................................................... 13 

4 Number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses of students 

regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by instructional level and district 

characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05......................................................................... 16 

5 Percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses of students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by instructional 

level and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 ............................................. 17 

6 Percentage distribution of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses, by the number of distance education 

enrollments and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 .................................. 20 

7 Percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses of students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by course 

completion status and district characteristics: 2004–05............................................... 22 

8 Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses that were planning to expand distance education 

courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05.......................................... 24 

9 Percentage distribution of public school districts indicating whether various entities 

delivered the technology-based distance education courses in which students in 

their district were enrolled: 2002–03 and 2004–05 ..................................................... 27 

10 Percent of public school districts indicating that various entities delivered the 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district 

were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05................................ 28 

11 Percent of public school districts indicating that they delivered technology-based 

distance education courses to students who were not regularly enrolled in their 

district, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05........................................... 32 
xvii 

List of Text Tables (continued) 

Table Page 

12 Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses indicating that students regularly enrolled in the district 

were enrolled in Advanced Placement courses offered through technology-based 

distance education, and percent of all enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses represented by enrollments in Advanced Placement courses, by 

district characteristics: 2004–05 .................................................................................. 34 

13 Percentage distribution of public school districts indicating whether various entities 

delivered the Advanced Placement technology-based distance education courses in 

which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 .............................................. 35 

14 Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses indicating that students regularly enrolled in the district 

were enrolled in dual credit college-level courses offered through technology-based 

distance education, and percent of all enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses represented by enrollments in dual credit college-level distance 

education courses, by district characteristics: 2004–05 ............................................... 36 

15 Percentage distribution of public school districts indicating whether various entities 

delivered the dual credit college-level technology-based distance education courses 

in which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 .......................................... 37 

16 Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses indicating that students regularly enrolled in the district 

were enrolled in Advanced Placement or dual credit college-level courses offered 

through distance education, and percent of all enrollments in technology-based 

education courses represented by enrollments in Advanced Placement or dual 

credit college-level courses offered through technology-based distance education, 

by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05........................................................ 39 

17 Percent of public school districts reporting that various technologies were used as 

primary modes of instructional delivery for any technology-based distance 

education courses in which students in their district were enrolled, by district 

characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05......................................................................... 42 

18 Percentage distribution of public school districts reporting that various 

technologies were used as the primary mode of delivery for the greatest number of 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district 

were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05................................ 45 

19 Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in online distance 

education courses, and percent of those public school districts indicating the access 

location of the online courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05....... 50 
xviii 

List of Text Tables (continued) 

Table Page 

20 Percent of public school districts with students accessing online distance education 

courses from home, and percent of those public school districts that provided or 

paid for various items for all or some of the students accessing online distance 

education courses from home, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05....... 53 

21 Percentage distribution of public school districts by use of technology-based 

distance education courses and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05........... 56 

22 Change in the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses in public school districts: 2002–03 to 2004–05 ............................................... 58 

23 Change in the technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for the 

greatest number of distance education courses in which students in public school 

districts were enrolled: 2002–03 to 2004–05................................................................ 59 

24 Technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for the greatest 

number of distance education courses in districts that had technology-based 

distance education enrollments in 2002–03, but did not have technology-based 

distance education enrollments anymore in 2004–05................................................... 60 

25 Technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for the greatest 

number of distance education courses in districts that did not have technologybased distance education enrollments in 2002–03, but started using technologybased distance education in 2004–05............................................................................ 61 
xix 

List of Appendix A Tables 

Table Page 

A-1 Number and percent of public school districts in the study, and the estimated 

number and percent in the nation, for the total sample and for districts with 

students regularly enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 

2002–03 and 2004–05, by district characteristics......................................................... A-5 

A-2 Number of schools in the nation, by instructional level and district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05................................................................................................... A-7 

A-3 Percent of unweighted and weighted cases with imputed data, by questionnaire 

items: 2004–05.............................................................................................................. A-9 
xx 

List of Appendix B Tables 

Table Page 

B-1 Standard errors for the number of public school districts in the nation, number of 

public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses, and percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 

and 2004–05.................................................................................................................. B-3 

B-2 Standard errors for the percent of public schools in the nation with students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, by instructional level and 

district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05............................................................. B-4 

B-3 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public schools with students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, by instructional level and 

district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05............................................................. B-5 

B-4 Standard errors for the number of enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses of students regularly enrolled in the districts, by instructional 

level and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 ............................................. B-6 

B-5 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses of students regularly enrolled in the public school 

districts, by instructional level and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05..... B-7 

B-6 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts with 

students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, by the number of 

distance education enrollments and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05.... B-8 

B-7 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses of students regularly enrolled in the public school 

districts, by course completion status and district characteristics: 2004–05................ B-9 

B-8 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses that were planning to expand distance 

education courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 ......................... B-10 

B-9 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts indicating 

whether various entities delivered the technology-based distance education courses 

in which students in their district were enrolled: 2002–03 and 2004–05 .................... B-11 

B-10 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts indicating that various 

entities delivered the technology-based distance education courses in which 

students in their district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 

2004–05 ........................................................................................................................ B-12 

B-11 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts indicating that they 

delivered technology-based distance education courses to students who were not 

regularly enrolled in their district, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05. B-15 
xxi 

List of Appendix B Tables (continued) 

Table Page 

B-12 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses indicating that students regularly 

enrolled in the district were enrolled in Advanced Placement courses offered 

through technology-based distance education, and percent of all enrollments in 

technology-based distance education courses represented by the enrollments in 

Advanced Placement courses, by district characteristics: 2004–05............................. B-16 

B-13 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts indicating 

whether various entities delivered the Advanced Placement technology-based 

distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled: 

2004–05 ........................................................................................................................ B-17 

B-14 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses indicating that students regularly 

enrolled in the district were enrolled in dual credit in college-level courses offered 

through technology-based distance education, and the percent of all enrollments in 

technology-based distance education courses represented by enrollments in dual 

credit college-level distance education courses, by district characteristics: 2004–05 . B-18 

B-15 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts indicating 

whether various entities delivered the dual credit college-level technology-based 

distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled: 

2004–05 ........................................................................................................................ B-19 

B-16 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses indicating that students regularly 

enrolled in the district were enrolled in Advanced Placement or dual credit collegelevel courses offered through distance education, and percent of all enrollments in 

technology-based education courses represented by enrollments in Advanced 

Placement or dual credit college-level courses offered through technology-based 

distance education, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 ........................ B-20 

B-17 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts reporting that various 

technologies were used as primary modes of instructional delivery for any 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district 

were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05................................ B-21 

B-18 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts reporting 

that various technologies were used as the primary mode of delivery for the 

greatest number of technology-based distance education courses in which students 

in their district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05........ B-22 
xxii 

List of Appendix B Tables (continued) 

Table Page 

B-19 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

online distance education courses, and percent of those public school districts 

indicating the access location of the online courses, by district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05................................................................................................... B-23 

B-20 Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students accessing 

online distance education courses from home, and percent of those public school 

districts that provided or paid for various items for all or some of the students 

accessing online distance education courses from home, by district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05................................................................................................... B-24 

B-21 Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts by use of 

technology-based distance education courses and district characteristics: 2002–03 

and 2004–05.................................................................................................................. B-25 

B-22 Standard errors for the change in the number of enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses in public school districts: 2002–03 and 2004–05 .............. B-26 

B-23 Standard errors for the change in the technologies used as primary modes of 

instructional delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses in 

which students in public school districts were enrolled: 2002–03 to 2004–05............. B-27 

B-24 Standard errors for the technologies used as primary modes of instructional 

delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses in districts that had 

technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03, but did not have 

technology-based distance education enrollments anymore in 2004–05...................... B-28 

B-25 Standard errors for the technologies used as primary modes of instructional 

delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses in districts that did 

not have technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03, but started 

using technology-based distance education in 2004–05 ............................................... B-29 
xxiii 

List of Figures 

Figure Page 

1 Percentage distribution of public schools with students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses, by instructional level: 2004–05 .............................. 14 

2 Percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses of students regularly enrolled in public school districts, by instructional 

level: 2004–05............................................................................................................... 18 

3 Number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses, 

by instructional level: 2002–03 to 2004–05.................................................................. 19 

4 Percentage distribution of public school districts reporting that various 

technologies were used as the primary mode of delivery for the greatest number of 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district 

were enrolled: 2004–05................................................................................................. 46 
xxiv 

This page intentionally left blank. 
1 

1. Introduction 

This report presents survey data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) about technology-based distance education courses in public school districts nationwide. For this 

study, distance education courses were defined as credit-granting courses offered to elementary and 

secondary school students enrolled in the district in which the teacher and students were in different 

locations. Distance education courses could originate from the respondent’s district or from other entities, 

such as a state virtual school or postsecondary institution. These courses could be delivered via audio, 

video (live or prerecorded), or Internet or other computer technologies. The following specific research 

questions are addressed in this report: 

• What percentage of public school districts have students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses? 

• What percentage of public schools have students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses, and does the percentage differ by instructional level? 

• What is the number of technology-based distance education enrollments in public 

schools, and does the number differ by instructional level? 

• What is the completion status of technology-based distance education enrollments in 

public schools? 

• Do districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses plan 

to expand their technology-based distance education courses? 

• What entities deliver technology-based distance education courses to public school 

students? 

• To what extent do districts use technology-based distance education to offer Advanced 

Placement (AP) and college-level courses to their students? 

• What technologies are used to deliver technology-based distance education courses? 

• Where do students access online distance education courses, and do districts provide 

financial or other infrastructure support to students to facilitate their access to online 

courses from home? 

• Do the data differ by district enrollment size, metropolitan status, region, or poverty 

concentration? 

• How have the findings for 2004–05 changed from the baseline data collected for 2002–

03? 
2 

Data from two NCES surveys, requested by the Office of Educational Technology (OET) in 

the U.S. Department of Education, are presented in this report. These surveys, “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” and “Distance Education 

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” were both conducted by 

NCES using the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). Findings from the first survey were presented in a 

previous NCES report (Setzer and Lewis 2005). The current report provides full statistical analysis of the 

data from the 2004–05 survey, compares those data with the baseline data from 2002–03, and provides 

longitudinal analysis of change in the districts that responded to both the 2002–03 and 2004–05 surveys. 

See appendix A for a more detailed discussion of the comparisons between the 2002–03 and 2004–05 

surveys. 

The remainder of this introductory section presents background information and a brief 

review of the literature on technology-based distance education in elementary and secondary schools, 

followed by a description of the study methodology and an overview of the organization of this report. 

Background 

Distance education is defined in the literature as the provision of educational materials, 

content, and instruction from teachers to students who are in different locations (as discussed in Arafeh 

2004, pp. 9–10). It may encompass various forms of course delivery, from written correspondence to 

prerecorded video to real-time online technologies. Research on this topic suggests that distance 

education course offerings and enrollments have proliferated at postsecondary education institutions 

within recent years (Lewis, Alexander, and Farris 1997; Lewis et al. 1999; Waits and Lewis 2003). As a 

highly proliferated nontraditional method of instructional delivery at the postsecondary level, technologybased distance education has been at the center of considerable attention and debate. 

The provision of technology-based distance education courses in public elementary and 

secondary schools is of increasing interest to both policymakers and school districts, as educators struggle 

to meet the challenges of overcrowded schools, student demand for courses, and delivery of advanced 

courses to students in rural settings (McDermon 2005–06; U.S. Department of Education 2004; 

Southwick 2003). Discussion on the proliferation of distance education is frequently seen in the media, 

including publications such as Education Week, eSchool News, the New York Times, and others (e.g., 

Cavanaugh 2006; Dillon 2006; eSchool News 2006). 
3 

There are some anecdotal reports that technology-based distance education at the elementary 

and secondary levels enables school districts to expand the range of courses available to their students, 

such as courses in advanced mathematics and science, foreign languages, or other core and noncore 

subjects, and may facilitate more flexibility in student schedules and instructional delivery (Thomas 1999; 

Yamashiro and Zucker 1999; Clark 2001, 2003; Wildavsky 2001; Doherty 2002; Kennedy-Manzo 2002; 

Trotter 2002; Cavanaugh 2006). Some accounts suggest that students also choose distance education 

courses to pass required courses that they have failed or that they need to take to fulfill state graduation 

requirements (Cavanaugh 2006). Media and industry reports indicate that courses preparing students for 

SAT tests and AP courses have also been an important part of the distance education course offering in 

high school settings in particular (Interactive Educational Systems Design 2002; Borja 2007; Miller 

2007). The use of distance education makes it possible for schools to offer more AP courses to their 

students, thereby accommodating individual schedules and catering to individual interests. A recent report 

from the Sloan Foundation, based on a study of public school districts, indicates that perceived 

importance by districts of online learning mostly relates to (in the order of importance) 1) offering courses 

not otherwise available at the school, 2) meeting the needs of specific groups of students, 3) offering AP 

or college-level courses, 4) reducing scheduling conflicts for students, and 5) permitting students to retake 

courses they failed (Picciano and Seaman 2007). 

Distance education increasingly relies on various technologies to facilitate teacher-student 

interaction from afar. Those technologies include prerecorded video, interactive video, asynchronous and 

synchronous Internet technologies, and others. Among these, online (Internet-based) technology is 

considered by some policymakers to be the cornerstone of the educational landscape of the future1

 (U.S. 

Department of Education 2004). According to a recent industry report, some of the most important 

reasons for schools and districts to adopt online courses are being able to deliver broader curriculum costeffectively, expanding college preparation/Advanced Placement courses, providing equal access to 

curriculum for schools with limited resources, and resolving scheduling conflicts (Interactive Educational 

Systems Design 2002). The reported barriers to online course implementation that were mentioned 

include lack of funding, lack of evidence that online courses are effective, difficulty finding online 

courses that would meet local needs and standards, lack of interest at the school level, and lack of interest 

at the district level. 

Some within the distance education field have come to view virtual (cyber) schools offering 

online distance education as a way to meet varied student needs at elementary and secondary instructional 

 

1

Online technology has become highly accessible in American schools, with nearly 100 percent of public schools in the United States having 

access to the Internet and 97 percent of them using high-speed broadband connections by fall 2005. The number of students in the U.S. public 

schools for each Internet-connected computer in 2005 was 3.8, a decrease from the 12.1 to 1 ratio in 1998 (Wells and Lewis 2006). 
4 

levels (Clark 2001; Berge and Clark 2005). Most virtual schools tend to be at the high school level; 

however, some are also offering courses at the middle and elementary school levels. By 2007, 23 states 

had established virtual schools (Technology Counts 2007), although the funding models for such statesponsored efforts remain different across the country. Some arrangements are entirely dependent on state 

funding, others draw upon a mix of state and federal funding, while still others collect tuition or course 

fees from school districts and parents (Borja 2005). 

Study Methodology and Analyses 

To address the existing gap in knowledge about technology-based distance education in the 

nation’s public elementary and secondary schools, OET has twice requested the FRSS survey, “Distance 

Education Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students.” The first FRSS survey 

provided baseline data, gathered for the 12-month 2002–03 school year, on the prevalence of technologybased distance education courses across the nation. The study found that approximately 36 percent of 

public school districts and 9 percent of all public schools nationwide had students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses during the 12-month 2002–03 school year. The current 2004–05 study is 

the second collection of nationally representative data undertaken by NCES on this subject. 2

As with the 2002–03 baseline survey, the 2004–05 study was conducted through the NCES 

FRSS. The FRSS is designed to collect small amounts of policy-relevant data on a quick turnaround basis 

from nationally representative samples of various educational sectors, such as public schools and school 

districts. In both school years, the FRSS distance education survey was mailed to public school district 

superintendents, who were asked to review the questionnaire and determine the person in the district who 

was best suited to complete it. Suggested respondents were the director of curriculum, the technology 

coordinator, or the distance education coordinator. Respondents were provided with a definition and 

description of distance education courses. For both studies, distance education courses were defined as 

credit-granting courses offered to elementary and secondary school students enrolled in the district in 

which the teacher and students were in different locations. Distance education courses could originate 

from the respondent’s district or from other entities, such as a state virtual school or postsecondary 

institution. These courses could be delivered via audio, video (live or prerecorded), or Internet or other 

computer technologies. The technologies included Internet courses using synchronous (i.e., simultaneous 

 

2

The time frame for the first survey was the 12-month 2002–03 school year. It included technology-based distance education courses during the 

summer of 2002 or the summer of 2003, depending on how records were kept at the district. The time frame for the second survey was the 12-

month 2004–05 school year. It included technology-based distance education courses during the summer of 2004 or the summer of 2005, 

depending on how records were kept at the district. 
5 

or “real time”) computer-based instruction, Internet courses using asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) 

computer-based instruction, two-way interactive video (i.e., two-way video with two-way audio), oneway prerecorded video, and other technologies. Additionally, the distance education courses could 

include occasional face-to-face interactions between the teacher and the students. Districts were also 

instructed to include information about distance education Advanced Placement or college-level courses 

in which students in their district were enrolled. For purposes of this survey, respondents were instructed 

to exclude information about supplemental course materials, virtual field trips, online homework, staff 

professional development, or courses conducted mainly via written correspondence. 

The 2004–05 FRSS survey asked whether there were any public elementary or secondary 

school students in the district enrolled in distance education courses. Respondents were instructed to 

report only about distance education enrollments of students regularly enrolled in the district and to 

include all distance education courses in which students in the district were enrolled, regardless of where 

the courses originated. If the respondents indicated that there were public elementary or secondary school 

students in the district enrolled in distance education courses, they were asked to report the number of 

schools in their district with students enrolled in distance education courses by instructional level of the 

school. Respondents were also asked to report the number of distance education course enrollments in 

schools in their district by instructional level of the school and the completion status of those enrollments. 

Other survey items asked about students’ enrollment in AP and dual credit college-level courses offered 

via distance education, which entities delivered distance education courses, which technologies were used 

as primary modes of instructional delivery for distance education courses, and locations from which 

students accessed online distance education courses. Finally, respondents were asked whether their 

district had any plans to expand their distance education courses in the future.3

 The questionnaires used in 

both 2002–03 and 2004–05 are provided in appendix C. 

Questionnaires for the 2004–05 survey were mailed in fall 2005 to a nationally 

representative sample of 2,312 public school districts in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The 

sample was selected from the 2003–04 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) “Local Education Agency 

Universe Survey” file, which was the most current file available at the time of selection. Of the districts 

selected for the sample, 22 were deemed ineligible for the survey during data collection,4

 and 2,176 

completed questionnaires. The questionnaire responses were weighted to produce national estimates. The 

unweighted response rate was 95.0 percent, and the weighted response rate was 95.6 percent. To permit 

longitudinal analyses of the survey data, the sample of districts for the 2004–05 study was designed to 

 

3

To allow comparisons with the 2002–03 study, the 2004–05 study asked most of the questions that were included in the baseline questionnaire. 

4

Detailed information about why districts were identified as ineligible can be found in appendix A. 
6 

maximize overlap with the district sample for the 2002–03 baseline study. Of 2,312 districts in the 2004–

05 sample, 2,242 districts also had been sampled for the 2002–03 survey, resulting in an overlap of 97 

percent between the samples for the two surveys (see appendix A for a more detailed discussion of the 

sample and sampling frame). Although the study was designed primarily as a cross-sectional study, the 

use of the overlapping sample provides a longitudinal component that can be used to analyze responses 

from the two surveys. Such analyses require repeated measurements for the same districts that would not 

otherwise be possible with independent cross-sectional samples. 

When reviewing the cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, the reader should be aware 

that while cross-sectional analyses present data across districts, the longitudinal analyses present data 

showing change taking place at the individual district level. Specifically, the cross-sectional analyses 

indicate whether the overall proportion of districts in the nation with technology-based distance education 

increased, decreased, or stayed about the same over time, while the longitudinal analyses show what 

proportion of individual districts that had technology-based distance education in the first year of data 

collection still had it, and what proportion dropped it, in the second year of data collection. The 

longitudinal analyses also show what proportion of individual districts that did not have technology-based 

distance education in the first year of data collection started having students enrolled in this type of 

education courses in the second year of data collection. Similarly, while the cross-sectional analyses 

present data about the overall change in the proportions of districts in the nation that used particular 

technologies to deliver distance education courses, the longitudinal analyses make it possible to observe 

the proportions of individual districts that used a particular technology in the first year of data collection 

and then continued using it or switched to a different technology in the second year of data collection. In 

short, the cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses present complementary data examining different 

aspects of change over time. A more detailed discussion of the comparisons between the 2002–03 and 

2004–05 surveys is provided in appendix A. 

The data are presented by the following district characteristics, which are defined in more 

detail in appendix A: 

• district enrollment size (less than 2,500, 2,500 to 9,999, 10,000 or more—referred to as 

small, medium, and large, respectively); 

• metropolitan status (urban, suburban, rural); 

• region (Northeast, Southeast, Central, West); and 

• poverty concentration (less than 10 percent, 10 to 19 percent, 20 percent or more—

referred to as low, medium, and high, respectively). 
7 

In general, comparisons by these district characteristics are presented only where significant 

differences were detected and followed meaningful patterns. It is important to note that many of the 

district characteristics used for independent analysis may also be related to each other. For example, 

district enrollment size and metropolitan status are related, with urban districts typically being larger than 

rural districts. Other relationships between these analysis variables may also exist. This report is purely 

descriptive in nature. The variables examined here demonstrate the range of information that is available 

from the study (see the survey questionnaire in appendix C). 

All specific statements of comparison made in this report have been tested for statistical 

significance through t-tests and are significant at the 95 percent confidence level. However, not all 

statistically significant differences are reported. Throughout this report, differences that appear large 

(particularly those by district characteristics) may not be statistically significant, possibly due to relatively 

large standard errors surrounding the estimates, particularly among subgroups. A detailed description of 

the statistical tests supporting the survey findings can be found in appendix A. 

Organization of This Report 

This report presents information about technology-based distance education in public 

elementary and secondary schools in the 2004–05 school year and changes from the 2002–03 school year. 

The discussion is divided into chapters that reflect the major topics addressed by the questionnaire. 

Chapter 2 describes the prevalence of technology-based distance education courses in public school 

districts and public schools. Chapter 3 discusses technology-based distance education course enrollments 

at various instructional levels. It also presents completion status of course enrollments taken via 

technology-based distance education in 2004–05, as well as districts’ plans to expand technology-based 

distance education offerings in the future. Chapter 4 presents information about the entities that deliver 

technology-based distance education courses to students and reports about technology-based distance 

education course delivery by districts to students who are not regularly enrolled in the district. Chapter 5 

reports on the prevalence of AP and college-level courses delivered via technology-based distance 

education and presents the types of entities that deliver these AP and college-level courses to students. 

Chapter 6 outlines technologies that are used for delivering distance education courses. Chapter 7 presents 

a closer look at courses delivered online, including information on districts’ provision or payment for the 

infrastructure needed to access online courses from home. Chapter 8 presents longitudinal analysis of the 

data, including changes in prevalence of technology-based distance education courses and in technologies 

that are used for course delivery. Chapter 9 summarizes the findings and provides conclusions from the 
8 

study. A detailed discussion of the survey methodology and tables of standard errors for all data presented 

in this report are included as technical appendixes (appendixes A and B). The 2002–03 and 2004–05 

FRSS questionnaires are presented in appendix C. 
9 

2. Technology-Based Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Students 

The FRSS 2004–05 survey collected information on several key measures of availability of 

technology-based distance education in public elementary and secondary schools. First, the survey asked 

whether there were any public elementary or secondary school students in the district enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05 (12-month school year). Districts with students 

enrolled in such distance education courses were asked to indicate the number of schools with at least one 

student enrolled in technology-based distance education courses. 

Prevalence of Technology-Based Distance Education 

Courses in Public School Districts 

During the 12-month 2004–05 school year, 37 percent of public school districts had students 

in the district enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (table 1). This represents an 

estimated 5,670 of a total 15,190 public school districts in the country.5

The percentage of districts that had students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses in 2004–05 varied by district size, metropolitan status, region, and poverty concentration. Fifty 

percent of large districts had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, as 

compared to 35 percent of medium-sized districts and 37 percent of small districts (table 1). In addition, a 

greater percentage of districts located in rural areas than districts in suburban or urban areas indicated that 

they had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (45 percent compared to 32 

and 25 percent, respectively). Examination of regional differences indicates that larger percentages of 

districts located in the Southeast and Central regions had students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education than districts located in the Northeast and West (46 and 45 percent of districts compared to 22 

and 35 percent, respectively). The percentage of districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses was lower in the Northeast than in other regions (22 percent vs. 35 to 46 

percent). The percentage of districts having students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

 

5

 Whether a district had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses does not provide information about the number of 

schools with technology-based courses in the district, the number of technology-based distance education courses, or the number of enrollments 

in technology-based distance education courses. 
10 

courses also varied by districts’ poverty concentration. Thirty-five percent of districts in the lowest 

poverty areas had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, as compared to 42 

percent of districts with medium poverty concentration and 43 percent of districts with high poverty 

concentration. 

Table 1. Number of public school districts in the nation, number of public school districts with 

students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, and percent of public 

school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, 

by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Number of districts 

Number of districts 

with students 

enrolled in technologybased distance education 

courses 

Percent of districts 

 with students 

enrolled in technologybased distance education 

courses 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts............................................... 15,040 15,190 5,470 5,670 36 37

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.................................................................. 11,080 11,120 4,050 4,150 37 37

2,500 to 9,999.................................................................... 3,100 3,090 1,010 1,070 32 35

10,000 or more .................................................................. 820 850 410 430 50 50

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ................................................................................. 1,220 1,530 290 380 23 25

Suburban............................................................................ 6,150 6,700 1,680 2,120 27 32

Rural .................................................................................. 7,660 6,950 3,500 3,160 46 45

 

Region 

Northeast ........................................................................... 3,040 2,910 640 630 21 22

Southeast ........................................................................... 1,750 1,750 790 800 45 46

Central ............................................................................... 5,390 5,650 2,490 2,550 46 45

West................................................................................... 4,850 4,880 1,540 1,690 32 35

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent.......................................................... 4,850 5,210 1,610 1,840 33 35

10 to 19 percent................................................................. 5,330 5,070 2,220 2,140 42 42

20 percent or more............................................................. 3,690 3,330 1,560 1,440 42 43

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. For the 2002–03 study sample, there were 3 cases for which district enrollment size was 

missing and 112 cases for which poverty concentration was missing. For the 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district 

enrollment size was missing and 103 cases for which poverty concentration was missing. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on 

Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or 

missing data for district characteristics. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
11 

Prevalence of Technology-Based Distance Education 

Courses in Public Schools 

Ten percent of all public schools nationwide had students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses during the 12-month 2004–05 school year (table 2). This represents an 

estimated 9,050 public schools nationwide.6

 

Table 2. Percent of public schools in the nation with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses, by instructional level and district characteristics: 2002–03 

and 2004–05 

All instructional 

levels 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools1 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts........... 9 10 # 1 4 5 38 39 20 20

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.............................. 15 16 # 1! 4 4 44 44 29 28

2,500 to 9,999................................ 6 7 # # 4 4 31 33 10 13

10,000 or more .............................. 6 7 # # 4 6 34 38 8 8

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................. 5 5 # # 3 3 26 26 4 4

Suburban........................................ 7 9 # 1 4 6 34 39 13 16

Rural .............................................. 15 16 # 1! 4 5 47 48 32 30

 

Region 

Northeast ....................................... 5 6 # 1 1! 4 26 27 12! 11

Southeast ....................................... 10 12 # # 6 8 45 49 14 14

Central ........................................... 12 12 # 1! 3 4 46 46 28 29

West............................................... 8 9 # # 4 4 31 34 19 21

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent...................... 8 10 # 1 4 5 35 40 29 23

10 to 19 percent............................. 10 11 # # 4 5 40 44 23 18!

20 percent or more......................... 9 10 # 1 4 5 40 37 16 21!

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or those that are 

not divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 89,310 schools in the nation in 2002–03 and 

89,610 schools in the nation in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of 

Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

 

6

 This number is derived from the total number of schools in the nation. For the school year 2004–05, this number was estimated at 89,610. See 

table A-2 in the Technical Notes (appendix A) for the counts of the number of schools in the nation by instructional level and district 

characteristics. 
12 

The percentage of schools that had students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

in 2004–05 varied by district size, metropolitan status, and region. Although a greater percentage of large 

districts than medium or small districts had students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses (table 1), a greater percentage of schools in small districts had students enrolled in such distance 

education courses than did schools in medium or large districts (16 percent for small districts vs. 7 percent 

for both medium-sized and large districts) (table 2). 

A higher percentage of schools in rural districts than schools in suburban or urban districts 

had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (16 percent compared to 9 and 5 

percent, respectively) (table 2). Also, a greater percentage of schools in suburban districts than schools in 

urban districts had students enrolled in such distance education courses. In addition, greater percentages 

of schools in the Central and Southeast regions had students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses than did schools in the West and Northeast (12 percent for both Central and Southeast 

compared to 9 and 6 percent, respectively). 

The percentage of schools with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses varied substantially by the instructional level of the school. Overall, 39 percent of public high 

schools offered technology-based distance education courses, as compared to 20 percent of combined or 

ungraded schools,7

 5 percent of middle or junior high schools, and 1 percent of elementary schools (table 

2). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, the percentage of schools that had students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses at all instructional levels increased from 9 percent in 2002–

03 to 10 percent in 2004–05 (table 2). 

 

7

Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 
13 

Table 3 and figure 1 present the percentage distribution of public schools with students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses by instructional level. Among all public schools 

with students enrolled in technology-based distance education, 72 percent were high schools, 16 percent 

were combined or ungraded schools, 8 percent were middle or junior schools, and 3 percent were 

elementary schools. 

Table 3. Percentage distribution of public schools with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses, by instructional level and district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools1 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based 

 distance education .................................. 2 3 7 8 76 72 15 16

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ............................................... 1! 3! 4 5 73 68 22 25

2,500 to 9,999.................................................. 1! 3 10 10 81 78 8 9

10,000 or more ................................................ 3 4! 12 15 79 76 6 6

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban............................................................... 5! 5! 10 9 80 81 6 6!

Suburban.......................................................... 1! 4 9 12 80 74 9 10

Rural ................................................................ 1! 2! 5 5 73 68 21 25

 

Region 

Northeast ......................................................... 3! 12 3 10 81 67 12 12

Southeast ......................................................... 2 2 11 13 78 75 9 10

Central ............................................................. 1! 3! 5 6 77 71 17 20

West................................................................. 1! 1! 8 7 73 73 19 19

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent........................................ 1! 5 9 10 75 71 15 15

10 to 19 percent............................................... 2! 2! 7 9 76 77 15 13

20 percent or more .......................................... 1 3! 6 7 79 68 14 21

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 8,210 schools with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 9,050 schools with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. 

Census Bureau. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
14 

Figure 1. Percentage distribution of public schools with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education courses, by instructional level: 2004–05 

High schools

(72%)

Combined or 

ungraded schools

(16%)

Middle or junior 

high schools

(8%)

Elementary 

schools

(3%)

1

1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 9,050 schools with students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses in 2004–05. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
15 

3. Enrollments in Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses 

Districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses were asked 

to indicate the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses of students 

regularly enrolled in the districts. Course completion status was also explored. Additionally, districts were 

asked about their plans for the future expansion of distance education courses. 

Technology-Based Distance Education Enrollments 

by Instructional Level 

In 2004–05, there were an estimated 506,950 enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses in public school districts (table 4). If a student was enrolled in multiple distance 

education courses, districts were instructed to count the student once for each course in which he or she 

was enrolled. Thus, distance education enrollments may include duplicated counts of students. 8 Between 

2002–03 and 2004–05, the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses 

increased by 60 percent, from an estimated 317,070 enrollments in 2002–03 to 506,950 enrollments in 

2004–05. 

In 2002–03, three districts in the sample had enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses that exceeded the total unduplicated number of enrollments in the district, indicating 

enrollment in more than one distance education course per student. The weighted sum of the distance 

education enrollments in these three districts constituted 18 percent of the distance education enrollments 

in the nation in 2002–03. In 2004–05, seven districts in the sample had enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses that exceeded the total unduplicated number of enrollments in the district. The 

weighted sum of the distance education enrollments in these seven districts constituted 25 percent of the 

distance education enrollments in the nation in 2004–05. If the weighted sums of the distance education 

 

8

To put the number of enrollments in distance education courses in context, NCES reported 48,794,911 students enrolled in public elementary 

and secondary schools in 2004–05. It is important to note that distance education enrollments collected in the Fast Response Survey System 

(FRSS) survey may include duplicated counts of students, while the NCES estimate of 48,794,911 students enrolled in public elementary and 

secondary schools is an unduplicated count (Sable and Hill 2006, p. 9). That is, the unduplicated number of students enrolled in distance 

education courses could be smaller than the estimated 506,950 enrollments in distance education courses, since a student enrolled in multiple 

distance education courses was counted for each course in which he or she was enrolled. 
16 

enrollments for these districts are removed from the sums of the distance education enrollments for the 

two years, the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses would be an 

estimated 260,890 in 2002–03 and 380,240 in 2004–05 (not shown in tables).9

Table 4. Number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses of students 

regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by instructional level and district 

characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

All instructional 

levels 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools1 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based 

 distance education................. 317,070 506,950 2,780! 12,540! 6,390 15,150 214,140 309,630 93,760 169,630!

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.............................. 116,300 210,200 80! 610! 1,250! 6,060! 72,730 103,190 42,240! 100,340!

2,500 to 9,999................................ 82,370 102,730 230! 6,650! 1,870! 2,570 44,170 48,420 36,110 45,080

10,000 or more .............................. 118,390 193,440 2,480! 5,280! 3,270 6,520 97,240 157,440 15,410! 24,210

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................. 98,100 136,100 2,390! 3,340! 2,120! 2,640! 57,730 70,540 35,860 59,580

Suburban........................................ 119,880 267,420 110! 8,790! 2,520 8,890! 77,980 168,320 39,280! 81,420!

Rural .............................................. 99,080 103,430 270! 410! 1,760 3,620! 78,440 70,770 18,620 28,630

 

Region 

Northeast ....................................... 41,950! 108,300! 100! 570! 190! 3,870! 17,300 16,860 24,350! 87,000!

Southeast ....................................... 59,240 112,830 1,390! 1,900! 2,530 5,030 50,640 89,800 4,680 16,090

Central ........................................... 106,690 128,650 940! 9,870! 1,050! 2,130! 59,110 70,450 45,590 46,190!

West............................................... 109,190 157,180 350! 200! 2,620 4,110! 87,090 132,520 19,130! 20,350!

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent...................... 75,740 112,320 570! 10,120! 2,020 4,070 55,670 80,150 17,470! 17,980!

10 to 19 percent............................. 95,510 151,050 1,450! 2,020! 1,830 4,800 78,680 124,540 13,560 19,700

20 percent or more......................... 86,110 106,610 760! 400! 2,540! 6,280! 75,930 78,590 6,880 21,340

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: Sums are based on 5,470 districts in the nation with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03, and on 

5,670 districts in the nation with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. Enrollments may include 

duplicated counts of students, since districts were instructed to count a student enrolled in multiple courses for each course in which he or she was 

enrolled. For the 2002–03 study sample, there were 3 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 112 cases for which poverty 

concentration was missing. For the 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases for 

which poverty concentration was missing. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of 

Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or missing data for district characteristics. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

 

9

 The two districts with the largest distance education enrollments were in the sample in both years. These two districts accounted for 55,700 

distance education enrollments in 2002–03 and 86,180 distance education enrollments in 2004–05. 
17 

Of the total enrollments in 2004–05 in technology-based distance education courses, 61 

percent were in high schools and 33 percent were in combined or ungraded schools; the remaining 

enrollments were in middle or junior high schools and elementary schools (table 5 and figure 2). 

Table 5. Percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses of 

students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by instructional level and 

district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools1 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based 

 distance education .................... 1! 2! 2 3 68 61 30 33

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ................................. # # 1! 3! 63 49! 36! 48!

2,500 to 9,999.................................... # 6! 2! 3! 54 47 44 44

10,000 or more .................................. 2! 3! 3 3 82 81 13! 13

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban................................................. 2! 2! 2! 2! 59 52 37 44

Suburban............................................ # 3! 2! 3! 65 63 33! 30!

Rural .................................................. # # 2 3! 79 68 19 28

 

Region 

Northeast ........................................... # 1! # 4! 41! 16! 58! 80

Southeast ........................................... 2! 2! 4 4 85 80 8 14

Central ............................................... 1! 8! 1! 2! 55 55 43 36

West................................................... # # 2! 3! 80 84 18! 13!

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent.......................... 1! 9! 3 4! 74 71 23! 16!

10 to 19 percent................................. 2! 1! 2 3 82 82 14 13

20 percent or more ............................ 1! # 3! 6! 88 74 8 20

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 317,070 enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2002–03 and 506,950 enrollments in distance education courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were 

based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
18 

Figure 2. Percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses 

of students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by instructional level: 

2004–05 

High schools

(61%)

Combined or 

ungraded 

schools

(33%)

Middle or junior 

high schools

(3%)

Elementary 

schools

(2%)

1

1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 506,950 enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2004–05. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Figure 3 and table 4 show the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses by instructional level for 2002–03 and 2004–05. Enrollment in technology-based distance 

education courses among high school students increased from an estimated 214,140 to 309,630 between 

2002–03 and 2004–05.10 While the number of technology-based distance education enrollments increased 

between 2002–03 and 2004–05, no differences were detected between these two school years in the 

percentage distribution of technology-based distance education enrollments at different instructional 

levels (table 5). 

 

10The total unduplicated enrollment in public secondary schools increased from 4,338,000 in 2002–03 to 4,617,000 in 2004–05 (U.S. Department 

of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data, retrieved November 26, 2007, from 

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/tables/dt06_036.asp). 
19 

Figure 3. Number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses, by instructional 

level: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

2,780 6,390 12,540 15,150

309,630

169,630

93,760

214,140

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

Elementary 

schools

Middle or junior high

schools

High 

schools

Combined or 

ungraded schools

Instructional level

Number of 

enrollments

2002–03

2004–05

1

1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or that are not 

divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: There were estimated 317,070 enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 506,950 enrollments in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

The number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05 

varied considerably among districts, from just a few enrollments per district to more than 100.11 However, 

the majority of districts (57 percent) reported small numbers of technology-based distance education 

enrollments (1 to 20 enrollments), with a quarter of the districts (24 percent) having 5 or fewer 

enrollments, 13 percent having between 6 and 10 enrollments, and 20 percent having 11 to 20 enrollments 

(table 6). About a quarter (24 percent) of districts reported between 21 and 50 enrollments, 9 percent of 

districts reported 51 to 100 enrollments, and another 9 percent reported more than 100 enrollments in 

technology-based distance education courses. 

 

11The category “more than 100 enrollments” included districts with technology-based distance education enrollment ranging from 101 to more 

than 1,000. In 1 percent of the districts, the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses was more than 1,000. 
20 

Table 6. Percentage distribution of public school districts with students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses, by the number of distance education enrollments and 

district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Number of technology-based distance education enrollments 

1–5 6–10 11–20 21–50 51–100 More than 100 

District characteristic 

2002–

03 

2004–

05 

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03 

2004–

05 

2002–

03

2004–

05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education.......... 26 24 13 13 18 20 29 24 8 9 6 9

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500....................... 27 26 14 15 19 23 31 24 6 8 2! 5

2,500 to 9,999......................... 25 25 10 10 17 15 27 26 10 12 11 13

10,000 or more ....................... 13 5 7 9 11 12 15 15 15 13 38 45

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ...................................... 20 18! 3! 9 16 20! 17 13 15 7 29 34

Suburban................................. 33 26 12 10 16 16 21 25 9 12 8 11

Rural ....................................... 23 24 14 16 19 23 34 25 6 7 4 5

 

Region 

Northeast ................................ 33 38 11! 13! 16 15 28 20 8 8 4! 6

Southeast ................................ 25 17 9 12 15 17 23 20 11 14 17 19

Central .................................... 24 21 13 14 21 24 33 27 6 9 3 5

West........................................ 27 27 16 13 16 18 25 23 8 7 8 12

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent............... 30 29 15 13 18 19 25 23 7 9 5 7

10 to 19 percent...................... 29 24 14 14 15 19 29 26 7 9 6 8

20 percent or more 18 17 9 15 23 25 33 23 10 10 8 10

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

NOTE: Data presented in this table are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses in 2002–03 and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. For the 2002–03 study 

sample, there were 3 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 112 cases for which poverty concentration was missing. For the 

2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases for which poverty concentrations was 

missing. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census 

Bureau. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or missing data for district characteristics. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Having a large number of enrollments in technology-based distance education was related to 

district size, metropolitan status, and region. The percentage of districts with more than 100 technologybased distance education enrollments in 2004–05 increased with district size, from 5 percent of small 

districts, to 13 percent of medium-sized districts, to 45 percent of large districts (table 6). Also, the 

percentage of urban districts that had more than 100 enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses was larger than the percentages of suburban or rural districts (34 percent vs. 11 and 5 percent, 

respectively). Additionally, the percentage of districts located in the West and Southeast that had more 
21 

than 100 enrollments in technology-based distance education courses was larger than the percentage of 

districts located in the Northeast and Central regions (12 and 19 percent vs. 6 and 5 percent, respectively). 

Technology-Based Distance Education Enrollments 

by Completion Status 

In 2004–05, the survey asked about the completion status of technology-based distance 

education enrollments in the districts.12 The following options for completion status were provided: 

“course completion with a passing grade,” “course completion without a passing grade,” “incomplete,” 

“other,” and “don’t know course completion status.” Of the estimated 506,950 enrollments in 

technology-based distance education courses (table 4), 66 percent were completed with a passing grade 

and 6 percent were completed without a passing grade (table 7). The completion status was unknown for 

21 percent of the enrollments. 

Availability of information on course completion differed for districts by metropolitan 

status. Urban districts, which had the highest percentage of large numbers of technology-based distance 

education course enrollments (34 percent with more than 100 enrollments) (table 6), at the same time had 

the largest percentage of courses with an unknown completion status (46 percent) (table 7). 

 

12 This question was not asked for the 2002–03 year. 
22 

Table 7. Percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses of 

students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, by course completion status and 

district characteristics: 2004–05 

District characteristic 

Course 

completions 

with a 

passing grade

Course 

completions 

without a 

passing grade Incompletes Other 

Don’t know course 

completion status

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based distance 

 education courses...................... 66 6 4! 4! 21

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ................................. 77 3! 6! 5! 10!

2,500 to 9,999.................................... 62 9 3 1! 26!

10,000 or more .................................. 56645 30

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban................................................. 39 8 7! 1! 46

Suburban............................................ 76 5 3! 3 13!

Rural .................................................. 75 4! 3! 10! 7

 

Region 

Northeast ........................................... 87 8! 1! # 4!

Southeast ........................................... 67936 15

Central ............................................... 54 3! 2 8! 33!

West................................................... 60 3! 9! 1 26

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent.......................... 63452 27!

10 to 19 percent................................. 61545 24

20 percent or more ............................ 67 8 2! # 23!

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 506,950 enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by 

the U.S. Census Bureau. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
23 

Plans for Future Expansion of Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses 

Districts that reported offering technology-based distance education courses were asked 

whether they planned to expand their distance education courses in the future. Seventy-one percent of 

districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05 planned to 

expand their distance education courses in the future (table 8). Among districts with technology-based 

distance education courses, a greater percentage of large districts than medium-sized or small districts 

planned to expand their distance education courses (86 percent vs. 69 and 70 percent, respectively). Also, 

a greater percentage of urban than rural and suburban districts with technology-based distance education 

planned to expand their distance education offerings (86 percent vs. 69 and 71 percent, respectively). A 

greater percentage of districts with technology-based distance education in the Southeast than such 

districts in the West and Central regions planned future expansion (81 percent vs. 71 and 67 percent, 

respectively). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, there was no difference in the percentages of all districts 

with technology-based distance education that planned to expand their distance education courses. 

However, the percentages of large districts and urban districts with technology-based distance education 

that planned to expand their distance education courses did increase from 2002–03 to 2004–05. Seventysix percent of large districts with technology-based distance education expressed interest in 2002–03 in 

expanding their distance education courses, compared to 86 percent that expressed such interest in 2004–

05. The percentage of urban districts with technology-based distance education that expressed interest in 

expanding their distance education courses increased from 70 percent in 2002–03 to 86 percent in 2004–

05. 
24 

Table 8. Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses that were planning to expand distance education courses, by district 

characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses ............. 72 71

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ...................................................................................................................................................... 73 70

2,500 to 9,999 ........................................................................................................................................................ 68 69

10,000 or more ....................................................................................................................................................... 76 86

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban...................................................................................................................................................................... 70 86

Suburban ................................................................................................................................................................ 69 71

Rural....................................................................................................................................................................... 74 69

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................................................................................................................ 71 76

Southeast ................................................................................................................................................................ 77 81

Central .................................................................................................................................................................... 71 67

West........................................................................................................................................................................ 73 71

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent............................................................................................................................................... 69 67

10 to 19 percent...................................................................................................................................................... 71 70

20 percent or more ................................................................................................................................................. 78 78

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. 

Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
25 

4. Entities Delivering Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses 

Districts that reported having students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses were asked about the types of entities that delivered the distance education courses. Districts were 

also asked whether they, or schools located within their district, delivered any distance education courses 

to students who were not regularly enrolled in the district (e.g., to students from other districts, private 

school students, or homeschooled students). 

Entities Delivering Courses 

Districts were asked which entities delivered technology-based distance education courses to 

students regularly enrolled in their district. Entities included 

• an online charter school in the district;13 

• other schools in the district; 

• their district (i.e., delivered centrally from the district); 

• another local school district, or schools in another district, in their state; 

• education service agencies within their state (e.g., Board of Cooperative Educational 

Services [BOCES], Council on Occupational Education [COE], Intermediate Units [IU]) 

not including the state education agency or local school districts; 

• a state virtual school in their state (i.e., state-centralized K–12 courses available through 

Internet- or web-based methods); 

• a state virtual school in another state; 

• districts or schools in other states (other than state virtual schools); 

• a postsecondary institution; 

• an independent vendor; 

 

13 The 2002–03 survey questionnaire worded this entity as “cyber (i.e., online) charter school in the district,” which was unclear to some 

respondents. The wording on the 2004–05 survey questionnaire was changed to “online charter school in the district.” 
26 

• a non-U.S.-based public or private entity (e.g., school, university, private vendor); and 

• other entities. 

Postsecondary institutions were the leading providers of technology-based distance 

education courses to public school students in 2004–05. Of those districts that reported having students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, about half (47 percent) had distance education 

courses delivered by a postsecondary institution (tables 9 and 10).14 A third (33 percent) of districts with 

students in technology-based distance education had courses delivered by another local school district, or 

schools in other districts, within their state; 24 percent had students enrolled in distance education courses 

delivered by a state virtual school within their state; and 21 percent had students enrolled in courses 

delivered centrally from their district. Fifteen percent of districts with enrollments in technology-based 

distance education had students enrolled in distance education courses delivered by education service 

agencies within their state, and 14 percent had students enrolled in distance education courses delivered 

by independent vendors. 

Among the districts with technology-based distance education, a lower percentage of small 

districts than medium-sized and large districts had technology-based distance education courses delivered 

by other schools in the district (5 percent vs. 12 and 25 percent, respectively), by a state virtual school in 

their state (22 percent vs. 32 percent for each), by a state virtual school in another state (4 percent vs. 10 

and 12 percent, respectively), or by independent vendors (10 percent vs. 23 and 25 percent, respectively) 

(table 10). However, a greater percentage of small districts than medium-sized or large districts with 

technology-based distance education had courses delivered by postsecondary institutions (51 percent vs. 

40 and 33 percent, respectively). 

Among districts with technology-based distance education, greater percentages of urban and 

suburban districts than rural districts had technology-based distance education courses delivered by 

independent vendors (19 and 18 percent, respectively, vs. 10 percent) (table 10). A larger percentage of 

rural districts than urban districts with technology-based distance education had courses delivered by 

postsecondary institutions (51 percent vs. 35 percent). 

 

14 Districts could have more than one entity delivering technology-based distance education courses. 
27 

Table 9. Percentage distribution of public school districts indicating whether various entities 

delivered the technology-based distance education courses in which students in their 

district were enrolled: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Yes No Don’t know 

Entity 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

Online charter school in the district ............................................. 3 4 95 95 2 1!

Other schools in the district ......................................................... 8 8 91 91 1! 1

Their district (delivered centrally from the district) .................... 16 21 83 78 1! #

Another local school district, or schools in other districts, 

 in their state ............................................................................ 34 33 64 66 2 2

Education service agencies within their state1 ............................. 17 15 81 83 2 2

State virtual school in their state2

................................................. 18 24 81 75 1 1!

State virtual school in another state2 ............................................ 4 6 94 92 2 2

Districts or schools in other states3 .............................................. 4 4 94 94 2 2

Postsecondary institutions............................................................ 48 47 50 51 1! 2

Independent vendor...................................................................... 18 14 79 84 3 2

Non-U.S.-based public or private entity ...................................... — 1! — 97 — 2

Other4

............................................................................................ 3 2! 92 98 5 #

— Not available; information not collected in 2002–03. 

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1 This category does not include the state education agency or local school districts. 2 A state virtual school is a state-centralized collection of K–12 courses available through Internet- or web-based methods. 3 This category does not include state virtual schools. 

4 Other responses mentioned included consortiums of schools and community education programs. 

NOTE: Percentages in this table are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses 

in 2002–03 and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. Percentages of districts 

indicating “yes” for the various entities sum to more than 100 because districts could have more than one entity delivering distance education 

courses. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
28 

Table 10. Percent of public school districts indicating that various entities delivered the 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district were 

enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Online charter 

school in 

the district 

Other schools 

in the district 

Their 

district (delivered 

centrally from 

the district) 

Another local school 

district, or schools 

in other districts, 

in their state 

Education service 

agencies within 

their state1 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................. 3 4 8 8 16 21 34 33 17 15

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500......................... 3 4 5 5 15 22 39 37 18 15

2,500 to 9,999........................... 3! 2! 15 12 17 18 26 24 18 15

10,000 or more ......................... 5 4 28 25 22 25 13 18 14 12

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ........................................ 8! 12! 26 17! 24 31 21 15! 20 8

Suburban................................... 5 4! 9 7 15 17 25 25 19 17

Rural ......................................... 2! 3! 6 7 16 23 40 40 16 14

 

Region 

Northeast .................................. 4! 6! 11 3! 21 20 38 24 18 20

Southeast .................................. 1! # 16 15 15 14 27 23 18 17

Central ...................................... 3! 5! 7 7 16 24 39 40 17 14

West.......................................... 3! 3! 5 7 15 21 29 30 17 12

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................. 4 4! 9 8 15 19 33 30 15 16

10 to 19 percent........................ 3! 2! 7 8 13 21 33 38 19 15

20 percent or more.................... 1! 2! 10 6 21 20 38 30 17 16

See notes at end of table. 
29 

Table 10. Percent of public school districts indicating that various entities delivered the 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district were 

enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05—Continued 

State virtual school in 

their state2 

State virtual school in 

another state2 

Districts or schools 

in other states3 

Postsecondary 

institutions 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................. 18 244644 48 47

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500......................... 15 223444 54 51

2,500 to 9,999........................... 27 32 4 10 3! 5 30 40

10,000 or more ......................... 27 32 8 12 5 3 33 33

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ........................................ 16 24 6! 11! 3! 2! 22 35

Suburban................................... 19 24 4 7 2! 3! 44 45

Rural ......................................... 18 254554 53 51

 

Region 

Northeast .................................. 6! 15 3! 8! 5! 4! 39 31

Southeast .................................. 43 52 7 11 3! 4! 23 27

Central ...................................... 17 24 4 5 5! 4! 53 52

West.......................................... 12 14 3! 4! 4! 3! 58 57

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................. 15 22 5 10 5! 5! 49 47

10 to 19 percent........................ 18 25 4 2 4! 3! 50 51

20 percent or more.................... 22 28 3! 5! 4! 4! 46 45

See notes at end of table. 
30 

Table 10. Percent of public school districts indicating that various entities delivered the 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district were 

enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05—Continued 

Independent vendor 

Non-U.S.-based 

public or private entity Other4 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................. 18 14 — 1! 3 2!

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500......................... 16 10 — 1! 3! 2!

2,500 to 9,999........................... 23 23 — 1! 4 1!

10,000 or more ......................... 28 25 — 1! 3 1!

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ........................................ 28 19 — 3! 1! 1!

Suburban................................... 22 18 — # 4! 1!

Rural ......................................... 15 10 — 1! 2! 2!

 

Region 

Northeast .................................. 21 22 — ‡ 3! 1!

Southeast .................................. 20 17 — # 4! 3!

Central ...................................... 13 10 — 1! 3! 1!

West.......................................... 24 15 — 1! 2! 2!

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................. 21 16 — 2! 4! 1!

10 to 19 percent........................ 18 14 — 1! 2! 2!

20 percent or more.................... 14 12 — # 3! 1!

— Not available; information not collected in 2002–03. 

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

‡ Reporting standards not met; too few cases for a reliable estimate. 1 This category does not include the state education agency or local school districts. 2

 A state virtual school is a state-centralized collection of K–12 courses available through Internet- or web-based methods. 3

 This category does not include state virtual schools. 

4

 Other responses mentioned included consortiums of schools and community education programs. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 

and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were 

based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. Percentages sum to more than 100 because 

districts could have more than one entity delivering distance education courses. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
31 

Among the districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education, greater 

percentages of districts located in the Central region and the West had technology-based distance 

education courses delivered by postsecondary institutions than did districts located in the Northeast and 

Southeast (52 and 57 percent vs. 31 and 27 percent, respectively) (table 10). About half (52 percent) of 

districts in the Southeast with technology-based distance education had courses delivered by state virtual 

schools in their state, as compared to 15 percent of such districts in the Northeast, 24 percent in Central 

states, and 14 percent in the West.15 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, an increased percentage of districts with students enrolled 

in technology-based distance education courses had those courses delivered to their students centrally 

from their district (16 percent of districts in 2002–03 compared to 21 percent in 2004–05) (tables 9 and 

10). Also, the percentage of districts with technology-based distance education that had courses delivered 

by state virtual schools within their state increased from 18 percent in 2002–03 to 24 percent in 2004–05. 

Delivery of Courses to Students Not Regularly 

Enrolled in the District 

During the 12-month 2004–05 school year, about one-fifth (21 percent) of districts offering 

technology-based distance education courses delivered them to students who were not regularly enrolled 

in the district (e.g., to students from other districts, private school students, or homeschooled students) 

(table 11). No differences were observed in the percentages of districts with technology-based distance 

education courses that delivered such courses in 2004–05 by district size, metropolitan status, region, or 

poverty concentration. 

Among the districts with technology-based distance education, no overall change took place 

between 2002–03 and 2004–05 in delivery of technology-based distance education courses to students 

outside of their districts, with 21 percent of such districts providing distance education courses to students 

not regularly enrolled in the district in both school years (table 11). However, when compared to 2002–

03, there was a decrease in delivery of technology-based distance education courses to students not 

regularly enrolled in the district in the Northeast, from 29 percent in 2002–03 to 18 percent in 2004–05. 

 

15 This high percentage of districts in the Southeast may be due to the Florida Virtual School, the largest virtual school in the country sponsored 

by state funds. 
32 

Table 11. Percent of public school districts indicating that they delivered technology-based 

distance education courses to students who were not regularly enrolled in their district, 

by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses .............. 21 21

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................................................................................................................... 22 22

2,500 to 9,999 ......................................................................................................................................................... 18 19

10,000 or more ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 22

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................................................................................................................... 15 20

Suburban ................................................................................................................................................................. 20 17

Rural........................................................................................................................................................................ 22 24

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................................................................................................................. 29 18

Southeast ................................................................................................................................................................. 13 18

Central ..................................................................................................................................................................... 22 23

West......................................................................................................................................................................... 19 21

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................................................................................................................ 19 22

10 to 19 percent....................................................................................................................................................... 22 21

20 percent or more .................................................................................................................................................. 22 20

NOTE: Percentages are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 

and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were 

based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
33 

5. Advanced Placement and 

College-Level Courses Offered Through 

Technology-Based Distance Education 

Districts that reported having students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses were asked whether any of those distance education enrollments were in Advanced Placement 

(AP) or dual credit college-level courses.16 Districts were also asked about the entities that delivered AP 

and dual credit college-level courses that were offered to students via technology-based distance 

education. 

Advanced Placement Courses 

Twenty-five percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses had students enrolled in AP courses offered through technology-based distance 

education in 2004–05 (table 12). Having students enrolled in AP distance education courses was related to 

district size, with a greater percentage of large and medium-sized districts than small districts with 

technology-based distance education reporting distance education enrollments in AP courses (33 and 31 

percent, respectively, vs. 23 percent). The percentage of districts with technology-based distance 

education with students enrolled in AP courses offered through distance education was higher in the 

Southeast than in the Central region or in the West (44 percent vs. 23 and 15 percent, respectively). 

Overall, there were an estimated 17,530 enrollments in AP courses offered through technology-based 

distance education (not shown in tables), representing 3 percent of the total enrollments in technologybased distance education (table 12). 

 

16 While the 2002–03 survey asked only one question about both types of courses combined, the 2004–05 survey asked separate questions about 

AP and college-level courses. 
34 

Table 12. Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses indicating that students regularly enrolled in the district were 

enrolled in Advanced Placement courses offered through technology-based distance 

education, and percent of all enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses represented by enrollments in Advanced Placement courses, by district 

characteristics: 2004–05 

District characteristic 

Percent of districts with students 

enrolled in Advanced Placement 

courses offered through 

technology-based distance education 

Percent of all technology-based

 distance education enrollments 

that are in Advanced Placement 

distance education courses 

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based distance 

 education courses................................................. 25 3 

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ............................................................ 23 4!

2,500 to 9,999............................................................... 31 3 

10,000 or more ............................................................. 33 3 

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban............................................................................ 22 2 

Suburban....................................................................... 28 3 

Rural ............................................................................. 23 7 

 

Region 

Northeast ...................................................................... 32 2!

Southeast ...................................................................... 44 5 

Central .......................................................................... 23 5 

West.............................................................................. 15 2 

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent..................................................... 29 4 

10 to 19 percent............................................................ 24 5 

20 percent or more ....................................................... 24 6 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percents of districts with students enrolled in Advanced Placement courses offered 

through technology-based distance education are based on the estimated 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2004–05. Enrollments may include duplicated counts of students, since districts were instructed to count a student enrolled 

in multiple courses for each course in which he or she was enrolled. Percents of all technology-based distance education enrollments that are in 

Advanced Placement distance education courses are based on the estimated 506,950 enrollments in technology-based distance education courses 

in 2004–05. For the 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases for which poverty 

concentration was missing. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the 

U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
35 

The entities that delivered the AP courses included postsecondary institutions, public schools 

or school districts, state virtual schools, independent vendors, and other entities. Postsecondary 

institutions, public schools and school districts, and state virtual schools were the major providers of AP 

courses offered through technology-based distance education in the country. Among the districts with 

students in AP courses delivered through technology-based distance education, 36 percent had students 

enrolled in AP courses delivered by postsecondary institutions, 36 percent by public schools or districts, 

and 35 percent by state virtual schools (table 13).17 Thirteen percent of districts had AP courses delivered 

by independent vendors. 

Table 13. Percentage distribution of public school districts indicating whether various entities 

delivered the Advanced Placement technology-based distance education courses in 

which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 

Entity Yes No Don’t know

 

Postsecondary institutions............................................................................................................ 36 63 1!

Public schools or school districts................................................................................................. 36 63 #

State virtual schools ..................................................................................................................... 35 64 1!

Independent vendors .................................................................................................................... 13 86 1!

Other entity1 ................................................................................................................................. 3! 95 2!

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Other responses included educational service agencies and other private institutions. 

NOTE: Percentages in this table are based on the estimated 1,410 districts with students enrolled in Advanced Placement courses offered through 

technology-based distance education in 2004–05. Percentages of districts indicating “yes” for the various entities sum to more than 100 because 

districts could have more than one entity delivering technology-based distance education courses. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Dual Credit College-Level Courses 

Districts were also asked about dual credit college-level courses offered through technologybased distance education.18 Forty percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses had students enrolled in dual credit college-level courses offered through distance 

education in 2004–05 (table 14). 

 

17 Districts could have more than one entity delivering AP technology-based distance education courses. 18Dual credit college-level courses are courses or programs where high school students can earn both high school and postsecondary credits for 

the same courses. 
36 

Table 14. Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses indicating that students regularly enrolled in the district were 

enrolled in dual credit college-level courses offered through technology-based distance 

education, and percent of all enrollments in technology-based distance education 

courses represented by enrollments in dual credit college-level distance education 

courses, by district characteristics: 2004–05 

District characteristic 

Percent of districts with students enrolled 

in dual credit college-level courses 

offered through technology-based 

distance education 

Percent of all technology-based distance 

education enrollments that are in dual 

credit college-level distance education 

courses 

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based distance 

 education courses................................................. 40 12 

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................... 47 15 

2,500 to 9,999.......................................................... 22 8 

10,000 or more ........................................................ 20 10!

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................... 24 2 

Suburban.................................................................. 30 11!

Rural ........................................................................ 48 26 

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................. 20 3 

Southeast ................................................................. 20 6 

Central ..................................................................... 48 13 

West......................................................................... 44 21!

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................ 36 22 

10 to 19 percent....................................................... 42 11 

20 percent or more .................................................. 45 14 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percents of districts with students enrolled in college-level courses offered through 

technology-based distance education are based on the estimated 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses in 2004–05. For the 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases for which 

poverty concentration was missing. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education 

by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Among the districts with technology-based distance education enrollments, a greater 

percentage of small districts than medium-sized or large districts had students enrolled in dual credit 

college-level courses offered through technology-based distance education (47 percent vs. 22 and 20 

percent, respectively) (table 14). Also, a greater percentage of rural districts than urban and suburban 

districts with technology-based distance education had enrollments in dual credit college-level courses 

offered through distance education (48 percent vs. 24 and 30 percent, respectively). Additionally, among 

districts with technology-based distance education, greater percentages of districts in the Central region 
37 

and the West (48 and 44 percent, respectively) had students enrolled in dual credit college-level courses 

offered through distance education than did districts in the Northeast and Southeast (20 percent each). 

There were an estimated 59,410 enrollments in dual credit college-level courses offered 

through technology-based distance education in 2004–05 (not shown in tables), which represents 12 

percent of the total enrollments in technology-based distance education (table 14). The percentage that the 

enrollments in dual-credit courses represented among all enrollments in distance education was related to 

district metropolitan status, with rural districts higher than urban districts (26 percent vs. 2 percent). 

The entities that delivered the dual credit college-level distance education courses included 

postsecondary institutions, public schools or school districts, and other entities. Dual credit college-level 

courses delivered through technology-based distance education were mostly provided by postsecondary 

institutions (table 15). Among the districts with students in dual credit college-level distance education 

courses, 92 percent had students who received college-level distance education courses from 

postsecondary institutions, while 25 percent of those districts had students enrolled in college-level 

courses delivered by the public schools or school districts.19

Table 15. Percentage distribution of public school districts indicating whether various entities 

delivered the dual credit college-level technology-based distance education courses in 

which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 

Entity Yes No Don’t know

 

Postsecondary institutions............................................................................................................ 92 7 1!

Public school or school district .................................................................................................... 25 74 1!

Other entity 1 ................................................................................................................................ 2! 98 #

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Other responses included independent vendors, state board of education, and state online schools. 

NOTE: Percentages in this table are based on the estimated 2,250 districts with students enrolled in dual credit college-level courses offered 

through technology-based distance education in 2004–05. Percentages of districts indicating “yes” for the various entities sum to more than 100 

because districts could have more than one entity delivering distance education courses. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

 

19 Districts could have more than one entity delivering dual credit college-level distance education courses. 
38 

Advanced Placement and Dual Credit 

College-Level Courses Combined 

While the 2002–03 survey asked only one question about both types of courses combined, 

the 2004–05 survey asked separate questions about AP and college-level courses. In order to make 

comparisons between 2002–03 and 2004–05, data for AP and dual credit college-level courses for 2004–

05 were combined. Fifty-five percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses had students enrolled in one or both types of courses (i.e., AP and/or dual credit 

college-level courses) offered through distance education in 2004–05 (table 16). 

During the 2004–05 school year, 59 percent of small districts with technology-based 

distance education had students enrolled in AP or college-level courses offered through distance 

education, as compared to 44 percent of medium-sized and 45 percent of large districts with technologybased distance education (table 16). Also, a greater percentage of rural districts than urban and suburban 

districts with technology-based distance education had students enrolled in such courses (61 percent vs. 

41 and 48 percent, respectively). 

When combined, enrollments in AP and dual credit college-level courses accounted for an 

estimated 76,940 technology-based distance education course enrollments in 2004–05 (not shown in 

tables). The number of combined AP and college-level enrollments represents 15 percent of all 

technology-based distance education enrollments in 2004–05 (table 16). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, no differences were observed in the percentage of all 

technology-based distance education enrollments that were in AP or college level dual-credit distance 

education courses (table 16). 
39 

Table 16. Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses indicating that students regularly enrolled in the district were 

enrolled in Advanced Placement or dual credit college-level courses offered through 

distance education, and percent of all enrollments in technology-based education 

courses represented by enrollments in Advanced Placement or dual credit college-level 

courses offered through technology-based distance education, by district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Percent of districts with students enrolled in 

Advanced Placement or dual credit collegelevel courses offered through technologybased distance education 

Percent of all technology-based distance 

education enrollments that are in Advanced 

Placement or dual credit college-level 

distance education courses 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based distance 

 education courses............................................... 50 55 14 15

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................... 53 59 24 19

2,500 to 9,999.......................................................... 40 44 10 12

10,000 or more ........................................................ 47 45 8 13!

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................... 43 41 4 4

Suburban.................................................................. 45 48 12 14!

Rural ........................................................................ 53 61 28 33

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................. 43 46 10! 5!

Southeast ................................................................. 42 53 12 11

Central ..................................................................... 50 59 13 18

West......................................................................... 56 53 18 23

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................ 49 56 16 26!

10 to 19 percent....................................................... 47 57 18 16

20 percent or more .................................................. 56 56 18 20

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded data. Percents of districts with students enrolled in Advanced Placement or dual credit college-level 

courses offered through technology-based distance education are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses in 2002–03 and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–

05. For the 2002–03 study sample, there were 3 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 112 cases for which poverty 

concentration was missing. For the 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases for 

which poverty concentrations was missing. Percents of all technology-based distance education enrollments that are Advanced Placement of dual 

credit college-level distance education courses are based on the estimated 317,070 enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 

2002–03 and 506,950 enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based 

on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
40 

This page intentionally left blank. 
41 

6. Technologies Used for Delivering 

Distance Education Courses 

Districts that reported offering technology-based distance education courses were asked 

about the types of technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for any distance education 

courses in which students in the district were enrolled. The technologies included Internet courses using 

synchronous (i.e., simultaneous or “real-time”) computer-based instruction, Internet courses using 

asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) computer-based instruction, two-way interactive video, one-way 

prerecorded video, and other technologies. Districts were also asked which one of the technologies was 

used as a primary mode of instructional delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses. 

Technologies Used as the Primary Modes of Instructional 

Delivery for Any Technology-Based Distance Education 

Courses 

In 2004–05, the technology used by the greatest percentage of districts with technologybased distance education as a primary mode of instructional delivery for any technology-based distance 

education courses was asynchronous Internet technology (58 percent) (table 17). In addition, two-way 

interactive video was used as a primary mode of instructional delivery by 47 percent of these districts, and 

Internet technologies using synchronous computer-based instruction were used as a primary delivery 

mode by 24 percent of these districts. One-way prerecorded video was used as a primary mode by 11 

percent of districts with technology-based distance education, and other technologies (such as 

teleconferencing and CD-ROM) were used by 2 percent of these districts.20

Among the districts with technology-based distance education, the percentage of districts 

that used various technologies as the primary modes of instructional delivery for any technology-based 

distance education courses varied by district size and metropolitan status. The percentage of these districts 

that used Internet technology with asynchronous computer-based instruction as a primary mode of 

delivery for any distance education courses increased with district size, from 53 percent of small districts 

to 71 percent of medium-sized districts and 78 percent of large districts with technology-based distance 

 

20 Percentages sum to more than 100 because some districts used different types of technologies as primary modes of delivery for different 

distance education courses. 
42 

education (table 17). However, a greater percentage of small districts than medium-sized or large districts 

with technology-based distance education used two-way interactive video technology as a primary mode 

of delivery for any distance education courses (53 percent vs. 31 and 28 percent, respectively). 

Table 17. Percent of public school districts reporting that various technologies were used as 

primary modes of instructional delivery for any technology-based distance education 

courses in which students in their district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Internet courses 

using synchronous 

computer-based 

instruction1 

Internet courses 

using asynchronous 

computer-based 

instruction1

Two-way interactive 

video2 

One-way 

prerecorded video 

Other 

technologies3 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................... 21 24 47 58 55 47 16 11 4 2

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500........................... 19 22 42 53 60 53 16 10 5 2!

2,500 to 9,999............................. 21 28 60 71 45 31 15 14 3 2!

10,000 or more ........................... 31 32 71 78 33 28 18 17 6 3!

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban .......................................... 22 22 68 85 39 19 20 18! 3! 1!

Suburban..................................... 24 29 58 68 39 32 14 12 4! 2!

Rural ........................................... 19 22 40 48 64 60 16 10 5 3!

 

Region 

Northeast .................................... 19 26 46 62 54 33 8 10! 12! 2!

Southeast .................................... 30 29 52 65 48 43 19 17 5! 7!

Central ........................................ 21 23 41 53 59 54 16 8 2! 1!

West............................................ 15 24 56 60 53 43 18 14 4! 2!

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................... 18 25 55 64 47 41 13 11 4! 1!

10 to 19 percent.......................... 25 26 42 52 55 53 17 9 4! 3!

20 percent or more...................... 17 22 45 56 65 51 16 14 6! 3!

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Synchronous refers to simultaneous or “real-time” interactions, whereas asynchronous is defined as not simultaneous. 2

 Two-way interactive video refers to two-way video with two-way audio. 3

 Other technologies mentioned included teleconferencing, CD-ROM, and other software packages. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 

and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were 

based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. Percentages sum to more than 100 because some 

districts used different types of technologies as primary modes of instructional delivery for different distance education courses. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
43 

In addition, among districts with technology-based distance education, a greater percentage 

of urban districts than suburban and rural districts, and a greater percentage of suburban districts than 

rural districts, used asynchronous Internet technology as a primary mode of delivery for any distance 

education courses (85 percent for urban districts, 68 percent for suburban districts, and 48 percent for 

rural districts) (table 17). However, among those districts with technology-based distance education, a 

greater percentage of rural districts than suburban and urban districts, and a greater percentage of 

suburban districts than urban districts, used two-way interactive video as a primary mode of delivery for 

any distance education courses (60 percent for rural districts, 32 percent for suburban districts, and 19 

percent for urban districts). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, some changes were observed in the use of various 

technologies for any distance education courses. The use of Internet courses employing asynchronous 

instruction increased overall by 11 percentage points, from 47 percent of districts with technology-based 

distance education in 2002–03 to 58 percent of districts with technology-based distance education in 

2004–05, making it the primary mode of technology-based distance education delivery in 2004–05 (table 

17). At the same time, there was a decrease in the use of two-way interactive video, which was the 

primary mode in 2002–03, from 55 percent of districts with technology-based distance education in 

2002–03 to 47 percent of districts with technology-based distance education in 2004–05. 

Difference in Technology Use Within District Types 

The use of various distance education technologies as a primary mode of instructional 

delivery for any distance education courses varied within district types. District enrollment size was 

associated with the types of technology used. Among small districts with technology-based distance 

education enrollments, Internet courses with asynchronous computer-based instruction and courses using 

two-way interactive video were the most frequently cited primary modes of instructional delivery for any 

technology-based distance education courses, with both technologies reported by 53 percent of small 

districts, compared with 2 to 22 percent for all the remaining technologies (table 17). In both mediumsized and large districts with technology-based distance education enrollments, Internet courses using 

asynchronous computer-based instruction was the most frequently cited technology used as a primary 

mode of instructional delivery, reported by 71 percent of medium-sized districts (vs. 2 to 31 percent for 

all remaining technologies) and 78 percent of large districts (vs. 3 to 32 percent for all remaining 

technologies).21 

 

21 Districts could use different types of technologies as primary modes of instructional delivery for different distance education courses. 
44 

The metropolitan status of the district was also associated with the types of technologies 

used as a primary mode of distance education delivery. In both urban and suburban districts with students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, Internet courses using asynchronous computerbased instruction was the most frequently reported technology, cited by 85 percent of urban districts (vs. 1 

to 22 percent for all remaining technologies) and by 68 percent of suburban districts (vs. 2 to 32 percent 

for all remaining technologies) (table 17). In rural districts with technology-based distance education 

enrollments, two-way interactive video was the technology cited most often as a primary mode of 

delivery (60 percent vs. 3 to 48 percent for all remaining technologies). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, the observed change in the use of asynchronous Internet 

technologies varied within type of metropolitan status. Among urban districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education, the use of asynchronous Internet courses as a primary mode of 

delivery for any distance education courses increased from 68 percent of urban districts in 2002–03 to 85 

percent of urban districts in 2004–05 (table 17). Among suburban districts with technology-based 

distance education, the use of asynchronous Internet courses as a primary mode for delivery of any 

distance education courses increased from 58 percent in 2002–03 to 68 percent in 2004–05. No 

differences were observed in the percentages of rural districts with students in technology-based distance 

education courses that used asynchronous Internet technology between the two years. 

Technologies Used as the Primary Mode of Instructional 

Delivery for the Greatest Number of Courses 

Districts were also asked which one of the listed technologies was used as the primary mode 

of delivery for the greatest number of technology-based distance education courses. In 2004–05, two-way 

interactive video and asynchronous Internet technologies were about equally widespread among districts 

with technology-based distance education: 41 percent reported two-way interactive video and 40 percent 

reported Internet courses employing asynchronous computer-based instruction as being used for the 

greatest number of distance education courses (table 18). Figure 4 presents the percentage distribution of 

districts with technology-based distance education reporting that various technologies were used for the 

greatest number of distance education courses in their district. 
45 

Table 18. Percentage distribution of public school districts reporting that various technologies 

were used as the primary mode of delivery for the greatest number of technology-based 

distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled, by district 

characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Internet courses 

using synchronous 

computer-based 

instruction1 

Internet courses 

using asynchronous 

computer-based 

instruction1 

Two-way 

interactive 

video2 

One-way 

prerecorded video 

Other 

technologies3 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................... 9 13 34 40 49 41 7 4 1! 1!

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500........................... 8 13 29 34 54 48 7 4 1! 1!

2,500 to 9,999............................. 9 14 47 56 38 26 5 4 1! ‡

10,000 or more ........................... 11 14 59 63 24 19 3 3 2! 1!

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban .......................................... 9 8 56 76 32 13 2! 3! 1! 1!

Suburban..................................... 11 17 46 51 36 28 5 4! 1! #

Rural ........................................... 7 12 27 28 57 54 7 5 2! 1!

 

Region 

Northeast .................................... 6! 16 39 52 49 29 2! 3! 4! ‡

Southeast .................................... 14 15 39 44 39 32 7 6 1! 2!

Central ........................................ 11 12 27 33 54 51 8 4! 1! 1!

West............................................ 4! 13 41 46 47 36 6! 4! 2! 1!

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................... 8 13 42 47 42 37 5! 3! 2! #

10 to 19 percent.......................... 10 14 31 31 50 48 9 5 1! 2!

20 percent or more...................... 8 12 29 40 57 43 4! 5! 2! 1!

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

‡ Reporting standards not met; too few cases for a reliable estimate. 1

 Synchronous refers to simultaneous or “real-time” interactions, whereas asynchronous is defined as not simultaneous. 2

 Two-way interactive video refers to two-way video with two-way audio. 3

 Other technologies mentioned included teleconferencing, CD-ROM, and other software packages. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. 

Census Bureau. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding and not reporting where there are too few cases for a reliable estimate. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
46 

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of public school districts reporting that various technologies 

were used as the primary mode of delivery for the greatest number of technology-based 

distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 

Other 

technologies

(1%)

One-way 

prerecorded 

video

(4%)

Synchronous 

Internet

(13%)

Asynchronous 

Internet

(40%)

Two-way 

interactive 

video 

(41%)

3

 2

4

 1

1

 Internet courses using synchronous (i.e., simultaneous or “real time”) computer-based instruction. 2 Internet courses using asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) computer-based instruction. 3

 Two-way interactive video refers to two-way video with two-way audio. 4

 Other technologies mentioned included teleconferencing, CD-ROM, and other software packages. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on the estimated 5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. 

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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

The percentage of districts with technology-based distance education that used various 

technologies as the primary mode of instructional delivery for the greatest number of distance education 

courses varied by district size, metropolitan status, and region. A greater percentage of large and mediumsized districts than small districts with technology-based distance education used asynchronous Internet 

technologies for the greatest number of distance education courses (63 and 56 percent, respectively, vs. 34 

percent) (table 18). However, a greater percentage of small districts than medium-sized or large districts, 

and a greater percentage of medium-sized districts than large districts, used two-way interactive video for 

the greatest number of distance education courses, among districts with technology-based distance 

education (48 percent for small districts, 26 percent for medium-sized districts, and 19 percent for large 

districts). 
47 

In addition, among the districts with technology-based distance education, a greater 

percentage of urban than suburban and rural districts, and a greater percentage of suburban than rural 

districts, used asynchronous Internet technologies for the greatest number of distance education courses 

(76 percent for urban districts, 51 percent for suburban districts, and 28 percent for rural districts). 

However, among districts with technology-based distance education, a greater percentage of rural districts 

than suburban and urban districts, and a greater percentage of suburban districts than urban districts, used 

two-way interactive video for the greatest number of distance education courses (54 percent for rural 

districts, 28 percent for suburban districts, and 13 percent for urban districts). A greater percentage of 

districts with technology-based distance education in the Central region than such districts located in 

other regions of the country used two-way interactive video for the greatest number of distance education 

courses (51 percent vs. 29 to 36 percent). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, some changes occurred in the use of various technologies 

for delivery of the greatest number of distance education courses. The use of two-way interactive video 

for delivery of the greatest number of distance education courses decreased from 49 percent to 41 percent 

of districts with technology-based distance education enrollments, and the use of Internet asynchronous 

technologies increased from 34 percent to 40 percent of such districts (table 18). 

Difference in Technology Use Within District Types 

The use of distance education technologies as a primary mode of instructional delivery for 

the greatest number of distance education courses varied within district types. District enrollment size was 

associated with the types of technologies used. Among small districts with technology-based distance 

education enrollments, two-way interactive video technology was the most frequently cited technology 

used for the greatest number of distance education courses, with 48 percent of small districts selecting this 

technology compared with 1 to 34 percent for all the remaining technologies (table 18). Among mediumsized and large districts with technology-based distance education, asynchronous Internet technologies 

were the most frequently cited technologies used for the greatest number of distance education courses, 

with 56 percent of medium-sized districts selecting this technology compared with 4 to 26 percent for all 

remaining technologies, and 63 percent of large districts selecting this technology compared with 1 to 19 

percent for all remaining technologies. 

The type of technology used to deliver the greatest number of distance education courses in 

the district was also related to district metropolitan status. Among districts with technology-based 

distance education enrollments, asynchronous Internet technologies were used for the greatest number of 
48 

distance education courses in urban and suburban districts, with 76 percent of urban districts selecting this 

technology compared with 1 to 13 percent for all remaining technologies, and 51 percent of suburban 

districts selecting this technology compared with 4 to 28 percent for all remaining technologies. In rural 

districts with technology-based distance education, two-way interactive video was the technology used 

for the greatest number of distance education courses, with 54 percent of rural districts selecting this 

technology compared with 1 to 28 percent for all remaining technologies. 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, the observed change in the use of technologies varied 

within type of metropolitan status. The percentage of urban districts with technology-based distance 

education that used asynchronous Internet courses as a primary mode of delivery for the greatest number 

of technology-based distance education courses increased by 20 percentage points (from 56 percent in 

2002–03 to 76 percent in 2004–05) (table 18). In rural and suburban districts with technology-based 

distance education, no measurable change in their use of asynchronous Internet was observed. The 

percentage of urban districts with technology-based distance education that used two-way interactive 

video courses as a primary mode of delivery for the greatest number of technology-based distance 

education courses decreased by 19 percentage points (from 32 percent in 2002–03 to 13 percent in 2004–

05), and the percentage of suburban districts with technology-based distance education that used this 

technology as a primary mode of delivery for the greatest number of technology-based distance education 

courses decreased by 8 percentage points (from 36 percent in 2002–03 to 28 percent in 2004–05). In rural 

districts with technology-based distance education, no measurable change in their use of two-way 

interactive video was observed. 
49 

7. Online Distance Education Courses 

Districts with technology-based distance education were asked whether any students 

regularly enrolled in their district were enrolled in online distance education courses. Online distance 

education courses were defined as Internet courses using synchronous computer-based technology or 

Internet courses using asynchronous computer-based technology as primary modes of instructional 

delivery for any distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled. Districts with 

student enrollments in online courses were then asked about the location where students accessed their 

online education. When districts indicated having students accessing online courses from home, the 

district provision or payment for a computer, an Internet service provider, or other items was explored. 

Prevalence of Online Distance Education Courses 

Seventy-one percent of districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses in 2004–05 had students enrolled in online distance education courses (i.e., courses 

delivered over the Internet) (table 19).22 Prevalence of online courses was associated with district size, 

metropolitan status, and poverty concentration. Greater percentages of large and medium-sized districts 

than small districts with technology-based distance education had students enrolled in online distance 

education courses (87 and 82 percent vs. 66 percent, respectively). In addition, greater percentages of 

urban and suburban districts with technology-based distance education than such rural districts had 

students enrolled in online courses (91 and 82 percent vs. 60 percent, respectively). Among districts with 

technology-based distance education, a greater percentage of districts with low poverty concentration than 

districts with medium poverty concentration had students in online distance education courses (77 percent 

vs. 65 percent). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, there was an increase in the percentage of districts with 

technology-based distance education that had students enrolled in online distance education courses, from 

58 percent of districts with technology-based distance education in 2002–03 to 71 percent of districts with 

technology-based distance education in 2004–05 (table 19). 

 

22 The questionnaire instructed districts to indicate that they had online distance education courses if they indicated in the previous technology 

question that they had either Internet courses using synchronous computer-based instruction or Internet courses using asynchronous computerbased instruction. 
50 

Location Where Students Access Online 

Distance Education Courses 

In 2004–05, the greatest percentage of districts with students in online distance education 

courses had students accessing online courses from school (86 percent) (table 19). Fifty-nine percent of 

districts with students in online distance education courses had students accessing online courses from 

home, and 8 percent had students accessing online courses from some other location.23 

Table 19. Percent of public school districts with students enrolled in online distance education 

courses, and percent of those public school districts indicating the access location of the 

online courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Access location for online courses2 Districts with 

students enrolled in 

online distance 

education courses1 School Home Other location 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students enrolled 

 in technology-based distance education 

 courses ................................................................. 58 71 92 86 60 59 8 8 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ............................................................ 53 66 95 90 55 54 6! 7

2,500 to 9,999............................................................... 71 82 87 78 66 67 9 7

10,000 or more ............................................................. 80 87 87 79 77 74 17 15 

Metropolitan status 

Urban............................................................................ 74 91 89 80 76 74 19 14!

Suburban....................................................................... 71 82 88 81 67 63 7 8

Rural ............................................................................. 51 60 96 92 53 52 7! 6 

Region 

Northeast ...................................................................... 57 74 87 82 61 80 6! 5!

Southeast ...................................................................... 67 74 96 90 63 53 8 8

Central .......................................................................... 55 67 92 86 56 57 8 9

West.............................................................................. 61 73 93 86 64 56 9! 6! 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent..................................................... 65 77 90 83 64 63 7 9

10 to 19 percent............................................................ 56 65 93 88 60 58 7 5

20 percent or more ....................................................... 53 66 95 92 53 49 10! 6

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Percentages are based on the estimated 5,470 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 

5,670 districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2004–05. 2

 Percentages are based on the estimated 3,190 districts with students enrolled in online distance education courses in 2002–03 and 4,000 districts 

with students enrolled in online distance education courses in 2004–05. Percentages sum to more than 100 because districts could have students 

accessing online courses from more than one location. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. 

Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

 

23 Percentages sum to more than 100 because districts could have students accessing online courses from more than one location. 
51 

Among the districts with online distance education enrollments, the percentage of districts 

with students accessing online distance education courses from school varied by district size, metropolitan 

status, and poverty concentration. A greater percentage of small districts than medium-sized or large 

districts with online distance education enrollments had students accessing online distance education 

courses from school (90 percent vs. 78 and 79 percent, respectively) (table 19). In addition, a greater 

percentage of rural districts than urban or suburban districts with online distance education had students 

accessing online distance education courses from school (92 percent vs. 80 and 81 percent, respectively). 

Also, among districts with online distance education, a greater percentage of districts in high poverty 

areas than districts in low poverty areas had students accessing online courses from school (92 vs. 83 

percent). 

Accessing online courses from home also varied by district size, metropolitan status, and 

poverty concentration. Among districts with online distance education, a greater percentage of large 

districts than medium-sized or small districts had students accessing online courses from home (74 

percent vs. 67 and 54 percent, respectively). In addition, a greater percentage of urban districts with 

online distance education enrollments had students accessing online courses from home than did rural 

districts with online distance education enrollments (74 percent vs. 52 percent). A greater percentage of 

districts in low poverty areas than districts in high poverty areas had students accessing online courses 

from home, among districts with online distance education enrollments (63 percent vs. 49 percent). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, among the districts with online distance education 

enrollments, the overall percentage of districts that had students accessing their online courses from 

school decreased from 92 percent to 86 percent of districts with online distance education courses (table 

19). Among districts with online distance education enrollments, there was no change in the overall 

percentage of districts with students accessing online courses from home. However, an increase was 

observed in the percentage of districts in the Northeastern region of the country that had student accessing 

online courses from home, from 61 to 80 percent of districts with online distance education enrollments. 

Districts’ Provision of Infrastructure Needed to 

Access Online Courses From Home 

Districts with students accessing online distance education courses from home were asked 

whether they provided or paid for various items for all or some of those students who accessed online 

courses from home. Among the 59 percent of districts with students accessing online distance education 
52 

courses from home in 2004–05, about a fifth (19 percent) of these districts provided or paid for a 

computer for all those students and 10 percent did so for some of those students (table 20). Additionally, 

18 percent of these districts provided or paid for the Internet service provider for all those students, and 9 

percent did so for some of those students. 

Whether districts offered infrastructure support to their students was associated with district 

size. A quarter (25 percent) of small districts with students accessing online distance education from 

home provided or paid for computers for all students, as compared to 12 percent of medium-sized and 10 

percent of large districts with online distance education accessed from home. Also, a greater percentage 

of small districts than large districts with students accessing online distance education from home 

provided or paid for an Internet service provider for all students (22 percent vs. 8 percent). 

Between 2002–03 and 2004–05, there were no measurable changes in the percent of districts 

with online courses accessed from home that provided or paid for computers used to access those online 

distance education courses from home, either for all students or for some students (table 20). Similarly, no 

difference was detected in the percentage of such districts that provided or paid for the Internet service, 

either for all students or for some students accessing online distance education courses from home. 
53 

Table 20. Percent of public school districts with students accessing online distance education 

courses from home, and percent of those public school districts that provided or paid 

for various items for all or some of the students accessing online distance education 

courses from home, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Items provided or paid for by the district2 Districts with 

students accessing 

online distance 

education courses 

from home1 Computer Internet service provider Other 3 

For all 

students 

For some 

students 

For all 

students 

For some 

students 

For all 

students 

For some 

students 

District 

characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 

2002–

03 

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05 

2002–

03 

2004–

05 

2002–

03

2004–

05 

All public school 

 districts with 

 students 

 enrolled in 

 technology- 

 based 

 distance 

 education 

 courses ........... 60 59 23 19 8 10 26 18 7 9 6 8 2! 2! 

District enrollment 

 size 

Less than 2,500 ...... 55 54 29 25 7! 8 31 22 7! 9! 7! 8 2! 3!

2,500 to 9,999......... 66 67 17 12 9 12 20 13 5! 10 5! 9 3! 1!

10,000 or more ....... 77 74 10 10 11 14 14 8 9 13 5 9 4! 6 

Metropolitan status 

Urban...................... 76 74 9! 18! 16 12! 19! 18! 11! 11! 3! 11 7! 2!

Suburban................. 67 63 15 19 7! 7 19 16 6! 8 5! 7 1! 3!

Rural ....................... 53 52 33 20 8! 11 34 21 7! 11! 8! 8! 3! 2! 

Region 

Northeast ................ 61 80 14! 20 10! 12 27! 21 10! 13 5! 9! 1 ‡

Southeast ................ 63 53 30 26 6! 14 39 23 6! 11 4! 7! 2! 1!

Central .................... 56 57 27 22 3 4! 25 18 2! 8! 9! 10 1! 2!

West........................ 64 56 19 13! 15 14 20 14! 13! 9! 4! 5! 5! 5! 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 

 percent .............. 64 63 23 18 5! 11 24 15 4! 12 5! 9 # 2!

10 to 19 percent...... 60 58 21 16 6! 7 22 17 5! 9 5! 9! 2! 1!

20 percent or more . 53 49 29 25 16! 14! 36 21! 14! 9! 9! 6! 5! 7!

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

‡ Reporting standards not met; too few cases for a reliable estimate. 1

 Percentages are based on the estimated 3,190 districts with students enrolled in online distance education courses in 2002–03 and 4,000 districts 

with students enrolled in online distance education courses in 2004–05. 2

 Percentages are based on the estimated 1,910 districts with students accessing online distance education courses from home in 2002–03 and 

2,340 districts with students accessing online distance education courses from home in 2004–05. 3

 Examples include software programs and phone service for dial-up Internet service. 

NOTE: Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census 

Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
54 

This page intentionally left blank. 
55 

8. Longitudinal Analysis of Change: 

2002–03 to 2004–05 

This chapter discusses changes in technology-based distance education in public school 

districts from the 2002–03 school year to the 2004–05 school year. The analysis is based on data from the 

two FRSS distance education surveys administered to the sample of districts that responded in both the 

2002–03 and 2004–05 surveys (see appendix A for a more detailed discussion of the sample). Although 

the study was designed primarily as a cross-sectional study, the use of the overlapping sample provides a 

longitudinal component that can be used to analyze responses from the two surveys. Such analyses 

require repeated measurements for the same districts that would not otherwise be possible with 

independent cross-sectional samples. 

This longitudinal analysis was based on the sample of 1,992 districts that responded in both 

years and represents the estimated 14,740 districts in the nation that existed in 2002–03 and still existed in 

2004–05. The following sections examine changes in prevalence of technology-based distance education 

courses in individual public schools districts, as well as changes in the number of enrollments in courses 

offered through technology-based distance education. It also examines changes in technologies used as 

primary modes of instructional delivery. 

Change in Prevalence of Technology-Based Distance 

Education Courses in Public School Districts 

Among the estimated 14,740 districts in the nation that existed in both 2002–03 and 2004–

05, about a quarter (26 percent) had students enrolled in distance education courses in both 2002–03 and 

2004–05, and 52 percent did not have students enrolled in distance education courses in either 2002–03 or 

2004–05 (table 21). Eleven percent of the districts did not have students enrolled in distance education 

courses in 2002–03 but did have such enrollments in 2004–05, and 11 percent of districts had students 

enrolled in distance education courses in 2002–03 but not in 2004–05. 
56 

Table 21. Percentage distribution of public school districts by use of technology-based distance 

education courses and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

[Percentage distribution of districts]

District characteristic 

Districts with 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

and 2004–05

Districts with 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

but not in 2004–05

Districts without 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

but with 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2004–05 

Districts without 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

and 2004–05

Total ........................................................................... 26 11 11 52

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500............................................................. 27 10 10 53

2,500 to 9,999............................................................... 21 11 12 55

10,000 or more ............................................................. 37 13 13 36

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................................................ 14 8 10 68

Suburban....................................................................... 20 9 11 60

Rural ............................................................................. 35 13 10 43

 

Region 

Northeast ...................................................................... 13 7 8 72

Southeast ...................................................................... 32 13 13 42

Central .......................................................................... 35 12 10 42

West.............................................................................. 22 10 12 56

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent..................................................... 24 10 11 55

10 to 19 percent............................................................ 31 12 11 47

20 percent or more........................................................ 31 12 12 46

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 14,740 districts existed in 2002–03 and still 

existed in 2004–05. Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. 

Census Bureau. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Various district characteristics were related to whether the district had students enrolled in 

distance education courses in both 2002–03 and 2004–05, including district size, metropolitan status, 

region, and poverty concentration. Large districts represented a larger percentage of the districts with 

technology-based distance education in both 2002–03 and 2004–05 than medium-sized or small districts 

(37 percent vs. 21 and 27 percent, respectively) (table 21). In addition, rural districts represented 35 

percent of districts with students enrolled in distance education courses in both school years, compared to 

20 percent represented by suburban districts and 14 percent by urban districts. Also, districts in the 

Southeast and Central regions represented larger percentages of districts with students in distance 
57 

education courses in both school years than did districts in the Northeast and West (32 and 35 percent vs. 

13 and 22 percent, respectively). Finally, districts with medium and high poverty concentration 

represented a greater percentage of districts that had distance education enrollments in both 2002–03 and 

2004–05 than those with low poverty concentration (31 percent each vs. 24 percent, respectively). 

Change in the Number of Enrollments in Technology-Based 

Distance Education Courses in Public School Districts 

In order to further describe the change taking place in districts with regard to their use of 

technology-based distance education, change in the number of enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses was analyzed. This analysis was based on the estimated 7,020 districts that reported 

having distance education enrollments in 2002–03 or 2004–05 (or both) and excluded districts that did not 

have distance education enrollments in either of the two years under study. Thirty-five percent of districts 

that did not have technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03 reported having 1 to 5 

such enrollments in 2004–05, and 14 percent of those districts reported having 6 to 10 enrollments in 

2004–05 (table 22). Five percent of districts without any technology-based distance education enrollments 

in 2002–03 had more than 100 such enrollments in 2004–05. Among districts that in 2002–03 had 1 to 5 

distance education enrollments, 39 percent dropped distance education enrollments all together in 2004–

05, and 31 percent still had 1 to 5 enrollments in 2004–05. About a third of districts with larger numbers 

of enrollments in 2002–03 tended to maintain their number of enrollments in 2004–05, with 34 percent of 

districts with 21 to 50 enrollments in 2002–03 continuing to report 21 to 50 enrollments in 2004–05, and 

32 percent of districts with 51 to 100 enrollments in 2002–03 continuing to report 51 to 100 enrollments 

in 2004–05. Sixty-three percent of districts that had more than 100 enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses in 2002–03 continued having more than 100 such enrollments in 2004–05, 

while 9 percent of those districts dropped technology-based distance education in 2004–05. 
58 

Table 22. Change in the number of enrollments in technology-based distance education courses in 

public school districts: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

[Percentage distribution of districts]

Number of technology-based distance education enrollments in 2004–05 

Number of technology-based distance 

education enrollments in 2002–03 

No 

enrollments 1–5 6–10 11–20 21–50 51–100

More than 

100

No enrollments ......................................... † 35 14 19 20 7 5

1–5 ............................................................ 39 31 10 10 6 2! 1!

6–10 .......................................................... 42 16 9! 14 15 3! #

11–20 ........................................................ 33 11! 14 21 13 2! 6

21–50 ........................................................ 21 4! 9 21 34 8 2!

51–100 ...................................................... 8! # 3! 10! 35 32 12

More than 100........................................... 9 4! 1! 1! 10! 13 63

# Rounds to zero. 

† Not applicable. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 7,020 districts that had students enrolled in 

distance education courses in 2002–03 or 2004–05 or both. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Change in Technology Used for the Greatest Number 

of Distance Education Courses 

Further analysis focused on changes between 2002–03 and 2004–05 in the technologies used 

for the greatest number of distance education courses. This analysis was based on the estimated 3,870 

districts with distance education in both 2002–03 and 2004–05. Among the districts that in 2002–03 used 

Internet with synchronous computer-based instruction as the primary mode of instructional delivery for 

the greatest number of courses, 36 percent continued using this technology most commonly in 2004–05, 

while 42 percent switched to Internet courses with asynchronous computer-based instruction (table 23). 

Among the districts that in 2002–03 used Internet courses with asynchronous computer-based instruction 

as the most common mode of instruction, 70 percent continued using this technology for the greatest 

number of courses in 2004–05, while 13 percent of those districts switched to Internet courses with 

synchronous computer-based instruction, and 15 percent switched to two-way interactive video as their 

most common mode. 
59 

Table 23. Change in the technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for the 

greatest number of distance education courses in which students in public school 

districts were enrolled: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

[Percentage distribution of districts]

Technologies used in 2004–05 

Technologies used in 2002–03 

Internet courses 

using synchronous 

computer-based 

instruction1

Internet courses 

using 

asynchronous 

computer-based 

instruction1

Two-way 

interactive video2

One-way 

prerecorded video 

Other 

technologies3

Internet courses using synchronous 

 computer-based instruction1

............... 36 42 21! 1! #

Internet courses using asynchronous 

 computer-based instruction1

............... 13 70 15 2! #

Two-way interactive video2

...................... 8 7 82 2! 1!

One-way prerecorded video ..................... 9! 19! 13! 59 #

Other technologies3

................................... 21! 27! 52! # #

# Rounds to zero. 

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Synchronous refers to simultaneous or “real-time” interaction, whereas asynchronous is defined as not simultaneous. 2

 Two-way interactive video refers to two-way video with two-way audio. 3

 Other technologies mentioned included teleconferencing, CD-ROM, and other software packages. 

NOTE: Percentage distributions are based on the technology used as a primary mode of instructional delivery for the greatest number of distance 

education courses in 2002–03. Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 3,870 districts that had 

students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in both 2002–03 and 2004–05. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Among the districts that in 2002–03 used two-way interactive video as the primary mode of 

instructional delivery for the greatest number of courses, 82 percent continued using this technology as 

their most common mode in 2004–05 (table 23). Eight percent of these districts switched to Internet 

courses with synchronous computer-based instruction, and 7 percent switched to Internet courses with 

asynchronous computer-based instruction as their most common mode. Among the districts that in 2002–

03 used one-way prerecorded video as the primary mode of instruction for the greatest number of courses, 

59 percent continued using this technology as their most common mode in 2004–05. 
60 

Additional analyses examined technology usage in districts with distance education in either 

2002–03 or 2004–05, but not in both school years. Among the estimated 1,580 districts that had 

technology-based distance education course enrollments in 2002–03 but no longer had such enrollments 

in 2004–05, the technologies most commonly used for the greatest number of distance education courses 

in 2002–03 were two-way interactive video (40 percent) and asynchronous Internet technologies (39 

percent) (table 24). In addition, 10 percent used synchronous Internet technologies and 8 percent used 

one-way prerecorded video. 

Table 24. Technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for the greatest number of 

distance education courses in districts that had technology-based distance education 

enrollments in 2002–03, but did not have technology-based distance education 

enrollments anymore in 2004–05 

Technology Percent of districts

Internet courses using synchronous computer-based instruction1 ............................................................................. 10 

Internet courses using asynchronous computer-based instruction1 ........................................................................... 39 

Two-way interactive video2

........................................................................................................................................ 40 

One-way prerecorded video ....................................................................................................................................... 8 

Other technologies3

..................................................................................................................................................... 3!

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Synchronous refers to simultaneous or “real-time” interaction, whereas asynchronous is defined as not simultaneous. 2

 Two-way interactive video refers to two-way video with two-way audio. 3

 Other technologies mentioned included teleconferencing, CD-ROM, and other software packages. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 1,580 districts that had students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 but did not have technology-based distance education enrollments in 2004–05. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
61 

Among the estimated 1,570 districts that did not have technology-based distance education 

course enrollments in 2002–03 but did have such enrollments in 2004–05, the technology used most 

commonly for the greatest number of distance education courses in 2004–05 was asynchronous Internet 

technologies (62 percent) (table 25). In addition, 19 percent used two-way interactive video and 14 

percent used synchronous Internet technologies. 

Table 25. Technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery for the greatest number of 

distance education courses in districts that did not have technology-based distance 

education enrollments in 2002–03, but started using technology-based distance 

education in 2004–05 

Technology Percent of districts

Internet courses using synchronous computer-based instruction1 ................................................................................. 14 

Internet courses using asynchronous computer-based instruction1 ............................................................................... 62 

Two-way interactive video2

............................................................................................................................................ 19 

One-way prerecorded video ........................................................................................................................................... 2!

Other technologies3

......................................................................................................................................................... 2!

! Interpret data with caution; the coefficient of variation is greater than 30 percent. 1

 Synchronous refers to simultaneous or “real-time” interaction, whereas asynchronous is defined as not simultaneous. 2

 Two-way interactive video refers to two-way video with two-way audio. 3

 Other technologies mentioned included teleconferencing, CD-ROM, and other software packages. 

NOTE: Percentages are based on unrounded numbers. Percentages are based on the estimated 1,570 districts that had students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 but did not have technology-based distance education enrollments in 2004–05. 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), “Distance Education 

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
62 

This page intentionally left blank. 
63 

9. Summary and Conclusions 

Distance education in elementary and secondary grades has become an increasingly 

important element of the contemporary educational landscape, offering a way to help schools and school 

districts meet the increasing challenges of today’s classrooms, including student demands for courses, and 

demand for individualized schedules. Technology-based distance education courses are considered the 

future of distance education offerings, with online technologies looked upon by some policymakers as 

offering the greatest promise (U.S. Department of Education 2004). A need for systematic data on the 

prevalence and development of distance education has become apparent, since many states do not collect 

systematic data on the distance education programs delivered to students in their states (National Forum 

on Education Statistics 2006). 

This FRSS study of public school districts investigated the prevalence of technology-based 

distance education courses in public elementary and secondary schools for the 2004–05 school year. 

Specifically, the data presented in this report address the following general questions: 

• How prevalent is technology-based distance education? 

• How is technology-based distance education delivered and by whom? 

• How do districts and schools differ in the provision and delivery of technology-based 

distance education? 

• What changes have occurred in technology-based distance education since 2002–03? 

How Prevalent Is Technology-Based Distance Education in 

Public School Districts and Schools? 

The survey findings provide information on the prevalence of technology-based distance 

education in public school districts and public schools. During the 12-month 2004–05 school year, 37 

percent of public school districts and 10 percent of all public schools nationwide had students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses (tables 1 and 2). These percentages represent an estimated 

5,670 school districts and 9,050 public schools in the country. A quarter (25 percent) of districts that 

reported having students in technology-based distance education courses had students enrolled in 
64 

Advanced Placement (AP) courses offered through distance education (table 12), and 40 percent had 

students enrolled in dual credit college-level courses offered through distance education (table 14). 

The survey also found that the prevalence of technology-based distance education 

enrollments in public schools varied by the instructional level of the school. Overall, 39 percent of public 

high schools, 20 percent of combined or ungraded schools, 5 percent of middle schools, and 1 percent of 

elementary schools in the nation had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses 

(table 2). Among the public schools that had technology-based distance education enrollments, high 

schools represented 72 percent, combined or ungraded schools represented 16 percent, middle or junior 

high schools represented 8 percent, and elementary schools represented 3 percent of those schools (table 

3). 

There were an estimated 506,950 technology-based distance education enrollments in public 

school districts in 2004–05 (table 4). The majority of those distance education enrollments (61 percent) 

were at the high school level, 33 percent were in combined or ungraded schools, with the remaining 

enrollments in middle or junior high schools and in elementary schools (table 5). Three percent of all 

technology-based distance education enrollments were in AP courses (table 12) and 12 percent of all 

technology-based distance education enrollments were in dual credit college-level courses (table 14). The 

majority of districts with technology-based distance education (57 percent) reported distance education 

enrollments between 1 and 20, and 9 percent of such districts reported more than 100 distance education 

enrollments (table 6). The majority (71 percent) of districts with students enrolled in technology-based 

distance education planned to expand their distance education courses in the future (table 8). 

The survey explored completion of courses offered via technology-based distance education. 

Sixty-six percent of technology-based distance education enrollments were reported as completed with a 

passing grade, and 6 percent were reported as completed without a passing grade (table 7). For 21 percent 

of technology-based distance education enrollments, their completion status was unknown. 

How Is Technology-Based Distance Education 

Delivered and by Whom? 

Postsecondary institutions were the leading providers of technology-based distance 

education courses, with 47 percent of districts with technology-based distance education reporting having 

students enrolled in distance education courses delivered by a postsecondary institution (table 9). Other 
65 

frequent providers among districts with technology-based distance education courses were other local 

school districts or schools in other districts within their state (33 percent) and state virtual schools within 

the district’s state (24 percent). 

Among districts with Advanced Placement courses offered through technology-based 

distance education, the courses were most frequently provided by postsecondary institutions (36 percent 

of districts with AP courses), public schools and school districts (36 percent of districts with AP courses), 

and state virtual schools (35 percent of districts with AP courses) (table 13). Similarly, among districts 

with dual credit college-level distance education courses offered through technology-based distance 

education, the courses were most frequently provided by postsecondary institutions (92 percent of 

districts with these courses) (table 15). A quarter of districts with dual credit college-level courses had 

students enrolled in college-level courses delivered by a public school or school district. 

The survey explored technologies that were used as a primary mode of instructional delivery 

for any distance education courses to public schools students. Asynchronous Internet technology was 

used by the greatest percentage of districts with technology-based distance education (58 percent) to 

deliver any distance education courses (table 17). In addition, two-way interactive video was used as a 

primary mode of instructional delivery by 47 percent of districts with technology-based distance 

education. Synchronous Internet technologies were reported by 24 percent of districts with technologybased distance education, and one-way prerecorded video was reported by 11 percent of districts as 

primary modes of instructional delivery for any distance education courses. The survey also obtained 

information about which one of the technologies was used as the primary mode of instructional delivery 

for the greatest number of distance education courses. Districts with technology-based distance education 

used two-way interactive video and Internet-based asynchronous technologies about equally as the most 

common modes, with 41 percent of districts with technology-based distance education reporting two-way 

interactive video and 40 percent of these districts reporting asynchronous Internet instruction (table 18). 

Use of online distance education courses (i.e., courses delivered over the Internet) was also 

explored in more depth. The survey found that 71 percent of districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses had students enrolled in online courses, which were most 

frequently accessed from school (86 percent of districts with enrollments in online courses) (table 19). 

Additionally, 59 percent of the districts with online distance education enrollments reported that students 

accessed online courses from home, and 8 percent reported that students accessed online courses from 

some other location. Nineteen percent of districts with students accessing online distance education 

courses from home provided or paid for a computer for all those students, and 10 percent did so for some 

students (table 20). Eighteen percent of districts with students accessing online courses from home 
66 

provided or paid for the Internet service provider for all of those students, and 9 percent did so for some 

students. 

How Do Public School Districts and Schools Differ in the 

Provision and Delivery of Technology-Based Distance 

Education? 

The survey found some differences in the provision and delivery of technology-based 

distance education associated with various district characteristics, including district enrollment size, 

metropolitan location, region, and poverty concentration. 

Greater percentages of large districts than medium-sized or small districts had students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (50 percent vs. 35 and 37 percent, respectively) 

(table 1). Among the districts that had technology-based distance education enrollments, district size was 

related to districts having large numbers of distance education enrollments, with 45 percent of large 

districts reporting more than 100 enrollments in technology-based distance education courses, as 

compared to 13 percent of medium-sized districts and 5 percent of small districts (table 6). Greater 

percentages of large districts than small districts with technology-based distance education had courses 

delivered by other schools in their districts, by state virtual schools in their state or in another state, and 

by independent vendors (table 10). Also, greater percentages of large and medium-sized districts than 

small districts with technology-based distance education used asynchronous Internet technology as a 

primary mode of delivery for any technology-based distance education courses (78 and 71 percent vs. 53 

percent, respectively) (table 17), as well as for the greatest number of technology-based distance 

education courses (63 and 56 percent vs. 34 percent, respectively) (table 18). Finally, large districts more 

often than medium-sized or small districts with technology-based distance-education enrollments planned 

further expansion of their technology-based distance education courses (86 percent vs. 69 and 70 percent, 

respectively) (table 8). 

On the other hand, a greater percentage of schools in small districts than in medium-sized or 

large districts had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (16 percent of schools 

in small districts vs. 7 percent in both medium and large districts) (table 2). Among the districts with 

students in technology-based distance education courses, small districts more often than large districts 

reported their distance education course completions as being with a passing grade (table 7). A greater 

percentage of small districts than medium-sized or large districts with technology-based distance 
67 

education had student enrollments in dual credit college-level distance education courses (47 percent vs. 

22 and 20 percent, respectively) (table 14). Also, a greater percentage of small districts than mediumsized or large districts with technology-based distance education used postsecondary institutions as 

providers of technology-based distance education courses delivered to their students (51 percent vs. 40 

and 33 percent, respectively) (table 10). A greater percentage of small districts than medium-sized or 

large districts with technology-based distance education used two-way interactive video technology for 

any distance education courses (53 percent vs. 31 and 28 percent, respectively) (table 17), as well as for 

the greatest number of distance education courses (48 percent vs. 26 and 19 percent, respectively) (table 

18). Finally, among the districts with students accessing online distance education from home, 

approximately a quarter of small districts provided or paid for computers (25 percent) or Internet service 

providers (22 percent) for all those students, as compared to 8 to 13 percent of medium-sized and large 

districts that provided this kind of support to their students (table 20). 

The metropolitan status of the school district was associated with whether districts and 

schools had students in technology-based distance education. A greater percentage of rural districts than 

suburban or urban ones had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (45 percent 

vs. 32 and 25 percent, respectively) (table 1). Also, a greater percentage of schools in rural districts than 

suburban or urban districts had students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses (16 

percent vs. 9 and 5 percent, respectively) (table 2). Among the districts with technology-based distance 

education enrollments, rural districts more often than urban districts had students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses that were delivered by postsecondary institutions (table 10). In addition, 

among the districts with technology-based distance education, a greater percentage of rural districts than 

urban and suburban ones had students enrolled in AP courses or dual credit college-level courses 

delivered via technology-based means (61 percent vs. 41 and 48 percent) (table 16). Two-way interactive 

video was a primary mode of delivery for any technology-based distance education course in 60 percent 

of rural districts, compared to 32 percent of suburban districts and 19 percent of urban districts with 

technology-based distance education (table 17). Two-way video technology was also a primary mode of 

delivery for the greatest number of technology-based distance education courses more often in rural 

districts (54 percent) than in suburban districts (28 percent) and urban districts (13 percent) with 

technology-based distance education (table 18). 

Among the districts with technology-based distance education, urban districts more 

frequently had large numbers of technology-based distance education enrollments (more than 100 

enrollments) than did suburban or rural districts (34 percent vs. 11 and 5 percent, respectively) (table 6). 

At the same time, urban districts reported the highest percentages of course enrollments with unknown 

course completion status (46 percent), as compared to rural districts (7 percent) (table 7). Asynchronous 
68 

Internet technologies were the predominant mode of technology-based distance education course delivery, 

and were used in a greater percentage of urban districts than in suburban or rural districts with 

technology-based distance education as a primary mode of delivery for both any distance education 

courses (85 percent vs. 68 and 48 percent, respectively) (table 17), and the largest number of distance 

education courses (76 percent vs. 51 and 28 percent, respectively) (table 18). Finally, among the districts 

with technology-based distance education, a greater percentage of urban districts planned to expand their 

technology-based distance education offerings than suburban or rural districts (86 percent vs. 71 and 69 

percent, respectively) (table 8). 

What Changes Have Occurred in Technology-Based 

Distance Education Since 2002–03? 

Data for the 2002–03 and 2004–05 school years indicate that about the same percentage of 

districts had technology-based distance education enrollments in the two years (36 percent in 2002–03 

and 37 percent in 2004–05) (table 1), and that 9 percent of public schools in 2002–03 and 10 percent of 

public schools in 2004–05 had distance education enrollments (table 2). At the same time, the number of 

enrollments in technology-based distance education courses increased substantially, from an estimated 

317,070 enrollments in 2002–03 to 506,950 enrollments in 2004–05 (table 4). 

Longitudinal analysis of prevalence data24 revealed that within a substantial percentage of 

districts, there were enrollments in distance education in one of the years but not in the other year. Thus, 

while about a quarter of districts (26 percent) had students enrolled in technology-based distance 

education courses in both school years, 11 percent of districts did not have any students enrolled in 

distance education courses in 2002–03 but had distance education enrollments in 2004–05, and another 11 

percent of districts had distance education enrollments in 2002–03 but not in 2004–05 (table 21). Fiftytwo percent of districts did not have students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 

either of the two years. 

Further analysis of longitudinal data based on the districts that had technology-based 

distance education in one or both school years indicated that about a third (35 percent) of districts that did 

not have technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03 started with 1 to 5 such 

enrollments in 2004–05, and 14 percent of districts without technology-based distance education in 2002–

 

24 Longitudinal analysis of change was based on the estimated 14,740 districts in the nation that existed in 2002–03 and still existed in 2004–05 

(see appendix A for more information). 
69 

03 had 6 to 10 enrollments in 2004–05 (table 22). Five percent of districts without any technology-based 

distance education enrollments in 2002–03 had more than 100 distance education enrollments in 2004–05. 

Among districts that in 2002–03 had a small number of distance education enrollments (1 to 5 

enrollments), 39 percent dropped technology-based distance education enrollments all together in 2004–

05, and 31 percent still had 1 to 5 enrollments in 2004–05. About a third of districts with larger numbers 

of distance education enrollments in 2002–03 tended to maintain their number of enrollments in 2004–05. 

Thus, 34 percent of districts with 21 to 50 distance education enrollments in 2002–03 continued to report 

21 to 50 enrollments in 2004–05, and 32 percent of districts with 51 to 100 distance education 

enrollments continued to report 51 to 100 enrollments in 2004–05. Among districts that in 2002–03 had 

more than 100 distance education enrollments in technology-based distance education courses, 63 percent 

continued having more than 100 distance education enrollments in 2004–05, while 9 percent of those 

districts dropped technology-based distance education in 2004–05. 

Longitudinal analysis of the data for districts with technology-based distance education in 

both school years indicated that 82 percent of districts that used two-way interactive video as the most 

common mode of instructional delivery for the greatest number of technology-based distance education 

courses in 2002–03 continued using this technology as their most common mode in 2004–05, while 7 

percent of these districts switched to asynchronous Internet courses, and another 8 percent switched to 

synchronous Internet courses as their most common mode (table 23). Seventy percent of districts that 

used asynchronous Internet technology as their most common mode in 2002–03 continued using this 

technology as their most common mode in 2004–05, while 15 percent of these districts switched to twoway interactive video, and 13 percent switched to synchronous Internet courses as their most common 

mode in 2004–05. 

Further analysis was conducted of the technologies used by districts as most common modes 

to deliver the greatest number of courses. This analysis revealed that 40 percent of districts with 

technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 but not in 2004–05 used two-way interactive 

video as their most common mode of instruction, 39 percent of such districts used asynchronous Internet 

courses, 10 percent used synchronous Internet courses, and 8 percent used one-way prerecorded video in 

2002–03 (table 24). Sixty-two percent of districts that did not have technology-based distance education 

enrollments in 2002–03 but reported such enrollments in 2004–05 used asynchronous Internet 

technologies as the most common mode of instruction, 19 percent of such districts used two-way 

interactive video, and 14 percent used synchronous Internet technologies in 2004–05 (table 25). 
70 

Conclusions 

Findings from the 2002–03 and 2004–05 surveys suggest that technology-based distance 

education has established its presence in the nation’s public schools. Rapid technological developments 

and widespread availability of the Internet in public schools made online education increasingly 

accessible and common among schools and districts. However, more traditional video-based technologies 

remain widely used as well. Also, although postsecondary institutions are the leading providers of 

distance education to public school districts and schools, districts themselves increasingly provide 

distance education courses to students, and increasingly use educational content provided by their state 

virtual schools. 
71 

References 

Arafeh, S. (2004). The Implications of Information and Communications Technologies for Distance 

Education: Looking Toward the Future. Arlington, VA: SRI International. 

Berge, Z.L., and Clark, T. (2005). Virtual Schools: Planning for Success. New York: Teachers College 

Press. 

Borja, R.R. (2005, May 5). Cyber Schools’ Status. Education Week, 24(35): 22-23. 

Borja, R.R. (2007, March 30). Students Opting for AP Courses Online. Education Week, 26(31): 1, 16, 

18. 

Cavanaugh, S. (2006, October 25). To Tailor Schedules, Students Log in to Online Classes. Education 

Week, 26(9):1, 24. 

Clark, T. (2001). Virtual Schools: Trends and Issues. A Study of Virtual Schools in the United States. San 

Francisco: Distance Learning Network, WestEd. 

Clark, T. (2003). Virtual and Distance Education in American Schools. In M. Moore and W. Andersen 

(Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education (pp. 1-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Dillon, S. (2006, October 20). No Test Tubes? Debate on Virtual Science Classes. New York Times. 

Doherty, K.M. (2002, May 9). Students Speak Out. Education Week. Retrieved December 12, 2002, from 

http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc02. 

eSchool News. (2006, October). “Districts’ Virtual Schools Run Afoul of State Rules.” Retrieved October 

2, 2006, from www.eschoolnews.com. 

Interactive Educational Systems Design. (2002). Online Courses and Other Types of Online Learning for 

High School Students. New York: Apex Learning & Blackboard Inc. 

Kennedy-Manzo, K. (2002, May 9). Sizing Up Online Content. Education Week. Retrieved December 12, 

2002, from http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc02. 

Lewis, L., Alexander, D., and Farris, E. (1997). Distance Education in Higher Education Institutions

(NCES 98–062). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC. 

Lewis, L., Snow, K., Farris, E., and Levin, D. (1999). Distance Education at Postsecondary Education 

Institutions: 1997–98 (NCES 2000–013). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. 

Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

McDermon, L. (2005–06). Distance Learning: It’s Elementary! Learning and Leading with Technology: 

The ISTE Journal of Educational Technology Practice and Policy, 33(4): 28. 

Miller, P. (2007, April 4). Virtual Learning Still Going Strong. Education Week. Retrieved April 19, 

2007, from http://www2.edweek.org/rc/articles/2007/04/09/sow0405.h26.html. 
72 

National Forum on Education Statistics. (2006). Forum Guide to Virtual Education: In Search of High 

Quality Data to Support Distance Learning (NFES 2006-803). National Center for Education 

Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

Picciano, A.G., and Seaman, J. (2007). K–12 Online Learning: A Survey of U.S. School Districts 

Administrators. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium. 

Sable, S., and Hill, J. (2006). Overview of Public Elementary and Secondary School Students, Staff, 

Schools, School Districts, Revenues, and Expenditures: School Year 2004–05 and Fiscal Year 

2004 (NCES 2007–309). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 

U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Available online at www.edpubs.org or 

www.bookstore.gpo.gov/. 

Setzer, C.J., and Lewis, L. (2005). Distance Education Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary 

School Students: 2002–03 (NCES 2005–010). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of 

Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

Southwick, J. (2003). Distance Education in the Rural K–12 Environment. Computers in the Schools 

20(30): 27-32. 

Technology Counts: 10th Annual Report of the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center. 

Education Week, 26(30). Retrieved July 12, 2007, from 

http://www.edweek.org/ew/toc/2007/03/29/index.html. 

Thomas, W.R. (1999). Electronic Delivery of High School Courses: Status, Trends, and Issues. Atlanta, 

GA: Southern Regional Education Board. 

Trotter, A. (2002, May 9). E-Learning Goes to School. Education Week. Retrieved December 12, 2002, 

from http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc02. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2004). Toward a New Golden Age in 

American Education: How the Internet, the Law and Today’s Students are Revolutionizing 

Expectations. Washington, DC: Author. 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core Data retrieved 

November 26, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/tables/dt06_036.asp. 

Waits, T., and Lewis, L. (2003). Distance Education at Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institutions: 

2000–2001 (NCES 2003–017). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education 

Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

Wells, J., and Lewis, L. (2006). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994-2005 

(NCES 2007–020). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. 

Department of Education. Washington, DC. 

Wildavsky, B. (2001, October 15). Want More From High School? usnews.com. Retrieved October 21, 

2002, from http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/elearning/articles/k12.htm. 

Yamashiro, K., and Zucker, A. (1999). An Expert Panel Review of the Quality of Virtual High School 

Courses: Final Report. Arlington, VA: SRI International. 
A-1 

Appendix A 

Technical Notes 
A-2 

This page intentionally left blank. 
A-3 

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 issueoriented data within a relatively short timeframe. 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 1,000 to 1,500 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 classification variables. However, as the number of categories 

within the classification variables increases, the sample size within categories decreases, which results in 

larger sampling errors for the breakouts by classification variables. 

Sample Design 

The sample for the FRSS survey on distance education courses in 2004–05 consisted of 

2,312 public school districts in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It was selected from the 2003–

04 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) Local Education Agency Universe file, which was the most 

current file available at the time of selection. The sampling frame included 14,063 regular public school 

districts and 1,513 “other education agencies” with at least one charter school (referred to here as charter 

school districts). For the purposes of the study, “regular” school districts included any local school district 

that was not a component of a supervisory union (i.e., Education Agency type 1 on the CCD) or was a 

local school district component of a supervisory union sharing a superintendent and administrative 

services with other local school districts (i.e., Education Agency type 2 on the CCD). Also, charter school 

districts were “other education agencies” (i.e., districts with Education Agency type 7 on the CCD) that, 

when matched against the corresponding 2003–04 CCD Public School Universe file, had at least one 

charter school (i.e., had at least one school for which CHARTR03 = 1). Excluded from the sampling 

frame were districts in the outlying U.S. territories and regular districts with no enrollments or missing 

enrollments.1

 The sample of 2,312 districts included 2,211 regular school districts and 101 charter school 

 

1 Charter school districts were included even if enrollment data were missing. 
A-4 

districts. To allow for longitudinal analyses, the sample was designed to maximize overlap with the 

sample for the FRSS survey on distance education courses in 2002–03.2

 Ninety-seven percent of the 

districts in the sample for the 2004–05 survey were also in the sample for the 2002–03 survey.3

 Although 

the study was designed primarily as a cross-sectional study, the use of the overlapping sample provides a 

longitudinal component that can be used to simultaneously analyze responses from the two surveys. Such 

analyses require repeated measurements for the same districts that would not otherwise be possible with 

independent cross-sectional samples. 

The school district sampling frame was stratified by district type (regular or charter), 

enrollment size (less than 1,000; 1,000 to 2,499; 2,500 to 9,999; 10,000 to 99,999; and 100,000 or more), 

and percentage of children in the district ages 5–17 in families living below the poverty level (less than 

10 percent, 10 to 19.99 percent, 20 to 29.99 percent, and 30 percent or more).4

 Districts in the frame were 

then sorted by type of locale (city, urban fringe, town, rural)5

 and region (Northeast, Southeast, Central, 

West) to induce additional implicit stratification. 

Data Collection and Response Rates 

Questionnaires and cover letters for the 2004–05 study were mailed to the superintendent of 

each sampled district in November 2005. The letter introduced the study and requested that the 

questionnaire be completed by the district’s director of curriculum and instruction, the technology 

coordinator, the distance education coordinator, or another staff member who was most knowledgeable 

about the district’s distance education courses. Respondents were offered the option of completing the 

survey via the Web or by mail. Telephone follow-up for survey nonresponse was completed at the end of 

May 2006. Telephone follow-up for quality control and data clarification was completed in November 

2006. 

 

2

The sample for the FRSS survey on distance education courses in 2002–03 used the same sample design and consisted of 2,305 public school 

districts in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It was selected from the 2001–02 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) Local Education 

Agency Universe file, which was the most current file available at the time of selection. The sampling frame included 14,229 regular public 

school districts and 989 “other education agencies” with at least one charter school. 3

Of the 2,312 districts selected for the 2004–05 distance education survey, 2,242 districts had also been selected for the 2002–03 distance 

education survey. 

4

Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau and 

contained in U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS) “Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, 

Title I Eligibility Database, 2002.” For detailed information on the methodology used to create these estimates, please refer to 

www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/index.html. The sampling categories were collapsed for analysis; see the section of this report on Definitions 

of Analysis Variables for more details. 

5

The 2003–04 CCD file contains two “urbanicity” variables: a three-category variable for metropolitan status (MSC03), and an eight-category 

variable for type of locale (LOCALE03). Type of locale was collapsed into four categories (city, urban fringe, town, and rural) and used for 

sampling, while metropolitan status was used for analysis (called urban, suburban, and rural for this report; see the section of this report on 

Definitions of Analysis Variables for more details). 
A-5 

Of the 2,312 districts in the sample, 22 districts were found to be ineligible for the survey for 

some reason. Of these 22 districts, 13 were found to be ineligible for the survey because they no longer 

existed, and 6 were found to be ineligible because they were merged (2 were merged with another 

sampled district and 4 were consolidated with another district not sampled for this study). Another three 

districts were found to be ineligible because they did not meet some other criteria for inclusion in the 

sample (e.g., they were administrative arms of a Board of Education). This left a total of 2,290 eligible 

districts in the sample. Completed questionnaires were received from 2,176 districts, or 95.0 percent of 

the eligible districts (table A-1). Of the districts that completed the survey, 35 percent completed it via the 

Web, 38 percent completed it by mail, 10 percent completed it by fax, and 17 percent completed it by 

telephone.6

 

Table A-1. Number and percent of public school districts in the study, and the estimated number 

and percent in the nation, for the total sample and for districts with students regularly 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 2004–05, 

by district characteristics 

Total sample 

Respondents (unweighted) National estimate (weighted) 

2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 

District characteristic Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

All public school districts............. 2,158 100 2,176 100 15,040 100 15,190 100 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500................................ 1,039 48 1,013 47 11,080 74 11,120 74 

2,500 to 9,999.................................. 722 34 740 34 3,100 21 3,090 21 

10,000 or more ................................ 394 18 416 19 820 5 850 6 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................... 282 13 296 14 1,220 8 1,530 10 

Suburban.......................................... 1,052 49 1,132 52 6,150 41 6,700 44 

Rural ................................................ 824 38 748 34 7,660 51 6,950 46 

Region 

Northeast ......................................... 459 21 466 21 3,040 20 2,910 19 

Southeast ......................................... 355 16 357 16 1,750 12 1,750 12 

Central ............................................. 700 32 700 32 5,390 36 5,650 37 

West................................................. 644 30 653 30 4,850 32 4,880 32 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent........................ 751 37 842 41 4,850 35 5,210 38 

10 to 19 percent............................... 776 38 746 36 5,330 38 5,070 37 

20 percent or more........................... 519 25 485 23 3,690 27 3,330 24 

See notes at end of table. 

 

6

In 2002–03, of the districts that completed the survey, approximately 38 percent completed it via mail, 35 percent via the Web, 17 percent via 

phone, and 10 percent via fax. 
A-6 

Table A-1. Number and percent of public school districts in the study, and the estimated number 

and percent in the nation, for the total sample and for districts with students regularly 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses in 2002–03 and 2004–05, 

by district characteristics—Continued 

Districts with students regularly enrolled in technology-based distance education courses 

Respondents (unweighted) National estimate (weighted) 

2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 

District characteristic Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

All public school districts............. 811 100 802 100 5,470 100 5,670 100 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500................................ 380 47 365 46 4,050 74 4,150 74 

2,500 to 9,999.................................. 232 29 238 30 1,010 18 1,070 19 

10,000 or more ................................ 199 25 198 25 410 7 430 8 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................... 101 12 109 14 290 5 380 7 

Suburban.......................................... 334 41 377 47 1,680 31 2,120 37 

Rural ................................................ 376 46 316 39 3,500 64 3,160 56 

Region 

Northeast ......................................... 109 13 113 14 640 12 630 11 

Southeast ......................................... 182 22 183 23 790 15 800 14 

Central ............................................. 295 36 283 35 2,490 46 2,550 45 

West................................................. 225 28 223 28 1,540 28 1,690 30 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent........................ 247 31 293 37 1,610 30 1,840 34 

10 to 19 percent............................... 331 41 288 37 2,220 41 2,140 40 

20 percent or more........................... 223 28 204 26 1,560 29 1,440 27 

NOTE: For the FRSS 2002–03 study sample, there were 3 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 112 cases for which poverty 

concentration was missing. For the FRSS 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases 

for which poverty concentration was missing. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or missing data for district characteristics. 

Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

The weighted response rate was 95.6 percent. The weighted number of eligible districts in 

the survey represents the estimated universe of public school districts in the 50 states and the District of 

Columbia. The estimated number of districts in the survey universe decreased from the 15,576 districts in 

the sampling frame to an estimated 15,190 because some of the districts were determined to be ineligible 

for the FRSS survey during data collection. 

There were 89,610 schools in the nation in the year 2004–05 (table A-2). Of those, 49,900 

were elementary schools, 15,710 were middle or junior high schools, 16,600 were high schools, and 7,400 

were combined or ungraded schools. 
A-7 

Table A-2. Number of schools in the nation, by instructional level and district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Number of schools 

All instructional 

levels 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools High schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools1

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts.... 89,310 89,610 50,880 49,900 15,520 15,710 16,610 16,600 6,310 7,400

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500....................... 30,580 30,220 14,300 13,270 5,310 5,310 7,490 7,420 3,480 4,220

2,500 to 9,999......................... 26,300 25,810 16,130 15,800 4,620 4,550 4,350 4,190 1,200 1,270

10,000 or more ....................... 32,390 33,270 20,440 20,670 5,590 5,780 4,760 4,920 1,610 1,900

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ...................................... 20,400 20,840 12,700 12,720 3,240 3,350 3,090 3,380 1,380 1,390

Suburban................................. 40,430 43,210 23,870 24,910 7,480 8,080 7,010 7,590 2,060 2,640

Rural ....................................... 28,480 25,560 14,310 12,270 4,790 4,280 6,510 5,640 2,870 3,380

 

Region 

Northeast ................................ 16,460 17,220 10,230 10,470 2,750 2,900 2,620 2,700 860 1,160

Southeast ................................ 18,840 19,650 10,620 10,930 3,540 3,590 3,390 3,450 1,290 1,680

Central .................................... 25,620 24,640 14,410 13,240 4,440 4,530 4,970 4,730 1,810 2,140

West........................................ 28,390 28,100 15,620 15,270 4,790 4,680 5,630 5,720 2,360 2,430

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent............... 27,910 29,770 16,720 17,100 5,300 5,590 4,750 5,170 1,130 1,910

10 to 19 percent...................... 33,230 32,760 18,630 18,140 5,980 6,020 6,380 6,070 2,240 2,530

20 percent or more.................. 26,090 23,860 15,060 13,380 4,080 3,760 4,770 4,330 2,180 2,390

1

 Combined or ungraded schools are those in which the grades offered in the school span both elementary and secondary grades or those that are 

not divided into grade levels. 

NOTE: For the FRSS 2002–03 study sample, there were 3 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 112 cases for which poverty 

concentration was missing. For the FRSS 2004–05 study sample, there were 7 cases for which district enrollment size was missing and 103 cases 

for which poverty concentration was missing. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or missing data for district characteristics. 

Poverty estimates for school districts were based on Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of Education by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; “Distance Education Courses for Public Elementary 

and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Comparisons With the 2002–03 FRSS Distance Education Survey 

In addition to providing full statistical analysis of the data from the 2004–05 FRSS distance 

education survey, the current report also compares the 2004–05 data to the baseline data collected in the 

2002–03 FRSS distance education survey. Two types of comparisons are possible with the FRSS data. 

The first type involves comparisons of the cross-sectional estimates for the two time periods. Crosssectional comparisons reflect the net change in a given characteristic across years including any changes 

in the underlying population. Findings from the 2002–03 survey were presented in a previous NCES 

report (Setzer and Lewis 2005) and can be used for cross-sectional comparisons. However, the enrollment 
A-8 

estimates for 2002–03 in the present report differ from those previously published due to extensive data 

quality control procedures in place during data collection for the 2004–05 survey. When a district 

reported distance education enrollments for 2004–05 that were very different from those they reported for 

2002–03, the district was contacted for verification of enrollment data for both school years. During these 

data clarification calls, some districts revised their enrollment data for 2002–03. Those revised estimates 

are presented in the tables of the current report. 

The current report also provides longitudinal analysis of change between 2002–03 and 

2004–05. The longitudinal analysis is based on data from the two FRSS distance education surveys, with 

the districts that existed in 2002–03 and still existed in 2004–05 included in the analysis. Districts that 

existed in 2002–03 and ceased to exist by 2004–05, as well as districts that did not exist in 2002–03 but 

were established by 2004–05, were excluded from this analysis. Unlike cross-sectional comparisons, 

longitudinal comparisons provide estimates of gross change within the same districts. The estimates of 

longitudinal change presented in this report were produced based on a set of weights designed to represent 

the population of districts that existed in 2002–03 and that still existed in 2004–05. 

Imputation for Item Nonresponse 

Data were imputed for all missing questionnaire data. These 19 items are listed in table A-3. 

The missing items included both numerical data, such as counts of enrollments in Advanced Placement 

courses offered through distance education, and categorical data, such as which technologies were used as 

primary modes of instructional delivery for distance education courses. Several questions contained 

multiple data items. These multiple items were imputed as a group to preserve their correlation. The 

missing data were imputed using a “hot-deck” approach to obtain a “donor” district from which the 

imputed values were derived.7

 Under the hot-deck approach, a donor district that matched selected 

characteristics of the district with missing data (the recipient district) was identified. The matching 

characteristics included district type, region, metropolitan status, district enrollment size class, and 

poverty concentration. Once a donor was found, it was used to derive the imputed values for the district 

with missing data. For categorical items, the imputed value was simply the corresponding value from the 

donor district. For numerical items, the imputed value was calculated by taking the donor’s response for 

that item (e.g., number of enrollments in advanced placement courses offered through distance education) 

and dividing that number by the total number of enrollments in distance education in the donor district. 

This ratio was then multiplied by the total number of enrollments in distance education in the recipient 

 

7

This is the same imputation approach as was used in the first Distance Education survey (see Setzer and Lewis 2005, p. A-7). 
A-9 

district to provide an imputed value. All missing items for a given district were imputed from the same 

donor whenever possible. 

Table A-3. Percent of unweighted and weighted cases with imputed data, by questionnaire items: 

2004–05 

Questionnaire item 

Respondent 

sample

(unweighted)

National 

estimate

(weighted)

Q6A Online charter school in district delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in the 

district were enrolled........................................................................................................................................ 0.46 0.20

Q6E Education service agencies within the state delivered any of the distance education courses in which 

students in the district were enrolled ............................................................................................................... 0.46 0.20

Q6F State virtual school in the state delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in the 

district were enrolled........................................................................................................................................ 0.46 0.20

Q6G State virtual school in another state delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in 

the district were enrolled.................................................................................................................................. 0.46 0.20

Q6H Districts or schools in other states delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in 

the district were enrolled.................................................................................................................................. 0.55 0.29

Q6I Postsecondary institution delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in the district 

were enrolled.................................................................................................................................................... 0.46 0.26

Q6J Independent vendor delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in the district were 

 enrolled............................................................................................................................................................. 0.55 0.29

Q6K Non-U.S.-based public or private entity delivered any of the distance education courses in which 

students in the district were enrolled ............................................................................................................... 0.46 0.20

Q6L Other entity delivered any of the distance education courses in which students in the district were 

enrolled............................................................................................................................................................. 0.46 0.20

Q8 Number of enrollments in Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education ...................... 0.50 0.24

Q9A Postsecondary institutions delivered Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education ...... 0.46 0.20

Q9B Public school or school district delivered Advanced Placement courses offered through distance 

 education .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.46 0.20

Q9C State virtual school delivered Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education ................. 0.46 0.20

Q9D Independent vendor delivered Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education ................ 0.46 0.20

Q9E Other entity delivered Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education............................. 0.46 0.20

Q11 Number of enrollments in college-level courses through distance education................................................. 0.51 0.24

Q14 Technologies used as a primary mode of instruction for the greatest number of distance education 

 courses.............................................................................................................................................................. 0.19 0.10

Q18 District delivered any distance education courses to students not regularly enrolled in the district ............. 0.46 0.18

Q19 District plans to expand distance education courses ...................................................................................... 0.69 0.38

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

Data Reliability 

While the “Distance Education Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School 

Students: 2004–05” 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. 
A-10 

Sampling Errors 

The responses were weighted to produce national estimates (see table A-1). The weights 

were designed to adjust for the variable probabilities of selection and differential nonresponse. The 

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

sampling variability. General sampling theory was used to estimate the sampling variability of the 

estimates and to test for statistically significant differences between estimates. 

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 

percentage of public school districts with students regularly enrolled in distance education courses in 

2004–05 is 37 percent and the standard error is 1.2 percent (tables 1 and 1a). The 95 percent confidence 

interval for the statistic extends from [37—(1.2 x 1.96)] to [37 + (1.2 x 1.96)], or from 34.6 to 

39.4 percent. The 1.96 is the critical value for a statistical test at the 0.05 significance level (where 0.05 

indicates the 5 percent of all possible samples that would be outside the range of the confidence interval). 

All specific statements of comparison made in this report have been tested for statistical significance 

through t-tests and are significant at the 95 percent confidence level. 

A similar approach was used to assess the significance of differences between groups within 

years and across years. For example, suppose that Y1 is an estimate of a characteristic for group 1 and Y2 

is the corresponding estimate for group 2. The estimated difference between groups was then computed as 

D = Y1 - Y2, and the associated standard error, SE(D), was computed using the jackknife replication 

method described below. The difference is then deemed to be statistically significant if the absolute value 

of t = D/SE(D) exceeds 1.96. Note that this general form of t-test applies to both subgroup comparisons 

within a year as well as comparisons across years. For comparisons across years, separate sets of 

jackknife replicate weights were created for cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses; however, in both 

cases, the replicate weights were designed to reflect the year-to-year correlation resulting from the use of 

the overlapping sample. 

Because the data from the FRSS distance education courses survey were collected using a 

complex sampling design, the variances of the estimates from this survey (e.g., estimates of percentages) 

are typically different from what would be expected from data collected with a simple random sample. 
A-11 

Not taking the complex sample design into account can lead to an underestimation of the standard errors 

associated with such estimates. To generate accurate standard errors for the estimates in this report, 

standard errors were computed using a technique known as jackknife replication. As with any replication 

method, jackknife replication involves constructing a number of subsamples (replicates) from the full 

sample and computing the statistic of interest for each replicate. The mean square error of the replicate 

estimates around the full sample estimate provides an estimate of the variance of the statistic. To 

construct the replications, 50 stratified subsamples of the full sample were created and then dropped one 

at a time to define 50 jackknife replicates. A computer program (WesVar) was used to calculate the 

estimates of standard errors. WesVar is a stand-alone Windows application that computes sampling errors 

from complex samples for a wide variety of statistics (totals, percents, ratios, log-odds ratios, general 

functions of estimates in tables, linear regression parameters, and logistic regression parameters). The 

standard errors for comparisons within the 2004–05 survey (e.g., comparing the percentage of urban and 

rural districts with students enrolled in distance education in 2004–05) are in appendix B. The replicate 

weights for the 2002–03 survey were recalculated from those used to calculate the standard errors that 

appear in the previous NCES publication (Setzer and Lewis 2005). This was done to incorporate the finite 

population correction for the 2002–03 data so that the standard errors for the 2002–03 data would be 

calculated in the same way as for the 2004–05 data. The standard errors, which are to be used for 

comparisons within the 2002–03 survey, are also in appendix B. 

In addition, because the sample for the 2004–05 distance education survey was designed to 

maximize the overlap with the sample for the 2002–03 distance education survey, a separate set of 

replicate weights was constructed for the cross-sectional comparisons of the 2002–03 and 2004–05 

surveys. This was necessary because the replicate weights created for the 2004–05 survey data, while 

appropriate for cross-sectional analyses of the 2004–05 survey, do not take account of the overlap in the 

samples between years. These additional replicate weights were created in a way that approximately 

reflects the correlation between years resulting from the overlap and were used to calculate the standard 

errors of the difference. These standard errors of the difference were used for cross-sectional comparisons 

of the 2002–03 and 2004–05 surveys (e.g., comparing the percentage of districts with students enrolled in 

distance education in 2002–03 and 2004–05). Replicate weights were also constructed for longitudinal 

comparisons of the overlapping districts. The weights for longitudinal analyses are different from those 

created for year-to-year cross-sectional comparisons because they apply only to the subset of districts in 

2002–03 that “survived” to 2004–05. The standard errors for the longitudinal comparisons of change 

(e.g., the percentage of districts with students enrolled in distance education in both 2002–03 and 2004–

05) are in tables B-21 through B-25 in appendix B. 
A-12 

Where appropriate, estimates with a coefficient of variation (CV) greater than 30 percent 

have been noted. The CV is a ratio of the standard error to the estimate, multiplied by 100 to obtain a 

percent. The CV is used to compare the variability of two or more estimates, where higher CV values 

indicate greater variability and lower CV values indicate less variability. 

 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 like unit and item nonresponse,8

 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 

distance learning specialists, instructional technology specialists, or other people at the district who were 

deemed to be the most knowledgeable about the district’s distance education courses. 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 

and the data requester at the Office of Educational Technology. In addition, manual and machine editing 

of the questionnaire responses was conducted to check the data for accuracy and consistency. Cases with 

missing or inconsistent items were recontacted by telephone to resolve problems. Data were entered with 

100 percent verification for surveys received by mail, fax, or telephone. 

Definitions of Analysis Variables 

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

example, district enrollment size and metropolitan status are related, with urban districts typically being 

larger than rural districts. Other relationships between these analysis variables may exist. However, this 

report focuses on bivariate relationships between the analysis variables and questionnaire variables rather 

than more complex analyses. 

 

8

Unit nonresponse typically refers to situations in which the survey was not completed by the respondent. Item nonresponse occurs when an item 

on the survey is blank or incomplete. 
A-13 

District Enrollment Size—This variable indicates the total number of students enrolled in the district 

based on data from the 2003–04 CCD. Data on this variable were missing for seven districts; districts 

with missing data were excluded from all analyses involving district enrollment size. The variable was 

collapsed into the following three categories: 

Less than 2,500 students

2,500 to 9,999 students

10,000 or more students 

Metropolitan Status—This variable indicates the type of community in which the district is located, as 

defined in the 2003–04 CCD (which uses definitions based on U.S. Census Bureau classifications). 

Metropolitan status is the classification of an education agency’s service area relative to a Metropolitan 

Statistical Area (MSA). An MSA is an area consisting of one or more contiguous counties (cities and 

towns in New England) that contain a core area with a large population nucleus, as well as adjacent 

communities having a high degree of economic and social integration with that core. An area is defined as 

an MSA if it is the only MSA in the immediate area and has a city of at least 50,000 population or it is an 

urbanized area of at least 50,000 with a total metropolitan population of at least 100,000 (75,000 in New 

England). The categories are described in more detail below. 

Urban—Primarily serves a central city of an MSA 

Suburban—Serves an MSA but not primarily its central city 

Rural—Does not serve an MSA 

Region—This variable classifies districts into one of the four geographic regions used by the Bureau of 

Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress. Data were obtained from the 2003–04 CCD Local Education Agency Universe file. The 

geographic regions are as follows: 

Northeast—Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont 

Southeast—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia 

Central—Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North 

Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin 

West—Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming 

Poverty Concentration—This variable indicates the percentage of children in the district ages 5–17 in 

families living below the poverty level, based on the Title I data provided to the U.S. Department of 

Education by the U.S. Census Bureau, “Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates.” Data on this variable 

were missing for 103 districts; districts with missing data were excluded from all analyses involving 

poverty concentration. The variable was collapsed into the following three categories: 

Less than 10 percent 

10 to 19 percent 

20 percent or more 
A-14 

Contact Information 

For more information about the survey, contact Bernard Greene, Early Childhood, 

International, and Crosscutting Studies Division, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of 

Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006; e-mail: 

Bernard.Greene@ed.gov; telephone (202) 502–7348. 
B-1 

Appendix B 

Standard Error Tables 
B-2 

This page intentionally left blank. 
B-3 

Table B-1. Standard errors for the number of public school districts in the nation, number of 

public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education 

courses, and percent of public school districts with students enrolled in technologybased distance education courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Number of districts 

Number of districts 

with students 

enrolled in technologybased distance education 

courses 

Percent of districts 

 with students 

enrolled in technologybased distance education 

courses 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts............................................... 53 86 179 186 1.2 1.2

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.................................................................. 50 99 170 181 1.5 1.6

2,500 to 9,999.................................................................... 7 7 55 51 1.8 1.6

10,000 or more .................................................................. 3 3 17 21 2.1 2.5

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ................................................................................. 73 100 31 45 2.7 2.8

Suburban............................................................................ 182 201 101 115 1.6 1.6

Rural .................................................................................. 176 213 179 168 1.9 1.9

 

Region 

Northeast ........................................................................... 118 159 70 62 2.2 2.0

Southeast ........................................................................... 91 94 64 67 2.6 3.2

Central ............................................................................... 150 197 134 161 2.3 2.4

West................................................................................... 159 140 112 121 2.2 2.1

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent.......................................................... 38 34 102 97 2.1 1.9

10 to 19 percent................................................................. 45 46 111 119 2.1 2.2

20 percent or more............................................................. 33 45 92 91 2.5 2.7

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-4 

Table B-2. Standard errors for the percent of public schools in the nation with students enrolled 

in technology-based distance education courses, by instructional level and district 

characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

All instructional 

levels 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts........... 0.3 0.3 † 0.1 0.4 0.5 1.2 1.1 1.9 1.6

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.............................. 0.7 0.8 † 0.3 0.7 0.9 2.2 2.2 3.4 2.5

2,500 to 9,999................................ 0.4 0.3 † † 0.8 0.8 1.6 1.7 2.6 2.8

10,000 or more .............................. 0.3 0.3 † † 0.3 0.7 1.7 1.4 1.0 0.9

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................. 0.3 0.5 † † 0.5 0.8 1.9 2.5 1.2 1.7

Suburban........................................ 0.4 0.3 † 0.1 0.5 0.6 1.6 1.4 2.1 2.4

Rural .............................................. 0.7 0.8 † 0.3 0.8 1.1 2.2 1.9 3.2 2.9

 

Region 

Northeast ....................................... 0.5 0.6 † 0.4 0.5 0.9 2.5 1.8 4.0 2.9

Southeast ....................................... 0.6 0.5 † † 0.8 1.1 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.2

Central ........................................... 0.7 0.7 † 0.2 0.7 0.9 2.2 2.4 4.1 3.9

West............................................... 0.5 0.6 † † 0.7 0.9 2.1 2.0 3.2 2.9

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent...................... 0.5 0.5 † 0.2 0.7 0.8 1.7 1.9 4.7 3.8

10 to 19 percent............................. 0.5 0.5 † † 0.6 0.7 1.8 1.9 2.8 2.3

20 percent or more......................... 0.5 0.6 † 0.3 0.8 1.0 2.3 2.0 2.7 2.4

†Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-5 

Table B-3. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public schools with students 

enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, by instructional level and 

district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools 

District characteristic 2003–04 2004–05 2003–04 2004–05 2003–04 2004–05 2003–04 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based 

 distance education courses .................... 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.4

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ............................................... 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.2 2.7 2.4 2.5

2,500 to 9,999.................................................. 0.4 0.9 1.9 1.9 2.8 2.6 1.8 2.0

10,000 or more ................................................ 1.0 1.3 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.9 0.5 0.6

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban............................................................... 2.0 2.4 1.3 2.1 2.5 3.7 1.0 2.2

Suburban.......................................................... 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.1 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.6

Rural ................................................................ 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 2.3 2.6 2.4 2.6

 

Region 

Northeast ......................................................... 1.9 3.1 1.6 1.9 4.2 4.3 3.4 3.2

Southeast ......................................................... 1.0 0.5 1.4 1.5 2.3 2.1 1.7 1.7

Central ............................................................. 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.3 2.5 3.1 2.3 2.8

West................................................................. 0.4 0.6 1.3 1.6 3.1 2.8 3.0 3.0

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent........................................ 0.7 1.2 1.4 1.4 2.8 2.4 2.7 2.2

10 to 19 percent............................................... 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 2.2 2.3 2.0 1.9

20 percent or more .......................................... 0.3 1.4 1.3 1.5 2.7 3.1 2.5 3.1

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-6 

Table B-4. Standard errors for the number of enrollments in technology-based distance 

education courses of students regularly enrolled in the districts, by instructional level 

and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

All instructional 

levels 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based distance 

 education courses.................. 27,437 56,959 977 6,107 1,067 3,367 16,549 24,350 22,593 51,753

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.............................. 21,698 54,063 64 275 450 3,097 6,924 17,659 20,502 51,025

2,500 to 9,999................................ 6,384 13,404 109 5,689 642 731 5,832 5,136 1,210 9,429

10,000 or more .............................. 15,703 16,415 968 2,202 723 1,101 13,853 16,044 8,563 5,298

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................. 13,660 21,900 973 1,749 719 975 13,860 16,851 1,337 12,533

Suburban........................................ 23,536 53,058 55 5,854 597 2,824 7,858 17,217 22,063 50,181

Rural .............................................. 8,505 12,269 124 183 523 1,717 7,456 6,846 2,748 9,266

Region 

Northeast ....................................... 20,821 49,777 49 206 96 2,711 3,656 2,621 20,314 49,691

Southeast ....................................... 6,251 6,341 919 1,333 632 732 5,698 5,276 1,254 1,913

Central ........................................... 7,726 22,055 441 5,957 412 953 6,455 13,024 2,529 15,067

West............................................... 16,010 22,608 165 161 782 1,732 14,825 21,287 8,619 7,587

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent...................... 11,177 16,778 400 5,957 564 1,123 7,556 10,651 8,591 9,510

10 to 19 percent............................. 7,962 12,379 920 1,336 392 602 7,050 10,283 2,446 5,835

20 percent or more......................... 13,518 14,709 249 221 837 3,111 13,532 13,367 1,557 2,905

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-7 

Table B-5. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses of students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, 

by instructional level and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Elementary 

schools 

Middle or junior 

high schools 

High 

schools 

Combined or 

ungraded schools 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based distance 

 education courses...................... 0.3 1.2 0.4 0.7 5.5 7.2 5.7 7.7

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ................................. † † 0.4 1.7 13.8 16.5 14.0 17.4

2,500 to 9,999.................................... † 5.6 0.7 0.8 3.2 5.2 3.3 6.0

10,000 or more .................................. 0.9 1.2 0.7 0.7 7.0 3.0 7.2 2.7

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban................................................. 1.1 1.4 0.8 0.8 7.0 7.9 6.1 7.7

Suburban............................................ † 2.3 0.7 1.3 14.6 15.1 15.1 16.5

Rural .................................................. † † 0.5 1.6 2.5 7.0 2.5 7.3

 

Region 

Northeast ........................................... † 0.5 † 4.2 43.5 14.9 44.2 18.9

Southeast ........................................... 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.6 2.7 1.7 2.1 1.5

Central ............................................... 0.4 4.7 0.4 0.8 2.7 8.1 2.8 8.7

West................................................... † † 0.8 1.1 7.8 4.8 7.9 4.8

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent.......................... 0.5 5.3 0.8 1.1 10.2 7.8 10.5 7.9

10 to 19 percent................................. 1.0 0.9 0.4 0.5 2.5 3.4 2.4 3.5

20 percent or more ............................ 0.3 † 1.1 2.9 3.0 4.4 2.3 3.4

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-8 

Table B-6. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts with 

students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses, by the number of 

distance education enrollments and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Number of technology-based distance education enrollments 

1–5 6–10 11–20 21–50 51–100 More than 100 

District characteristic 

2002–

03 

2004–

05 

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03 

2004–

05 

2002–

03

2004–

05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education.......... 2.2 1.8 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.1 1.8 1.0 1.1 0.7 0.9

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500....................... 2.9 2.4 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.2 2.7 2.3 1.3 1.4 0.7 1.1

2,500 to 9,999......................... 2.0 2.8 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.4 2.9 3.0 2.0 1.8 1.9 2.0

10,000 or more ....................... 1.9 1.2 1.4 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.7 2.6 1.6 1.6 2.4 2.3

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ...................................... 6.1 7.7 1.6 2.4 3.5 6.1 4.4 2.9 3.6 1.9 3.6 6.5

Suburban................................. 3.5 3.1 2.3 1.8 2.8 2.3 2.8 2.7 1.8 1.7 1.3 1.5

Rural ....................................... 2.4 2.4 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.7 2.4 1.5 1.6 0.9 1.1

 

Region 

Northeast ................................ 6.6 5.2 3.9 4.0 4.3 2.9 5.4 4.1 2.3 2.3 1.3 1.8

Southeast ................................ 3.9 3.3 2.5 2.8 3.1 4.2 4.0 3.3 2.5 3.1 2.4 2.7

Central .................................... 3.2 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.5 3.5 2.7 1.7 1.8 0.8 1.2

West........................................ 3.9 3.2 2.9 2.6 3.4 3.1 3.9 3.4 1.9 1.8 1.5 2.1

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent............... 3.6 3.7 2.9 2.5 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.1 1.6 1.8 1.2 1.3

10 to 19 percent...................... 3.2 3.0 2.4 3.1 2.6 3.8 3.2 2.8 1.4 1.9 0.8 1.2

20 percent or more.................. 2.9 2.9 2.2 2.9 3.7 3.7 4.5 3.3 2.3 2.4 1.4 1.8

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-9 

Table B-7. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses of students regularly enrolled in the public school districts, 

by course completion status and district characteristics: 2004–05 

District characteristic 

Course 

completions 

with a 

passing grade

Course 

completions 

without a 

passing grade Incompletes Other 

Don’t know 

course 

completion status 

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based distance 

 education courses...................... 4.8 0.7 1.3 1.7 4.2

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500.................................. 8.6 1.0 3.3 4.4 5.4

2,500 to 9,999.................................... 9.3 1.8 0.8 0.3 11.2

10,000 or more .................................. 4.5 0.8 0.6 0.7 5.3

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ................................................. 6.3 1.6 4.7 0.3 9.4

Suburban............................................ 5.9 0.9 0.7 0.8 4.5

Rural .................................................. 7.1 1.6 1.1 8.3 1.9

 

Region 

Northeast ........................................... 9.5 5.8 0.4 † 4.1

Southeast ........................................... 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.8 1.3

Central ............................................... 9.4 1.0 0.6 6.8 10.1

West................................................... 6.8 1.2 4.0 0.3 7.9

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent.......................... 9.3 1.0 0.9 0.4 10.4

10 to 19 percent................................. 3.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 3.6

20 percent or more............................. 9.0 1.8 0.8 † 10.0

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-10 

Table B-8. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses that were planning to expand distance 

education courses, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses .................. 2.2 1.9

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................................................................................................................... 2.9 2.5

2,500 to 9,999 ......................................................................................................................................................... 2.4 2.3

10,000 or more ........................................................................................................................................................ 2.2 1.8

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................................................................................................................... 5.2 3.2

Suburban ................................................................................................................................................................. 3.1 3.1

Rural........................................................................................................................................................................ 3.0 2.3

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................................................................................................................. 5.0 5.1

Southeast ................................................................................................................................................................. 4.3 3.1

Central ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3.3 3.1

West......................................................................................................................................................................... 3.7 3.1

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................................................................................................................ 3.7 3.4

10 to 19 percent....................................................................................................................................................... 2.9 3.1

20 percent or more .................................................................................................................................................. 3.6 3.2

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-11 

Table B-9. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts indicating 

whether various entities delivered the technology-based distance education courses in 

which students in their district were enrolled: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Yes No Don’t know 

Entity 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

Online charter school in the district ............................................. 0.6 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.5 0.4

Other schools in the district ......................................................... 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.3 0.3

Their district (delivered centrally from the district) .................... 1.5 1.8 1.5 1.9 0.3 †

Another local school district, or schools in other districts, in 

their state .................................................................................. 1.8 2.1 1.8 2.1 0.5 0.4

Education service agencies within their state .............................. 1.6 1.4 1.7 1.4 0.4 0.5

State virtual school in their state .................................................. 1.3 1.7 1.4 1.6 0.3 0.4

State virtual school in another state ............................................. 0.7 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.4 0.5

Districts or schools in other states ............................................... 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.4 0.5

Postsecondary institutions............................................................ 2.2 2.1 2.3 2.1 0.4 0.4

Independent vendor...................................................................... 1.4 1.2 1.5 1.3 0.6 0.4

Non-U.S.-based public or private entity ...................................... † 0.4 † 0.6 † 0.5

Other............................................................................................. 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.7 †

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-12 

Table B-10. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts indicating that various 

entities delivered the technology-based distance education courses in which students 

in their district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Online charter 

school in 

the district 

Other schools 

in the district 

Their 

district (delivered 

centrally from 

the district) 

Another local school 

district, or schools 

in other districts, 

in their state 

Education service 

agencies within 

their state

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................. 0.6 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.5 1.8 1.8 2.1 1.6 1.4

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500......................... 0.8 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.9 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.1 1.8

2,500 to 9,999........................... 1.1 0.8 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.6 1.8 1.9

10,000 or more ......................... 0.9 0.9 2.8 2.1 2.6 1.4 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.5

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ........................................ 3.8 6.1 4.0 6.1 4.8 7.4 5.5 6.2 5.5 2.2

Suburban................................... 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.2 2.4 2.4 2.8 2.8 2.2 2.6

Rural ......................................... 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.5 2.3 2.7 2.8 3.3 2.2 1.9

 

Region 

Northeast .................................. 1.8 3.0 3.3 1.2 4.0 3.7 5.3 4.7 4.2 4.1

Southeast .................................. 0.6 † 2.3 2.2 2.7 2.8 4.8 3.3 3.5 3.2

Central ...................................... 0.9 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.7 3.3 2.9 3.3 2.7 2.5

West.......................................... 1.3 1.5 1.4 2.0 2.4 4.1 3.2 4.2 2.5 2.6

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................. 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.6 2.6 2.9 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.5

10 to 19 percent........................ 1.0 1.1 1.5 1.7 2.5 2.6 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.0

20 percent or more.................... 0.6 1.2 1.9 1.7 3.3 3.5 4.3 4.7 2.9 2.6

See notes at end of table. 
B-13 

Table B-10. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts indicating that various 

entities delivered the technology-based distance education courses in which students 

in their district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05—

Continued 

State virtual school in 

their state

State virtual school in 

another state

Districts or schools 

in other states

Postsecondary 

institution 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................. 1.3 1.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 2.2 2.1

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500......................... 1.7 2.2 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.0 2.9 2.7

2,500 to 9,999........................... 2.1 2.3 1.2 1.7 0.9 1.1 2.9 2.6

10,000 or more ......................... 1.9 2.1 1.7 1.9 1.4 0.8 2.6 2.0

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ........................................ 3.1 6.3 2.4 6.1 1.6 1.2 3.4 6.5

Suburban................................... 2.5 2.6 1.0 1.2 0.9 1.1 3.6 3.2

Rural ......................................... 1.9 2.6 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.2 3.1 3.0

 

Region 

Northeast .................................. 2.1 3.3 1.9 3.2 2.1 2.0 4.5 5.7

Southeast .................................. 4.3 4.6 2.1 2.5 1.1 1.3 3.8 2.9

Central ...................................... 2.4 2.9 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.5 3.6 3.4

West.......................................... 2.8 3.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 1.4 3.6 3.9

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................. 2.5 2.9 1.4 2.2 1.8 1.6 4.6 3.2

10 to 19 percent........................ 2.2 2.8 1.1 0.7 1.3 1.2 3.0 3.6

20 percent or more.................... 3.2 3.6 1.4 1.6 1.9 1.6 3.7 3.7

See notes at end of table. 
B-14 

Table B-10. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts indicating that various 

entities delivered the technology-based distance education courses in which students 

in their district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05—

Continued 

Independent vendor 

Non-U.S.-based 

public or private entity Other

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled 

 in technology-based 

 distance education............ 1.4 1.2 † 0.4 0.7 0.5

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500......................... 1.7 1.4 † 0.5 0.8 0.7

2,500 to 9,999........................... 2.5 2.5 † 0.6 1.1 0.6

10,000 or more ......................... 2.1 2.5 † 0.6 0.7 0.6

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ........................................ 4.5 3.8 † 1.2 0.7 0.9

Suburban................................... 2.7 1.9 † † 1.5 0.4

Rural ......................................... 1.8 1.7 † 0.7 0.8 0.9

 

Region 

Northeast .................................. 4.5 4.2 † † 1.5 0.7

Southeast .................................. 3.1 2.8 † † 1.5 1.4

Central ...................................... 2.1 1.8 † 0.7 1.3 0.7

West.......................................... 3.2 2.3 † 1.0 1.1 1.3

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................. 3.1 2.1 † 0.9 1.5 0.6

10 to 19 percent........................ 2.2 2.3 † 0.8 0.8 1.2

20 percent or more.................... 2.3 2.6 † † 1.5 1.1

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-15 

Table B-11. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts indicating that they 

delivered technology-based distance education courses to students who were not 

regularly enrolled in their district, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students enrolled in technology-based distance education courses .................. 1.7 2.2

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................................................................................................................... 2.3 2.9

2,500 to 9,999 ......................................................................................................................................................... 2.4 2.3

10,000 or more ........................................................................................................................................................ 2.0 1.9

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................................................................................................................... 3.1 6.1

Suburban ................................................................................................................................................................. 2.8 2.4

Rural........................................................................................................................................................................ 2.4 2.8

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................................................................................................................. 4.3 3.9

Southeast ................................................................................................................................................................. 2.9 3.2

Central ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3.3 3.6

West......................................................................................................................................................................... 2.9 3.4

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................................................................................................................ 3.5 3.2

10 to 19 percent....................................................................................................................................................... 2.7 3.4

20 percent or more .................................................................................................................................................. 3.2 3.3

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-16 

Table B-12. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses indicating that students regularly 

enrolled in the district were enrolled in Advanced Placement courses offered through 

technology-based distance education, and percent of all enrollments in technologybased distance education courses represented by the enrollments in Advanced 

Placement courses, by district characteristics: 2004–05 

District characteristic 

Percent of districts with students enrolled 

in Advanced Placement courses 

offered through technologybased distance education

Percent of all technology-based 

distance education enrollments that 

are in Advanced Placement 

distance education courses

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based distance 

 education courses............................................ 1.8 0.5

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................... 2.3 1.6

2,500 to 9,999.......................................................... 2.8 0.4

10,000 or more ........................................................ 2.0 0.3

 

Metropolitan status 

 

Urban....................................................................... 3.8 0.4

Suburban.................................................................. 2.8 0.8

Rural ........................................................................ 2.6 1.5

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................. 4.5 1.7

Southeast ................................................................. 4.4 0.8

Central ..................................................................... 2.8 1.1

West......................................................................... 2.5 0.6

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................ 3.4 0.7

10 to 19 percent....................................................... 2.7 0.7

20 percent or more .................................................. 3.2 1.3

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-17 

Table B-13. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts indicating 

whether various entities delivered the Advanced Placement technology-based 

distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 

Entity Yes No Don’t know

 

Postsecondary institutions............................................................................................................ 3.6 3.6 0.6

Public school or school district .................................................................................................... 4.0 4.0 †

State virtual school....................................................................................................................... 3.9 4.0 0.6

Independent vendor...................................................................................................................... 2.1 2.2 0.5

Other entity................................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.4 0.7

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-18 

Table B-14. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses indicating that students regularly 

enrolled in the district were enrolled in dual credit college-level courses offered 

through technology-based distance education, and the percent of all enrollments in 

technology-based distance education courses represented by enrollments in dual 

credit college-level distance education courses, by district characteristics: 2004–05 

District characteristic 

Percent of districts with students enrolled 

in dual credit college-level courses 

offered through technologybased distance education

Percent of all technology-based distance 

education enrollments that are in dual 

credit college-level distance 

education courses

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based distance 

 education courses............................................. 2.2 2.2

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................... 2.9 4.2

2,500 to 9,999.......................................................... 2.1 2.5

10,000 or more ........................................................ 2.1 4.8

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................... 6.4 0.6

Suburban.................................................................. 3.3 4.0

Rural ........................................................................ 3.4 4.2

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................. 4.6 0.5

Southeast ................................................................. 2.8 1.3

Central ..................................................................... 4.1 2.9

West......................................................................... 3.7 6.3

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................ 3.5 8.3

10 to 19 percent....................................................... 3.8 2.1

20 percent or more .................................................. 4.0 3.2

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

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005.
B-19 

Table B-15. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts indicating 

whether various entities delivered the dual credit college-level technology-based 

distance education courses in which students in their district were enrolled: 2004–05 

Entity Yes No Don’t know

 

Postsecondary institutions............................................................................................................ 1.8 1.8 0.4

Public school or school district .................................................................................................... 3.6 3.6 0.7

Other entity................................................................................................................................... 1.1 1.1 †

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-20 

Table B-16. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

technology-based distance education courses indicating that students regularly 

enrolled in the district were enrolled in Advanced Placement or dual credit collegelevel courses offered through distance education, and percent of all enrollments in 

technology-based education courses represented by enrollments in Advanced 

Placement or dual credit college-level courses offered through technology-based 

distance education, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Percent of districts with students enrolled in 

Advanced Placement or dual credit collegelevel courses offered through technologybased distance education 

Percent of all technology-based distance 

education enrollments that are in Advanced 

Placement or dual credit college-level 

distance education courses 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students 

 enrolled in technology-based distance 

 education courses............................................... 2.3 2.3 1.6 2.5

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ....................................................... 3.0 3.0 5.2 5.6

2,500 to 9,999.......................................................... 2.3 2.8 2.7 2.4

10,000 or more ........................................................ 2.6 2.7 1.7 4.8

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban....................................................................... 5.1 6.8 0.9 0.8

Suburban.................................................................. 3.1 3.6 2.6 4.3

Rural ........................................................................ 3.2 3.2 3.5 5.1

 

Region 

Northeast ................................................................. 5.1 4.9 7.0 1.7

Southeast ................................................................. 4.8 4.1 1.8 1.5

Central ..................................................................... 3.6 3.9 1.9 3.6

West......................................................................... 3.8 3.9 4.2 6.4

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................................................ 3.0 4.0 3.3 8.0

10 to 19 percent....................................................... 3.6 3.9 3.4 2.5

20 percent or more .................................................. 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.8

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-21 

Table B-17. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts reporting that various 

technologies were used as primary modes of instructional delivery for any 

technology-based distance education courses in which students in their district were 

enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Internet courses 

using synchronous 

computer-based 

instruction 

Internet courses 

using asynchronous 

computer-based 

instruction 

Two-way 

interactive 

video 

One-way 

 prerecorded video 

Other 

technologies 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................... 1.7 1.8 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.4 1.3 0.9 0.7

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500........................... 2.2 2.4 2.9 2.5 2.6 2.7 1.8 1.6 1.2 0.9

2,500 to 9,999............................. 2.6 2.3 3.0 2.9 3.1 2.5 1.9 1.8 1.0 0.8

10,000 or more ........................... 2.0 2.4 3.1 2.1 2.4 2.0 2.4 2.3 1.0 1.0

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban .......................................... 3.6 4.1 5.7 2.9 5.5 3.8 4.8 6.0 1.1 0.5

Suburban..................................... 3.2 3.0 2.9 2.7 3.3 3.2 2.0 1.9 1.4 0.6

Rural ........................................... 2.3 2.6 2.9 2.8 3.0 3.3 2.0 1.6 1.3 1.1

 

Region 

Northeast .................................... 3.9 4.4 6.4 5.3 6.2 5.5 2.4 3.1 4.5 1.1

Southeast .................................... 4.1 2.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 3.6 2.7 2.6 1.5 2.5

Central ........................................ 2.5 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.2 3.7 2.4 2.0 1.1 0.7

West............................................ 2.8 3.3 4.5 3.4 4.0 4.3 2.7 3.0 1.8 1.3

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................... 3.2 2.7 4.2 3.5 4.1 3.2 2.6 2.0 1.4 0.4

10 to 19 percent.......................... 2.4 2.8 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.1 2.4 1.8 1.2 1.5

20 percent or more...................... 2.9 3.7 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.7 2.9 2.8 1.9 1.3

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-22 

Table B-18. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts reporting 

that various technologies were used as the primary mode of delivery for the greatest 

number of technology-based distance education courses in which students in their 

district were enrolled, by district characteristics: 2002–03 and 2004–05 

Internet courses 

 using synchronous 

computer-based 

instruction 

Internet courses 

using asynchronous 

computer-based 

instruction 

Two-way 

interactive 

video 

One-way 

 prerecorded video 

Other 

technologies 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts 

 with students enrolled in 

 technology-based 

 distance education 

 courses ............................... 1.0 1.4 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.0 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.5

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500........................... 1.2 1.7 2.5 2.1 2.6 2.6 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.6

2,500 to 9,999............................. 2.1 2.2 3.2 3.3 2.6 2.4 1.2 1.2 0.7 †

10,000 or more ........................... 1.5 1.5 3.0 2.2 2.2 1.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban .......................................... 2.4 2.2 5.5 4.2 5.5 3.1 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5

Suburban..................................... 2.2 2.1 3.4 3.0 3.2 2.8 1.5 1.3 0.6 †

Rural ........................................... 1.4 2.0 2.5 2.2 2.9 3.1 1.4 1.4 0.7 0.8

 

Region 

Northeast .................................... 2.2 4.5 6.2 5.5 5.9 5.3 1.0 1.5 2.5 †

Southeast .................................... 3.2 2.7 4.3 4.4 4.7 4.0 1.9 1.9 0.7 2.0

Central ........................................ 1.7 2.3 2.9 2.9 3.2 3.5 1.8 1.6 0.7 0.6

West............................................ 1.5 2.7 3.7 3.4 3.7 4.0 2.1 1.7 1.1 0.9

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent................... 1.8 2.2 4.1 3.4 4.0 3.1 1.7 1.1 1.3 †

10 to 19 percent.......................... 1.9 2.5 2.7 2.7 3.7 4.1 1.9 1.6 0.4 1.1

20 percent or more...................... 2.1 3.0 3.2 4.6 3.9 5.3 1.6 1.7 1.0 1.0

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-23 

Table B-19. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students enrolled in 

online distance education courses, and percent of those public school districts 

indicating the access location of the online courses, by district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Districts with Access location for online courses

students enrolled in 

online distance 

education courses School Home Other location 

District characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05 2002–03 2004–05

 

All public school districts with students enrolled 

 in technology-based distance education 

 courses ................................................................. 2.3 1.9 1.1 1.6 2.8 2.8 1.6 1.2

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500 ............................................................ 3.0 2.4 1.4 2.1 4.1 4.1 2.2 1.6

2,500 to 9,999............................................................... 2.5 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.9 2.0 2.0 1.4

10,000 or more ............................................................. 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.8 1.9 2.2 2.3 2.0

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban............................................................................ 5.4 2.2 3.2 4.1 5.4 6.9 4.0 6.6

Suburban....................................................................... 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.7 3.8 3.1 1.5 1.9

Rural ............................................................................. 3.1 3.2 1.2 1.8 3.9 4.7 2.5 1.4

 

Region 

Northeast ...................................................................... 5.7 5.0 4.6 4.3 6.9 4.8 2.5 2.1

Southeast ...................................................................... 4.6 4.2 1.2 2.3 5.7 4.2 2.5 2.0

Central .......................................................................... 3.3 3.5 1.9 2.8 4.1 4.8 1.9 2.1

West.............................................................................. 4.6 3.3 1.7 3.5 5.6 5.5 2.7 2.4

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent..................................................... 3.9 3.2 2.4 2.2 5.2 4.2 1.8 2.1

10 to 19 percent............................................................ 3.1 3.2 1.7 2.3 4.6 4.6 1.8 1.1

20 percent or more ....................................................... 4.2 4.5 1.4 2.5 4.6 5.2 3.4 1.8

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-24 

Table B-20. Standard errors for the percent of public school districts with students accessing 

online distance education courses from home, and percent of those public school 

districts that provided or paid for various items for all or some of the students 

accessing online distance education courses from home, by district characteristics: 

2002–03 and 2004–05 

Items provided or paid for by the district

Computer Internet service provider Other

Districts with 

students accessing 

online distance 

education courses 

from home

For all 

students 

For some 

students 

For all 

students 

For some 

students 

For all 

students 

For some 

students 

District 

characteristic 2002–03 2004–05 

2002–

03 

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05

2002–

03

2004–

05 

2002–

03 

2004–

05 

2002–

03

2004–

05

 

All public school 

 districts with 

 students 

 enrolled in 

 technology- 

 based 

 distance 

 education 

 courses ........... 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.5 1.7 1.4 3.0 2.6 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.5 0.9 1.0

 

District enrollment 

 size 

Less than 2,500 ...... 4.1 4.1 4.3 3.9 2.6 2.0 4.8 4.1 2.6 2.6 2.2 2.1 1.4 1.5

2,500 to 9,999......... 2.9 2.0 3.6 2.4 2.0 2.3 3.0 2.5 1.8 2.4 1.7 2.3 1.3 0.7

10,000 or more ....... 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.1 2.8 1.4 1.9 1.2 1.3

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban...................... 5.4 6.9 3.5 8.8 3.9 4.0 7.5 8.8 3.8 3.7 2.4 3.3 2.8 1.0

Suburban................. 3.8 3.1 3.0 3.4 2.6 2.0 3.7 3.2 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.6 0.5 1.6

Rural ....................... 3.9 4.7 4.3 3.6 2.8 2.6 4.9 3.9 2.7 3.5 2.5 2.8 1.7 1.5

 

Region 

Northeast ................ 6.9 4.8 5.5 5.8 5.2 3.5 10.4 5.9 5.4 3.6 3.6 3.4 0.1 †

Southeast ................ 5.7 4.2 6.8 5.4 2.0 3.6 6.8 5.2 2.0 3.4 2.4 3.0 1.3 0.7

Central .................... 4.1 4.8 5.5 3.5 1.3 1.4 4.9 3.7 0.6 2.6 2.9 2.8 0.3 0.9

West........................ 5.6 5.5 5.3 4.2 4.4 4.0 5.5 4.3 4.4 3.1 2.5 1.8 2.8 3.0

 

Poverty 

concentration 

Less than 10 

 percent .............. 5.2 4.2 5.2 3.6 2.0 2.5 5.3 3.4 1.5 2.9 1.7 2.2 † 0.9

10 to 19 percent...... 4.6 4.6 4.8 3.7 2.3 1.8 4.7 3.6 2.3 2.6 2.5 3.1 1.2 0.6

20 percent or 

 more.................. 4.6 5.2 6.6 6.2 5.4 4.6 6.8 6.5 5.4 3.9 4.2 2.2 3.5 4.6

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-25 

Table B-21. Standard errors for the percentage distribution of public school districts by use of 

technology-based distance education courses and district characteristics: 2002–03 and 

2004–05 

[Percentage distribution of districts]

District characteristic 

Districts with 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

and 2004–05

Districts with 

technology-based 

distance education 

 in courses 2002–03 

but not in 2004–05

Districts without 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

but with 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2004–05 

Districts without 

technology-based 

distance education 

courses in 2002–03 

and 2004–05

 All public school districts with students enrolled 

 in technology-based distance education 

 courses.................................................................. 1.0 0.7 0.8 1.0

 

District enrollment size 

Less than 2,500............................................................. 1.3 0.9 1.0 1.2

2,500 to 9,999............................................................... 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.8

10,000 or more ............................................................. 2.1 1.7 1.7 2.3

 

Metropolitan status 

Urban ............................................................................ 1.8 1.9 1.7 2.8

Suburban....................................................................... 1.2 0.9 1.0 1.3

Rural ............................................................................. 1.8 1.0 1.3 1.6

 

Region 

Northeast ...................................................................... 1.8 1.1 1.5 2.0

Southeast ...................................................................... 2.6 2.0 1.9 3.2

Central .......................................................................... 1.9 1.4 1.0 1.8

West.............................................................................. 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.7

 

Poverty concentration 

Less than 10 percent..................................................... 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.7

10 to 19 percent............................................................ 1.6 0.9 1.3 1.8

20 percent or more........................................................ 2.0 1.4 1.3 2.1

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-26 

Table B-22. Standard errors for the change in the number of enrollments in technology-based 

distance education courses in public school districts: 2002–03 to 2004–05 

[Percentage distribution of districts]

Number of technology-based distance education enrollments in 2004–05 

Number of technology-based distance 

education enrollments in 2002–03 

No 

enrollments 1–5 6–10 11–20 21–50 51–100

More than 

100

No enrollments ......................................... † 3.2 2.2 2.1 2.7 2.0 1.0

1–5 ............................................................ 3.1 3.4 2.4 2.1 1.6 1.1 0.4

6–10 .......................................................... 5.1 3.5 3.1 3.8 4.2 1.9 †

11–20 ........................................................ 5.1 3.5 2.4 3.9 3.1 0.9 1.4

21–50 ........................................................ 2.8 1.3 2.3 2.8 3.1 1.6 0.6

51–100 ...................................................... 2.6 † 1.5 3.4 5.7 5.2 3.4

More than 100........................................... 2.7 3.0 0.7 0.9 4.1 3.6 4.7

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-27 

Table B-23. Standard errors for the change in the technologies used as primary modes of 

instructional delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses in which 

students in public school districts were enrolled: 2002–03 to 2004–05 

[Percentage distribution of districts]

Technologies used in 2004–05 

Technologies used in 2002–03 

Internet courses 

using synchronous 

computer-based 

instruction

Internet courses 

using 

asynchronous 

computer-based 

instruction

Two-way 

interactive video

One-way 

prerecorded video 

Other 

technologies

Internet courses using synchronous 

 computer-based instruction................ 10.9 9.3 6.5 0.7 †

Internet courses using asynchronous 

 computer-based instruction................ 2.8 2.8 2.3 0.8 †

Two-way interactive video....................... 1.7 1.3 1.9 0.9 0.6

One-way prerecorded video..................... 5.9 6.9 6.4 7.0 †

Other technologies ................................... 21.0 23.1 33.6 † †

† Not applicable. 

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-28 

Table B-24. Standard errors for the technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery 

for the greatest number of distance education courses in districts that had technologybased distance education enrollments in 2002–03, but did not have technology-based 

distance education enrollments anymore in 2004–05 

Technology Percent of districts

Internet courses using synchronous computer-based instruction .............................................................................. 2.2

Internet courses using asynchronous computer-based instruction............................................................................. 3.4

Two-way interactive video......................................................................................................................................... 2.8

One-way prerecorded video ....................................................................................................................................... 1.6

Other technologies...................................................................................................................................................... 1.2

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 

 
B-29 

Table B-25. Standard errors for the technologies used as primary modes of instructional delivery 

for the greatest number of distance education courses in districts that did not have 

technology-based distance education enrollments in 2002–03, but started using 

technology-based distance education in 2004–05 

Technology Percent of districts

Internet courses using synchronous computer-based instruction .................................................................................. 2.3

Internet courses using asynchronous computer-based instruction................................................................................. 3.4

Two-way interactive video............................................................................................................................................. 3.2

One-way prerecorded video ........................................................................................................................................... 1.0

Other technologies.......................................................................................................................................................... 1.0

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

Courses for Public School Elementary and Secondary Students: 2002–03,” FRSS 84, 2003; and “Distance Education Courses for Public 

Elementary and Secondary School Students: 2004–05,” FRSS 89, 2005. 
B-30 

This page intentionally left blank. 
C-1 

Appendix C 

FRSS Questionnaires for 

2002–03 and 2004–05 
C-2 

This page intentionally left blank. 
C-3 

Information Copy - 

Do Not Complete

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION O.M.B. APPROVED 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS No.: 1850–0733 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006–5651 

DISTANCE EDUCATION COURSES FOR PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND 

SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS: 2002–03 

FAST RESPONSE SURVEY SYSTEM 

This survey is authorized by law (P.L. 103–382). While participation in this survey is voluntary, your cooperation is critical to make the 

results of this survey comprehensive, accurate, and timely. 

• Distance education courses are credit-granting courses offered to elementary and secondary school 

students enrolled in your district in which the teacher and students are in different locations. These courses: 

• may originate from your district or from other entities (e.g., a state virtual school or a postsecondary institution). 

• can be delivered via audio, video (live or prerecorded), or Internet or other computer technologies, including both 

synchronous (i.e., simultaneous or “real time”) and asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) instruction. 

• may include occasional face-to-face interactions between the teacher and the students. For example, a teacher 

teaching a course at several schools via video-conferencing may rotate between schools, or the teacher and 

students may be in the same location for occasional lab work or tests. 

• Include information about distance education Advanced Placement or college-level courses in which 

students in your district were enrolled.

• For purposes of this survey, do not include information about:

• supplemental course materials, virtual field trips, online homework, or staff professional development. 

• courses conducted mainly via written correspondence. 

• Include information for all schools administered by your district (e.g., regular schools, charter schools, 

magnet schools, alternative schools, special education schools, etc.). 

• The time frame for this survey is the 12-month 2002–03 school year. This includes distance education courses 

during the summer of 2002 or the summer of 2003, depending on how records are kept at your district.

IF ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE MAKE CORRECTIONS DIRECTLY ON LABEL. 

Name of person completing form: Telephone: 

Title/position: 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: IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CONTACT: 

 Anne Kleiner (7166.29) Anne Kleiner at Westat 

 Westat 800-937-8281, Ext. 2710 or 240-453-2710 

 1650 Research Boulevard Fax: 800-254-0984 

 Rockville, Maryland 20850-3195 E-mail: annekleiner@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 1850–0733. The time required to complete this information collection is 

estimated to average 30 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 or suggestions for improving 

this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 20202–4651. If you have any comments or concerns regarding the status of 

your individual submission of this form, write directly to: National Center for Education Statistics, 1990 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006. 

FRSS Form No. 84 11/2003 
C-4 

Information Copy - 

Do Not Complete

Before you answer the questions, please carefully read the instructions and definitions on the front of 

this questionnaire. 

1. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), how many schools were in your district? Please include all schools 

administered by your district (e.g., regular schools, charter schools, magnet schools, alternative schools, special 

education schools, etc.). Enter “0” if there were no schools in your district at that instructional level in 2002–03. 

a. Total number of schools ................................ 

b. Number of elementary schools ......................... 

c. Number of middle or junior high schools .......... 

d. Number of high schools .................................... 

e. Number of combined or ungraded schools....... 

• The number of enrollments may include duplicated counts of students; i.e., a student should be counted for 

each course in which he/she was enrolled. 

• Report only about distance education enrollments of students regularly enrolled in your district. 

• Take into account any distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled, regardless of 

where the courses originated (i.e., from your district or another entity). 

• Include enrollments in distance education Advanced Placement or college-level courses in which students in 

your district were enrolled. 

• Consider only credit-granting courses. Do not take into account supplemental course materials, virtual field 

trips, online homework, staff professional development, or courses conducted mainly via written 

correspondence. 

2. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), were any public elementary or secondary school students in your district 

enrolled in distance education courses (as defined on the front of this questionnaire and in the box above)? 

Yes ...... 1 (Continue with question 3.) No........ 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return 

questionnaire.) 

3. Of the schools reported in question 1, how many had at least one student enrolled in distance education courses 

in 2002–03 (12-month school year)? See box above for instructions. Enter “0” if there were no schools with 

students enrolled in distance education courses in your district at that instructional level in 2002–03.

a. Total number of schools with students enrolled in distance education courses......................... 

b. Number of elementary schools with students enrolled in distance education courses ......................... 

c. Number of middle or junior high schools with students enrolled in distance education courses........... 

d. Number of high schools with students enrolled in distance education courses .................................... 

e. Number of combined or ungraded schools with students enrolled in distance education courses....... 

4. For 2002–03 (12-month school year), report the number of enrollments in distance education courses of students 

regularly enrolled in your district. See box above for instructions. Enter “0” if there were no students in your district 

enrolled in distance education courses at that instructional level in 2002–03. 

a. Total number of distance education course enrollments ............................................................... 

b. Number of distance education course enrollments in elementary schools ........................................... 

c. Number of distance education course enrollments in middle or junior high schools............................. 

d. Number of distance education course enrollments in high schools ...................................................... 

e. Number of distance education course enrollments in combined or ungraded schools ......................... 
C-5 

Information Copy - 

Do Not Complete

5. For 2002–03 (12-month school year), report the number of enrollments in distance education courses by 

curriculum area of students who were regularly enrolled in your district. See box on previous page for instructions. 

Enter “0” if there were no students in your district enrolled in distance education courses in that curriculum area in 

2002–03.

a. General elementary school curriculum ........................................................................... 

b. English/language arts ..................................................................................................... 

c. Social studies/social sciences (including history) ........................................................... 

d. Computer science ........................................................................................................... 

e. Natural/physical science (e.g., biology, chemistry, physics)........................................... 

f. Mathematics.................................................................................................................... 

g. Foreign languages .......................................................................................................... 

h. Other (specify) 

i. Total number of enrollments across curriculum areas (Total should equal total 

in question 4a.).............................................................................................................. 

6. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), were any students regularly enrolled in your district enrolled in Advanced 

Placement or college-level courses offered through distance education? See box on previous page for instructions.

Yes...... 1 (Number of enrollments: ____________) No........ 2 

7. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), which technologies were used as primary modes of instructional delivery for 

any distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled? (Circle one on each line.) 

• If a course used multiple technologies to deliver instruction, but one mode predominated, circle yes for the 

predominant mode for the course. 

• Please take into account any distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled, 

regardless of where the courses originated. 

• Do not consider technologies used for supplemental course materials or professional development.

Yes No 

a. Internet courses using synchronous (i.e., simultaneous or “real time”) computer-based 

instruction (e.g., interactive computer conferencing)......................................................................... 1 2 

b. Internet courses using asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) computer-based instruction.............. 1 2 

c. Two-way interactive video (i.e., two-way video with two-way audio)................................................. 1 2 

d. One-way prerecorded video (including prerecorded videos provided to students, and television 

broadcast and cable transmission using prerecorded videos) .......................................................... 1 2 

e. Other technologies (specify) 1 2 

8. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), which one of the technologies listed in question 7 was used for the greatest 

number of distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled? (Circle the letter 

corresponding to the technology listed in question 7. Circle only one.) 

 a b c d e 

9. How important were the following reasons for having distance education courses in your district in 2002–03 (12-

month school year)? Please take into account any distance education courses in which students in your district 

were enrolled, regardless of where the courses originated. (Circle one on each line.) 

Not 

important 

Somewhat 

important 

Very 

important 

Don’t 

know 

a. Offering courses not otherwise available at the school ............. 1 2 3 4 

b. Offering Advanced Placement or college-level courses ............ 1 2 3 4 

c. Addressing growing populations and limited space................... 1 2 3 4 

d. Reducing scheduling conflicts for students................................ 1 2 3 4 

e. Permitting students who failed a course to take it again ........... 1 2 3 4 

f. Meeting the needs of specific groups of students...................... 1 2 3 4 

g. Generating more district revenues............................................. 1 2 3 4 

h. Other (specify) — 2 3 — 
C-6 

Information Copy - 

Do Not Complete

10. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), which of the following entities delivered the distance education courses in 

which students in your district were enrolled? (Circle one on each line.) 

Yes No 

Don’t 

know 

a. Cyber (i.e., online) charter school in your district.................................................. 1 2 3 

b. Other schools in your district................................................................................. 1 2 3 

c. Your district (i.e., delivered centrally from the district).......................................... 1 2 3 

d. Another local school district, or schools in another district, in your state ............. 1 2 3 

e. Education service agencies within your state (e.g., BOCES, COE, IU),

not including the state education agency or local school districts ........................ 1 2 3 

f. State virtual school in your state (i.e., state-centralized K-12 courses

available through Internet- or web-based methods). ............................................ 1 2 3 

g. State virtual school in another state...................................................................... 1 2 3 

h. Districts or schools in other states (other than state virtual schools).................... 1 2 3 

i. Postsecondary institution ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 

j. Independent vendor .............................................................................................. 1 2 3 

k. Other (specify) 1 2 3 

11. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), were any students in your district enrolled in online distance education 

courses (i.e., courses delivered over the Internet)? 

Yes...... 1 (Continue with question 12.) No........ 2 (Skip to question 14.) 

12. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), where were students in your district accessing online distance education 

courses? Please take into account any online distance education courses in which students in your district were 

enrolled, regardless of where the courses originated. (Circle one on each line.) 

Yes No 

a. At school ................................................................................................................................. 1 2 

b. At home................................................................................................................................... 1 2 

c. At some other location (specify) 1 2 

13. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), did your district provide or pay for the following items for students accessing 

online distance education courses from home? (Circle one on each line.) 

 If no online distance education courses were accessed at home, check here and skip to question 14. 

Yes, for 

all 

students 

Yes, for 

some 

students 

No 

a. Computer ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 

b. Internet service provider ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 

c. Other (specify) 1 2 3 

14. In 2002–03 (12-month school year), did your district (or schools in your district) deliver any distance education 

courses to students who were not regularly enrolled in your district (e.g., to students from other districts, private 

school students, or home-schooled students)? 

Yes...... 1 No........ 2 Don’t know...... 3 

15. Does your district plan to expand distance education courses? 

Yes...... 1 (Continue with question 16.) No........ 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return 

questionnaire.) 

16. To what extent are the following factors keeping your district (or schools in your district) from expanding distance 

education courses? (Circle one on each line.) 

Not 

at all 

Minor 

extent 

Moderate

extent 

Major 

extent 

a. Course development and/or purchasing costs ................................... 1 2 3 4 

b. Limited technological infrastructure to support distance education.... 1 2 3 4 

c. Concerns about course quality ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 

d. Restrictive federal, state, or local laws or policies .............................. 1 2 3 4 

e. Concerns about receiving funding based on student attendance for 

distance education courses ................................................................ 1 2 3 4 

f. Other (specify) — 2 3 4
C-7 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FORM APPROVED 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS O.M.B. No.: 1850–0733 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006–5651 EXPIRATION DATE: 09/2006 

DISTANCE EDUCATION COURSES FOR PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND 

SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS: 2004–05 

FAST RESPONSE SURVEY SYSTEM 

This survey is authorized by law (P.L. 103–382). While participation in this survey is voluntary, your cooperation is critical to make the 

results of this survey comprehensive, accurate, and timely. 

• Distance education courses are credit-granting courses offered to elementary and secondary school 

students enrolled in your district in which the teacher and students are in different locations. These courses: 

• may originate from your district or from other entities (e.g., a state virtual school or a postsecondary institution). 

• can be delivered via audio, video (live or prerecorded), or Internet or other computer technologies, including both 

synchronous (i.e., simultaneous or “real time”) and asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) instruction. 

• may include occasional face-to-face interactions between the teacher and the students. For example, a teacher 

teaching a course at several schools via video-conferencing may rotate between schools, or the teacher and 

students may be in the same location for occasional lab work or tests. 

• For purposes of this survey, do not include information about:

• supplemental course materials, virtual field trips, online homework, or staff professional development. 

• courses conducted mainly via written correspondence. 

• Include information about distance education Advanced Placement or dual credit college-level courses in 

which students in your district were enrolled.

• Include information for all schools administered by your district (e.g., regular schools, charter schools, 

magnet schools, alternative schools, special education schools, etc.). 

• The time frame for this survey is the 12-month 2004–05 school year. This includes distance education courses 

during the summer of 2004 or the summer of 2005, depending on how records are kept at your district.

IF ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE MAKE CORRECTIONS DIRECTLY ON LABEL. 

Name of person completing form: Telephone: 

Title/position: 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: IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CONTACT: 

Mail: Izabella Zandberg (8096.08.03) 

 Westat Izabella Zandberg at Westat 

 1650 Research Boulevard 800-937-8281, Ext. 4467 or 301-294-4467 

 Rockville, Maryland 20850-3195 E-mail: izabellazandberg@westat.com 

Fax: 800-254-0984 

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 1850–0733. The time required to complete this information collection is 

estimated to average 30 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 or suggestions for improving 

this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 20202–4651. If you have any comments or concerns regarding the status of 

your individual submission of this form, write directly to: National Center for Education Statistics, 1990 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006. 

FRSS Form No. 89 11/2005 
C-8 

Before you answer the questions, please carefully read the instructions and definitions on the front of 

this questionnaire. 

1. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), how many schools were in your district? 

Please include all schools administered by your district (regular schools, charter schools, magnet schools, 

alternative schools, special education schools, etc.). Count each school at only one instructional level. If a school 

has combined grade ranges (for example, includes both elementary and middle school grades), count it in “e” as a 

“combined” school. Enter “0” if there were no schools in your district at an instructional level in 2004–05. 

a. Total number of schools................................ 

b. Number of elementary schools......................... 

c. Number of middle or junior high schools .......... 

d. Number of high schools.................................... 

e. Number of combined or ungraded schools....... 

Instructions 

• Consider only credit-granting courses. Do not take into account supplemental course materials, virtual field trips, 

online homework, staff professional development, or courses conducted mainly via written correspondence. 

• Take into account any distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled, regardless of 

where the courses originated (i.e., from your district or another entity). 

• Report only about distance education enrollments of students regularly enrolled in your district. 

• The number of enrollments may include duplicated counts of students; i.e., a student should be counted for each 

course in which he/she was enrolled. 

• Include enrollments in distance education Advanced Placement or dual credit college-level courses in which 

students in your district were enrolled. Dual credit college-level courses are courses for which students receive 

both high school and college credits. 

2. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), were any public elementary or secondary school students in your district 

enrolled in distance education courses (as defined on the front of this questionnaire and in the box above)? 

Yes...... 1 (Continue with question 3.) No........ 2 (Stop. Complete respondent section on front and return 

questionnaire.) 

3. Of the schools reported in question 1, how many had at least one student enrolled in distance education courses 

in 2004–05 (12-month school year)? See instruction box above. Count each school at only one instructional level. If 

a school has combined grade ranges, count it in “e” as a “combined” school. Enter “0” if there were no schools with 

students enrolled in distance education courses in your district at an instructional level in 2004–05.

a. Total number of schools with students enrolled in distance education courses.................. 

b. Number of elementary schools with students enrolled in distance education courses .................. 

c. Number of middle or junior high schools with students enrolled in distance education courses ... 

d. Number of high schools with students enrolled in distance education courses ............................. 

e. Number of combined or ungraded schools with students enrolled in distance education courses 

4. For 2004–05 (12-month school year), report the number of enrollments in distance education courses of students 

regularly enrolled in your district. See instruction box above. Count each enrollment at only one instructional level.

Enter “0” if there were no students in your district enrolled in distance education courses at an instructional level in 

2004–05. 

a. Total number of distance education course enrollments ....................................................... 

b. Number of distance education course enrollments in elementary schools .................................... 

c. Number of distance education course enrollments in middle or junior high schools...................... 

d. Number of distance education course enrollments in high schools ............................................... 

e. Number of distance education course enrollments in combined or ungraded schools.................. 
C-9 

5. Of the total enrollments in distance education courses in 2004–05 (12-month school year) in your district, as 

reported in question 4a, how many enrollments resulted in each of the following? Enter “0” if there were no 

enrollments in a category; enter “X” if information is not available for a category. If you do not know the course 

completion status of some or all of the enrollments, enter the number of those enrollments in “e.” 

a. Course completions with a passing grade...................................................................................... 

b. Course completions without a passing grade................................................................................. 

c. Incompletes .................................................................................................................................... 

d. Other (specify) _______________________________________________________________ 

e. Don’t know course completion status ............................................................................................ 

f. Total number of distance education course enrollments (This total of “a” through “e” 

should equal the total in question 4a.) .......................................................................................

6. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), which of the following entities delivered any of the distance education courses 

in which students in your district were enrolled? (Circle one on each line.) 

Yes No 

Don’t 

know 

a. Online charter school in your district..................................................................... 1 2 3 

b. Other schools in your district ................................................................................ 1 2 3 

c. Your district (i.e., delivered centrally from the district).......................................... 1 2 3 

d. Another local school district, or schools in another district, in your state ............. 1 2 3 

e. Education service agencies within your state (e.g., BOCES, COE, IU),

not including the state education agency or local school districts ........................ 1 2 3 

f. State virtual school in your state (i.e., state-centralized K-12 courses

available through Internet- or web-based methods)............................................. 1 2 3 

g. State virtual school in another state...................................................................... 1 2 3 

h. Districts or schools in other states (other than state virtual schools) ................... 1 2 3 

i. Postsecondary institution...................................................................................... 1 2 3 

j. Independent vendor .............................................................................................. 1 2 3 

k. Non-U.S.-based public or private entity (e.g., school, university, private vendor) 1 2 3 

l. Other (specify) _________________________________________________ 1 2 3 

7. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), were any students regularly enrolled in your district enrolled in Advanced 

Placement courses offered through distance education? See instruction box on previous page. 

Yes...... 1 (Continue with question 8.) No........ 2 (Skip to question 10.) 

8. In 2004–05 (12 month school year), how many enrollments of students regularly enrolled in your district were there 

in Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education? _________________ 

9. Which entities delivered these Advanced Placement courses offered through distance education? (Circle one on 

each line.)

Yes No 

Don’t 

Know 

a. Postsecondary institutions .................................................................................... 1 2 3 

b. Public school or school district.............................................................................. 1 2 3 

c. State virtual school................................................................................................ 1 2 3 

d. Independent vendor.............................................................................................. 1 2 3 

e. Other entity (specify) _____________________________________________ 1 2 3 

10. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), were any students regularly enrolled in your district enrolled in dual credit 

college-level courses offered through distance education? See instruction box on previous page. 

Yes...... 1 (Continue with question 11.) No........ 2 (Skip to question 13.) 

11. In 2004–05 (12 month school year), how many enrollments of students regularly enrolled in your district were 

there in dual credit college-level courses offered through distance education? (Exclude enrollments in Advanced 

Placement courses.) ________________ 
C-10 

12. Which entities delivered these dual credit college-level courses offered through distance education? (Circle one on 

each line.) 

Yes No 

Don’t 

Know 

a. Postsecondary institutions .................................................................................... 1 2 3 

b. Public school or school district.............................................................................. 1 2 3 

c. Other entity (specify) _____________________________________________ 1 2 3 

13. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), which technologies were used as primary modes of instructional delivery for 

any distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled? (Circle one on each line.) 

• Each course should have one primary mode of instructional delivery. If a course used multiple technologies to 

deliver instruction, consider only the primary mode for the course. 

• Different courses may have different primary modes of instructional delivery. Therefore, you may circle yes for 

more than one technology.

• Please take into account any distance education courses in which students in your district were enrolled, 

regardless of where the courses originated (i.e., from your district or another entity). 

• Do not consider technologies used for supplemental course materials or professional development.

Yes No 

a. Internet courses using synchronous (i.e., simultaneous or “real time”) computer-based 

instruction (e.g., Video or Voice over Internet Protocol, interactive computer conferencing)... 1 2 

b. Internet courses using asynchronous (i.e., not simultaneous) computer-based instruction..... 1 2 

c. Two-way interactive video (i.e., two-way video with two-way audio)........................................ 1 2 

d. One-way prerecorded video (including prerecorded videos provided to students, and 

television broadcast and cable transmission using prerecorded videos) ................................. 1 2 

e. Other technologies (specify)___________________________________________________ 1 2 

14. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), which one of the technologies listed in question 13 was used as a primary

mode of instructional delivery for the greatest number of distance education courses in which students in your 

district were enrolled? (Circle the letter corresponding to the technology listed in question 13.) (Circle only one.)

 a b c d e 

15. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), were any students regularly enrolled in your district enrolled in online distance 

education courses (i.e., courses delivered over the Internet)? (If you answered yes in question 13 a or b, you 

should answer yes here.) 

Yes...... 1 (Continue with question 16.) No........ 2 (Skip to question 18.) 

16. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), where were students regularly enrolled in your district accessing online 

distance education courses? Please take into account any online distance education courses in which students in 

your district were enrolled, regardless of where the courses originated. (Circle one on each line.) 

Yes No 

a. At school ................................................................................................................................. 1 2 

b. At home................................................................................................................................... 1 2 

c. At some other location (specify) ______________________________________________ 1 2 

17. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), did your district provide or pay for the following items for students regularly 

enrolled in your district who accessed online distance education courses from home? (Circle one on each line.) 

 If no online distance education courses were accessed at home (i.e., you answered no in question 16 b), 

check here and skip to question 18. 

Yes, 

for all 

students 

Yes, 

for some 

students No 

a. Computer ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 

b. Internet service provider ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 

c. Other (specify) _________________________________________________ 1 2 3 

18. In 2004–05 (12-month school year), did your district (or schools in your district) deliver any distance education 

courses to students who were not regularly enrolled in your district (e.g., to students from other districts, private 

school students, or home-schooled students)? 

Yes...... 1 No........ 2 Don’t know...... 3 

19. Does your district plan to expand distance education courses? 

Yes...... 1 No........ 2