NCES 2007-040

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Status of Education 

in Rural America

Stephen Provasnik

National Center for Education Statistics

Angelina KewalRamani

Mary McLaughlin Coleman

Lauren Gilbertson

Education Statistics Services Institute–American Institutes for Research

Will Herring

Qingshu Xie

Education Statistics Services Institute–MacroSys Research 

and Technology

July 2007

NCES 2007-040

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

July 2007

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

Provasnik, S., KewalRamani, A., Coleman, M.M., Gilbertson, L., Herring, W., and Xie, Q. (2007). Status of Education in Rural America (NCES 2007-040). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 

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

For ordering information on this report, write

U.S. Department of Education

ED Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

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

Content Contact:

Stephen Provasnik

(202) 502-7480

Stephen.Provasnik@ed.gov
In 2006, NCES released a new classification system 

to make the reporting of locale data consistent across 

its various surveys and to be more precise in its classification of rural areas. This report brings together 

data from NCES and Census surveys and applies the 

new classification system to create a series of indicators on the status of education in rural America. The 

data used in these indicators are drawn from the most 

recent versions of NCES’s Common Core of Data 

(CCD), Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 

National Household Education Surveys Program 

(NHES), the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), 

and Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 

(ACS). Additional information on the methodology 

and the datasets used in this report can be found 

in appendix B. More detailed information on the 

new NCES urban-centric locale classification system can be found in the section “Measuring Rural 

Education.”

The main findings of this report are summarized 

below, by chapter:

Demographics 

In 2003–04, over half of all operating school 

districts and one-third of all public schools 

were in rural areas; yet only one-fifth of all 

■

public school students were enrolled in rural 

schools. (Indicator 1.1)

In 2003–04, a larger percentage of public 

school students in rural areas (10 percent) 

attended very small schools (schools with 

fewer than 200 students) than public 

school students in towns (3 percent), 

suburbs (1 percent), or cities (1 percent). 

(Indicator 1.2)

The percentage of White public school 

students in rural areas was larger than that 

in any other locale. The same was true for 

American Indian/Alaska Native public 

school students. However, the percentages 

of public school students in rural areas who 

were Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander were smaller than those in any other 

locale. (Indicator 1.3)

A larger percentage of public school students in the South and the Midwest were 

enrolled in rural schools (28 and 25 percent, 

respectively) than in the Northeast and the 

West (16 and 13 percent, respectively) in 

2003–04. (Indicator 1.4)

In 2005, about 50 percent of children in 

rural areas between the ages of 3 and 5 at-

■

■

■

■

Highlights
iv Status of Education in Rural America

tended a center-based preprimary program, 

such as a daycare center, Head Start program, 

preschool, nursery school, or prekindergarten. This was less than the national rate (57 

percent). (Indicator 1.5)

In 2003–04, about 6 percent of rural students were enrolled in private schools, which 

was less than the national rate (11 percent). 

(Indicator 1.6 )

In 2004, the percentage of children living 

in poverty or below 185 percent of the 

poverty threshold in rural areas (35 percent) 

was smaller than that in towns (46 percent) 

or cities (47 percent), but larger than that 

in suburban areas (28 percent). (Indicator 

1.7 )

Rural public schools overall had a smaller 

percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch in 2003–04 (38 percent) 

than public schools in cities and towns (53 

and 43 percent, respectively). The percentage of public school students in rural remote 

areas attending a moderate-to-high poverty 

school (45 percent) was higher than the 

percentages in all other locales except large 

and midsize cities (66 and 49 percent). 

(Indicator 1.8)

In 2003–04, larger percentages of Black 

and American Indian/Alaska Native public 

school students in remote rural areas attended moderate-to-high poverty schools 

(87 and 79 percent, respectively) than in 

large cities (78 and 62 percent, respectively). 

(Indicator 1.9)

A smaller percentage of public school students in rural areas were identified as limited 

English proficient (LEP) than in any other 

locale in 2003–04 (2 vs. 5–14 percent). 

(Indicator 1.10)

There was little variation between the percentage of public school students with an 

Individual Education Program (IEP) in rural 

areas (13 percent) and the percentages in 

other locales (12–14 percent) in 2003–04. 

(Indicator 1.11)

In 2003, greater percentages of students 

in rural areas than students in cities had 

parents who attended a school event (74 vs. 

65 percent) or served as a volunteer or on 

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

a committee (42 vs. 38 percent). In addition, a larger percentage of students in rural 

areas had parents who reported taking their 

children to an athletic event outside of school 

than students in cities and suburbs (42 vs. 

34 and 38 percent, respectively). (Indicators 

1.12 and 1.13)

In 2004, the percentages of school-age children in rural areas with a mother or father 

whose highest educational attainment was a 

high school diploma (33 and 36 percent, respectively) were higher than the comparable 

percentages for children in cities (26 and 24 

percent, respectively) and suburbs (25 and 

24 percent respectively). (Indicator 1.14)

In all locales a larger percentage of high 

school students in 2003 had parents who 

expected their child’s highest educational 

attainment to be a bachelor’s degree than any 

other level of attainment. The percentage of 

rural students whose parents expected their 

highest educational attainment to be less 

than a bachelor’s degree (42 percent) was 

larger than the percentages of students in 

cities and suburban areas (30 and 25 percent, 

respectively). (Indicator 1.15)

Outcomes

A larger percentage of rural public school 

students in the 4th- and 8th-grades in 2005 

scored at or above the Proficient level on the 

National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) reading, mathematics, and science 

assessments than did public school students 

in cities at these grade levels. However, smaller percentages of rural public school students 

than suburban public school students scored 

at or above the Proficient level in reading and 

mathematics. (Indicators 2.1–2.3)

In 2004, the high school status dropout rate 

among 16- to 24-year-olds in rural areas (11 

percent) was higher than in suburban areas 

(9 percent), but lower than in cities (13 

percent). (Indicator 2.4)

The averaged freshman graduation rate for 

public high school students was higher during the 2002–03 school year in rural areas 

(75 percent) than in cities (65 percent), but 

lower than in towns and suburban areas 

(76 and 79 percent, respectively). (Indicator 2.5)

■

■

■

■

■

Outcomes
Status of Education in Rural America

Highlights

A larger percentage of teenagers in rural 

areas than in suburban areas were neither 

enrolled in school nor employed in 2004 (6 

vs. 4 percent). (Indicator 2.6 )

College enrollment rates for both 18- to 

24-year olds and 25- to 29-year olds were 

generally lower in rural areas than in all other 

locales in 2004. (Indicator 2.7 )

A smaller percentage of rural adults than 

suburban adults in 2005 took work-related 

courses (24 vs. 30 percent) or courses for 

personal interest (18 vs. 23 percent), and a 

smaller percentage of rural adults than adults 

in cities and suburban areas participated in 

part-time college or university credential 

programs (3 vs. 6 percent each). (Indicator 

2.8)

The percentage of adults with a bachelor’s 

degree as their highest level of educational 

attainment in 2004 was lower in rural areas 

(13 percent) than the national percentage 

(17 percent). (Indicator 2.9)

Regardless of educational attainment, 

persons in rural areas generally had higher 

median earnings in 2004 than those in cities 

and towns (when adjusted to reflect regional 

cost differences), but lower median earnings 

than those in suburban areas. (Indicator 

2.10) 

The unemployment rate for adults ages 25 

to 34 was lower in rural areas (6.7 percent) 

than in cities (8.0 percent) and towns (8.3 

percent), and the unemployment rate for 

adults ages 35 to 64 was lower in rural 

areas (4.5 percent) than in all other locales 

(4.8–6.4 percent). (Indicator 2.11)

Resources for public schools

Rural public schools tended to receive a 

smaller percentage of their revenues in 

2003–04 from federal sources (9 percent) 

than city public schools (11 percent), but 

a larger percentage than suburban public 

schools (6 percent). (Indicator 3.1)

Adjusted current public school expenditures 

per student were higher in rural areas in 

2003–04 ($8,400) than in cities ($8,100), 

suburbs ($7,900 each), and towns ($8,400). 

(Indicator 3.2)

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

In rural areas, as well as nationally, a larger 

percentage of public schools reported being 

underenrolled (69 percent of rural schools) 

than overenrolled (13 percent of rural 

schools) in fall 2005. The percentage of 

public schools reporting severe underenrollment in rural areas (33 percent) was greater 

than in all other locales (12–18 percent). 

(Indicator 3.3)

In 2002–03, the percentage of public high 

school students attending schools offering 

dual credit courses was similar in rural areas 

(76 percent) to the percentages in cities and 

suburbs, while the percentage of public high 

school students attending schools offering 

Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses or programs was lower in 

rural areas (69 and 1 percent, respectively) 

than in cities (93 and 8 percent) and suburbs 

(96 and 7 percent). (Indicator 3.4)

The number of public school students per 

instructional computer with Internet access 

in school was lower in rural areas (3.0 to 1) 

in 2005 than in suburban (4.3 to 1) and city 

(4.2 to 1) schools. (Indicator 3.5)

Rural public schools generally had fewer 

pupils per teacher (15.3) than public schools 

in other locales (15.9–16.9) in 2003–04. 

(Indicator 3.6 )

Racial/ethnic minorities account for a 

smaller percentage of public school teachers 

in rural schools (8 percent) than in schools in 

all other locales (12–29 percent) in 2003–04. 

(Indicator 3.7 )

In 2003–04, teachers in rural public schools 

averaged more years of experience (14.5 

years) than teachers in city public schools 

(13.6 years). (Indicator 3.8)

In general, smaller percentages of public 

school teachers in rural areas than across the 

nation as a whole reported problems as “serious” and behavioral problems as frequent 

(occurring at least once a week) in their 

schools in 2003–04. (Indicator 3.9)

Generally, a larger percentage of public 

school teachers in rural areas than in other 

locales reported being satisfied with the 

teaching conditions in their school in 

2003–04, though a smaller percentage of 

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■
vi Status of Education in Rural America

rural public school teachers than suburban 

public school teachers reported being satisfied with their salary. (Indicator 3.9)

Public school teachers in rural areas earned 

less ($43,000), on average, in 2003–04 than 

their peers in towns ($45,900), suburbs 

($45,700), and cities ($44,000), even after 

adjusting for geographic cost differences. 

(Indicator 3.10)

In 2003–04, public schools in rural areas 

experienced the greatest difficulty filling 

teacher vacancies in the fields of English as a 

■

■

second language (ESL) and foreign languages. Apart from these fields, the percentage 

of public schools in rural areas that reportedly could not fill teacher vacancies was not 

measurably different from the percentages 

in other locales. (Indicator 3.11)

In public schools, the average number 

of students per counselor, social worker, 

school psychologist, and special education 

instructional aide was lower in rural areas in 

2003–04 than in cities at both the elementary and secondary levels. (Indicator 3.12)

■

Resources for public schools
Acknowledgements

A number of people contributed to the development and production of Status of Education in Rural 

America. John Ralph, of the National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES), provided guidance in 

the development of the report, which was prepared 

under the general direction of Thomas Snyder and 

Val Plisko (NCES). Andrew White (NCES) reviewed 

the entire document. 

Several staff members at the Education Statistics 

Services Institute (ESSI) contributed to this report. 

ESSI is funded by NCES and composed of staff 

from the American Institutes for Research (AIR) 

and a number of partner organizations. Mary Ann 

Fox of ESSI-AIR provided overall guidance, research 

support, and statistical analysis. Elizabeth Jacinto 

(ESSI-AIR) and William Sonnenberg (NCES) gave 

programming and data support. Nancy Collins, in 

her role as an independent contractor for ESSI-AIR, 

provided programming assistance. Lauren Drake 

(ESSI-MacroSys) provided research and formatting 

support. Tom Nachazel (ESSI-AIR) copyedited the 

report. Michael Stock, Kalle Culotta, and Katie Ferguson (ESSI-MacroSys) worked on the cover design 

and report layout and did the desktop publishing of 

the report.

Status of Education in Rural America has received 

extensive reviews by several people, both within and 

outside of the Department of Education. We would 

like to thank them for their time and expert advice: 

Kristin Flanagan, Sandy Eyster, Zeyu Xu, Aparna 

Sundaram, Alison Slade, and Stephen Mistler of 

ESSI-AIR, Alexandra Henning of ESSI-QIP, and 

Siri Warkentien of ESSI-Child Trends; and Duc-Le 

To of IES.
This page intentionally left blank.
Highlights................................................................................................................................................. iii

Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................vii

List of Tables..............................................................................................................................................xi

List of Figures...........................................................................................................................................xiv

Measuring Rural Education........................................................................................................................ 1

Exhibit A. NCES’s urban-centric locale categories, released in 2006 .................................................... 2

Exhibit B. Comparison of number and percentage of public elementary and secondary schools and 

students classified as rural under the former metro-centric classification system and under the 

new urban-centric classification system: 2003–04 ...................................................................... 3

Exhibit C. Rural, town, suburban, and city locales in the United States: 2003–04............................... 5

Chapter 1. Demographics .......................................................................................................................... 7

1.1. Public elementary and secondary students, schools, and districts................................................ 8

1.2. Public elementary and secondary schools and students, by school level and size....................... 10

1.3. Public school students, by race/ethnicity .................................................................................. 14

1.4. Elementary and secondary public school students, by region and state..................................... 16

1.5. 3- to 5-year-olds in preprimary programs................................................................................. 20

1.6. Private schools ......................................................................................................................... 22

1.7. Children in poverty.................................................................................................................. 24

1.8. Students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch in public schools................................. 26

1.9. Concentrations of poverty in public schools, by race/ethnicity................................................. 28

1.10. Public school students with limited English proficiency ........................................................... 32

1.11. Public school students with disabilities..................................................................................... 34

1.12. Parental participation in school-related activities...................................................................... 36

1.13. Family outings ......................................................................................................................... 38

1.14. Parents’ educational attainment................................................................................................ 40

1.15. Parental expectations of educational attainment....................................................................... 42

Chapter 2. Outcomes............................................................................................................................... 45

2.1. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading achievement............................. 46

2.2. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics achievement..................... 50

2.3. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science achievement ............................. 54

2.4. High school status dropouts..................................................................................................... 58

2.5. Public high school graduation.................................................................................................. 60

Contents

Page
 Status of Education in Rural America Contents

2.6. Teens neither enrolled in school nor employed......................................................................... 62

2.7. College enrollment rates........................................................................................................... 64

2.8. Adult education ....................................................................................................................... 66

2.9. Educational attainment............................................................................................................ 68

2.10. Median earnings ...................................................................................................................... 72

2.11. Employment of adults.............................................................................................................. 76

Chapter 3. Resources for Public Schools................................................................................................... 79

3.1. Public school revenues ............................................................................................................. 80

3.2. Public school expenditures....................................................................................................... 84

3.3. Public school capacity .............................................................................................................. 88

3.4. Dual credit, Advanced Placement, and International Baccalaureate courses.............................. 90

3.5. Internet and computer access................................................................................................... 92

3.6. Pupil-teacher ratio in public schools......................................................................................... 94

3.7. Selected characteristics of public school teachers ...................................................................... 96

3.8. Teaching experience............................................................................................................... 100

3.9. Teacher perceptions of problems in schools............................................................................ 102

3.10. Average base salary for full-time public school teachers .......................................................... 108

3.11. Difficulty hiring teachers........................................................................................................ 110

3.12. Use of professional support staff and paraprofessionals........................................................... 114

References .............................................................................................................................................. 119

Appendix A. Supplemental Tables .......................................................................................................... 121

Appendix B. Technical Notes and Glossary............................................................................................. 137

Appendix C. Guide to Sources ............................................................................................................... 145

Page
Status of Education in Rural America xi

L

List of Tables

ist of Tables

Chapter 1. Demographics

1.1. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary districts, schools, and 

students, by locale: 2003–04 ......................................................................................................... 8

1.2a. Number of public schools and students, by locale, school level, and size of school: 2003–04...... 10

1.2b. Percentage distribution of public schools and students, by locale, school level, and size of school:

2003–04 ..................................................................................................................................... 12

1.3. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by race/

ethnicity and locale: 2003–04 ..................................................................................................... 14

1.4. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by locale, region, and state 

and District of Columbia: 2003–04 ............................................................................................ 18

1.5. Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds enrolled in center-based preprimary programs, by poverty status, 

hours of attendance, and locale: 2005.......................................................................................... 20

1.6a. Percentage distribution of elementary and secondary students, by control of school and locale: 

2003–04 ..................................................................................................................................... 22

1.6b. Number and percentage distribution of private elementary and secondary students and schools, 

by control of school and locale: 2003–04 .................................................................................... 22

1.7. Percentage distribution of children under 18 living in families, by poverty level, age group, and

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 24

1.8. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by 

percentage of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and locale: 2003–04..... 26

1.9a. Number of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students in school 

eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, locale, and race/ethnicity: 2003–04................................ 30

1.9b. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students 

in school eligible for a free or reduced-price lunch, locale, and race/ethnicity: 2003–04 .............. 31

1.10. Number and percentage of public school students who were identified as limited English 

proficient (LEP), by locale and region: 2003–04 ......................................................................... 33

1.11. Number and percentage of public school students with Individual Education Programs (IEPs), 

by locale: 2003–04...................................................................................................................... 35

1.12. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported 

participation in school-related activities, by selected school activity, grade level, and 

locale: 2003................................................................................................................................. 36

1.13. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported 

outings with their children in the past month, by selected activity and locale: 2003 .................... 38

1.14. Percentage distribution of children ages 6 to 18, by parents’ highest level of education and 

locale: 2004 ................................................................................................................................ 40

1.15. Percentage distribution of public and private elementary and secondary students, by parents’

expectations for child’s highest educational attainment and locale: 2003 ..................................... 42

Table Page
xii Status of Education in Rural America List of Tables

Chapter 2. Outcomes

2.1. Percentage distribution of public school students across NAEP reading achievement levels, by 

grade level and locale: 2005......................................................................................................... 49

2.2. Percentage distribution of public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement levels, 

by grade level and locale: 2005 .................................................................................................... 53

2.3. Percentage distribution of public school students across NAEP science achievement levels, by 

grade level and locale: 2005......................................................................................................... 57

2.4. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by poverty level and

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 59

2.6. Percentage of persons ages 16–19 who were neither enrolled in school nor working, by sex and 

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 62

2.7. Percentage of persons ages 18–29 enrolled in colleges or universities, by age group, locale, and 

sex: 2004..................................................................................................................................... 64

2.8. Percentage of adults age 16 or older who participated in adult educational activities, by type of 

activity and locale: 2005.............................................................................................................. 66

2.9a. Percentage distribution of adults age 25 and over, by highest level of educational attainment, 

age group, and locale: 2004 ........................................................................................................ 69

2.9b. Percentage distribution of adults age 25 and over, by highest level of educational attainment, 

locale, and poverty status: 2004 .................................................................................................. 70

2.10a. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost

differences, by locale and educational attainment: 2004 .............................................................. 72

2.10b. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost

differences, by locale, sex, and educational attainment: 2004....................................................... 74

2.11. Percentage of civilian persons ages 25–64 in the labor force and unemployed, by sex, age group, 

and locale: 2004 ......................................................................................................................... 76

Chapter 3. Resources for Public Schools

3.1. Revenues for public elementary and secondary schools and percentage distribution of revenues, 

by source of funds, locale, and district poverty level: 2003–04..................................................... 82

3.2. Expenditures per public elementary and secondary student, by type, locale, and district poverty 

level: 2003–04............................................................................................................................. 86

3.3. Percentage distribution of public schools reporting being underenrolled, at capacity, or 

overenrolled, by school locale: Fall 2005...................................................................................... 88

3.4. Number and percentage of public high schools that offered dual credit, Advanced Placement 

(AP), or International Baccalaureate (IB) courses during the 12-month school year, and 

percentage of all public high school students who were enrolled in these schools during this 

school year, by locale: 2002–03 ................................................................................................... 90

3.5a. Percentage of public schools with internet access, by type of access available and locale: 2005..... 92

3.5b. Number of public school students per instructional computer with internet access and 

percentage of public schools providing hand-held or laptop computers, by locale: 2005.............. 92

3.6. Pupil-teacher ratios in public schools, by school level, school size, and locale: 2003–04............... 95

3.7. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary school teachers, by 

locale and selected characteristics: 2003–04................................................................................. 98

Table Page
Status of Education in Rural America xiii List of Tables

3.8. Average number of years of teaching experience for public school teachers and percentage 

distribution of such teachers, by years of teaching experience, locale, and grade level taught: 

2003–04 ................................................................................................................................... 100

3.9a. Percentage of public school teachers who reported potential problems as “serious problems” in 

their schools, by type of problem, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04 ................................ 103

3.9b. Percentage of public school teachers who reported behavioral problems occurring in their

schools at least weekly, by type of problem, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04.................. 105

3.9c. Percentage of public school teachers who reported agreement with various statements about

teaching conditions, by condition, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04............................... 107

3.10. Average base salary for full-time teachers in public elementary and secondary schools adjusted

for geographic cost differences, by highest degree earned and locale: 2003–04 .......................... 108

3.11. Percentage of public elementary and secondary schools with a teaching vacancy in selected

teaching fields, by the school’s reported level of difficulty in filling the vacancy, teaching field, 

and locale: 2003–04.................................................................................................................. 112

3.12. Total number of teachers and student support staff in regular public schools, average number 

of staff per school, and average number of students per staff in schools with such staff, by 

locale, school level, and type of school staff: 2003–04 ............................................................... 117

Appendix A. Supplemental Tables

A-1.1. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary districts, schools, 

and students, by detailed locale: 2003–04 ................................................................................. 123

A-1.2. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary schools, by school 

size and detailed locale: 2003–04 .............................................................................................. 124

A-1.4. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by detailed locale, region, 

and state and District of Columbia: 2003–04........................................................................... 125

A-1.7. Percentage distribution of families with children under 18, by poverty level, locale, and family 

type: 2004................................................................................................................................. 126

A-1.8. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by 

percentage of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and detailed locale: 

2003–04 ................................................................................................................................... 127

A-1.9. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students 

in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, detailed locale, and race/ethnicity: 

2003–04 ................................................................................................................................... 128

A-1.10. Percentage of children ages 5–17 who spoke a language other than English at home and who 

spoke English with difficulty, by age, locale, and race/ethnicity: 2004 ....................................... 130

A-2.4. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by race/ethnicity and 

locale: 2004............................................................................................................................... 131

A-3.7. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary school teachers, by 

detailed locale and selected characteristics: 2003–04.................................................................. 132

A-3.8. Average number of years of teaching experience for public school teachers and percentage 

distribution of such teachers, by detailed locale, years of teaching experience, and grade level 

taught: 2003–04 ....................................................................................................................... 134

Table Page
xiv Status of Education in Rural America List of Figures

List of Figures

Chapter 1. Demographics

1.1. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary districts, schools, and students, by 

locale: 2003–04............................................................................................................................. 9

1.2a. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary schools, by level, locale, and size of 

school: 2003–04.......................................................................................................................... 11

1.2b. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by level, locale, and size of 

school: 2003–04.......................................................................................................................... 13

1.3. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by race/ethnicity and 

locale: 2003–04........................................................................................................................... 15

1.4a. Percentage of public elementary and secondary students enrolled in schools in rural areas, by 

state and District of Columbia: 2003–04 .................................................................................... 16

1.4b. Percentage of public elementary and secondary students enrolled in schools in remote rural 

areas, by state and District of Columbia: 2003–04 ..................................................................... 17

1.5. Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds enrolled in center-based preprimary programs, by locale and

hours of attendance: 2005........................................................................................................... 21

1.6. Percentage distribution of elementary and secondary students, by control of school and locale: 

2003–04 ..................................................................................................................................... 23

1.7. Percentage distribution of children under 18 living in families, by poverty level and locale:

2004 ........................................................................................................................................... 25

1.8. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students in 

school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and locale: 2003–04............................................. 27

1.9. Percentage of public school students in moderate-to-high poverty schools, by race/ethnicity and 

locale: 2003–04........................................................................................................................... 29

1.12. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported 

participation in school-related activities, by selected school activity and locale: 2003................... 37

1.13. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported 

outings with their child in the past month, by selected activity and locale: 2003 ......................... 39

1.14. Percentage distribution of children ages 6 to 18, by parents’ highest level of education and

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 41

1.15. Percentage distribution of public and private elementary and secondary students, by parents’ 

expectations for child’s highest educational attainment and locale: 2003 ..................................... 43

Chapter 2. Outcomes

2.1a. Percentage distribution of 4th-grade public school students across NAEP reading achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005.................................................................................................................. 46

2.1b. Percentage distribution of 8th-grade public school students across NAEP reading achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005.................................................................................................................. 47

2.1c. Percentage distribution of 12th-grade public school students across NAEP reading achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005.................................................................................................................. 48

2.2a. Percentage distribution of 4th-grade public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement levels, by locale: 2005......................................................................................................... 50

Figure Page
Status of Education in Rural America xvList of Figures

2.2b. Percentage distribution of 8th-grade public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement levels, by locale: 2005......................................................................................................... 51

2.2c. Percentage distribution of 12th-grade public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement levels, by locale: 2005......................................................................................................... 52

2.3a. Percentage distribution of 4th-grade public school students across NAEP science achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005.................................................................................................................. 54

2.3b. Percentage distribution of 8th-grade public school students across NAEP science achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005.................................................................................................................. 55

2.3c. Percentage distribution of 12th-grade public school students across NAEP science achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005.................................................................................................................. 56

2.4a. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by poverty level and 

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 58

2.4b. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by race/ethnicity and 

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 59

2.5. Averaged freshman graduation rate for public high school students, by locale: 2002–03.............. 61

2.6. Percentage of persons ages 16–19 who were neither enrolled in school nor working, by sex and

locale: 2004................................................................................................................................. 63

2.7. Percentage of persons ages 18–24 enrolled in colleges and universities, by sex and locale: 2004... 65

2.8. Percentage of adults age 16 or older who participated in adult educational activities, by type of

activity and locale: 2005.............................................................................................................. 67

2.9a. Percentage distribution of adults ages 25–34 and 65 and over, by locale and highest level of

educational attainment: 2004...................................................................................................... 68

2.9b. Percentage distribution of adults age 25 and over, by poverty status, locale, and highest level of

educational attainment: 2004...................................................................................................... 71

2.10a. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost 

differences, by locale and educational attainment: 2004 .............................................................. 73

2.10b. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost 

differences, by sex, locale, and educational attainment: 2004....................................................... 75

2.11. Percentage of civilian persons ages 25–34 who were unemployed, by sex and locale: 2004 .......... 77

Chapter 3. Resources for Public Schools

3.1. Percentage distribution of revenues for public elementary and secondary schools, by source of 

funds and locale: 2003–04 .......................................................................................................... 81

3.2. Total adjusted current expenditures per public elementary and secondary student, by locale 

and district poverty level: 2003–04.............................................................................................. 85

3.3. Percentage distribution of public schools reporting being underenrolled, at capacity, or overenrolled, by school locale: Fall 2005 ............................................................................................ 89

3.4. Percentage of public high school students in schools that offered dual credit, Advanced

Placement (AP), or International Baccalaureate (IB) courses during the 12-month school year, 

by locale: 2002–03...................................................................................................................... 91

3.5. Percentage of public schools offering various types of internet access and providing hand-held 

or laptop computers, by locale: 2005........................................................................................... 93

3.6. Average pupil-teacher ratios in public schools, by locale: 2003–04 .............................................. 94

Figure Page
xvi Status of Education in Rural America List of Figures

3.7. Percentage distribution of race/ethnicity of public elementary and secondary school teachers, 

by locale: 2003–04...................................................................................................................... 97

3.8. Percentage distribution of teachers in public schools, by years of teaching experience and 

detailed locale: 2003–04............................................................................................................ 101

3.9a. Percentage of public school teachers who reported potential problems as “serious problems” in 

their schools, by type of problem and locale: 2003–04 .............................................................. 102

3.9b. Percentage of public school teachers who reported behavioral problems occurring in their

schools at least weekly, by type of problem and locale: 2003–04................................................ 104

3.9c. Percentage of public school teachers who reported agreement with various statements about 

teaching conditions, by condition and locale: 2003–04............................................................. 106

3.10. Average base salary for full-time teachers in public elementary and secondary schools adjusted 

for geographic cost differences, by locale and highest degree earned: 2003–04 .......................... 109

3.11. Percentage of public elementary and secondary schools with a teaching vacancy in selected

teaching fields that reported filling the vacancy as “very difficult” or that the vacancy could 

not be filled, by teaching field and locale: 2003–04................................................................... 111

3.12a. Average number of students per student support staff in regular public elementary schools

with such staff, by selected type of staff and locale: 2003–04..................................................... 115

3.12b. Average number of students per student support staff in regular public secondary schools with 

such staff, by selected type of staff and locale: 2003–04............................................................. 116

Figure Page
Measuring Rural

Education

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 

in its authorizing legislation is charged with the task 

of reporting information on issues surrounding education by “urban, rural, suburban districts, and other 

population characteristics, when such disaggregated 

information will facilitate educational and policy 

decisionmaking.”1 To further this aim, NCES has 

developed a new classification system to make the 

reporting of locale consistent across its various surveys, 

as well as improve upon previous systems. This report 

marks the first use of the new classification system 

across NCES surveys to describe elementary and secondary education in rural settings and other locales. 

Rural education has been the focus of a sizable volume 

of recent research, which has examined rural schools’ 

student achievement, finances, cultural diversity, 

responses to special needs students, distance education programs, crime rates, and staff recruitment and 

retention (Imazeki and Reschovsky 2003; McClure 

and Reeves 2004; Nelson 2004; RosenKoetter, Irwin, 

and Saceda 2004; Smith, Hill, Evans, and Bandera 

2000; Wenger and Dinsmore 2005; Williams 2005). 

However, the ability to compare findings across this 

research, and as a result, the potential usefulness of 

this research, is hampered by the lack of a single, 

uniform definition of “rural.” 

To help address this problem and improve rural 

education reporting, NCES worked with the Census 

Bureau to create new measures of locale based on 

improved geocoding technology and the 2000 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions 

of metro areas that rely less on population size and 

county boundaries than proximity of an address to an 

urbanized area. Released in 2006, the new measures 

or locale codes are assigned to each school according to the school’s physical longitude and latitude. 

Thus, these new locale codes make school data more 

consistent, accurate, and useful to policymakers, 

researchers, and educators concerned with rural 

education issues. 

This report presents various education indicators, 

using the 2006 locale codes, to provide a more comprehensive description of the current condition of 

rural education. The report’s focus is on elementary 

and secondary schools, although a few indicators 

look at postsecondary enrollment and adult education and attainment to provide a context for student 

expectations and opportunities. This report does not 

examine trends. Rather, most indicators report data 

from the school year 2003–04 or calendar year 2004, 

the first year of data that include the new locale codes. 

Data from prior years were not recoded in order to 

1

 U.S. Code, Title 20, Chapter 76, Subchapter 1, Part C, Sec. 9543 (a)(3); P.L. 107-279, Part C, Sec. 153 (a)(3).
 Status of Education in Rural America

Exhibit A. NCES’s urban-centric locale categories, released in 2006

The New Classification System

examine trends. The data apply to the 50 states and 

the District of Columbia. 

The New Classification System

The new urban-centric classification system has four 

major locale categories—city, suburban, town, and 

rural—each of which is subdivided into three subcategories. Cities and suburbs are subdivided into the 

categories small, midsize, or large; towns and rural 

areas are subdivided by their proximity to an urbanized area into the categories fringe, distant, or remote 

(see exhibit A). These twelve categories are based on 

several key concepts that Census uses to define an 

area’s urbanicity: principal city, urbanized area, and 

urban cluster. A principal city is a city that contains 

the primary population and economic center of a 

metropolitan statistical area, which, in turn, is defined 

as one or more contiguous counties that have a “core” 

area with a large population nucleus and adjacent 

communities that are highly integrated economically 

or socially with the core. Urbanized areas and urban 

clusters are densely settled “cores” of Census-defined 

blocks with adjacent densely settled surrounding 

areas. Core areas with populations of 50,000 or 

more are designated as urbanized areas; those with 

populations between 25,000 and 50,000 are designated as urban clusters. For more information on

Locale Definition

City

Large Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with population of 250,000 

or more 

Midsize Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with population less than 250,000 

and greater than or equal to 100,000

Small Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with population less than 

100,000

Suburban

Large Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with population of 250,000 

or more

Midsize Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with population less than 

250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000

Small Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with population less than 

100,000

Town

Fringe Territory inside an urban cluster that is less than or equal to 10 miles from an urbanized 

area

Distant Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles 

from an urbanized area

Remote Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 35 miles from an urbanized area

Rural

Fringe Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles from an urbanized area, as 

well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5 miles from an urban cluster

Distant Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles 

from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is more than 2.5 miles but less than or 

equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster

Remote Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and is also 

more than 10 miles from an urban cluster

SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget (2000). Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan 

Statistical Areas; Notice. Federal Register (65) No. 249.
Status of Education in Rural America Measuring Rural Education

urbanized areas and urban clusters, see http://www.

census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Rural areas are 

designated by Census as those areas that do not lie 

inside an urbanized area or urban cluster.

NCES has classified all schools into one of these 

twelve categories based on schools’ actual addresses 

and their corresponding coordinates of latitude and 

longitude. Not only does this mean that the location 

of any school can be identified precisely, but also 

that distance measures can be used to identify town 

and rural subtypes. Unlike the previous classification system that differentiated towns on the basis of 

population size, the new system differentiates towns 

and rural areas on the basis of their proximity to 

larger urban centers. This key feature allows NCES 

to identify and differentiate rural schools and school 

districts in relatively remote areas from those that may 

be located just outside an urban center.

The choropleth map (see exhibit C) shows the proportion and location of the Census-defined locales 

in the United States. Differences in locale type are 

indicated by color. Cities are red, suburban areas are 

orange, and towns are yellow. Rural areas are represented by varying shades of green: the lightest green 

indicates fringe rural areas, medium-green indicates 

distant rural areas, and the darkest green indicates 

remote rural areas. For the purposes of this map, 

locales are presented at the level of Census blocks 

(not by schools or school districts), giving an overall 

view of the relative concentrations and arrangement 

of the various locales across the country.

Impact of New Classification System

Expanding the school locale codes to twelve categories 

allows for a greater degree of precision in identifying 

schools according to their distance from an urban 

area and the population density of the location, yet 

it does not cause an enormous shift in the number 

or percentage of public elementary and secondary 

schools that are classified as rural. Overall, about 6 

percent of these schools were affected by the reclassification: 2,878 schools were newly designated as 

rural, and 2,418 formerly rural schools were placed 

in a nonrural category (see exhibit B). The net change 

was a 0.5 percentage point increase in the total number of public schools classified as rural in the United 

States; however, there were larger shifts within the 

rural category, as 8 percent of public schools formerly 

classified as rural were no longer considered rural in 

the new system. Also, the number of students enrolled 

in public schools classified as rural increased 1 percent, by 337,000. Aside from providing the benefit 

of a more accurate classification for these schools, the 

distinguishing benefit of this classification system lies 

in its ability to distinguish between schools in fringe, 

distant, and remote rural areas.

Exhibit B. Comparison of number and percentage of public elementary and secondary schools and students 

classified as rural under the former metro-centric classification system and under the new urban-centric 

classification system: 2003–04

Characteristic All locales

Rural

under

former

system

Rural

under new 

system

Unchanged

(rural

in both

systems)

No longer

classified

as rural

Newly

classified

as rural

Net

increase

Number of schools 95,726 29,517 29,977 27,099 2,418 2,878 460

Percentage of 

All schools 100.0 30.8 31.3 28.3 2.5 3.0 0.5

Former rural schools † 100.0 101.61 91.8 8.2 † †

Number of students 

 (in thousands) 48,354 9,971 10,308 8,851 1,120 1,457 337

Percentage of 

All students 100.0 20.6 21.3 18.3 2.3 3.0 0.7

Students formerly 

classified as rural † 100.0 103.41 88.8 11.2 † †

† Not applicable.

1

 This percentage, which represents the number under the new system divided by the number under the former system, is over 100 percent because the new 

classification system increased the total number classified as rural.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Locale Code File,” 2003–04.
Status of Education in Rural America Organization of the Report

The new classification system allows for the collection and reporting of high-quality data across the 

range of rural locales (and other locales) with greater 

consistency and integrity. At present, all NCES 

national surveys are able to report findings for the 

major locale designations (i.e., city, suburb, town, 

and rural). Larger surveys, such as the Schools and 

Staffing Survey (SASS), and universe datasets, such 

as the Common Core of Data (CCD), are also able 

to report breakouts for the various subcategories—including fringe, distant, and remote rural areas. Where 

possible, those data are included in this report.

Organization of the Report

This report is the first national effort to report on a 

variety of educational variables using the new locale 

codes. It is organized into three chapters: demographics, outcomes, and resources for public schools. 

The demographic information that is presented in 

the first chapter describes the number of schools 

and students in rural areas and examines some of 

the characteristics of those students and schools, 

including race/ethnicity, poverty status, the use of a 

language other than English as a primary language, 

and the degree of parental involvement in education. 

The outcomes chapter of this report highlights student achievement data in reading, mathematics, and 

science. It also provides dropout rates, high school 

completion rates, and college enrollment rates, as 

well as employment rates and earnings of adults. 

The final chapter focuses on public school resources, 

including federal and state revenues, computer access, 

pupil/teacher ratios, and indicators of teacher characteristics from the most recent Schools and Staffing 

Survey (SASS).

Using the most recent data from the surveys already 

mentioned and other national surveys—including 

the CCD, National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP), National Household Education 

Surveys Program (NHES), the Fast Response Survey 

System (FRSS), and the Census Bureau’s American 

Community Survey (ACS)—this report sets new 

standards in the breadth of information provided and 

in the consistency of the metrics used to highlight the 

condition of rural education. It is meant to serve as a 

foundation for further discussion and future research 

on the educational characteristics and developments 

unique to rural schools as well as those shared with 

other locales in America.
Status of Education in Rural America 5Measuring Rural Education

Legend

City (Large, Midsize, Small)

Suburb (Large, Midsize, Small)

Town (Fringe, Distant, Remote)

Rural Fringe

Rural Distant

Rural Remote

Exhibit C. Rural, town, suburban, and city locales in the United States: 2003–04

NOTE: Different locale types are represented by area shading. These shaded areas connect U.S. Census block and block groups of the same locale type; 

they are not intended to represent population density or land contours. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) works with the U.S. Census 

Bureau to assign a locale type to all public and private elementary and secondary schools in the nation. These locale assignments are included in NCES 

data and analytic products, and they are widely used by researchers and program administrators to investigate how conditions of education vary across 

geographic areas.

The locale typology relies on three core concepts: urbanized areas, urban clusters, and principal cities. Urbanized areas and urban clusters are defined by 

the U.S. Census Bureau and based on population data from Census 2000. These urban areas are constructed from collections of densely settled census 

blocks and block groups. Urban areas with a population of 50,000 or more are designated as urbanized areas, and those with a population less than 

50,000 but greater than 2,500 are designated as urban clusters. Principal cities are a component of Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA) defined by the 

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). These entities were previously known as central cities, and they identify municipalities (and some unincorporated areas) within a CBSA that are primary population and economic centers. For more information on urbanized areas and urban clusters, see

http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Rural areas are designated by Census as those areas that do not lie inside an urbanized area or urban 

cluster. The NCES locale typology includes four basic classifications. Each classification includes three subtypes.

City: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city. 

Suburb: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area. 

Town: Territory inside an urban cluster. 

Rural: Territory defined as rural by the Census Bureau. Rural territory that is within 5 miles of an urbanized area, as well as rural territory within 2.5 miles 

of a town is classified as Fringe. Rural territory that is between 5 and 25 miles from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is between 2.5 and 10 

miles from a town is identified as Distant. Rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and is also more than 10 miles from a town is 

classified as Remote.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Geographic boundaries and names are based on TIGER/Line 2004. Principal cities are based on CBSA component revisions 

issued by OMB in December 2005.
This page intentionally left blank.
The indicators in this chapter profile rural school 

systems, rural students in poverty or with disabilities, and parental support and school involvement 

in rural areas. The indicators highlight the fact 

that rural public school systems in the United 

States constitute over half of all school districts 

and one-third of all public schools, yet enroll only 

one-fifth of all public school students (indicator 

1.1). Rural public school systems predominate in 

the South and Midwest (indicator 1.4).

Rural public school systems differ from those 

in other locales in terms of the population they 

serve. Greater proportions of rural public students are White and are enrolled in small schools 

than public school students in cities or suburban 

areas (indicators 1.2 and 1.3). A smaller proportion of students in rural areas than in cities or 

towns live near or below the poverty threshold 

(indicator 1.7). However, poverty is concentrated in remote rural areas, where American 

Indian/Alaska Native and Black public school 

students disproportionately attend moderateto-high poverty schools (indicators 1.8 and 1.9). 

A smaller percentage of rural public school students are limited English proficient than public 

school students in other locales (indicator 1.10). 

The percentage of rural public school students 

identified as having disabilities is similar to other 

locales (indicator 1.11).

Rural students’ parents do not differ markedly 

from those in other locales on several indicators. For example, parents in rural areas enroll 

their children in preprimary programs at similar rates to parents in towns, but at lower rates 

than parents in suburbs and cities (indicator 

1.5). The percentages of rural students whose 

parents attend school events and volunteer are 

similar to those of students in suburban areas 

and towns, but higher than those of students 

in cities (indicator 1.12). However, a smaller 

percentage of students in rural areas than in cities have parents who are high school dropouts, 

and a smaller percentage of students in rural 

areas than in suburban areas have a parent with 

a bachelor’s degree (indicator 1.14). Also, while 

a larger percentage of students in all locales have 

parents who expect them to attain a bachelor’s 

degree than any other level of educational attainment, a greater proportion of rural students 

than students in cities and suburbs have parents 

who expect them to attain less than a bachelor’s 

degree (indicator 1.15). 

1Demographics
In 2003–04, some 96,000 public elementary and 

secondary schools, located in 14,000 school districts, 

served over 48 million students in the United States 

(table 1.1). The distribution of districts, schools, 

and students across locales highlights some key differences in the size and nature of education in rural 

America, compared to education in towns, suburbs, 

and cities. 

In 2003–04, more than half of all operating school 

districts were located in rural areas (56 percent), 

while 20 percent of districts were located in suburban areas, 18 percent in towns, and 6 percent 

in cities (figure 1.1). About one-third of all U.S. 

public schools were located in rural areas (30,000), 

more than in suburbs (27,000), cities (25,000), 

or towns (15,000). Fewer students, however, were 

enrolled in public schools in rural areas than in 

suburbs and cities. Public schools in rural areas enrolled 10 million students compared to 17 million 

in suburban areas and 15 million in cities. 

Rural areas located close to or on the fringe of urbanized areas, referred to as “fringe rural,” differed 

from rural areas located further from urbanized 

areas, referred to as “distant rural” and “remote 

rural,” in their proportions of districts, schools, and 

students (see the introductory section “Measuring Rural Education” for detailed descriptions of 

these locale types). Public schools in fringe rural 

areas enrolled a larger percentage of all students 

(11 percent) than public schools in distant rural (7 

percent) and remote rural (3 percent) areas. However, the percentage of all school districts located 

in fringe rural areas (11 percent) was smaller than 

that in distant rural (22 percent) and remote rural 

(23 percent) areas (see table A-1.1 for a comparison 

of all locale types).

1.1. Public elementary and secondary students, schools, and districts

In 2003-04, over half of all operating school districts and one-third of all public schools were in rural areas, 

more than in any other locale. However, fewer students were enrolled in public schools in rural areas than 

in suburbs or cities.

 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.1 — Public elementary and secondary students, schools, and districts

Table 1.1. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary districts, schools, and 

students, by locale: 2003–04

Locale Districts Schools Students

Number

Total 14,076 95,726 48,353,523

City 831 24,597 14,685,209

Suburban 2,800 26,589 17,137,511

Town 2,572 14,563 6,222,788

Rural 7,873 29,977 10,308,015

Fringe 1,568 10,176 5,305,303

Distant 3,062 11,036 3,438,256

Remote 3,243 8,765 1,564,456

Percentage distribution

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

City 5.9 25.7 30.4

Suburban 19.9 27.8 35.4

Town 18.3 15.2 12.9

Rural 55.9 31.3 21.3

Fringe 11.1 10.6 11.0

Distant 21.8 11.5 7.1

Remote 23.0 9.2 3.2

NOTE: Schools with no reported enrollment are included in school totals but excluded from student totals. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a 

population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas 

are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban 

cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey” and “Local Education Agency Universe Survey,” 2003–04.
Figure 1.1. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary districts, schools, and students, by locale: 

2003–04

NOTE: Schools with no reported enrollment are included in school totals but excluded from student totals. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey” and “Local Education Agency Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

6 20 18 56

26 28 15 31

30 35 13 21

City Suburban Town Rural

0

Students

Schools

Districts

10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

Status of Education in Rural America Chapter 1 — Demographics
Table 1.2a. Number of public schools and students, by locale, school level, and size of school: 2003–04

School type and size

City Suburban Town Rural 

Schools1 Students Schools1 Students Schools1 Students Schools1 Students

Total 24,597 14,685,209 26,589 17,137,511 14,563 6,222,788 29,977 10,308,015

Less than 200 3,379 307,082 2,546 227,312 2,537 215,016 10,741 1,054,676

200 to 399 5,476 1,692,541 4,952 1,565,377 4,311 1,320,478 8,509 2,507,251

400 to 799 9,741 5,543,548 11,911 6,799,659 5,595 3,089,494 7,621 4,206,179

800 to 1,199 3,003 2,865,051 3,913 3,754,859 1,050 994,048 1,502 1,427,856

1,200 to 1,999 1,621 2,460,362 1,895 2,865,691 368 539,794 576 850,139

2,000 or more 689 1,816,625 746 1,924,613 28 63,958 106 261,914

Elementary 17,872 9,680,751 19,746 11,228,185 9,427 3,945,264 18,713 6,350,574

Less than 200 1,276 143,539 999 115,711 1,150 134,798 6,238 658,658

200 to 399 4,784 1,492,887 4,486 1,428,917 3,577 1,090,698 6,006 1,772,698

400 to 799 8,876 5,028,258 10,777 6,103,564 4,196 2,273,652 5,492 3,009,603

800 to 1,199 2,269 2,137,088 2,786 2,635,028 422 384,652 789 735,058

1,200 to 1,999 545 773,880 598 839,904 44 59,417 121 170,184

2,000 or more 44 105,099 43 105,061 1 2,047 2 4,373

Secondary 4,671 4,530,123 5,330 5,619,275 3,975 2,154,449 8,806 3,447,777

Less than 200 1,077 90,898 792 59,451 796 51,615 3,395 318,317

200 to 399 439 126,721 325 97,633 666 209,516 2,071 608,977

400 to 799 658 399,950 1,025 632,407 1,318 768,505 1,785 1,005,751

800 to 1,199 662 659,444 1,070 1,064,602 611 593,214 635 619,280

1,200 to 1,999 1,021 1,603,767 1,265 1,975,522 321 476,242 430 643,335

2,000 or more 629 1,649,343 692 1,789,660 24 55,357 102 252,117

Combined 1,546 441,425 1,072 262,256 792 112,462 2,027 494,292

Less than 200 897 62,901 614 41,935 518 24,001 970 68,792

200 to 399 208 59,731 119 33,180 59 17,505 422 122,972

400 to 799 189 106,688 100 58,857 77 45,010 337 186,966

800 to 1,199 72 68,519 54 52,330 16 15,257 78 73,518

1,200 to 1,999 54 81,403 31 48,357 3 4,135 25 36,620

2,000 or more 16 62,183 10 27,597 3 6,554 2 5,424

1

 Total includes schools not reporting enrollment or grade level.

NOTE: Enrollment counts exclude schools with no reported enrollment. 1,749 schools and 86,690 students with no reported grade level are not separately 

shown. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding or because of schools with no reported grade level that are not separately shown.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Across the United States in the 2003–04 school year, 

31.2 million students were enrolled in 65,800 public elementary schools, 15.8 million students were 

enrolled in 22,800 public secondary schools, and 

1.3 million students were enrolled in 5,400 public 

combined schools (data not shown). In rural areas, 

6.4 million students were enrolled in 18,700 public 

elementary schools, 3.4 million students in 8,800 

public secondary schools, and 0.5 million students in 

2,000 public combined-level schools (tables 1.2a and 

A-1.2). At both the elementary and secondary level, 

the number of students attending rural public schools 

(6.4 million and 3.4 million, respectively) was larger 

than the number attending public schools in towns 

(3.9 million and 2.1 million), but smaller than the 

numbers attending public schools in suburbs (11.2 

million and 5.6 million) and in cities (9.7 million 

and 4.5 million).

In 2003–04, about two-thirds of public schools in rural areas enrolled less than 400 students, and less than 

one-half of a percent enrolled 2,000 or more students 

(table 1.2b). In contrast, in cities and suburbs, roughly 

two-thirds of public schools enrolled more than 400 

students and 3 percent of public schools enrolled 

2,000 or more students. In towns, about half of public 

schools enrolled more than 400 students.

1.2. Public elementary and secondary schools and students, by school level and size

In 2003–04, a larger percentage of rural students attended small or very small public schools than students 

in other locales.

10 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.2 — Public elementary and secondary schools and students, by school level and size
Status of Education in Rural America 11Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.2a. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary schools, by level, locale, and size of 

school: 2003–04

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Excludes schools with no reported enrollment and 1,749 schools with no reported grade level are not separately shown. Detail may not sum to totals 

because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

7

5

12

33

24

15

21

40

27 50 13 3 #

23 55 14 3 #

38 45 4

#

#

32 29 4

1

#

10 15 15 23 14

6 20 21 24 13

18 35 16 9

25 21 8 5

1

1

City

Locale

Suburban

Town

Rural

City

Locale

Suburban

Town

Rural

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

800 to 1,199 1,200 to 1,999 2,000 or more 

0 10 20 30 40 50

400 to 799

Percent

Elementary

Secondary

60 70 80 90 100

Less than 200 200 to 399
Table 1.2b. Percentage distribution of public schools and students, by locale, school level, and size of school: 

2003–04

School type and size

City Suburban Town Rural 

Schools Students Schools Students Schools Students Schools Students

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 200 14.1 2.1 9.8 1.3 18.3 3.5 37.0 10.2

200 to 399 22.9 11.5 19.1 9.1 31.0 21.2 29.3 24.3

400 to 799 40.7 37.7 45.9 39.7 40.3 49.6 26.2 40.8

800 to 1,199 12.6 19.5 15.1 21.9 7.6 16.0 5.2 13.9

1,200 to 1,999 6.8 16.8 7.3 16.7 2.6 8.7 2.0 8.2

2,000 or more 2.9 12.4 2.9 11.2 0.2 1.0 0.4 2.5

Elementary 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 200 7.2 1.5 5.1 1.0 12.2 3.4 33.5 10.4

200 to 399 26.9 15.4 22.8 12.7 38.1 27.6 32.2 27.9

400 to 799 49.9 51.9 54.7 54.4 44.7 57.6 29.5 47.4

800 to 1,199 12.8 22.1 14.2 23.5 4.5 9.7 4.2 11.6

1,200 to 1,999 3.1 8.0 3.0 7.5 0.5 1.5 0.6 2.7

2,000 or more 0.2 1.1 0.2 0.9 # 0.1 # 0.1

Secondary 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 200 24.0 2.0 15.3 1.1 21.3 2.4 40.3 9.2

200 to 399 9.8 2.8 6.3 1.7 17.8 9.7 24.6 17.7

400 to 799 14.7 8.8 19.8 11.3 35.3 35.7 21.2 29.2

800 to 1,199 14.8 14.6 20.7 18.9 16.4 27.5 7.5 18.0

1,200 to 1,999 22.8 35.4 24.5 35.2 8.6 22.1 5.1 18.7

2,000 or more 14.0 36.4 13.4 31.8 0.6 2.6 1.2 7.3

Combined 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 200 62.5 14.2 66.2 16.0 76.6 21.3 52.9 13.9

200 to 399 14.5 13.5 12.8 12.7 8.7 15.6 23.0 24.9

400 to 799 13.2 24.2 10.8 22.4 11.4 40.0 18.4 37.8

800 to 1,199 5.0 15.5 5.8 20.0 2.4 13.6 4.3 14.9

1,200 to 1,999 3.8 18.4 3.3 18.4 0.4 3.7 1.4 7.4

2,000 or more 1.1 14.1 1.1 10.5 0.4 5.8 0.1 1.1

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Excludes schools with no reported enrollment. 1,749 schools and 86,690 students with no reported grade level are not included in the calculations 

of these percentage distributions. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Generally, a larger percentage of rural students 

than students in other locales were enrolled in 

very small public schools. At the elementary level, 

the percentage of students in rural areas attending public schools with an enrollment below 200 

(10.4 percent) was about three times as large as the 

percentage in towns (3.4 percent), about 7 times 

as large as the percentages in cities (1.5 percent), 

and about 10 times as large as the percentage in 

suburbs (1.0 percent). 

At the secondary level, similar differences were 

found, with the percentage of students in rural 

areas attending public schools with enrollments 

of less than 200 (9 percent) being more than 

three times larger than the percentages in cities, 

suburbs, and towns (ranging from 1 to 2 percent). 

Conversely, the percentage of students in rural 

areas attending public schools with enrollments of 

2,000 or more (7 percent) was less than in cities (36 

percent) and suburbs (32 percent), though greater 

than in towns (3 percent).

Larger numbers of public combined schools 

(schools having a grade below 7th grade and a 

grade above 8th grade) and public combined school 

students were found in rural areas (2,000 schools 

and 494,000 students) than in each of the other 

locales (800–1,500 schools and 112,000–441,000 

students). While few differences were seen across 

locales in the distribution of combined school 

students across school sizes, a smaller percentage 

of public combined school students in rural areas 

attended schools with 1,200 or more students than 

in cities, suburbs, and towns (9 percent vs. 33, 29, 

and 10 percent, respectively). 

12 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.2 — Public elementary and secondary schools and students, by school level and size
Figure 1.2b. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by level, locale, and size of 

school: 2003–04

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: 86,690 students in schools with no reported grade level are not separately shown. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

52 22 8

54 23 7

3 58 10 #

10 47

15

13

28

28 12 3 #

2 9 15 35 36

19 35 32

2 36 28 22

29

3

2 11

10

9 18 18 19

3

7

City

Locale

Suburban

Town

Rural

City

Locale

Suburban

Town

Rural

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Elementary

Secondary

60 70 80 90 100

1

2

1

1

1

800 to 1,199 1,200 to 1,999 2,000 or more 

Less than 200 200 to 399 400 to 799

1

Status of Education in Rural America 13Chapter 1 — Demographics
14 Status of Education in Rural America

In the 2003–04 school year, 58 percent of all public elementary and secondary school students in 

the nation were White, 17 percent were Black, 19 

percent were Hispanic, 4 percent were Asian/Pacific 

Islander, and 1 percent were American Indian/

Alaska Native (table 1.3). In rural areas, 78 percent 

of public school students were White, 10 percent 

were Black, 8 percent were Hispanic, 2 percent were 

Asian/Pacific Islander, and 3 percent were American 

Indian/Alaska Native.

The percentage of these students who were White 

was higher in rural areas (78 percent) than in cities (35 percent), suburban areas (62 percent), and 

towns (72 percent) (figure 1.3). Conversely, the 

percentages of these students in rural schools who 

were Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander 

were lower than the corresponding percentages in 

cities, suburban areas, and towns. A higher percentage of these students in rural areas were American 

Indian/Alaska Native than in cities, suburbs, and 

towns (1 to 2 percent). 

Within rural areas, a lower percentage of these students 

in rural fringe areas were White (74 percent) than in 

remote rural (79 percent) and distant rural (83 percent) 

areas. A greater proportion of students attending public 

schools in fringe rural areas were Black (12 percent), 

Hispanic (10 percent), and Asian/Pacific Islander (2 

percent) than in distant rural and remote rural areas. 

However, 7 percent of these students attending schools 

in remote rural areas were American Indian/Alaska 

Native, compared with 1 percent in fringe rural areas 

and 2 percent in distant rural areas.

1.3. Public school students, by race/ethnicity

A greater proportion of public school students in rural areas were White or American Indian/Alaska Native 

than in towns, suburbs, or cities, and a smaller proportion of public school students in rural areas were 

Black, Hispanic, or Asian/Pacific Islander than in towns, suburbs, or cities.

Table 1.3. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by race/ethnicity 

and locale: 2003–04

Locale Total White Black Hispanic

Asian/Pacific 

Islander

American

 Indian/Alaska 

Native

Number

Total 47,277,389 27,612,086 8,089,204 8,883,272 2,107,001 585,826

City 14,358,734 5,049,347 3,998,670 4,243,922 945,856 120,939

Suburban 16,899,108 10,466,158 2,397,357 3,032,308 909,026 94,259

Town 6,058,054 4,352,994 679,916 803,520 99,898 121,726

Rural 9,961,493 7,743,587 1,013,261 803,522 152,221 248,902

Fringe 5,115,917 3,806,283 596,189 519,923 122,728 70,794

Distant 3,309,673 2,731,320 299,375 188,831 20,284 69,863

Remote 1,535,903 1,205,984 117,697 94,768 9,209 108,245

Percentage distribution

Total 100.0 58.4 17.1 18.8 4.5 1.2

City 100.0 35.2 27.8 29.6 6.6 0.8

Suburban 100.0 61.9 14.2 17.9 5.4 0.6

Town 100.0 71.9 11.2 13.3 1.6 2.0

Rural 100.0 77.7 10.2 8.1 1.5 2.5

Fringe 100.0 74.4 11.7 10.2 2.4 1.4

Distant 100.0 82.5 9.0 5.7 0.6 2.1

Remote 100.0 78.5 7.7 6.2 0.6 7.0

NOTE: Enrollment counts exclude schools with no reported enrollment. Race/ethnicity information was not reported for 1,076,134 students. Race/ethnicity 

categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized 

areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe 

rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or 

equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more 

than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.

gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04. 

Indicator 1.3 — Public school students, by race/ethnicity
Status of Education in Rural America 15Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.3. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by race/ethnicity and locale: 

2003–04

NOTE: Enrollment counts exclude schools with no reported enrollment. Race/ethnicity information was not reported for 1,076,134 students. Race/ethnicity 

categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized 

areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe 

rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or 

equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more 

than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.

gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

White 

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific 

Islander

American Indian/

Alaska Native

Rural, distant

Rural, remote

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total

Locale

58 17 19 4

35 28 30 7 1

1

62 14 18 5

72 11 13 2 2

78 10 8 2 2

74 12 10 2

83 9 6 2

79 8 6 7

1

1

1

1
16 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.4 — Elementary and secondary public school students, by region and state

In 2003–04, among all regions the South had the 

largest percentage of public school students enrolled 

in rural schools (28 percent), followed by the Midwest 

(25 percent), Northeast (16 percent), and West (13 

percent) (table 1.4). Looking at individual states, 

Maine and Vermont had more than 50 percent of 

their public school students enrolled in rural schools 

(53 percent each), while Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, 

South Dakota, and West Virginia each had over 40 

percent of their public school students enrolled in 

rural schools (41–47 percent).

1.4. Elementary and secondary public school students, by region and state

A greater proportion of public school students in the South and the Midwest were enrolled in rural schools 

in 2003–04 than in the Northeast and the West.

Figure 1.4a. Percentage of public elementary and secondary students enrolled in schools in rural areas, by state 

and District of Columbia: 2003–04

NOTE: Numbers in parentheses in the legend represent the number of states in each category.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

33.0 or more (17)

5.0 to 9.9 (3)

0.0 to 4.9 (1)

10.0 to 19.9 (15)

20.0 to 32.9 (15)

Percent enrolled

 in rural areas

WA

MT ND

OR

ID

WY

SD

UT

CA

NV

CO

KS

NE

AZ NM OK

AK

MN

IA

MO

AR

TN NC

LA

FL

MS AL GA

WI

IL

KY

IN

OH

WV

PA

NY

VA

ME

VT

NH

MA

CT

SC

MI

HI

RI

NJ

TX

DC

MD

DE
Status of Education in Rural America 17Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.4b. Percentage of public elementary and secondary students enrolled in schools in remote rural areas, by 

state and District of Columbia: 2003–04

NOTE: Numbers in parentheses in the legend represent the number of states in each category. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban 

cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 

to 49,999. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Censusdefined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

33.0 or more (1)

5.0 to 9.9 (11)

0.0 to 4.9 (29)

10.0 to 19.9 (7)

20.0 to 32.9 (3)

Percent enrolled

 in remote rural areas

WA

MT ND

OR

ID

WY

SD

UT

CA

NV

CO

KS

NE

AZ NM OK

AK

MN

IA

MO

AR

TN NC

LA

FL

MS AL GA

WI

IL

KY

IN

OH

WV

PA

NY

VA

ME

VT

NH

MA

CT

SC

MI

HI

RI

NJ

TX

DC

MD

DE

The percentage of public school students enrolled in remote rural areas differed across the regions of the country 

(table A-1.4). The Midwest had the largest percentage 

of students enrolled in remote rural areas (5 percent), 

followed by the South (3 percent), West (3 percent), and 

the Northeast (1 percent). In the states, North Dakota 

and South Dakota had more than 30 percent of their 

public school students enrolled in remote rural schools 

(35 and 32 percent, respectively), while Alaska, Montana, Nebraska, Vermont, and Wyoming each had 15 

percent or more of their public school students enrolled 

in remote rural schools (15–24 percent).
18 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.4 — Elementary and secondary public school students, by region and state

Table 1.4. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by locale, region, and state and 

District of Columbia: 2003–04

Region and state City Suburban Town Rural

Total 30.4 35.4 12.9 21.3

Northeast 27.2 48.9 8.0 15.9

Connecticut 27.4 54.3 4.6 13.7

Maine 11.6 12.6 22.3 53.4

Massachusetts 20.8 66.0 2.5 10.7

New Hampshire 15.0 32.9 18.1 34.0

New Jersey 9.9 78.6 2.1 9.4

New York 43.7 35.5 7.8 13.0

Pennsylvania 21.4 44.4 13.5 20.7

Rhode Island 32.8 51.9 2.6 12.7

Vermont 6.6 10.8 29.8 52.9

Midwest 26.3 32.0 17.1 24.6

Illinois 31.9 44.8 11.5 11.7

Indiana 27.9 24.1 17.7 30.3

Iowa 26.2 9.4 28.1 36.3

Kansas 25.0 13.4 27.7 33.8

Michigan 27.0 37.9 12.5 22.6

Minnesota 22.0 30.5 21.4 26.0

Missouri 19.2 30.7 20.1 30.0

Nebraska 33.6 11.6 23.7 31.2

North Dakota 26.8 7.7 20.5 45.0

Ohio 21.7 39.0 15.0 24.4

South Dakota 24.7 0.9 30.4 43.9

Wisconsin 29.2 22.7 20.2 27.8

South 28.0 30.7 13.6 27.7

Alabama 23.3 16.5 14.7 45.6

Arkansas 25.2 10.0 24.2 40.6

Delaware 16.0 47.8 20.2 15.9

District of Columbia 99.8 0.0 0.0 0.21

Florida 25.1 55.8 5.6 13.5

Georgia 15.4 39.8 12.8 31.9

Kentucky 13.7 20.4 23.3 42.6

Louisiana 32.0 20.9 18.5 28.7

Maryland 16.1 60.8 6.1 17.0

Mississippi 11.5 11.2 30.4 46.8

North Carolina 25.3 15.7 14.0 45.0

Oklahoma 21.3 19.4 25.2 34.1

South Carolina 12.3 30.5 17.7 39.5

Tennessee 30.5 17.6 16.1 35.8

Texas 45.7 24.1 12.7 17.5

Virginia 25.1 39.3 7.7 27.9

West Virginia 13.4 15.9 26.3 44.4

West 40.0 36.3 11.2 12.6

Alaska 40.3 3.8 23.1 32.9

Arizona 50.8 21.4 10.7 17.2

California 44.8 41.1 6.6 7.5

Colorado 35.6 35.3 11.7 17.4

Hawaii 24.4 33.7 22.0 19.9

Idaho 29.1 15.6 24.5 30.8

Montana 21.9 2.6 35.8 39.8

Nevada 43.7 34.6 8.0 13.6

New Mexico 32.8 12.8 29.0 25.4

Oregon 31.2 23.8 27.7 17.4

Utah 19.2 57.6 14.1 9.1

Washington 27.6 44.0 12.1 16.3

Wyoming 24.0 1.6 42.6 31.8

1

 These students are funded by the District of Columbia public school system, but attend school outside of the District.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003-04.
This page intentionally left blank.
Table 1.5. Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds enrolled in center-based preprimary programs, by poverty status, hours of 

attendance, and locale: 2005

Locale and hours of attendance All1

At or above the 

poverty threshold

Below the 

poverty threshold

Total 57.1 59.9 47.2

City 57.6 60.0 52.1

Suburban 63.4 66.3 46.0

Town 52.2 53.9 46.9

Rural 49.6 52.3 38.9 !

Attends less than 30 hours 

a week 35.4 38.3 25.3

City 31.0 33.0 26.1

Suburban 41.8 45.1 21.7 !

Town 33.5 35.0 29.0 !

Rural 33.0 35.0 25.3 !

Attends 30 hours or more 

a week 21.4 21.4 21.5

City 26.3 26.7 25.5

Suburban 21.3 21.0 23.6

Town 18.7 18.9 17.9 !

Rural 16.4 17.2 13.6 !

! Interpret with caution.

1

Total includes 3 cases with an unknown locale code.

NOTE: Estimates are based on children who have yet to enter kindergarten. Center-based programs include day care centers, Head Start program, preschool, prekindergarten, and other early childhood programs. For comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because 

of rounding and because not all respondents reported number of hours.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Early Childhood Program Participation” survey, 2005.

1.5.	 3- to 5-year-olds in preprimary programs

In 2005, about half of children in rural areas between the ages of 3 and 5 attended a center-based preprimary 

program such as a daycare center, Head Start program, preschool, or prekindergarten.

20 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.5 — 3- to 5-year-olds in preprimary programs

Nationwide, 57 percent of 3- to 5-year-olds were 

enrolled in center-based preprimary programs2 in 

2005 (table 1.5). In rural areas, the percentage of 3- 

to 5-year-olds enrolled in such programs (50 percent) 

was lower than the national rate (57 percent) and 

lower than the rates for children in suburban areas 

(63 percent) and cities (58 percent). There was no 

measurable difference between the enrollment rates 

for children in rural areas and towns.

Across the United States in 2005, a greater percentage of children in families with incomes at or above 

the poverty threshold than children in families with 

incomes below the poverty threshold were enrolled 

in preprimary programs (60 vs. 47 percent). Among 

rural children, the apparent difference in enrollment 

rates between children living at or above the poverty 

threshold (52 percent) and children living below the 

poverty threshold (39 percent) was not statistically 

significant due to large standard errors.

The number of hours children attended center-based 

preprimary programs varied. Nationally, a greater 

percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds attended preprimary 

programs less than 30 hours a week than attended 

preprimary programs 30 hours or more a week (35 vs. 

21 percent). The same relationship held true for children in rural areas (33 vs. 16 percent) (figure 1.5).

2

 The National Household Education Survey: 2005 Early Childhood Program Participation (ECPP-NHES:2005) 

Interview classifies early childhood care and programs into three categories: relative care, nonrelative care, and centerbased programs. For rates of attendance in center-based programs, respondents were asked if the child was “attending 

a day care center, preschool, prekindergarten, or (Early) Head Start program.” For more information on the ECPPNHES:2005, see http://www.nces.ed.gov/nhes/pdf/early/2005_ecpp.pdf.
Status of Education in Rural America 21Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.5. Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds enrolled in center-based preprimary programs, by locale and hours of 

attendance: 2005

NOTE: Excludes 3 cases with an unknown locale code. Estimates are based on children who have yet to enter kindergarten. Center-based programs include 

day care centers, Head Start program, preschool, prekindergarten, and other early childhood programs. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Early Childhood 

Program Participation” survey, 2005.

City Suburban Town Rural

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Less than 30 30 or more

Locale

Hours attended a week:

Percent

31

42

33 33

26

21

19 16
Table 1.6a. Percentage distribution of elementary and secondary students, by control of school and locale: 

2003–04

Private

Locale All Public Total Catholic

Non-Catholic 

religious Non-sectarian

Total 100.0 88.8 11.2 4.6 4.1 2.5

City 100.0 85.0 15.0 6.7 5.0 3.3

Suburban 100.0 87.5 12.5 5.3 4.3 2.9

Town 100.0 93.3 6.7 3.2 2.6 0.9

Rural 100.0 94.3 5.7 1.0 3.1 1.5

NOTE: Includes kindergarten-terminal schools, in which the highest grade is kindergarten. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Private School Universe Survey (PSS), 2003–2004; Common Core of Data 

(CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Table 1.6b. Number and percentage distribution of private elementary and secondary students and schools, by 

control of school and locale: 2003–04

Elementary and secondary students Schools

Locale Total Catholic

Non-Catholic 

religious 

Nonsectarian Total CatholicNon-Catholic 

religious 

Nonsectarian

Number

Total 6,099,000 2,520,000 2,228,000 1,351,000 34,700 8,000 15,500 11,100

City 2,592,000 1,160,000 867,000 565,000 12,100 3,400 4,600 4,100

Suburban 2,440,000 1,032,000 848,000 560,000 12,500 2,900 4,700 4,900

Town 446,000 214,000 175,000 57,400 3,400 1,100 1,700 590

Rural 622,000 114,000 339,000 169,000 6,700 650 4,500 1,600

Percentage distribution

 Total 100.0 41.3 36.5 22.2 100.0 23.2 44.7 32.1

City 100.0 44.8 33.4 21.8 100.0 28.1 38.0 33.9

Suburban 100.0 42.3 34.8 23.0 100.0 23.2 37.6 39.2

Town 100.0 47.9 39.2 12.9 100.0 31.7 50.7 17.6

Rural 100.0 18.3 54.5 27.2 100.0 9.7 66.7 23.6

NOTE: Includes kindergarten-terminal schools, in which the highest grade is kindergarten. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Private School Universe Survey (PSS), 2003–04.

1.6. Private schools

In 2003–04, about 6 percent of rural students were enrolled in private schools, over half of them in nonCatholic, religious schools. In contrast, 11 percent of students nationally were enrolled in private schools, 

the largest percentage of whom (41 percent) were enrolled in Catholic schools.

22 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.6 — Private schools

In 2003–04, some 34,700 private schools across 

the United States enrolled 6.1 million elementary 

and secondary students (or 11 percent of all students) (tables 1.6a and 1.6b). In rural areas, 6,700 

private schools enrolled 622,000 prekindergarten 

through 12th-grade students (or 6 percent of all 

rural students). For the purposes of this analysis, 

private schools are categorized as Catholic; nonCatholic religious; and nonsectarian schools.

In cities, suburban areas, and towns, the largest 

percentage of private school students were enrolled 

in Catholic schools (42–48 percent), followed by 

non-Catholic religious schools (33–39 percent), 

and then nonsectarian schools (13–23 percent) 

(figure 1.6). In rural areas, however, 55 percent of 

private school students attended non-Catholic religious schools, compared with 27 percent attending 

nonsectarian schools and 18 percent attending 

Catholic schools. Rural areas were the only locale 

where Catholic schools did not enroll the largest 

proportion of private school students.
Status of Education in Rural America 23Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.6. Percentage distribution of elementary and secondary students, by control of school and locale: 

2003–04

NOTE: Includes kindergarten-terminal schools, in which the highest grade is kindergarten. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Private School Universe Survey (PSS), 2003–2004; Common Core of Data 

(CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Non-Catholic religious Nonsectarian

Percent

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Public Catholic

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Locale

85 7 5 3

88 5 4 3

94 3 2

93 3 3 1

1
Table 1.7. Percentage distribution of children under 18 living in families, by poverty level, age group, and locale: 2004

Age group and locale Total

Below the 

poverty threshold

100–185 percent of 

the poverty threshold

Above 185 percent of 

the poverty threshold

 Total 100.0 18.4 18.7 62.8

City 100.0 25.4 21.7 52.9

Suburban 100.0 12.7 15.1 72.2

Town 100.0 24.8 21.5 53.6

Rural 100.0 15.3 19.6 65.1

0–4 100.0 21.0 19.5 59.5

City 100.0 27.9 21.7 50.4

Suburban 100.0 14.6 16.0 69.4

Town 100.0 27.8 22.0 50.2

Rural 100.0 17.3 21.0 61.7

5–17 100.0 17.5 18.5 64.1

City 100.0 24.3 21.7 54.0

Suburban 100.0 12.0 14.7 73.3

Town 100.0 23.7 21.4 55.0

Rural 100.0 14.7 19.1 66.2

NOTE: For comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

24 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.7 — Children in poverty

Using annual household incomes collected by the 

American Community Survey (ACS), households in 

poverty are defined as those having an annual income 

below the poverty threshold (for a comparison of poverty definitions see appendix B). In 2004, 18 percent 

of children under the age of 18 were living in families 

below the poverty threshold, while 19 percent were 

living in families between the poverty threshold and 

185 percent of the poverty threshold (table 1.7).

The percentage of children under the age of 18 in 

rural areas who were living in families in poverty (15 

percent) was smaller than in cities and towns (25 

percent each) (figure 1.7). However, a larger percentage of rural children lived in poverty than suburban 

children (15 vs. 13 percent). These same patterns 

were found for children under the age of 5 and for 

children ages 5 to 17 (table 1.7), as well as for families 

headed by a married couple, a single mother, and a 

single father (table A-1.7).

Widening the focus to include children living in 

families below 185 percent of the poverty threshold, 

including those living in poverty, reveals similar patterns. The percentage of children under the age of 18 

in rural areas who were living in families at or below 

185 percent of the poverty threshold (35 percent) 

was smaller than in cities (47 percent) or towns (46 

percent), but larger than in suburban areas (28 percent) (figure 1.7). These same patterns were detected 

among children under the age of 5 and children 

between ages 5 and 17.

1.7. Children in poverty

The proportion of children living near or below the poverty threshold in rural areas was smaller than in towns 

or cities, but larger than in suburban areas in 2004. 
Status of Education in Rural America 25Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.7. Percentage distribution of children under 18 living in families, by poverty level and locale: 2004

NOTE: For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Above 185 percent of the 

poverty threshold

100–185 percent of the 

poverty threshold

40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

Below the poverty 

threshold

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Locale

25 22 53

13 15 72

25 22 54

15 20 65
Table 1.8. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students 

in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and locale: 2003–04

Locale

Number and percent 

eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch

10 percent 

or less

11–25 

percent

26–50 

percent

51–75

 percent

More than 

75 percent

Number

Total 43,126,448 6,449,924 8,862,597 12,557,762 8,769,074 6,487,091

City 12,809,572 1,095,406 1,691,884 3,162,898 3,136,954 3,722,430

Suburban 15,549,796 3,946,797 4,026,236 3,883,089 2,259,610 1,434,064

Town 5,627,799 336,839 1,082,265 2,202,499 1,417,805 588,391

Rural 9,139,281 1,070,882 2,062,212 3,309,276 1,954,705 742,206

Fringe 4,748,997 900,458 1,262,186 1,494,091 802,882 289,380

Distant 2,973,841 147,550 667,832 1,195,216 698,936 264,307

Remote 1,416,443 22,874 132,194 619,969 452,887 188,519

Percentage distribution

Total 40.7 15.0 20.6 29.1 20.3 15.0

City 52.9 8.6 13.2 24.7 24.5 29.1

Suburban 31.4 25.4 25.9 25.0 14.5 9.2

Town 42.9 6.0 19.2 39.1 25.2 10.5

Rural 37.9 11.7 22.6 36.2 21.4 8.1

Fringe 32.5 19.0 26.6 31.5 16.9 6.1

Distant 41.1 5.0 22.5 40.2 23.5 8.9

Remote 49.6 1.6 9.3 43.8 32.0 13.3

NOTE: The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at 

or below 130 percent of the poverty threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. 

Approximately 13,704 schools did not report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this 

information is missing for 5,227,075 students. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area 

or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population 

of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more 

than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. 

Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined 

areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

26 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.

8 — Students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch in public schools

During the 2003–04 school year, 41 percent of public 

elementary and secondary school students nationwide 

were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (table 1.8). 

In rural areas, the percentage of students eligible for free 

or reduced-price lunch (38 percent) was lower than the 

national percentage. It was also lower than the percentage in both cities (53 percent) and towns (43 percent), 

but was higher than in suburban areas (31 percent).

Using the percentage of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch as a proxy for the poverty level 

within a school (for a comparison of poverty definitions see appendix B), moderate-to-high poverty schools 

are defined, for the purposes of this analysis, as schools 

with more than 50 percent of students eligible. Using 

this definition—combining the last two columns of 

table 1.8 to include “51 to 75 percent” and “more 

than 75 percent” eligible schools—35 percent of students nationwide attended moderate-to-high poverty 

public schools. The percentage of students in rural 

areas attending moderate-to-high poverty public 

schools (30 percent) was less than the national percentage. The percentage of rural students attending 

these schools was lower than the percentage in both 

1.8. Students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch in public schools

In 2003–04, rural public schools had a larger proportion of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch 

than suburban public schools, but had a smaller proportion of students eligible for free or reduced-price 

lunch than public schools in cities or towns. The percentage of public school students in rural remote areas 

attending a moderate-to-high poverty public school was higher than the percentages in all other locales 

except large and midsize cities.
Status of Education in Rural America 27Chapter 1 — Demographics

cities (54 percent) and towns (36 percent), but was 

higher than the percentage of students in suburban 

areas (24 percent) (figure 1.8).

Within rural areas, however, the percentage of students 

attending moderate-to-high poverty public schools 

varied markedly. Specifically, 45 percent of students in 

remote rural areas attended moderate-to-high poverty 

public schools, compared with 32 percent in distant 

rural areas and 23 percent in fringe rural areas. 

Comparing the percentages of students attending 

moderate-to-high poverty public schools in rural fringe 

and rural remote areas to other, nonrural, locales further highlights the differences occurring within rural 

areas. The percentage of students attending moderate-to-high poverty public schools in rural fringe areas 

(23 percent) was lower than the percentage of students 

attending such schools in suburban areas (24 percent). 

On the other hand, only large cities and midsize cities 

had larger percentages of students attending moderateto-high poverty public schools than remote rural areas 

(66 and 49 percent vs. 45 percent) (table A-1.8).

Figure 1.8. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students in 

school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and locale: 2003–04

NOTE: The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at or 

below 130 percent of the poverty threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. Approximately 13,704 schools did not report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this information is 

missing for 5,227,075 public school students. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Percent

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Locale

51–75 

percent

More than 

75 percent

26–50 

percent

10 percent

or less

11–25

percent

9 13 25 24 29

25 26 25 15 9

6 19 39 25 10

12 23 36 21 8
28 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.9 — Concentrations of poverty in public schools, by race/ethnicity

Using the percentage of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch as a proxy for the concentration of low-income students within a school (for a 

comparison of poverty definitions see appendix B), 

moderate-to-high poverty schools are defined, for the 

purposes of this analysis, as schools with more than 50 

percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price 

lunch. Approximately 15.3 million public school students nationwide (or 35 percent of all public school 

students) attended moderate-to-high poverty schools 

in 2003–04 (tables 1.9a and 1.9b). 

Nationally, 63 percent of Hispanics, 62 percent of 

Blacks, 55 percent of American Indians/Alaska Natives, 29 percent of Asians/Pacific Islanders, and 19 

percent of Whites attended moderate-to-high poverty 

public schools (table 1.9b). A similar pattern was detected in rural areas, where more than half of American 

Indian/Alaska Native (69 percent), Black (60 percent), 

and Hispanic (54 percent) students were enrolled in 

moderate-to-high poverty public schools, compared 

with less than a quarter of White (21 percent) and 

Asian/Pacific Islander students (20 percent). 

When comparing the detailed rural locales (fringe, 

distant, and remote) with other detailed locales (such 

as large, midsize, and small cities), higher percentages 

of Black and American Indian/Alaska Native public 

school students in remote rural areas were enrolled in 

moderate-to-high poverty schools (87 and 79 percent, 

respectively) than their peers in large cities (78 and 62 

percent) (table A-1.9). Furthermore, approximately 

half of all Black public school students and nearly 

half of all American Indian/Alaska Native public 

school students (45 percent) in remote rural areas 

were enrolled in high-poverty schools (schools with 

more than 75 percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch), compared with the 5 percent 

of White public school students in remote rural areas 

who attended high-poverty schools.

1.9. Concentrations of poverty in public schools, by race/ethnicity

In rural areas, greater percentages of Hispanic, Black, and American Indian/Alaska Native public school 

students than White or Asian/Pacific Islander public school students attended a moderate-to-high poverty 

school in 2003–04. This was particularly true for remote rural areas; for instance, larger proportions of 

Black and American Indian/Alaska Native public school students attended such schools in remote rural 

areas than in large cities.
Status of Education in Rural America 29Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.9. Percentage of public school students in moderate-to-high poverty schools, by race/ethnicity and locale: 

2003–04

NOTE: Figures are percentages of students in schools where over 50 percent of students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. The National School 

Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at or below 130 percent of the poverty 

threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. Approximately 13,704 public schools did not 

report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this information is missing for 5,227,075 public school 

students. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Race/ethnicity

White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific

Islander

American Indian/

Alaska Native

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

27

10

24 21

72

44

71

60

72

54

63

54

39

21

32

20

52

26

54

69

City Suburban Town Rural
30 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.9 — Concentrations of poverty in public schools, by race/ethnicity

Table 1.9a. Number of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students in school eligible for 

free or reduced-price lunch, locale, and race/ethnicity: 2003–04

Locale and race/ethnicity Total

10 percent 

or less

11–25 

percent

26–50 

percent

51–75 

percent

 More than 

75 percent

Total1 43,126,448 6,449,924 8,862,597 12,557,762 8,769,074 6,487,091

White 24,987,584 5,168,192 6,896,451 8,286,731 3,724,458 911,752

Black 7,315,144 305,887 685,995 1,788,696 2,176,850 2,357,716

Hispanic 8,235,502 494,403 761,638 1,787,306 2,335,214 2,856,941

Asian/Pacific Islander 1,889,010 424,107 416,154 499,207 343,537 206,005

American Indian/Alaska Native 542,303 27,605 66,010 148,963 161,613 138,112

City1 12,809,572 1,095,406 1,691,884 3,162,898 3,136,954 3,722,430

White 4,637,765 677,307 1,116,813 1,578,646 875,556 389,443

Black 3,447,262 79,127 189,718 681,491 1,033,738 1,463,188

Hispanic 3,771,510 192,344 222,873 649,379 1,015,661 1,691,253

Asian/Pacific Islander 797,841 134,381 140,345 209,352 173,038 140,725

American Indian/Alaska Native 109,972 6,029 15,329 31,063 28,817 28,734

Suburban1 15,549,796 3,946,797 4,026,236 3,883,089 2,259,610 1,434,064

White 9,404,426 3,262,751 3,004,301 2,212,009 748,679 176,686

Black 2,230,834 176,705 363,596 704,198 568,604 417,731

Hispanic 2,897,626 224,624 394,428 712,177 791,008 775,389

Asian/Pacific Islander 851,559 251,364 218,474 204,901 124,582 52,238

American Indian/Alaska Native 89,413 12,559 23,975 29,510 16,030 7,339

Town1 5,627,799 336,839 1,082,265 2,202,499 1,417,805 588,391

White 3,962,573 289,969 970,464 1,752,415 813,830 135,895

Black 652,334 10,846 29,511 150,344 252,363 209,270

Hispanic 786,228 25,939 50,482 212,690 285,319 211,798

Asian/Pacific Islander 96,008 5,462 17,681 42,556 23,221 7,088

American Indian/Alaska Native 112,694 3,434 11,062 37,156 38,809 22,233

Rural1 9,139,281 1,070,882 2,062,212 3,309,276 1,954,705 742,206

White 6,982,820 938,165 1,804,873 2,743,661 1,286,393 209,728

Black 984,714 39,209 103,170 252,663 322,145 267,527

Hispanic 780,138 51,496 93,855 213,060 243,226 178,501

Asian/Pacific Islander 143,602 32,900 39,654 42,398 22,696 5,954

American Indian/Alaska Native 230,224 5,583 15,644 51,234 77,957 79,806

Fringe1 4,748,997 900,458 1,262,186 1,494,091 802,882 289,380

White 3,475,402 781,466 1,054,729 1,131,458 440,524 67,225

Black 577,770 34,998 86,142 172,342 183,788 100,500

Hispanic 504,549 45,486 73,840 135,806 142,024 107,393

Asian/Pacific Islander 116,134 31,475 34,682 31,938 15,006 3,033

American Indian/Alaska Native 63,745 3,892 9,008 19,380 20,594 10,871

Distant1 2,973,841 147,550 667,832 1,195,216 698,936 264,307

White 2,409,257 137,365 625,868 1,053,066 509,171 83,787

Black 290,903 3,768 16,042 66,943 95,432 108,718

Hispanic 183,116 4,213 16,388 52,397 65,025 45,093

Asian/Pacific Islander 18,769 1,213 4,058 6,701 4,674 2,123

American Indian/Alaska Native 67,301 736 4,374 14,085 23,771 24,335

Remote1 1,416,443 22,874 132,194 619,969 452,887 188,519

White 1,098,161 19,334 124,276 559,137 336,698 58,716

Black 116,041 443 986 13,378 42,925 58,309

Hispanic 92,473 1,797 3,627 24,857 36,177 26,015

Asian/Pacific Islander 8,699 212 914 3,759 3,016 798

American Indian/Alaska Native 99,178 955 2,262 17,769 33,592 44,600

1

 Includes other racial/ethnic groups not separately shown.

NOTE: The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at 

or below 130 percent of the poverty threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. 

Approximately 13,704 public schools did not report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this 

information is missing for 5,227,075 public school students. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled 

areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or 

less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an 

urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey” 2003–04.
Status of Education in Rural America 31Chapter 1 — Demographics

Table 1.9b. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students in 

school eligible for a free or reduced-price lunch, locale, and race/ethnicity: 2003–04

Locale and race/ethnicity Total

10 percent 

or less

11–25 

percent

26–50 

percent

51–75 

percent

 More than 

75 percent

Total1 100.0 15.0 20.6 29.1 20.3 15.0

White 100.0 20.7 27.6 33.2 14.9 3.6

Black 100.0 4.2 9.4 24.5 29.8 32.2

Hispanic 100.0 6.0 9.2 21.7 28.4 34.7

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 22.5 22.0 26.4 18.2 10.9

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 5.1 12.2 27.5 29.8 25.5

City1 100.0 8.6 13.2 24.7 24.5 29.1

White 100.0 14.6 24.1 34.0 18.9 8.4

Black 100.0 2.3 5.5 19.8 30.0 42.4

Hispanic 100.0 5.1 5.9 17.2 26.9 44.8

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 16.8 17.6 26.2 21.7 17.6

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 5.5 13.9 28.2 26.2 26.1

Suburban1 100.0 25.4 25.9 25.0 14.5 9.2

White 100.0 34.7 31.9 23.5 8.0 1.9

Black 100.0 7.9 16.3 31.6 25.5 18.7

Hispanic 100.0 7.8 13.6 24.6 27.3 26.8

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 29.5 25.7 24.1 14.6 6.1

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 14.0 26.8 33.0 17.9 8.2

Town1 100.0 6.0 19.2 39.1 25.2 10.5

White 100.0 7.3 24.5 44.2 20.5 3.4

Black 100.0 1.7 4.5 23.0 38.7 32.1

Hispanic 100.0 3.3 6.4 27.1 36.3 26.9

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 5.7 18.4 44.3 24.2 7.4

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 3.0 9.8 33.0 34.4 19.7

Rural1 100.0 11.7 22.6 36.2 21.4 8.1

White 100.0 13.4 25.8 39.3 18.4 3.0

Black 100.0 4.0 10.5 25.7 32.7 27.2

Hispanic 100.0 6.6 12.0 27.3 31.2 22.9

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 22.9 27.6 29.5 15.8 4.1

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 2.4 6.8 22.3 33.9 34.7

Fringe1 100.0 19.0 26.6 31.5 16.9 6.1

White 100.0 22.5 30.4 32.6 12.7 1.9

Black 100.0 6.1 14.9 29.8 31.8 17.4

Hispanic 100.0 9.0 14.6 26.9 28.2 21.3

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 27.1 29.9 27.5 12.9 2.6

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 6.1 14.1 30.4 32.3 17.1

Distant1 100.0 5.0 22.5 40.2 23.5 8.9

White 100.0 5.7 26.0 43.7 21.1 3.5

Black 100.0 1.3 5.5 23.0 32.8 37.4

Hispanic 100.0 2.3 9.0 28.6 35.5 24.6

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 6.5 21.6 35.7 24.9 11.3

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 1.1 6.5 20.9 35.3 36.2

Remote1 100.0 1.6 9.3 43.8 32.0 13.3

White 100.0 1.8 11.3 50.9 30.7 5.4

Black 100.0 0.4 0.9 11.5 37.0 50.3

Hispanic 100.0 1.9 3.9 26.9 39.1 28.1

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 2.4 10.5 43.2 34.7 9.2

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 1.0 2.3 17.9 33.9 45.0

1

 Includes other racial/ethnic groups not separately shown.

NOTE: The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at 

or below 130 percent of the poverty threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. 

Approximately 13,704 public schools did not report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this 

information is missing for 5,227,075 public school students. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled 

areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or 

less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an 

urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey” 2003–04.
1.10. Public school students with limited English proficiency

A smaller proportion of public school students in rural areas were identified as limited English proficient 

(LEP) than in any other locale in 2003–04.

32 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.10 — Public school students with limited English proficiency

During the 2003–04 school year, 3.8 million public 

school students in the United States were identified as 

limited English proficient (LEP), meaning they did not 

use English as their primary language or had limited 

ability to read, speak, write, or understand English 

(table 1.10). Those students made up 8 percent of the 

total student population, but among rural students, 

LEP students made up 2 percent of the student population—the lowest percentage of all locales.

LEP students constituted a larger percentage of the 

public school student population in cities (14 percent) 

than in suburban areas (7 percent), towns (5 percent), 

or rural areas (2 percent). Of all LEP students in the 

United States, 52 percent attended public schools in 

cities, while 34 percent attended public schools in 

suburban areas, 9 percent in towns, and 6 percent in 

rural areas.

Of the four major U.S. regions, the West had the largest 

percentage of LEP students (18 percent), followed by the 

South (6 percent), the Northeast (5 percent), and the 

Midwest (4 percent). In each region besides the Midwest, 

rural public schools enrolled a lower percentage of LEP 

students than public schools in any other locale. In the 

Midwest, however, there was no measurable difference 

between the percentages of LEP students in town and 

rural public schools. In the Midwest, South, and West, 

the proportions of LEP students in town and rural public 

schools were higher than in the Northeast.

LEP students often do not speak English at home. In 

2004, some 19 percent of children ages 5–17 spoke a 

language other than English at home and 5 percent of 

children these ages had difficulty speaking English (table 

A-1.10). The percentages of children in rural areas who 

spoke a language other than English at home (7 percent) 

and who had difficulty speaking English (2 percent) were 

lower than those for children in cities (29 and 9 percent, 

respectively), suburban areas (19 and 5 percent, respectively), and towns (12 and 3 percent, respectively).

Within each racial/ethnic group (except within the 

American Indian/Alaska Native group, where no measurable difference was observed), smaller percentages of 

children ages 5–17 in rural areas than in cities spoke a 

language other than English at home or spoke English 

with difficulty.

Locale

Percentage of public 

school students who 

were identified as LEP

City 14

Suburban 7

Town 5

Rural 2
Status of Education in Rural America 33Chapter 1 — Demographics

Table 1.10. Number and percentage of public school students who were identified as limited English proficient 

(LEP), by locale and region: 2003–04

Locale and region Number of LEP students Percent of students

Percentage distribution 

of LEP students

Total 3,809,000 8.0 100.0

City 1,970,000 13.9 51.7

Suburban 1,277,000 7.4 33.5

Town 332,000 5.3 8.7

Rural 230,000 2.4 6.0

Northeast 391,000 4.8 100.0

City 218,000 10.9 55.7

Suburban 158,000 3.9 40.5

Town 9,100 ! 1.2 2.3 !

Rural 5,500 ! 0.4 ! 1.4 !

Midwest 389,000 3.6 100.0

City 183,000 6.4 47.0

Suburban 150,000 ! 4.4 38.5

Town 29,000 1.5 7.4

Rural 28,000 1.1 7.1 !

South 1,030,000 6.0 100.0

City 510,000 10.0 49.4

Suburban 348,000 6.4 33.7

Town 86,000 ! 3.9 8.3 !

Rural 89,000 2.0 8.6

West 1,997,000 18.0 100.0

City 1,059,000 25.1 53.0

Suburban 621,000 14.3 31.1

Town 209,000 14.9 10.5

Rural 108,000 9.7 5.4

! Interpret with caution.

NOTE: Does not include prekindergarten, postsecondary, or adult education students. Limited English proficient (LEP) refers to students whose native or 

dominant language is a language other than English and whose difficulty speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language is sufficient 

enough as to deny them the opportunity to learn successfully in an English-only classroom. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Public School Questionnaire,” 2003–04. 
34 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.11 — Public school students with disabilities

In 2003–04, approximately 6.1 million public school 

students across the United States were identified with 

disabilities that were addressed through an Individual 

Education Program (IEP) (table 1.11). This number 

represented about 13 percent of the total number 

of public school students. An IEP is required for all 

public school students with an identified disability 

under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

of 2004 (IDEA). IDEA is intended to “support states 

and localities in protecting the rights of, meeting the 

individual needs of, and improving the educational 

outcomes of infants, toddlers, children, and youth 

with disabilities and their families” (U.S. Department 

of Education 2006).

Generally, there was little variation among the percentages of public school students with an IEP in 

the different locales (the percentages ranged from 

12 to 14 percent). The percentages of such students 

in towns and rural areas who had an IEP (14 and 13 

percent, respectively) were higher than in suburban 

areas (12 percent).

1.11. Public school students with disabilities

Across locales, there was little variation in 2003–04 in the percentage of public school students identified 

with disabilities that were addressed through an Individual Education Program (IEP).

Locale

Percentage of public 

school students with IEPs

City 13

Suburban 12

Town 14

Rural 13
Status of Education in Rural America 35Chapter 1 — Demographics

Table 1.11. Number and percentage of public school students with Individual Education Programs (IEPs), by 

locale: 2003–04

Locale

Number 

of public 

school students

Number 

of students 

with IEPs

Percent 

of public 

school students

Percentage 

distribution of 

students with IEPs

Total 47,360,000 6,081,000 12.8 100.0

City 14,196,000 1,811,000 12.8 29.8

Suburban 17,257,000 2,133,000 12.4 35.1

Town 6,324,000 875,000 13.8 14.4

Rural 9,583,000 1,262,000 13.2 20.8

NOTE: Does not include prekindergarten, postsecondary, or adult education students. An IEP is required for all students with an identified disability under 

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “School Questionnaire,” 2003–04.
1.12. Parental participation in school-related activities

In 2003, greater percentages of rural students had parents who attended a school event or served as a 

volunteer or on a committee than did students in cities, while a smaller percentage of rural students than 

suburban students had parents who attended a general school meeting.

In 2003, the National Household Education Survey 

(NHES) asked parents of elementary and secondary public and private school students about their 

participation in four school-related activities since 

the beginning of the school year: attending a general 

school meeting, attending a scheduled meeting with 

their child’s teacher, attending a school event, and 

serving as a volunteer or on a committee. In all locales, 

over 80 percent of students had parents who reported 

that they attended a general meeting, and most students (between 65 and 78 percent in all locales) had 

parents who reported that they attended a scheduled 

meeting with a teacher and attended a school event 

(table 1.12 and figure 1.12). The least commonly 

reported activity (under 50 percent in all locales) was 

serving as a volunteer or on a committee. 

In all locales, higher percentages of students in kindergarten through 5th grade had parents who reported 

participating in each type of school-related activity 

than did students in 6th through 12th grades, with 

one exception. No significant difference was found 

between the percentage of students in kindergarten 

through 5th grade and the percentage of students 

in 6th through 12th grades in towns whose parents 

reported attending a school event.

A higher percentage of students in rural areas had 

parents who reported serving as a volunteer or on a 

committee (42 percent) than did students in cities (38 

percent) (table 1.12 and figure 1.12). A higher percentage of rural students also had parents who reported 

attending a school event (74 percent) than did students 

in cities (65 percent). No measurable differences were 

detected between rural areas and suburbs and towns in 

the percentages of students whose parents participated 

in these two activities. The percentage of rural students 

with parents who reported attending a general school 

meeting (86 percent) was less than the percentage of 

suburban students with parents who reported doing 

so (90 percent), but was not measurably different than 

the percentage of students in towns and cities with 

parents who reported doing so. No measurable differences were found between the percentages of students 

in each locale with parents who reported attending a 

scheduled meeting with a teacher.

Table 1.12. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported 

participation in school-related activities, by selected school activity, grade level, and locale: 2003

Grade and locale

Attended 

general 

meeting

Attended 

scheduled 

meeting 

with teacher

Attended 

school 

event

Acted as a 

volunteer or 

served on a 

committee

Indicated

 involvement 

in any of the

 four activities

Total 87.7 77.0 70.0 41.7 95.1

City 86.7 77.9 64.8 37.8 94.4

Suburban 90.0 77.5 71.3 44.8 95.5

Town 85.5 75.9 72.6 40.8 94.4

Rural 85.9 75.4 73.8 42.4 95.7

K–5 93.3 91.2 75.4 52.3 98.3

City 91.5 90.3 70.8 46.7 97.8

Suburban 96.0 93.3 77.3 58.9 99.1

Town 90.3 88.2 75.0 45.6 96.4

Rural 92.9 90.5 79.1 52.3 98.4

6–12 82.7 64.7 65.3 32.5 92.4

City 82.4 66.6 59.3 29.7 91.3

Suburban 84.7 63.6 65.9 32.2 92.3

Town 81.4 65.5 70.5 36.8 92.8

Rural 80.5 63.8 69.8 34.8 93.6

NOTE: Excludes 1,193,461 homeschooled students, or 2.3 percent of all K–12 students. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Parent and Family Involvement in Education” survey, 2003.

36 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.1

2 — Parental participation in school-related activities
Status of Education in Rural America 37Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.12. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported 

participation in school-related activities, by selected school activity and locale: 2003

NOTE: Excludes 1,193,461 homeschooled students, or 2.3 percent of all K-12 students.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Parent and Family Involvement in Education” survey, 2003.

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Activity

60 70 80 90 100

Acted as 

volunteer or

served on

 committee

Attended

school event

Attended

scheduled

meeting

with teacher

Attended a

general

 meeting

87

90

86

86

78

78

76

75

65

71

73

74

38

45

41

42

City Suburban Town Rural
Table 1.13. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported outings 

with their children in the past month, by selected activity and locale: 2003

Locale Visited a library

Attended an athletic/

sporting event 

(outside 

of school) in 

which child 

was not a player

Went to a 

play, concert,

 or live show

Visited an art 

gallery, museum, or 

historical site

Visited a zoo 

or aquarium

Total 44.3 37.5 35.0 19.7 12.2

City 47.8 33.8 35.4 22.4 15.4

Suburban 47.0 37.8 35.6 21.5 13.6

Town 37.9 39.0 34.3 15.6 8.0

Rural 37.8 41.8 33.9 15.0 7.5

NOTE: Includes students that are homeschooled. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Parent and Family Involvement in Education” survey, 2003.

In 2003, the National Household Education Survey 

(NHES) asked parents of elementary and secondary public and private school students about their 

participation in certain activities outside of school 

and home. Nationally, 44 percent of elementary and 

secondary school students had parents who reported 

visiting a library with their children in the past month; 

38 percent had parents who reported attending an 

athletic or sporting event; 35 percent had parents 

who reported going to a play, concert, or live show; 

20 percent had parents who reported visiting an art 

gallery, museum, or historical site; and 12 percent 

had parents who reported visiting a zoo or aquarium 

(table 1.13). In rural areas, 42 percent of students had 

parents who reported attending an athletic event with 

their children; 38 percent had parents who reported 

visiting a library; 34 percent had parents who reported 

going to a play, concert, or live show; 15 percent had 

parents who reported visiting an art gallery, museum, 

or historical site; and 8 percent had parents who reported visiting a zoo or aquarium (figure 1.13).

A larger percentage of rural students (42 percent) than 

suburban students (38 percent) and city students (34 

percent) had parents who reported attending athletic 

events with their children. There were no measurable 

differences between the percentage of students in 

rural areas (34 percent) with parents who reported 

taking their children to a play, concert, or live show 

and the percentages of students in cities (35 percent), 

suburbs (36 percent), and towns (34 percent) with 

parents who reported attending these events. No 

measurable differences existed between the percentages of students in rural areas and students in towns 

whose parents reported participating in any of the 

selected activities. 

A smaller percentage of students in rural areas and 

towns had parents who reported visiting a library 

with their children (38 percent in both areas) than 

students in cities (48 percent) and suburban areas (47 

percent). A lower percentage of students in rural areas 

(15 percent) also had parents who reported having 

visited an art gallery, museum, or historical site with 

their children than students in suburbs (21 percent) 

or cities (22 percent). Similarly, a lower percentage 

of students in rural areas (8 percent) had parents who 

reported having visited a zoo or aquarium with their 

children, compared with students in suburbs (14 

percent) and cities (15 percent).

1.13. Family outings

In 2003, a greater proportion of students in rural areas had parents who reported taking their children to 

an athletic event outside of school than students in cities and suburbs. A smaller percentage of students in 

rural areas and towns than students in cities and suburbs had parents who reported taking their children 

to a library or visiting a zoo or aquarium. 

38 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.13 — Family outings
Status of Education in Rural America 39Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.13. Percentage of public and private elementary and secondary students whose parents reported outings 

with their child in the past month, by selected activity and locale: 2003

NOTE: Includes students that are homeschooled. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Parent and Family Involvement in Education” survey, 2003.

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Activity

60 70 80 90 100

Visited a zoo

or aquarium

Visited an 

art gallery, 

museum,or 

historical site

Went to a play,

concert, or 

live show

Attended 

athletic/sporting

event (outside of 

school) in which 

student was

not a player

Visited a library

48

47

38

38

34

38

39

42

35

36

34

34

22

21

16

15

15

14

8

8

City Suburban Town Rural
Table 1.14. Percentage distribution of children ages 6 to 18, by parents’ highest level of education and locale: 2004 

Parent and locale Total

Less than 

high school 

diploma or 

equivalent1

High school diploma or equivalent or higher

Total

High school 

diploma or 

equivalent

Some 

college/ 

associate’s 

degree

Bachelor’s degree or higher

Total

Bachelor’s 

degree

Graduate or 

professional 

degree

Mother

 Total 100.0 14.5 85.5 27.6 32.8 25.1 17.6 7.5

City 100.0 21.1 78.9 25.9 30.2 22.8 15.6 7.2

Suburban 100.0 11.2 88.8 24.9 33.0 30.9 21.7 9.2

Town 100.0 15.6 84.4 31.3 34.2 18.8 13.6 5.2

Rural 100.0 11.0 89.0 33.0 35.1 21.0 15.0 6.0

Father

 Total 100.0 14.4 85.6 27.8 27.3 30.6 18.7 11.9

City 100.0 20.0 80.0 24.4 25.2 30.4 17.7 12.7

Suburban 100.0 11.1 88.9 23.9 27.1 37.8 22.8 15.0

Town 100.0 15.5 84.5 31.5 29.8 23.3 15.0 8.3

Rural 100.0 13.3 86.7 36.1 28.8 21.8 14.3 7.4

1

 Includes parents currently enrolled in high school.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

In 2004, some 11 percent of school-age children (ages 

6–18) in rural areas had mothers who did not have a 

high school diploma (or its equivalent), 33 percent had 

mothers whose highest educational attainment was a 

high school diploma (or its equivalent), 35 percent had 

mothers whose highest attainment was some college or 

an associate’s degree, and 21 percent had mothers who 

had completed a bachelor’s degree or higher (table 1.14 

and figure 1.14). 

The percentage of school-age children whose mothers did 

not complete high school was smaller in rural areas (11 

percent) than in cities (21 percent) or towns (16 percent). 

The percentage of these children whose mothers had a 

bachelor’s degree as their highest educational attainment 

was smaller in rural areas (15 percent) than in suburban 

areas (22 percent), higher in rural areas than in towns 

(14 percent), and similar in rural areas and cities.

In contrast, the percentage of school-age children 

whose mothers’ highest educational attainment was 

high school completion was larger in rural areas (33 

percent) than in suburban areas (25 percent) and cities (26 percent). This same pattern was observed for 

children whose mothers’ highest attainment was some 

college or an associate’s degree. 

Across locales, the percentage of school-age children 

whose fathers did not complete high school was lower 

in rural areas (13 percent) than in cities (20 percent) 

and towns (15 percent), while the percentage in rural 

areas was higher than in suburban areas (11 percent). 

A higher percentage of rural children had fathers who 

completed a high school diploma (or equivalent) as their 

highest level of attainment (36 percent) than children 

in suburban areas (24 percent), cities (24 percent), and 

towns (31 percent). 

The percentage of school-age children whose fathers had completed some college or an associate’s 

degree as their highest attainment was greater in 

rural areas (29 percent) than in cities (25 percent) 

and suburban areas (27 percent). In contrast, a 

lower percentage of rural children had fathers who 

completed a bachelor’s degree (14 percent) than 

suburban children (23 percent) and children in 

cities (18 percent). No differences were detected 

between children in rural areas and towns in the 

percentages of children whose fathers had completed 

these levels of educational attainment as their highest attainment.

1.14. Parents’ educational attainment

In 2004, a larger percentage of school-age children in rural areas had a mother or father who completed 

high school as their highest level of educational attainment than their peers in cities and suburbs. The 

percentage of school-age children with a mother or father with a bachelor’s degree as their highest 

attainment was lower in rural areas than in suburban areas.

40 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.14 — Parents’ educational attainment
Status of Education in Rural America 41Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.14. Percentage distribution of children ages 6 to 18, by parents’ highest level of education and locale: 2004

1

 Includes parents currently enrolled in high school.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Mother

Father

60 70 80 90 100

Some college/associate’s degree

High school graduate or equivalent Bachelor’s degree or higher

Less than high school graduate1

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Parent

and locale

21 26 30 23

11 25 33 31

16 31 34 19

11 33 35 21

20 24 25 30

11 24 27 38

15 31 30 23

13 36 29 22
In 2003, the National Household Education Survey 

(NHES) asked parents of elementary and secondary 

public and private school students about their educational expectations for their children. Nationally, 

a larger percentage of students had parents who 

reported that they expected their child’s highest level 

of educational attainment to be a bachelor’s degree 

(39 percent) than the percentage of students whose 

parents reported that they expected their child’s highest level of educational attainment to be a graduate 

or professional degree (30 percent), completion of 2 

or more years of college (16 percent), a high school 

diploma (8 percent), and attendance at a vocational 

or technical school after high school (7 percent) 

(table 1.15). Less than one percent of students in 

all locales had parents who expected their child to 

receive less than a high school diploma. In rural 

areas, the ranking of parental expectations mirrored 

the national rates: the largest percentage of students 

had parents who expected their child to complete a 

bachelor’s degree (37 percent), followed by a graduate 

or professional degree (21 percent), 2 years or more 

of college (20 percent), a high school diploma (11 

percent), and attendance at a vocational or technical 

school (10 percent).

There were no measurable differences between the 

percentage of rural students with parents expecting 

their child’s highest attainment to be a bachelor’s 

degree (37 percent) and the percentages of students 

with parents having similar expectations in cities 

(36 percent) and towns (39 percent); however, the 

percentage of rural students having parents with 

such expectations was lower than the percentage of 

suburban students (37 vs. 41 percent) (figure 1.15). A 

smaller percentage of rural students also had parents 

who reported expecting their child to earn a graduate 

or professional degree as their highest level of attainment (21 percent) than students in cities or suburban 

areas (both 34 percent). As with all other levels of 

parental educational expectations, no measurable differences were found in the percentages of students in 

rural areas and towns with parents who expected their 

child to attain a graduate or professional degree.

A greater percentage of students in rural areas had 

parents who reported expecting their child to complete high school as their highest level of educational 

attainment (11 percent) than students in cities (8 percent) or suburban areas (5 percent). This pattern was 

also true among students with parents who reported 

expecting their child’s highest attainment to be 2 or 

more years of college (20 percent for rural vs. 15 and 

13 percent for cities and suburban areas, respectively) 

or attendance at a vocational or technical school (10 

percent vs. 7 and 6 percent, respectively).

Table 1.15. Percentage distribution of public and private elementary and secondary students, by parents’ 

expectations for child’s highest educational attainment and locale: 2003

Locale

Less than a high 

school diploma

High school 

diploma

Vocational 

or technical 

school 

2 or more 

years of college

4- or 5- 

year college 

degree

Graduate or 

professional 

degree

Total 0.5 7.5 7.4 15.7 38.6 30.3

City 0.3 ! 7.5 7.1 14.9 36.1 34.1

Suburban 0.5 ! 5.3 5.8 13.0 41.3 34.1

Town 0.6 ! 9.2 8.9 18.1 38.7 24.5

Rural 0.6 ! 10.6 9.9 20.4 37.3 21.2

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: Includes students who are homeschooled.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Parent and Family Involvement in Education” survey, 2003.

1.15. Parental expectations of educational attainment

While a larger percentage of high school students in all locales in 2003 had parents who expected their 

child’s highest educational attainment to be a bachelor’s degree than any other level of attainment, a 

greater proportion of rural students than students in cities and suburbs had parents who expected their 

child’s highest attainment to be less than a bachelor’s degree.

42 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 1.1

5 — Parental e

xpectations of educational attainment
Status of Education in Rural America 43Chapter 1 — Demographics

Figure 1.15. Percentage distribution of public and private elementary and secondary students, by parents’ 

expectations for child’s highest educational attainment and locale: 2003

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Includes students who are homeschooled. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES), “Parent and Family Involvement in Education” survey, 2003.

Percent

Parents’

expectation

0 10 20 30 40 50

Graduate or

 professional

 degree

4- or 5-year

 college degree

2 or more

years of college

Vocational or

 technical school

High school

diploma

Less than a high

 school diploma

#

1

1

1

8

5

9

11

7

6

9

10

15

18

13

15

36

41

39

37

34

34

24

21

City Suburban Town Rural
This page intentionally left blank.
The indicators in this chapter focus on a range of 

learner outcomes, including assessment scores from 

the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP); dropout and graduation rates for high 

school students; and college enrollment, labor force 

participation, and unemployment rates. These indicators show that, on average, public school students in 

rural areas perform better than their peers in cities, 

but generally not as well as their peers in suburban 

areas, as measured by 4th- and 8th-grade reading, 

mathematics, and science assessment scores and high 

school graduation rates (indicators 2.1–2.3 and 2.5). 

Generally, a smaller percentage of high school graduates in rural areas enroll in college than graduates in

any other locale, and a smaller percentage of rural 

adults have a bachelor’s degree than their peers in 

cities and suburbs (indicators 2.7 and 2.9). 

The unemployment rate for older adults is lower 

in rural areas than in all other locales, and the 

unemployment rate for younger adults is lower in 

rural areas than in cities and towns (indicator 2.11). 

In addition, regardless of educational attainment, 

median earnings (when adjusted for geographic cost 

differences) for adults who worked full-time, all year, 

are generally higher in rural areas than in cities and 

towns, but lower in rural areas than in suburban areas 

(indicator 2.10). 

2Outcomes
46 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 2.1 — Public elementary and secondary students, schools, and districts Indicator 

2.1 — National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading achievement

Nationwide, some 30 percent of 4th-grade public 

school students scored at or above the Proficient level 

on the 2005 NAEP reading assessment (table 2.1). 

The percentage of such 4th-graders in rural areas scoring at this achievement level (31 percent) was larger 

than in towns (28 percent) and cities (24 percent), but 

smaller than in suburban areas (34 percent). Within 

rural locales, a higher percentage of such 4th-graders 

in fringe rural areas scored at or above the Proficient

level (34 percent) than in distant rural areas (30 percent) or remote rural areas (27 percent).

2.1. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading achievement

The proportion of public school students in rural areas in the 4th and 8th grades that read at or above the 

Proficient level in 2005 was larger than in cities and towns, but smaller than in suburban areas.

Figure 2.1a. Percentage distribution of 4th-grade public school students across NAEP reading achievement levels, 

by locale: 2005

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Reading Assessment.

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

Locale

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total 38 33 23 7

46 30 18 5

33 33 26 9

38 34 23 6

34 35 25 7

26 8

35 36 24 6

39 34 22 5

32 34

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Status of Education in Rural America 47Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

The pattern for 8th-grade public school students who 

scored at or above Proficient in reading was similar 

to that for 4th-graders, with 29 percent of such 

8th-graders in the United States scoring at this level 

overall. The percentage of 8th-graders in rural areas 

scoring at or above the Proficient level (30 percent) 

was larger than in towns (27 percent) and cities (23 

percent), but smaller than in suburban areas (34 

percent). Additionally, a higher percentage of public 

school 8th-graders in fringe rural areas scored at or 

above the Proficient level (31 percent) than in remote 

rural areas (29 percent).

Figure 2.1b. Percentage distribution of 8th-grade public school students across NAEP reading achievement levels, 

by locale: 2005

! Interpret data with caution. 

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Reading Assessment.

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total 29 42 26 3

37 41 21 2

25 42 30 3

29 44 25 2

26 44 28 2

26 43 29 3

26 45 27 2

27 45 27 2!

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Across the nation, 34 percent of 12th-grade public 

school students scored at or above Proficient in reading. A lower percentage of such 12th-graders scored 

at this level in rural areas (33 percent) than in suburbs 

(37 percent). There were no measurable differences 

between the percentages of public school 12th-graders achieving at this level in rural areas and in towns 

and cities, or between the percentages of such 12thgraders scoring at this level in each of the three rural 

locales. Many of the apparent differences between 

these groups were not statistically significant due to 

large standard errors.

Figure 2.1c. Percentage distribution of 12th-grade public school students across NAEP reading achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005

! Interpret data with caution. 

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Reading Assessment.

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total 29 38 29 4

32 39 26 3

26 37 32 5

29 38 30

30 37 29 4!

30 36 30 4!

29 40 28 4!

28 37 30 4!

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

3!

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

48 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.1 — National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading achievement
Status of Education in Rural America 49Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Table 2.1. Percentage distribution of public school students across NAEP reading achievement levels, by grade level 

and locale: 2005

Grade level and locale Below basic At basic

At or above proficient

Total At proficient At advanced 

4th grade

 Total 37.5 32.7 29.8 23.0 6.8

City 46.0 30.4 23.6 18.3 5.3

Suburban 32.5 33.1 34.4 25.9 8.5

Town 38.2 33.6 28.1 22.6 5.5

Rural 34.1 34.8 31.1 24.6 6.5

Fringe 32.1 34.3 33.5 26.0 7.6

Distant 34.7 35.7 29.6 23.9 5.7

Remote 39.0 34.1 26.9 21.8 5.1

8th grade

 Total 29.0 42.1 28.9 26.3 2.5

City 36.8 40.7 22.6 20.7 1.8

Suburban 24.9 41.5 33.5 30.2 3.4

Town 28.9 43.8 27.3 25.2 2.1

Rural 25.7 43.9 30.4 28.0 2.4

Fringe 25.6 43.0 31.5 28.8 2.7

Distant 25.5 45.1 29.4 27.4 2.0

Remote 26.6 44.8 28.6 26.7 1.9 !

12th grade

 Total 28.8 37.6 33.7 29.4 4.2

City 31.7 38.7 29.5 26.2 3.3

Suburban 26.1 36.7 37.2 31.8 5.4

Town 28.7 38.0 33.2 29.9 3.4 !

Rural 29.5 37.1 33.4 29.3 4.1 !

Fringe 30.2 35.6 34.2 30.1 4.2 !

Distant 28.9 39.8 31.3 27.5 3.8 !

Remote 28.5 37.4 34.1 29.8 4.3 !

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized 

area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area 

and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may 

not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Reading Assessment.
2.2. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics achievement

A larger proportion of public school students in rural areas in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades in 2005 

scored at or above the Proficient level in mathematics than their peers in cities. However, at all three 

grade levels, smaller percentages of rural public school students scored at this achievement level than 

did their suburban peers.

50 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.2 — National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics achievement

Nationwide, some 35 percent of 4th-grade public 

school students scored at or above the Proficient level 

on the 2005 NAEP mathematics assessment (table 

2.2). The percentage of such 4th-graders scoring at 

this achievement level in rural areas (36 percent) was 

larger than in cities (29 percent), but was smaller 

than in suburban areas (41 percent). No measurable 

difference was detected between the percentages of 

4th-graders in rural areas and towns achieving at 

this level. Within rural locales, higher percentages of 

public school 4th-graders in fringe rural areas scored 

at or above the Proficient level (38 percent) than in 

distant rural areas (35 percent) or remote rural areas 

(32 percent).

Figure 2.2a. Percentage distribution of 4th-grade public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Mathematics Assessment.

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total 21 44 30 5

28 43 25 4

17 43 34 6

20 46 31 4

17 47 32 4

16 45 33 5

18 48 31 4

20 48 29 3

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Status of Education in Rural America 51Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.2b. Percentage distribution of 8th-grade public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Mathematics Assessment. 

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

32 39 23 6

41 36 18 5

28 39 26 7

31 42 22 4

28 43 24 5

28 42 25 6

28 44 24 4

30 44 23 3

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

The percentages of 8th-grade public school students 

scoring at or above the Proficient level in mathematics 

followed a similar pattern. Nationally, 29 percent of 

such 8th-graders scored at this level. The percentage 

of 8th-graders reaching the Proficient level or above in 

rural areas (29 percent) was larger than in both towns 

(26 percent) and cities (23 percent), but was smaller 

than in suburban areas (33 percent). Within rural locales, a higher percentage of public school 8th-graders 

in fringe rural areas scored at this achievement level 

(31 percent) than in distant rural areas (27 percent) 

or remote rural areas (26 percent).
The proportion of 12th-grade public school students 

in rural areas scoring at or above the Proficient level in 

mathematics (21 percent) was greater than in cities 

(18 percent), but smaller than in suburban areas (25 

percent). No difference was detected between the 

percentages of such 12th-graders in rural areas and 

towns achieving this level or among the percentages 

of 12th-graders scoring at this level in the three different rural locales.

52 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.2 — National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics achievement

Figure 2.2c. Percentage distribution of 12th-grade public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005

# Rounds to zero.

! Interpret data with caution. 

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Mathematics Assessment. 

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

41 37 20

47 35 15

38 37 23

39 40 20 1!

40 39 19

40 21 2!

2

2

2

2

37

40 41 18 1!

42 41 17 #

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Status of Education in Rural America 53Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Table 2.2. Percentage distribution of public school students across NAEP mathematics achievement levels, by grade 

level and locale: 2005

Grade level and locale Below basic At basic

At or above proficient

Total At proficient At advanced 

4th grade

 Total 20.5 44.1 35.3 30.5 4.8

City 28.0 43.3 28.7 24.6 4.1

Suburban 16.7 42.7 40.7 34.4 6.3

Town 19.7 46.3 34.0 30.5 3.5

Rural 17.3 46.7 36.0 31.9 4.1

Fringe 16.2 45.3 38.5 33.4 5.0

Distant 17.6 47.8 34.6 31.1 3.5

Remote 19.9 48.3 31.8 28.9 2.9

8th grade

 Total 32.1 39.4 28.5 22.8 5.6

City 41.2 35.9 22.9 17.9 5.0

Suburban 27.6 38.9 33.4 26.1 7.3

Town 31.2 42.4 26.4 22.4 4.0

Rural 28.2 42.9 28.9 24.2 4.6

Fringe 27.7 41.6 30.7 24.9 5.8

Distant 28.3 44.4 27.3 23.8 3.5

Remote 29.9 44.5 25.7 22.6 3.0

12th grade

 Total 41.1 37.4 21.5 19.5 2.0

City 47.3 35.1 17.6 15.3 2.3

Suburban 37.6 37.2 25.3 22.8 2.5

Town 38.9 40.5 20.6 19.7 1.0 !

Rural 40.4 39.0 20.6 19.0 1.6

Fringe 40.4 36.8 22.8 20.7 2.1 !

Distant 39.7 41.4 18.9 17.6 1.3 !

Remote 41.9 40.9 17.2 16.8 0.4 !

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized 

area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area 

and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may 

not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Mathematics Assessment. 
2.3. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science achievement

A larger proportion of public school students in rural areas in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades in 2005 

scored at or above the Proficient level in science than did their peers in cities. There were no measurable 

differences between the percentages of rural and suburban public school students scoring at the Proficient

level in any of the three grade levels.

54 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.3 — National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science achievement

Nationwide, 27 percent of 4th-grade public school 

students scored at or above the Proficient level on 

the 2005 NAEP science assessment (table 2.3). The 

percentage of such 4th-graders scoring at this level 

in rural areas (32 percent) was larger than in towns 

(27 percent) or cities (19 percent). There was no 

measurable difference between the percentages of 

4th-graders in rural and suburban areas achieving 

at or above the Proficient level. Within rural areas, 

a larger percentage of public school 4th-graders in 

fringe rural areas scored at this level (34 percent) than 

their peers in distant rural (30 percent) and remote 

rural (28 percent) areas.

Figure 2.3a. Percentage distribution of 4th-grade public school students across NAEP science achievement levels, 

by locale: 2005

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

34 39 25 2

46 35 17 2

30 40 28 3

32 41 25 2

26 42 29 3

24 42 31 3

27 43 28 2

31 41 25 2!

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Status of Education in Rural America 55Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

The pattern for 8th-grade public school students scoring at or above Proficient in science was similar to that 

for 4th-graders, with 27 percent of such 8th-graders 

in the United States scoring at or above this level. 

Again, a larger percentage of 8th-graders in rural areas 

scored at or above the Proficient level (30 percent) 

than in towns (28 percent) and cities (19 percent). 

There were also no measurable differences between 

the percentages of public school 8th-graders in rural 

and suburban areas scoring at this level or between 

the percentages of such 8th-graders achieving at this 

level in each of the three rural locales.

Figure 2.3b. Percentage distribution of 8th-grade public school students across NAEP science achievement levels, 

by locale: 2005

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment.

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

43 30 24 3

55 26 17 2

38 31 28 4

40 32 25 3

36 33 27 3

36 32 28 3

37 35 26 2

34 36 28 2!

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced
Among 12th-grade public school students nationally, 

17 percent scored at or above the Proficient level in 

science. A greater proportion of such 12th-graders 

achieved at this level in rural areas (18 percent) than 

in cities (13 percent), but there were no measurable 

differences in the percentages of 12th-graders in rural 

areas, towns, and suburbs who scored at this level. 

There were also no measurable differences between 

the percentages of public school 12th-graders in 

each of the three rural locales scoring at or above the 

Proficient level.

Figure 2.3c. Percentage distribution of 12th-grade public school students across NAEP science achievement 

levels, by locale: 2005

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 

area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment.

Locale

Rural, remote

Rural, distant

Rural, fringe

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent below basic Percent at or above basic

48 35 16 2!

57 30 12 1

45 35 18 2!

44 38 16 2!

46 37 16 1!

44 37 17 2!

47 36 15 2!

47 36 16 1!

Below basic At basic At proficient At advanced

56 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.3 — National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science achievement
Status of Education in Rural America 57Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Table 2.3. Percentage distribution of public school students across NAEP science achievement levels, by grade level 

and locale: 2005

Grade level and locale Below basic At basic

At or above proficient

Total At proficient At advanced 

4th grade

 Total 34.0 39.0 27.0 24.7 2.3

City 46.2 34.8 19.1 17.5 1.6

Suburban 29.9 39.7 30.4 27.6 2.7

Town 31.5 41.0 27.4 25.3 2.1

Rural 25.9 42.3 31.7 29.2 2.6

Fringe 24.1 41.8 34.1 31.2 2.9

Distant 26.7 43.5 29.9 27.6 2.2

Remote 30.8 41.5 27.8 25.4 2.3 !

8th grade

 Total 42.7 30.0 27.3 24.4 2.9

City 54.7 25.8 19.5 17.3 2.1

Suburban 38.2 30.6 31.2 27.5 3.7

Town 40.4 31.6 28.0 25.4 2.6

Rural 36.3 33.5 30.2 27.4 2.8

Fringe 36.2 32.2 31.6 28.2 3.4

Distant 37.1 34.7 28.2 26.0 2.2

Remote 34.3 35.5 30.2 28.5 1.7 !

12th grade

 Total 48.2 34.5 17.3 15.6 1.8 !

City 56.5 30.0 13.5 12.0 1.5

Suburban 44.9 35.3 19.8 17.6 2.2 !

Town 44.1 37.8 18.1 16.5 1.7 !

Rural 45.6 36.7 17.7 16.3 1.5 !

Fringe 44.3 37.0 18.7 17.0 1.7 !

Distant 46.9 36.4 16.7 15.2 1.5 !

Remote 47.2 36.2 16.7 16.0 0.7 !

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: For information on NAEP, including technical aspects of scoring and assessment validity and more specific information on achievement levels, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from 

an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized 

area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area 

and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may 

not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 
2.4. High school status dropouts

The high school status dropout rate among 16- to 24-year-olds in rural areas in 2004 was higher than in 

suburban areas, but lower than in cities. 

58 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 2.4 — High school status dropouts

This indicator examines the high school status dropout rate of 16- to 24-year-olds. The high school status 

dropout rate is defined as the percentage of individuals who are not enrolled in high school and have not 

earned a high school credential (either a diploma or an 

equivalency credential such as a General Educational 

Development [GED] certificate).3 In 2004, some 

11 percent of all 16- to 24-year-olds nationally were 

high school status dropouts (table 2.4). The status 

dropout rate in rural areas (11 percent) was higher 

than in suburban areas (9 percent), but lower than 

in cities (13 percent). No measurable difference was 

detected between the status dropout rate in rural 

areas and towns.

In each locale, the high school status dropout rate 

among 16- to 24-year-olds living below the poverty 

threshold (16–23 percent) was greater than among

those living above 185 percent of the poverty threshold (6–9 percent) (figure 2.4a) (for a comparison of 

poverty definitions see appendix B). In addition, 

in rural and suburban areas, the high school status 

dropout rate in this age group was greater among 

those living in poverty (23 and 18 percent, respectively) than among those living between 100 and 185 

percent of the poverty threshold (17 and 15 percent, 

respectively). Among those living in poverty, a larger 

percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds in rural areas were 

status dropouts (23 percent) than in towns (16 percent), cities (18 percent), and suburban areas (18 

percent). In contrast, among those living above 185 

percent of the poverty threshold, the percentage of 

16- to 24-year-olds in rural areas who were status 

dropouts (7 percent) was smaller than in cities (9 

percent) and towns (8 percent), but still larger than 

in suburban areas (6 percent).

3

 The status dropout rate includes all dropouts regardless of when they last attended school, as well as individuals 

who may have never attended school in the United States, such as immigrants who did not complete a high school 

diploma in their home country. For a comparison of poverty definitions and measures of educational attainment, see 

appendix B.

Figure 2.4a. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by poverty level and locale: 

2004

NOTE: The data presented here represent the status dropout rate, which is the percentage of civilian, noninstitutionalized 16- to 24-year-olds who are not in high 

school and who have not earned a high school credential (either a diploma or equivalency credential such as a GED). The status dropout rate includes all dropouts regardless of when they last attended school, as well as individuals who may have never attended school in the United States, such as immigrants who did 

not complete a high school diploma in their home country. For a comparison of poverty definitions and measures of educational attainment, see appendix B.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Locale

100–185 percent of

the poverty threshold

Above 185 percent of

the poverty threshold

Below the poverty 

threshold

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

City Suburban Town Rural

18 17

9

18

15

6

16 16

8

23

17

7
Status of Education in Rural America 59Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Table 2.4. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by poverty level and locale: 2004

Locale Total

Below the 

poverty threshold

100–185 percent of 

the poverty threshold

Above 185 percent of

the poverty threshold

Total 11.1 18.4 16.3 7.2

City 12.8 17.6 17.1 8.8

Suburban 9.0 18.4 14.9 6.0

Town 12.1 16.5 15.5 8.4

Rural 11.1 23.2 17.1 6.9

NOTE: The data presented here represent the status dropout rate, which is the percentage of civilian, noninstitutionalized 16- to 24-year-olds who are 

not in high school and who have not earned a high school credential (either a diploma or equivalency credential such as a GED). The status dropout rate 

includes all dropouts regardless of when they last attended school, as well as individuals who may have never attended school in the United States, such 

as immigrants who did not complete a high school diploma in their home country. For a comparison of poverty definitions and measures of educational 

attainment, see appendix B. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

The status dropout rate for 16- to 24-year-olds showed 

considerable variations across racial/ethnic groups. Nationally, 8 percent of Whites, 12 percent of Blacks, 24 

percent of Hispanics, 4 percent of Asians, and 17 percent 

of American Indian/Alaska Natives were high school 

status dropouts in 2004 (figure 2.4b and table A-2.4).

A higher percentage of White 16- to 24-year-olds in

rural areas were status dropouts (10 percent) than in 

suburban areas (6 percent), cities (7 percent), and 

towns (9 percent). For Black 16- to 24-year-olds, the 

status dropout rate in rural areas (14 percent) was 

higher than in suburban areas (9 percent), but was not 

measurably different from that in cities and towns. 

No measurable differences were found between the 

status dropout rate for Hispanic 16- to 24-year-olds 

in rural areas and in the other locales.

Figure 2.4b. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by race/ethnicity and locale: 

2004

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: The data presented here represent the status dropout rate, which is the percentage of civilian, noninstitutionalized 16- to 24-year-olds who are not in 

high school and who have not earned a high school credential (either a diploma or equivalency credential such as a GED). The status dropout rate includes 

all dropouts regardless of when they last attended school, as well as individuals who may have never attended school in the United States, such as immigrants who did not complete a high school diploma in their home country. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise 

specified. For a comparison of measures of educational attainment, see appendix B. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Race/ethnicity

Total Rural

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

White Black Hispanic Asian Native

Hawaiian/

Pacific 

Islander

American 

Indian/

Alaska

Native

8

10

12 14

24 24

4

2!

6! 6!

17 16
2.5. Public high school graduation

The averaged freshman graduation rate for public high schools during the 2002–03 school year was higher 

in rural areas than in cities, but was lower in rural areas than in towns and suburbs. 

60 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.5 — Public high school graduation

Nationally, during the 2002–03 school year, the 

averaged graduation rate4 for the freshman class of 

1999–2000 was 73 percent (figure 2.5). The averaged freshman graduation rate was higher in rural 

areas (75 percent) than across the nation as a whole. 

This rate was higher in rural areas than in cities (65 

percent), but was lower in rural areas than in towns 

and suburbs (76 and 79 percent, respectively).

Among the three rural locale types, the averaged freshman graduation rate was higher in remote rural areas 

(79 percent) than in distant rural and rural fringe areas 

(75 and 74 percent, respectively). The averaged freshman graduation rates in distant rural and rural fringe 

areas were lower than the rates in suburbs and towns. 

However, the averaged freshman graduation rate in 

remote rural areas was higher than the rate in towns 

and was comparable to the rate in suburban areas.

4

 The averaged freshman graduation rate provides an estimate of the percentage of public high school students who 

graduate on time. The rate is the number of graduates divided by the estimated count of freshmen 4 years earlier. The 

estimated averaged freshman enrollment count is the sum of the number of 8th-graders 5 years earlier, the number of 

9th-graders 4 years earlier (because this is when current year seniors were freshmen), and the number of 10th-graders 

3 years earlier, divided by 3. (Enrollment counts used for these calculations include a proportional distribution of 

students not enrolled in a specific grade.) The averaging is intended to account for higher grade retentions in the 9th 

grade. Graduates include only those who earned regular diplomas or diplomas for advanced academic achievement 

(e.g., honors diplomas) as defined by the state or district. This measure is sensitive to in and out migration at 

the school district level. Please see Seastrom et al. (2006) for a more detailed discussion of the averaged freshman 

graduation rate compared to other NCES graduation rate measures. For a comparison of measures of educational 

attainment, see appendix B.
Status of Education in Rural America 61Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.5. Averaged freshman graduation rate for public high school students, by locale: 2002–03

NOTE: The averaged freshman graduation rate provides an estimate of the percentage of public high school students who graduate on time. The rate is 

the number of graduates divided by the estimated count of freshmen 4 years earlier. The estimated averaged freshman enrollment count is the sum of the 

number of 8th-graders 5 years earlier, the number of 9th-graders 4 years earlier (because this is when current year seniors were freshmen), and the number 

of 10th-graders 3 years earlier, divided by 3. (Enrollment counts used for these calculations include a proportional distribution of students not enrolled in 

a specific grade.) The averaging is intended to account for higher grade retentions in the 9th grade. Graduates include only those who earned regular diplomas or diplomas for advanced academic achievement (e.g., honors diplomas) as defined by the state or district. This measure is sensitive to in and out migration at the school district level. Data in this table reflect totals reported by schools and school districts and may differ slightly from data calculated from 

state reported summaries. For a comparison of measures of educational attainment, see appendix B. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or 

urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 

2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 

5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote 

rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see 

http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04. 

Percent

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Locale

City 65

Total 73

Suburban 79

Town 76

Rural 75

Rural, fringe 74

Rural, distant 75

Rural, remote 79
Table 2.6. Percentage of persons ages 16–19 who were neither enrolled in school nor working, by sex and locale: 2004

Locale Total Male Female

 Total 5.5 4.9 6.1

City 6.6 5.8 7.6

Suburban 4.3 4.0 4.6

Town 5.9 5.1 6.7

Rural 5.8 5.4 6.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

2.6. Teens neither enrolled in school nor employed

In 2004, the percentage of teenagers in rural areas who were neither enrolled in school nor employed was 

higher than in suburban areas, lower than in cities, but not measurably different than in towns. 

62 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 2.6 — Teens neither enrolled in school nor employed

In 2004, approximately 5.5 percent of persons ages 16 

to 19 were neither enrolled in school nor working in 

the labor market (table 2.6). The percentage of rural 

teenagers who were neither enrolled nor employed 

(5.8 percent) was greater than the percentage in suburban areas (4.3 percent), lower than the percentage 

in cities (6.6 percent), but not measurably different 

from the percentage in towns (5.9 percent). 

Nationally, a larger percentage of females ages 16 to 

19 were neither enrolled nor employed (6.1 percent) 

than males (4.9 percent). While this same difference 

existed between male and female teenagers in cities 

and towns, there was no measurable difference between the percentages of male and female teenagers 

in rural or suburban areas who were neither enrolled 

nor employed. The apparent difference between these 

percentages in rural areas may not be statistically 

significant due to large standard errors. 

A greater percentage of rural males ages 16 to 19 were 

neither enrolled nor employed (5.4 percent) than 

suburban males (4.0 percent), while no difference was 

detected between these rural males and their peers in 

cities or towns (figure 2.6). Like males, the percentage 

of female teenagers in rural areas who were neither 

enrolled nor employed (6.3 percent) was greater than 

in suburban areas (4.6 percent) and not measurably 

different than in towns (6.7 percent). However, unlike 

males, the percentage of such females in rural areas 

was smaller than in cities (7.6 percent).
Status of Education in Rural America 63Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.6. Percentage of persons ages 16–19 who were neither enrolled in school nor working, by sex and 

locale: 2004

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data. 

Locale

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

City Suburban Town Rural

Male Female

6

8

4 5 5

7

5

6
Table 2.7. Percentage of persons ages 18–29 enrolled in colleges or universities, by age group, locale, and sex: 2004

Ages 18–24 Ages 25–29 

Locale and sex Enrolled in any program

Enrolled in undergraduate programsEnrolled in graduate or 

professional programs

Total 34.2 10.1 5.2

City 36.6 10.6 6.8

Suburban 36.6 10.3 5.2

Town 31.8 11.2 3.2

Rural 27.1 7.8 2.6

Sex

Male 31.0 8.9 4.6

City 33.5 9.8 6.3

Suburban 33.9 9.2 4.4

Town 28.0 9.6 2.8

Rural 23.1 6.2 2.1

Female 37.6 11.2 5.7

City 39.8 11.5 7.3

Suburban 39.4 11.3 6.0

Town 35.6 12.7 3.6

Rural 31.5 9.5 3.2

NOTE: These data were collected by the American Community Survey (ACS), which asked survey respondents to identify persons who had been living in the 

household for the past 2 months. ACS did not begin to collect data for group quarters (e.g., students living in dorms on campus) until 2006. Thus, 2004 

data for each of the rural, city, suburban, and town locales include independent students living in the locale and dependent students living at home in the 

locale, but not dependent students in campus dorms in the locale, nor dependent students from the locale who were in campus dorms. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

2.7. College enrollment rates

College enrollment rates for both 18- to 24-year-olds and 25- to 29-year-olds were generally lower in rural 

areas than in all other locales in 2004. In rural areas, as in the nation as a whole, females enrolled in 

postsecondary education at a higher rate than males.

64 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.7 — College enrollment rates

In 2004, approximately 34 percent of all 18- to 

24-year-olds were enrolled in colleges or universities. The college enrollment rate in rural areas 

(27 percent) was lower than the rate in cities (37 

percent), suburban areas (37 percent), or towns (32 

percent) (table 2.7).5

A higher percentage of all 18- to 24-year-old females 

enrolled in a college or university (38 percent) than 

did their male peers (31 percent). This finding also 

held true within each locale (figure 2.7). For example, 

within rural areas, 31 percent of females in this age 

group were enrolled in postsecondary education, 

compared with 23 percent of males.

Among 25- to 29-year-olds, 10 percent were enrolled 

in undergraduate programs and another 5 percent were 

enrolled in graduate programs (including professional 

programs) (table 2.7). The undergraduate enrollment 

rate for this age group was lower in rural areas (8 percent) 

than in all other locales (10–11 percent). The percentage 

of 25- to 29-year-olds enrolled in graduate programs 

was also lower in rural areas (3 percent) than in cities 

(7 percent) and suburban areas (5 percent), but was not 

measurably different from the percentage in towns.

The enrollment rate for 25- to 29-year-old females 

was higher than the enrollment rate for their male 

peers at both the undergraduate level (11 vs. 9 

percent) and the graduate level (6 vs. 5 percent). 

This finding also held true in rural areas, where 9 

percent of females and 6 percent of males were enrolled in undergraduate programs, while 3 percent 

of females and 2 percent of males were enrolled in 

graduate programs.

5

 These data were collected by the American Community Survey (ACS), which asked survey respondents to identify 

persons who had been living in the household for the past 2 months. ACS did not begin to collect data for group 

quarters (e.g., students living in dorms on campus) until 2006. Thus, 2004 data for each of the rural, city, suburban, 

and town locales include independent students living in the locale and dependent students living at home in the 

locale, but not dependent students in campus dorms in the locale, nor dependent students from the locale who were 

in campus dorms.
Status of Education in Rural America 65Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.7. Percentage of persons ages 18–24 enrolled in colleges and universities, by sex and locale: 2004

NOTE: These data were collected by the American Community Survey (ACS), which asked survey respondents to identify persons who had been living in the 

household for the past 2 months. ACS did not begin to collect data for group quarters (e.g., students living in dorms on campus) until 2006. Thus, 2004 

data for each of the rural, city, suburban, and town locales include independent students living in the locale and dependent students living at home in the 

locale, but not dependent students in campus dorms in the locale, nor dependent students from the locale who were in campus dorms. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Locale

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

City Suburban Town Rural

Total Male Female

37

34

40

37

34

39

32

28

36

27

23

31
Table 2.8. Percentage of adults age 16 or older who participated in adult educational activities, by type of activity 

and locale: 2005

Locale Overall participation

Type of adult educational activity

College or university 

credential 

programs 1

Work-related 

courses

Personal 

interest 

courses Other activities 2

Total 44.4 5.0 26.9 21.4 3.3

City 45.8 5.7 26.3 22.5 4.6

Suburban 46.9 5.8 29.7 23.4 2.6

Town 41.8 4.2 ! 25.6 18.5 3.6 !

Rural 39.6 3.3 24.2 18.4 2.2 !

! Interpret data with caution.

1

 Full-time participation for all or part of the year in a college or university credential program or a vocational or technical diploma program was not counted 

as an adult educational activity. However, individuals who were enrolled part-time in a college or university credential program or vocational or technical 

diploma program were included in the denominator.

2

 Includes basic skills training, apprenticeships, and English as a Second Language (ESL) courses.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Adult Education Survey of the 2005 National Household Education 

Surveys Program (NHES).

2.8. Adult education

Forty percent of adults in rural areas participated in some type of formal educational activity in 2005. A 

smaller percentage of rural adults than suburban adults took work-related courses or courses for personal 

interest and a smaller percentage of rural adults than adults in both cities and suburban areas participated 

in part-time college or university credential programs.

66 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.8 — Adult education

In 2005, 44 percent of persons nationwide age 16 and 

over participated in some form of adult educational 

activities (table 2.8). In rural areas, 40 percent of such 

persons participated in some form of adult educational activities (figure 2.8). Adult educational activities 

include all formal educational activities led by an instructor, excluding full-time participation for any part 

of the year in a postsecondary credential program. They 

include English as a Second Language (ESL) classes, 

basic skills or General Educational Development (GED) 

preparation classes, part-time postsecondary or vocational programs, apprenticeship programs, work-related 

courses, and personal interest courses. The percentage 

of adults participating in such educational activities in 

rural areas was less than the percentage participating 

in suburban areas (47 percent) and cities (46 percent), 

but was not measurably different from the percentage 

participating in towns (42 percent).

The most common adult educational activity was 

work-related coursework, with 27 percent of all adults 

participating in these courses (table 2.8). Nationally, 

adults also enrolled in personal interest courses (21 

percent), college or university credential programs (5 

percent), and other activities (3 percent). This “other 

activities” category includes activities such as basic skills 

training, ESL classes, and apprenticeships. Adults in 

rural areas followed participation patterns similar to 

those of the nation as a whole: work-related courses 

were the most common type of educational activity 

(24 percent), followed by personal interest courses (18 

percent), part-time college or university credential programs (3 percent), and other activities (2 percent).

A lower percentage of adults in rural areas (3 percent) 

than in cities and suburban areas (both 6 percent) 

participated in part-time college or university credential programs (figure 2.8). In addition, a smaller 

proportion of adults in rural areas than in suburban 

areas participated in work-related courses (24 vs. 

30 percent) or participated in courses for personal 

interest (18 vs. 23 percent). Also, a smaller percentage of adults in rural areas than adults in cities 

participated in other activities (2 vs. 5 percent). 

There were, however, no measurable differences 

between adults in rural areas and towns in terms of 

the percentages participating in any of the selected 

educational activities.
Status of Education in Rural America 67Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.8. Percentage of adults age 16 or older who participated in adult educational activities, by type of 

activity and locale: 2005

! Interpret data with caution.

1

 Full-time participation for all or part of the year in a college or university credential program or a vocational or technical diploma program was not counted 

as an adult educational activity. However, individuals who were enrolled part-time in a college or university credential program or vocational or technical 

diploma program were included in the denominator. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Adult Education Survey of the 2005 National Household Education 

Surveys Program (NHES).

Overall 

participation

College or university 

credential programs1

Work-related 

courses

Personal 

interest courses

Percent

Type of adult education activity

0

10

20

30

40

50

City Suburban Town Rural

46 47

42

40

6 6 4! 3

26

30

26 24

22 23

18 18
2.9. Educational attainment

In 2004, the percentage of adults with a bachelor’s degree as their highest educational level was lower 

in rural areas than the national percentage. 

68 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.9 — Educational attainment

In 2004, across the nation some 16 percent of adults 

age 25 and over lacked a high school credential, 30 

percent had completed only high school (with a diploma or its equivalent), 27 percent had completed 

some college or an associate’s degree, 17 percent had 

earned a bachelor’s degree as their highest level of 

educational attainment, and 10 percent had a graduate or professional degree (table 2.9a). 

In rural areas, the percentage of adults age 25 and over 

who lacked a high school credential (17 percent) was 

one percentage point higher than the national figure. 

No measurable differences were detected between the 

rural and national percentages of adults who had some 

college or an associate’s degree as their highest level 

of attainment. Smaller percentages of rural adults 

(compared with the national percentages) had earned 

either a bachelor’s degree (13 percent) or a graduate 

or professional degree (7 percent) as their highest 

educational attainment level. 

Smaller percentages of adults in rural areas had a 

bachelor’s degree or higher than did adults in cities and 

suburbs at all age groups. For example, 21 percent of 

adults ages 25–34 in rural areas had a bachelor’s degree 

or higher, compared with 34 percent each in cities and 

suburbs (figure 2.9a). No substantive differences were 

found between the percentages of adults with a bachelor’s 

degree or higher in rural and town locales, except among 

adults ages 45-54 and adults age 65 and over.

Figure 2.9a. Percentage distribution of adults ages 25–34 and 65 and over, by locale and highest level of 

educational attainment: 2004

1

 Includes those currently enrolled in school.

2

 Includes those currently enrolled in college. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Percent

Ages 25 to 34

Age group

and locale

Ages 65 

and over

Some college/associate’s degree

High school graduate or equivalent Bachelor’s degree or higher 2

Less than high school graduate1

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

15 23 28 34

12 24 30 34

14 32 33 21

13 33 33 21

30 30 20 20

24 35 21 21

31 36 19 15

33 37 18 13
Status of Education in Rural America 69Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Overall and within each locale, adults age 65 and over 

had lower educational attainment than younger adults 

(table 2.9a). For example, among adults in rural areas, 

13 percent of adults age 65 and over had a bachelor’s 

degree or higher, compared with 21 percent of adults 

ages 45–54 years old and 20 percent of adults ages 

55–64 years old. Thirty-three percent of rural adults 

age 65 and over did not have a high school diploma 

(or equivalent), compared with 13 percent of rural 

adults ages 25–34, 12 percent of those ages 45–54, 

and 17 percent of those ages 55–64. 

Table 2.9a. Percentage distribution of adults age 25 and over, by highest level of educational attainment, age 

group, and locale: 2004 

Age group and locale Total

Less than 

high school 

graduate1

High school graduate or higher

Total

High school 

graduate or 

equivalent2

Some 

college/ 

associate’s 

degree

Bachelor’s degree or higher

Total

Bachelor’s 

degree

Graduate or 

professional 

degree

25 and over

 Total 100.0 16.1 83.9 29.5 27.4 27.0 17.2 9.9

City 100.0 18.4 81.6 25.7 26.2 29.8 18.6 11.2

Suburban 100.0 12.8 87.2 27.5 28.2 31.5 19.9 11.5

Town 100.0 18.5 81.5 33.7 27.9 19.9 12.9 7.0

Rural 100.0 17.1 82.9 36.4 27.5 19.1 12.6 6.5

25–34 100.0 13.7 86.3 26.1 30.0 30.3 21.8 8.5

City 100.0 15.5 84.5 23.0 27.5 34.0 23.8 10.2

Suburban 100.0 11.9 88.1 23.9 30.4 33.8 24.1 9.6

Town 100.0 14.2 85.8 31.8 32.7 21.3 16.3 5.0

Rural 100.0 13.0 87.0 33.3 32.8 20.8 16.0 4.8

35–44 100.0 12.7 87.3 29.1 29.3 28.9 19.2 9.7

City 100.0 15.9 84.1 25.7 27.5 30.9 19.7 11.1

Suburban 100.0 9.7 90.3 26.2 29.9 34.1 22.7 11.4

Town 100.0 14.8 85.2 34.0 30.7 20.5 14.2 6.3

Rural 100.0 12.3 87.7 37.1 30.1 20.5 14.5 6.0

45–54 100.0 12.0 88.0 29.1 29.7 29.2 17.8 11.3

City 100.0 15.5 84.5 25.2 28.5 30.8 18.3 12.5

Suburban 100.0 9.0 91.0 26.1 30.1 34.7 21.3 13.4

Town 100.0 13.7 86.3 33.4 30.3 22.5 13.9 8.6

Rural 100.0 11.8 88.2 37.2 30.0 21.0 13.3 7.7

55–64 100.0 15.6 84.4 30.0 26.8 27.6 15.0 12.6

City 100.0 18.0 82.0 25.5 25.6 30.9 16.3 14.6

Suburban 100.0 12.1 87.9 27.7 28.2 32.0 17.5 14.5

Town 100.0 18.3 81.7 33.6 26.9 21.2 11.6 9.6

Rural 100.0 16.7 83.3 37.0 26.2 20.1 11.4 8.7

65 and over 100.0 28.4 71.6 33.9 19.8 17.9 10.3 7.6

City 100.0 29.8 70.2 30.1 20.0 20.0 11.6 8.4

Suburban 100.0 23.5 76.5 34.8 21.1 20.6 11.8 8.8

Town 100.0 30.8 69.2 35.6 19.1 14.5 8.2 6.3

Rural 100.0 32.9 67.1 36.5 17.7 12.9 7.6 5.3

1

 Includes those currently enrolled in school.

2

 Includes those currently enrolled in college.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.
Within each locale, a larger percentage of adults with 

incomes above 185 percent of the poverty threshold 

had a bachelor’s degree or higher than did adults below the poverty threshold and adults between 100 and 

185 percent of the poverty threshold. For example, in 

rural areas, 6 percent of adults with incomes below 

the poverty threshold and 7 percent of adults with 

incomes between 100 and 185 percent of the poverty 

threshold had a bachelor’s degree or higher, while 23 

percent of adults with incomes above 185 percent 

of the poverty threshold had a bachelor’s degree or 

higher (table 2.9b and figure 2.9b). 

In rural areas, 12 percent of adults with incomes above 

185 percent of the poverty threshold lacked a high 

school credential, compared with 38 percent of adults 

with incomes below the poverty threshold and 32 

percent of those with incomes between 100 and 185 

percent of the poverty threshold (for a comparison 

of poverty definitions see appendix B). 

Table 2.9b. Percentage distribution of adults age 25 and over, by highest level of educational attainment, locale, 

and poverty status: 2004 

Locale and poverty status Total

Less than 

high school 

graduate1

High school graduate or higher

Total

High school 

graduate or 

equivalent2

Some 

college/ 

associate’s 

degree

Bachelor’s degree or higher

Total

Bachelor’s 

degree

Graduate or 

professional 

degree

Total 100.0 16.1 83.9 29.5 27.4 27.0 17.2 9.9

Incomes below the poverty 

 threshold

City 100.0 39.1 60.9 28.6 20.3 12.0 8.2 3.8

Suburban 100.0 33.0 67.0 32.3 22.3 12.4 8.6 3.8

Town 100.0 38.2 61.8 34.7 21.0 6.1 4.5 1.6

Rural 100.0 38.3 61.7 36.1 19.4 6.2 4.6 1.6

Incomes 100–185 percent 

 of the poverty threshold

City 100.0 33.4 66.6 31.8 22.7 12.1 8.6 3.6

Suburban 100.0 28.6 71.4 35.9 24.1 11.3 8.0 3.4

Town 100.0 31.3 68.7 37.4 23.5 7.8 5.8 2.0

Rural 100.0 31.7 68.3 39.7 21.6 7.0 5.1 1.9

Incomes above 185 percent 

 of the poverty threshold

City 100.0 11.6 88.4 23.8 28.0 36.6 22.5 14.1

Suburban 100.0 9.0 91.0 25.9 29.3 35.7 22.5 13.3

Town 100.0 11.6 88.4 32.6 30.3 25.5 16.2 9.3

Rural 100.0 11.6 88.4 35.7 29.6 23.1 15.0 8.0

1

 Includes those currently enrolled in school.

2

 Includes those currently enrolled in college.

NOTE: For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

70 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.9 — Educational attainment
Status of Education in Rural America 71Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.9b. Percentage distribution of adults age 25 and over, by poverty status, locale, and highest level of 

educational attainment: 2004

1

 Includes those currently enrolled in school.

2

 Includes those currently enrolled in college. 

NOTE: For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

100

Some college/associate’s degree

High school graduate or equivalent Bachelor’s degree or higher 2

Less than high school graduate1

40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Below poverty

 threshold

Poverty status

 and locale

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

100–185

 percent

 of poverty

 threshold

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Above 185

 percent of 

poverty

 threshold

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

39 29 20 12

33 32 22 12

38 35 21 6

38 36 19 6

33 32 23 12

29 36 24 11

31 37 24 8

32 40 22 7

12 24 28 37

9 26 29 36

12 33 30 25

12 36 30 23

Percent
2.10. Median earnings

People with higher levels of educational attainment had higher annual median earnings in 2004, regardless 

of sex and locale. Persons in rural areas generally had higher median earnings than those in cities and 

towns, but lower median earnings than those in suburban areas, regardless of educational attainment. 

72 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.10 — Median earnings

In 2004, the median annual earnings for all fulltime, full-year workers over the age of 25 in the 

United States was $38,600 (table 2.10a). Nationally, among such workers, those with higher 

educational attainment had higher median earnings 

than those with lower educational attainment: the 

median earnings of those with a graduate or professional degree ($67,200) was higher than that of 

those with a bachelor’s degree ($51,500), those with 

some college or an associate’s degree ($37,300), 

those with a high school diploma or equivalent 

($31,100), and those with less than a high school 

diploma ($23,700). 

In order to accurately compare earnings among such 

workers across various locales, the data presented in 

this analysis have been adjusted to reflect geographic 

cost differences (such as cost-of-living differences).6

The median earnings in rural areas ($39,000) was 

higher than that in cities ($35,700) and towns 

($36,500), but was lower than that in suburban areas 

($40,200). This pattern held true at each level of 

educational attainment, with two exceptions. Among 

workers with less than a high school diploma or 

equivalent, the median earnings for those in rural 

areas ($28,200) was higher than for those in towns 

($25,100), suburbs ($24,400), and cities ($20,900) 

(figure 2.10a). In addition, the median earnings of 

those with a high school diploma or its equivalent as 

their highest level of education was higher in rural 

areas ($33,800) than in suburban areas ($31,900), 

towns ($31,600), and cities ($28,700).

In 2004, the median earnings for full-time, full-year 

employed males over the age of 25 ($42,900) were 

higher than the median earnings for such females 

($32,300) (table 2.10b and figure 2.10b). This difference was observed in all locales and at all levels 

of educational attainment. For males, the median 

earnings in rural areas ($44,800) were higher than 

the median earnings in cities ($39,600) and towns 

($42,200), but lower than the median earnings in 

suburban areas ($46,900). For females, the median 

earnings in rural areas ($31,500) were also higher than 

in towns ($30,500) and lower than in suburban areas 

($34,400), but were not measurably different from 

the median earnings in cities ($31,600).

Table 2.10a. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost differences, by 

locale and educational attainment: 2004

Educational attainment Total City Suburban Town Rural

 Total $38,600 $35,700 $40,200 $36,500 $39,000

Less than high school diploma or equivalent 23,700 20,900 24,400 25,100 28,200

High school diploma or equivalent or higher 40,700 38,800 42,600 38,300 40,100

High school diploma or equivalent 31,100 28,700 31,900 31,600 33,800

Some college/associate’s degree 37,300 34,600 38,700 37,100 39,700

Bachelor’s degree or higher 56,300 52,800 58,200 52,200 56,700

Bachelor’s degree 51,500 48,500 53,000 47,600 53,600

Graduate or professional degree 67,200 63,400 69,300 59,100 67,100

NOTE: NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage 

Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

6

 NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the 

CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).
Status of Education in Rural America 73Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.10a. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost 

differences, by locale and educational attainment: 2004

1

 Includes GED or other equivalency.

NOTE: NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

City Suburban Town Rural

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

$ 70,000

Median earnings

Locale

High school 

graduate1 Graduate or 

professional degree

�

Less than high 

school graduate

� Bachelor’s degree �

20,900

28,700

34,600

48,500

� $63,400

�

�

�

24,400

31,900

38,700

53,000

$69,300

�

�

�

�

25,100

31,600

37,100

$59,100

�

�

�

�

�

28,200

33,800

39,700

53,600

$67,100

�

�

�

�

�

Some college/

associate’s degree

�

�

�

47,600
Table 2.10b. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost differences, by 

locale, sex, and educational attainment: 2004

Sex and educational attainment Total City Suburban Town Rural

Male $42,900 $39,600 $46,900 $42,200 $44,800

Less than high school diploma or equivalent 26,300 22,700 26,700 28,800 31,500

High school diploma or equivalent or higher 46,100 42,700 48,600 45,300 46,000

High school diploma or equivalent 35,600 31,000 36,700 36,700 39,400

Bachelor’s degree or higher 65,300 59,600 67,400 59,700 67,200

Female $32,300 $31,600 $34,400 $30,500 $31,500

Less than high school diploma or equivalent 19,600 17,700 20,000 19,700 22,200

High school diploma or equivalent or higher 33,800 33,800 35,300 31,700 32,600

High school diploma or equivalent 25,900 24,900 27,400 25,700 26,300

Bachelor’s degree or higher 46,900 45,600 47,800 44,200 46,200

NOTE: NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage 

Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

74 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

2.10 — Median earnings

While males and females as a whole showed relatively 

similar patterns across locales, different earnings patterns between the sexes, particularly in earnings 

between rural and suburban areas, are observed 

when levels of educational attainment are taken into 

account. Males in rural areas had higher median 

earnings than males in towns and cities, regardless 

of their educational attainment. Even though rural 

males with no more than a high school diploma (or 

equivalent) had higher median earnings than their 

suburban peers, no significant difference was detected 

between the median earnings of rural and suburban 

males with bachelor’s degrees.

Median earnings for females in rural areas were higher 

than median earnings for females in cities and towns, 

regardless of their educational attainment, with two 

exceptions. No significant differences were detected 

between median earnings for females with a high 

school diploma (or equivalent) in rural areas and 

towns or for females with a bachelor’s degree or higher 

in rural areas and cities. Females with less than a high 

school diploma (or equivalent) had higher median 

earnings in rural areas than in suburban areas, while 

females with a high school diploma (or equivalent) or 

higher (including a bachelor’s degree) had lower median earnings in rural areas than in suburban areas. 
Status of Education in Rural America 75Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.10b. Median earnings of full-time, full-year workers age 25 and over adjusted for geographic cost 

differences, by sex, locale, and educational attainment: 2004

1

 Includes GED or other equivalency.

NOTE: NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

City Suburban Town Rural

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

$ 70,000

Median earnings

Locale

22,700

26,700 28,800 31,000 31,500

36,700 36,700 39,400

$59,600

$67,400

$59,700

$67,200

Male

City Suburban Town Rural

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

$ 70,000

Median earnings

17,700 20,000 19,700

22,200

24,900 27,400 25,700 26,300

$45,600 $47,800

$44,200 $46,200

Bachelor’s degree

or higher

High school

graduate1

Less than high 

school graduate

Locale

Female

�

� �

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

Bachelor’s degree

or higher

High school

graduate1

Less than high 

school graduate

� �

�

�

�

�

� �

�

�

� � � �

� � � �
Table 2.11. Percentage of civilian persons ages 25–64 in the labor force and unemployed, by sex, age group, and 

locale: 2004 

In labor force Unemployed

Age group and locale Total Male Female Total Male Female

25–34

 Total 82.1 90.9 73.6 7.2 6.7 7.8

City 81.9 90.1 73.9 8.0 7.3 8.8

Suburban 82.9 91.7 74.3 6.3 5.9 6.8

Town 81.1 89.4 73.3 8.3 7.8 8.9

Rural 81.5 91.5 71.6 6.7 6.3 7.2

35–64

 Total 76.2 83.4 69.3 5.2 5.1 5.4

City 75.6 82.6 69.1 6.4 6.2 6.5

Suburban 78.3 86.0 71.0 4.8 4.6 5.0

Town 74.1 80.7 68.1 5.5 5.6 5.4

Rural 74.3 81.2 67.4 4.5 4.4 4.5

NOTE: Members of the military on active duty were excluded from labor force population and population total. Individuals enrolled in school and those not 

looking for work are excluded from the unemployment rate. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

2.11. Employment of adults

In 2004, the unemployment rate for adults ages 25 to 34 was lower in rural areas than in cities and towns, 

and the unemployment rate for adults ages 35 to 64 was lower in rural areas than in all other locales. 

76 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 2.11 — Employment of adults

In 2004, some 82 percent of young adults participated 

in the labor force (table 2.11). For the purposes of this 

analysis, young adults are defined as all civilian adults 

from the age of 25 to 34. The labor force participation rate for young adults in rural areas (81 percent) 

was not measurably different from the national rate 

or from the rates in all other locales. Nationally, the 

labor force participation rate among young adults 

was higher for males (91 percent) than for females 

(74 percent). The same was true for young adults in 

rural areas (92 vs. 72 percent, respectively).

Older adults, for the purposes of this analysis, are 

defined as all civilian adults from the age of 35 to 64. 

The overall labor force participation rate for older 

adults (76 percent) was lower than that for young 

adults (82 percent), but across locales and by sex the 

rates for older adults followed patterns similar to those 

of the rates for young adults. The labor force participation rate for older adults in rural areas (74 percent) 

was not measurably different from the national rate 

or the rates in other locales, with the exception of 

suburban areas (78 percent). As among young adults, 

the labor force participation rate in all locales was 

higher among older adults who were male (81 to 86 

percent) than female (67 to 71 percent).

The unemployment rate for young adults across the 

nation in 2004 was 7.2 percent. In rural areas, the 

unemployment rate for young adults (6.7 percent) 

was lower than in cities (8.0 percent) or towns (8.3 

percent), but not measurably different from the rate in 

suburban areas (figure 2.11). This same pattern held 

true among both males and females, although in all 

locales, female young adults had higher unemployment rates than male young adults.

The national unemployment rate among older adults 

(5.2 percent) was lower than among young adults 

(7.2 percent) (table 2.11). The unemployment rate 

for older adults in rural areas (4.5 percent) was lower 

than that in cities (6.4 percent), towns (5.5 percent), 

or suburban areas (4.8 percent). This same pattern 

generally held true among both males and females, 

with one exception: the unemployment rates for 

male older adults in rural areas (4.4 percent) and 

in suburbs were not measurably different. While 

the national unemployment rate was higher among 

female older adults (5.4 percent) than male older 

adults (5.1 percent), there was no measurable difference between the unemployment rates of older 

males and older females in rural areas.
Status of Education in Rural America 77Chapter 

2 — Outcomes

Figure 2.11. Percentage of civilian persons ages 25–34 who were unemployed, by sex and locale: 2004

NOTE: Members of the military on active duty were excluded from labor force population and population total. Individuals enrolled in school and those not 

looking for work are excluded from the unemployment rate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Total Male Female

0

5

10

15

20

25

8.0

6.3

8.3

6.7 7.3

5.9

7.8

6.3

8.8

6.8

8.9

7.2

City Suburban Town Rural

Percent

Sex
This page intentionally left blank.
The indicators in this chapter describe major fiscal, 

physical, curricular, and workforce conditions in rural 

public schools. The indicators highlight the fact that 

rural public schools depend more on state funding 

than city and suburban schools (which tend to receive 

a greater proportion of their funding from local sources) 

and that rural public schools spend more per student 

than public schools in cities, suburbs, and towns when 

adjusted for geographic cost differences (indicators 3.1 

and 3.2). Rural public schools also have lower pupilto-teacher ratios than schools in other locales (indicator 

3.6). Compared to city public schools, rural public 

schools have lower average numbers of students per 

school counselor, social worker, school psychologist, and 

special education instructional aides (indicator 3.12). 

Compared with public high school students in cities 

and suburbs, those in rural areas have less access to 

Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses or programs, but about the same access 

to dual credit courses (indicator 3.4). In rural public 

schools, elementary and secondary students had 

slightly greater access to instructional computers 

with Internet connectivity than students in city and 

suburban schools (indicator 3.5).

Public school teachers in rural areas also differ in 

some ways, on average, from those in other locales. 

Compared with public school teachers in cities, those 

in rural areas have more years of experience and are 

less racially and/or ethnically diverse (indicators 3.7 

and 3.8). Public school teachers in rural areas earn 

less, on average, than their peers in towns, suburbs, 

and cities, even after adjusting for geographic cost 

differences (indicator 3.10). In addition, their perception of their work tends to differ: rural public school 

teachers generally report student behavioral problems 

as less frequent in their schools than teachers across 

the nation as a whole (indicator 3.9). Also, a larger 

proportion of rural teachers than teachers in other 

locales report being satisfied with the teaching conditions in their school, though a smaller proportion of 

rural teachers than suburban teachers report being 

satisfied with their salaries (indicator 3.9).

3Resources forPublic Schools
80 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.1 — Public school revenues

In 2003–04, U.S. public elementary and secondary 

school revenues totaled $453.4 billion (table 3.1). 

These revenues came from federal, state, and local 

sources in varying proportions by locale.

Rural public schools received a smaller percentage of 

their revenue from federal sources (9 percent) than city 

schools (11 percent), but a larger percentage than suburban schools (6 percent) (figure 3.1). Rural schools 

also received a larger percentage of their revenue from 

federal Impact Aid (0.7 percent)7 than schools in other 

locales (0.1 to 0.3 percent) (table 3.1). 

In the nation as a whole, rural public schools relied on state funding more than city and suburban 

schools.8 Specifically, 52 percent of rural schools’ 

revenues came from state sources compared with 

42 and 46 percent, respectively, for suburban and 

city schools (figure 3.1). Conversely, a smaller 

percentage of rural school revenues came from 

local sources (primarily, local property taxes) (39 

percent) than suburban schools (52 percent) and 

city schools (43 percent). Little difference was noted 

in the distribution of revenues by source between 

rural and town schools. 

Within rural areas, public schools in remote rural 

areas received a greater percentage (2 percent) of 

their revenue from federal Impact Aid than those 

in fringe (0.3 percent) or distant (0.4 percent) rural 

areas, while schools in fringe rural areas relied more 

on local funding (43 percent) than those in distant 

(36 percent) or remote rural (35 percent) areas.

Rural public schools located in high-poverty school 

districts received a larger percentage of their revenue 

from federal sources (19 percent) than rural schools 

located in districts at each of the other poverty levels 

(3 to 12 percent) (table 3.1).9 Rural schools located in 

high-poverty districts also received a smaller percentage of their revenues from local sources (23 percent) 

and a larger percentage from state sources (58 percent), when compared with other rural schools. These 

same patterns were noted in each of the other locales, 

to varying degrees, and within rural areas.

3.1. Public school revenues

Compared with city and suburban public schools, rural public schools tended to receive a greater proportion 

of their revenues in 2003–04 from state sources and a smaller proportion from local sources. Rural public 

schools received a smaller proportion of their revenues from federal sources than city public schools, but 

a greater proportion than suburban public schools. 

7

 The Impact Aid program, originally enacted in 1950 under P.L. 815 and 874 (now Title VIII of P.L. 107-110, the 

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001), compensates local school districts for any “substantial and continuing financial 

burden” resulting from federal ownership of land that exempts it from property taxes as well as from the enrollment of 

children residing on Indian lands, military bases, low-rent housing properties, or other federal properties.

8

 This general national pattern was not true in all states; the most notable exceptions were Connecticut and Rhode 

Island where rural public schools relied more on local funding than city and suburban schools.

9

 District poverty was determined by ranking school districts by the percentage of enrolled children ages 5–17 from 

families with an income below the poverty threshold, and then dividing these districts into five categories with equal 

proportions of the total enrollment. The low-poverty district category consists of the 20 percent of students nationally in 

districts with the lowest percentages of poor school-age children. Conversely, the high-poverty district category consists 

of the 20 percent of students nationally in districts with the highest percentages of poor school-age children. For a 

comparison of poverty definitions see appendix B.
Status of Education in Rural America 81Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.1. Percentage distribution of revenues for public elementary and secondary schools, by source of funds 

and locale: 2003–04

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “National Public Education Financial Survey,” 2003–04.

State Local

Percent

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Federal

Locale

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

Total 8 46 45

11 46 43

6 42 52

9 52 38

9 52 39

Source of funds
Table 3.1. Revenues for public elementary and secondary schools and percentage distribution of revenues, by source 

of funds, locale, and district poverty level: 2003–04

Locale 

and district 

poverty level1

Amount (in thousands) Percentage distribution

Federal Federal

Total All Impact Aid2 State Local Total All

 Impact 

Aid2 State Local

Total $453,400,652 $37,808,157 $1,139,359 $209,701,624 $205,890,871 100.0 8.3 0.3 46.3 45.4

City 146,163,198 15,900,546 217,639 67,718,762 62,543,890 100.0 10.9 0.1 46.3 42.8

Low 9,091,268 325,552 11,908 3,071,008 5,694,708 100.0 3.6 0.1 33.8 62.6

Middle low 15,653,185 1,013,323 65,865 6,074,803 8,565,059 100.0 6.5 0.4 38.8 54.7

Middle 21,665,316 1,789,426 9,370 9,719,023 10,156,867 100.0 8.3 0.0 44.9 46.9

Middle high 32,710,740 3,669,580 111,655 15,694,559 13,346,601 100.0 11.2 0.3 48.0 40.8

High 67,042,689 9,102,665 18,841 33,159,369 24,780,655 100.0 13.6 0.0 49.5 37.0

Suburban 177,784,268 10,118,851 237,097 74,538,803 93,126,614 100.0 5.7 0.1 41.9 52.4

Low 70,526,667 2,014,290 66,527 22,891,008 45,621,369 100.0 2.9 0.1 32.5 64.7

Middle low 44,369,835 2,254,879 19,729 18,791,991 23,322,965 100.0 5.1 0.0 42.4 52.6

Middle 32,715,447 2,622,052 106,318 15,708,226 14,385,169 100.0 8.0 0.3 48.0 44.0

Middle high 21,057,785 2,085,385 37,027 11,833,911 7,138,489 100.0 9.9 0.2 56.2 33.9

High 9,114,534 1,142,245 7,496 5,313,667 2,658,622 100.0 12.5 0.1 58.3 29.2

Town 52,461,047 4,947,534 182,926 27,436,275 20,077,238 100.0 9.4 0.3 52.3 38.3

Low 5,387,222 191,254 9,454 2,498,273 2,697,695 100.0 3.6 0.2 46.4 50.1

Middle low 11,472,236 719,584 53,970 5,643,013 5,109,639 100.0 6.3 0.5 49.2 44.5

Middle 12,315,137 1,032,006 26,805 6,406,366 4,876,765 100.0 8.4 0.2 52.0 39.6

Middle high 14,151,139 1,549,708 30,789 7,624,610 4,976,821 100.0 11.0 0.2 53.9 35.2

High 9,135,313 1,454,982 61,908 5,264,013 2,416,318 100.0 15.9 0.7 57.6 26.5

Rural 76,992,139 6,841,226 501,697 40,007,784 30,143,129 100.0 8.9 0.7 52.0 39.2

Low 14,894,005 505,214 17,868 6,375,226 8,013,565 100.0 3.4 0.1 42.8 53.8

Middle low 17,509,198 986,990 41,956 8,563,810 7,958,398 100.0 5.6 0.2 48.9 45.5

Middle 17,615,960 1,406,807 37,297 9,654,650 6,554,503 100.0 8.0 0.2 54.8 37.2

Middle high 16,508,782 1,930,687 112,000 9,342,077 5,236,018 100.0 11.7 0.7 56.6 31.7

High 10,464,194 2,011,528 292,576 6,072,021 2,380,645 100.0 19.2 2.8 58.0 22.8

Fringe 33,786,582 2,487,836 98,070 16,614,548 14,684,198 100.0 7.4 0.3 49.2 43.5

Low 9,874,548 303,408 15,512 3,913,403 5,657,737 100.0 3.1 0.2 39.6 57.3

Middle low 8,262,287 451,178 9,405 3,948,181 3,862,928 100.0 5.5 0.1 47.8 46.8

Middle 6,680,348 540,788 14,340 3,674,730 2,464,830 100.0 8.1 0.2 55.0 36.9

Middle 

high 5,795,074 650,761 19,094 3,186,049 1,958,264 100.0 11.2 0.3 55.0 33.8

High 3,174,325 541,701 39,719 1,892,185 740,439 100.0 17.1 1.3 59.6 23.3

Distant 28,356,432 2,472,848 106,275 15,636,598 10,246,986 100.0 8.7 0.4 55.1 36.1

Low 6,241,127 324,077 1,572 3,913,403 2,052,444 100.0 3.9 # 48.9 47.2

Middle low 7,427,545 573,919 10,152 3,948,181 2,731,789 100.0 5.2 0.2 51.0 43.8

Middle 6,630,139 766,755 12,711 3,674,730 2,648,187 100.0 7.7 0.2 56.6 35.7

Middle 

high 3,712,766 640,519 35,989 3,186,049 1,940,245 100.0 11.6 0.5 59.2 29.3

High 674,602 34,228 45,851 1,892,185 874,321 100.0 17.3 1.2 59.2 23.5

Remote 14,849,125 1,880,542 297,352 7,756,638 5,211,945 100.0 12.7 2.0 52.2 35.1

Low 674,602 34,228 784 336,990 303,384 100.0 5.1 0.1 50.0 45.0

Middle low 3,005,784 211,735 22,399 1,430,368 1,363,681 100.0 7.0 0.7 47.6 45.4

Middle 3,508,067 292,100 10,246 1,774,481 1,441,486 100.0 8.3 0.3 50.6 41.1

Middle 

high 4,083,569 513,171 56,917 2,232,889 1,337,509 100.0 12.6 1.4 54.7 32.8

High 3,577,103 829,308 207,006 1,981,910 765,885 100.0 23.2 5.8 55.4 21.4

# Rounds to zero.

1 District poverty was determined by ranking school districts by the percentage of enrolled children ages 5–17 from families with an income below the poverty threshold, and then dividing these districts into five categories with equal proportions of the total enrollment. The low-poverty district category consists 

of 20 percent of students in districts with the lowest percentages of poor school-age children. Conversely, the high-poverty district category consists of the 

20 percent of students in districts with the highest percentages of poor school-age children. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B.

2 Impact Aid was designed to assist local school districts that have lost property tax revenue due to the presence of tax-exempt federal property, or that have 

experienced increased expenditures due to the enrollment of federally connected children, including children living on Indian lands.

NOTE: Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. 

Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles 

or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles 

but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from 

an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may not sum to totals because of 

rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “National Public Education Financial Survey,” 

2003–04.

82 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.1 — Public school revenues
This page intentionally left blank.
3.2. Public school expenditures

In rural areas, adjusted current public school expenditures per student were higher in 2003–04 than in 

cities, suburbs, and towns. Public schools had higher adjusted current expenditures per student in highpoverty rural school districts than in middle-poverty and middle high-poverty rural school districts.

84 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.2 — Public school e

xpenditures

Expenditures for public schools are typically discussed 

as either current expenditures for regular school programs, which are instruction, administrative, and 

operation and maintenance expenditures, or else as 

total expenditures, which include current expenditures 

plus capital outlay and interest on school debt. In 

2003–04, current expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools amounted to $8,100 per 

student and total expenditures amounted to $9,800 

per student (table 3.2). 

In order to make an appropriate comparison across 

locales, this indicator examines differences in current expenditures per student, with adjustments to 

reflect geographic cost differences.10 Adjusted current 

expenditures per student for public schools in rural 

areas ($8,400) were higher than in cities ($8,100) 

and suburban areas ($7,900). 

Rural public schools in high-poverty school districts 

had lower adjusted current expenditures per student 

($8,400) than rural schools located in low-poverty 

($9,100) or middle-low poverty ($8,500) districts 

(figure 3.2).11 However, the adjusted current expenditures per student for rural schools located in 

high-poverty districts were greater than the adjusted 

current expenditures for rural schools located in 

middle high-poverty school districts ($8,100) and 

middle-poverty districts ($8,200). A similar pattern 

was seen in rural fringe areas, although not in distant 

and remote rural areas.

In contrast, city schools located in high-poverty school 

districts had higher adjusted current expenditures per 

student than low-poverty, middle low-poverty, middlepoverty, and middle high-poverty school districts.

10 NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on 

the CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321). These cost adjustments 

cannot be applied to total expenditures.

11 District poverty was determined by ranking school districts by the percentage of enrolled children ages 5–17 from 

families with an income below the poverty threshold, and then dividing these districts into five categories with equal 

proportions of the total enrollment. The low-poverty district category consists of the 20 percent of students nationally 

in districts with the lowest percentages of poor school-age children. Conversely, the high-poverty district category 

consists of the 20 percent of students nationally in districts with the highest percentages of poor school-age children. 

For a comparison of poverty definitions see appendix B.
Status of Education in Rural America 85Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.2. Total adjusted current expenditures per public elementary and secondary student, by locale and 

district poverty level: 2003–04

NOTE: Value labels for the highest and lowest expenditure per student are shown for each locale. District poverty was determined by ranking school districts 

by the percentage of enrolled children ages 5–17 from families with an income below the poverty threshold, and then dividing these districts into five 

categories with equal proportions of the total enrollment. The low-poverty district category consists of 20 percent of students in districts with the lowest 

percentages of poor school-age children. Conversely, the high-poverty district category consists of the 20 percent of students in districts with the highest 

percentages of poor school-age children. Once determined, each school district’s poverty status remained unchanged when the data were examined by 

locale. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. 

The same geographic adjustment factor was used for the overall rural locale and the detailed rural locales. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable 

Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “National Public Education Financial Survey,” 2003–04.

7,200

9,000

8,700

7,100

8,900

8,200

9,100

8,100

0

5,500

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

8,000

8,500

9,000

$ 9,500

Expenditures 

per student

City Suburban

Locale

Town Rural

� �

�

�

�

�

�

�

� Low Middle high � High

�

�

�

�

� Middle low

�

�

� �

� Middle

� �

�

�

District poverty level:
Table 3.2. Expenditures per public elementary and secondary student, by type, locale, and district poverty level: 

2003–04

Locale and district poverty level1

Expenditures per student in fall enrollment

Total expenditures Current expenditures

Unadjusted dollars Unadjusted dollars

Adjusted for geographic 

cost differences2

Total $9,754 $8,134 $8,134

City 10,075 8,453 8,149

Low 10,115 8,048 7,758

Middle low 9,341 7,670 7,394

Middle 9,025 7,442 7,174

Middle high 9,470 8,023 7,734

High 11,006 9,347 9,011

Suburban 10,099 8,321 7,877

Low 11,173 9,143 8,655

Middle low 9,690 8,031 7,602

Middle 9,221 7,451 7,053

Middle high 9,428 7,943 7,519

High 9,622 8,286 7,843

Town 8,813 7,436 8,377

Low 9,737 7,868 8,863

Middle low 9,246 7,668 8,638

Middle 8,965 7,417 8,355

Middle high 8,376 7,249 8,166

High 8,324 7,263 8,182

Rural 9,133 7,680 8,432

Low 10,339 8,322 9,136

Middle low 9,342 7,748 8,506

Middle 8,805 7,497 8,231

Middle high 8,532 7,343 8,062

High 8,839 7,631 8,378

Fringe 9,030 7,510 8,245

Low 10,687 8,488 9,319

Middle low 8,977 7,423 8,149

Middle 8,344 7,116 7,812

Middle high 7,976 6,907 7,583

High 8,431 7,232 7,940

Distant 8,932 7,543 8,281

Low 9,634 7,942 8,719

Middle low 9,517 7,825 8,591

Middle 8,763 7,463 8,193

Middle high 8,475 7,217 7,923

High 8,474 7,453 8,182

Remote 9,821 8,397 9,219

Low 10,175 8,543 9,379

Middle low 10,102 8,608 9,450

Middle 9,966 8,454 9,281

Middle high 9,578 8,317 9,131

High 9,683 8,244 9,051

1 District poverty was determined by ranking school districts by the percentage of enrolled children ages 5–17 from families with an income below the 

poverty threshold, and then dividing these districts into five categories with equal proportions of the total enrollment. The low-poverty district category consists of 20 percent of students in districts with the lowest percentages of poor school-age children. Conversely, the high-poverty district category consists 

of the 20 percent of students in districts with the highest percentages of poor school-age children. Once determined, each school district’s poverty status 

remained unchanged when the data were examined by locale. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. 

2 NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. The same geographic adjustment factor was used for the overall 

rural locale and the detailed rural locales. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).

NOTE: Current expenditures include instruction, student support services, food services, and enterprise operations. Total expenditures include current 

expenditures, capital outlay, and interest on debt. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled 

areas containing at least 50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or 

less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an 

urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “National Public Education Financial Survey,” 2003–04.

86 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.2 — Public school e

xpenditures
This page intentionally left blank.
Table 3.3. Percentage distribution of public schools reporting being underenrolled, at capacity, or overenrolled, by 

school locale: Fall 2005

School locale

Underenrolled1

Enrollment within 

5 percent of 

capacity

Overenrolled2

More than 

25 percent 6–25 percent 6–25 percent

More than 

25 percent

Total 21.1 38.4 22.4 10.1 8.0

City 16.1 35.8 24.2 11.5 12.5 !

Suburban 12.3 40.9 27.2 9.8 9.8

Town 18.0 ! 44.2 20.6 12.9 ! 4.3 !

Rural 32.6 35.9 18.3 8.2 ! 5.0 !

! Interpret data with caution.

1 “Underenrolled” indicates that the capacity of the permanent buildings and instructional space is greater than student enrollment by more than 5 percent. 2 “Overenrolled” indicates that the enrollment of the school is greater than the capacity of the permanent buildings and instructional space by more than 5 percent.

NOTE: 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), “Public School Principals’ Perceptions of Their School Facilities: Fall 2005,” FRSS 88, 2005.

3.3. Public school capacity

In rural areas, as well as nationally, a larger percentage of public schools reported being underenrolled 

than overenrolled in fall 2005. The percentage of public schools reporting severe underenrollment in rural 

areas was greater than in all other locales. In contrast, the percentage of public schools reporting severe 

overenrollment was lower in rural areas than in cities and suburbs.

88 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 3.3 — Public school capacity

In fall 2005, 60 percent of all public schools reported being underenrolled (i.e., enrolling more than 

5 percent below the number of students the school 

was designed to accommodate in its permanent facilities), 18 percent reported being overenrolled (i.e., 

enrolling more than 5 percent above the designed 

capacity of the school’s permanent facilities), and 

22 percent reported enrollments within 5 percent 

of their designed capacity (table 3.3 and figure 3.3). 

Specifically, 38 percent of public schools reported 

moderate underenrollment (by 6 to 25 percent of 

capacity), 21 percent of public schools reported 

severe underenrollment (by more than 25 percent 

of capacity), 10 percent of public schools reported 

moderate overenrollment (of 6 to 25 percent of 

capacity), and 8 percent reported severe overenrollment (of more than 25 percent of capacity).

Similar to the national pattern, a greater percentage 

of rural public schools reported underenrollment 

(69 percent) than overenrollment (13 percent). 

Specifically, about 36 percent of rural public schools 

reported that they were moderately underenrolled, 

and 33 percent reported severe underenrollment. 

In contrast, 8 percent of rural public schools reported moderate overenrollment, while 5 percent 

reported that they were severely overenrolled. In 

addition, 18 percent of rural public schools reported that their enrollment was within 5 percent 

of their designed capacity.

The percentage of rural public schools reporting that 

they were severely underenrolled (33 percent) was 

greater than the percentages in towns, cities, and 

suburban areas (18, 16, and 12 percent, respectively). 

In contrast, the percentage of rural public schools 

reporting that they were severely overenrolled (5 

percent) was smaller than the percentages in cities and 

suburban areas (13 and 10 percent, respectively). 

The percentage of rural public schools reporting 

that they were enrolled at capacity (18 percent) was 

lower than in suburban areas (27 percent), but was 

not measurably different from the percentages in 

cities or towns. 
Status of Education in Rural America 89Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.3. Percentage distribution of public schools reporting being underenrolled, at capacity, or overenrolled, 

by school locale: Fall 2005

! Interpret data with caution.

1

 “Underenrolled” indicates that the capacity of the permanent buildings and instructional space is greater than student enrollment by more than 5 percent. 2

 “Overenrolled” indicates that the enrollment of the school is greater than the capacity of the permanent buildings and instructional space by more than 5 percent.

NOTE: 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), “Public School Principals’ Perceptions of Their School Facilities: Fall 2005,” FRSS 88, 2005.

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

6–25 percent

underenrolled1

More than 

25 percent 

underenrolled1

Enrollment 

within 5 percent 

of capacity

6–25 percent

overenrolled2

More than

25 percent 

overenrolled2

Locale

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 16 36 24 12 13!

12 41 27 10 10

18! 44 21 13! 4!

33 36 18 8! 5!
3.4. Dual credit, Advanced Placement, and International Baccalaureate courses

In 2002–03, the percentage of public high school students in rural areas attending schools offering dual 

credit courses was not measurably different from those in cities and suburbs, while the percentages of public 

high school students in rural areas attending schools that offered Advanced Placement and International 

Baccalaureate courses or programs were lower than those in cities and suburbs.

90 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 3.4 — Dual credit, Advanced Placement, and International Baccalaureate courses

The size of public high schools is positively related 

to the percentage of such schools offering dual credit 

courses (Waits, Setzer, and Lewis 2005). As a result, 

the percentage of public high school students with 

access to these courses in 2002–03 was higher than 

the percentage of schools offering these courses. 

Nationally, 78 percent of public high school students attended high schools that offered dual credit 

courses, 87 percent attended schools that offered 

Advanced Placement (AP) courses, and 5 percent 

attended schools that offered International Baccalaureate (IB) programs (table 3.4) (see Glossary for 

details on these types of courses or programs).

The percentage of public high school students in 

rural areas attending schools offering dual credit 

courses (76 percent) was lower than in towns (86 

percent), but not measurably different from cities 

and suburbs. A lower percentage of public high 

school students in rural areas were enrolled in 

schools offering AP courses (69 percent) than in 

suburban areas (96 percent), cities (93 percent), or 

towns (83 percent). Finally, the percentage of public 

high school students who were enrolled in schools 

offering IB programs was lower in rural areas (1 

percent) than in cities (8 percent) and suburbs (7 

percent), but not significantly different from the 

percentage in towns. 

The differences across locales in the percentages of 

public high schools offering dual credit courses followed the same pattern as detected in the percentage 

of public school students with access to these courses 

at their high school.

Table 3.4. Number and percentage of public high schools that offered dual credit, Advanced Placement (AP), or 

International Baccalaureate (IB) courses during the 12-month school year, and percentage of all public 

high school students who were enrolled in these schools during this school year, by locale: 2002–03

Course offering and locale Number of schools Percent of schools Percent of students 

Offered dual credit course1

 Total 11,700 71.3 77.7

City 1,800 67.2 76.5

Suburban 2,500 72.3 76.5

Town 2,200 82.1 86.5

Rural 5,300 68.5 75.7

Offered Advanced Placement (AP) course

 Total 11,000 66.7 86.6

City 2,100 78.0 93.0

Suburban 2,900 85.2 95.7

Town 1,900 72.3 83.0

Rural 4,000 52.5 69.2

Offered International Baccalaureate (IB)2 course

 Total 390 2.4 5.0

City 160 ! 5.9 ! 7.5 !

Suburban 150 ! 4.5 ! 7.0 !

Town 20 ! 0.8 ! 1.3 !

Rural 60 ! 0.8 ! 1.4 !

! Interpret data with caution.

1 Dual credit courses are courses for which high school students can earn both high school and postsecondary credits.

2 International Baccalaureate programs include an international curriculum certified by the International Baccalaureate Organization. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Dual Credit and Exam-Based 

Courses,” FRSS 85, 2003.
Status of Education in Rural America 91Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.4. Percentage of public high school students in schools that offered dual credit, Advanced Placement 

(AP), or International Baccalaureate (IB) courses during the 12-month school year, by locale: 2002–03

! Interpret data with caution.

1

 Dual credit courses are courses for which high school students can earn both high school and postsecondary credits.

2

 International Baccalaureate programs include an international curriculum certified by the International Baccalaureate Organization. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS), “Dual Credit and Exam-Based 

Courses,” FRSS 85, 2003. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percent

Locale

Offered Advanced 

Placement (AP) 

course

� Offered dual 

credit course1

Offered International

Baccalaureate (IB)2

�

8!

77

93

City

�

�

� 7!

77

96

Suburban

�

�

�

1!

83

86

Town

�

�

� 1!

69

76

Rural

�

�

�
Table 3.5b. Number of public school students per instructional computer with internet access and percentage of 

public schools providing hand-held or laptop computers, by locale: 2005

Locale

Number of students per 

instructional computer 

with internet access2

Percent of schools

Providing hand-held computers for 

instructional purposes1 Lending laptop 

computers to 

To teachers To students students

Total 3.8 17.2 8.1 10.0

City 4.2 19.2 8.6! 6.8

Suburban 4.3 15.7 10.2! 10.1

Town 3.3 14.0! 6.1! 10.5

Rural 3.0 18.5 6.9! 11.9

! Interpret data with caution. 

1 Hand-held computers are personal digital assistants, such as Palm Pilots or Pocket PCs. Schools were asked to include all hand-held computers provided 

for instructional purposes, including those available for loan, but to exclude laptop computers. 

2 The number of students to instructional computers with internet access was computed by dividing the total number of students in all public schools by 

the total number of instructional computers with internet access in all public schools (including schools with no internet access). 

NOTE: Percentages are based on all public schools. 

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

Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.

Table 3.5a. Percentage of public schools with internet access, by type of access available and locale: 2005

Locale

With internet access in school Instructional classrooms

Total1

Using broadband 

internet 

connection2

Using any type of 

wireless internet 

connection2,3

With 

internet 

access1

With 

wireless 

connection1,3

Total 99.6 97.3 45.4 93.6 15.0

City 99.4 97.8 49.7 87.5 17.1

Suburban 99.3 97.6 49.2 95.6 16.2

Town 100.0 100.0 40.2 97.6 14.0

Rural 100.0 95.4 41.4 94.8 12.4

1 Percentages are based on all public schools.

2 Percentages are based on public schools with internet access.

3 Percentages include schools using solely wireless internet connections (both broadband and narrowband), as well as schools using both wireless and 

wired connections.

NOTE: For estimates that are 100 percent, the event defined could have been reported by fewer schools had a different sample been drawn. 

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

Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.

92 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.5 — Internet and computer access

In 2005, virtually all public schools, in all locales, had 

some type of Internet access. Among public schools 

with Internet access, 97 percent used a broadband Internet connection and 45 percent had wireless Internet 

connections. Internet access in instructional rooms 

was available in 94 percent of all public schools, and 

15 percent of all public schools offered wireless Internet connections in instructional classrooms (table 

3.5a). In general, there were few variations detected 

in these percentages between public schools in rural 

areas and in other locales. However, the percentage 

of public schools with Internet access in instructional 

rooms was higher in rural areas (95 percent) than in 

cities (88 percent) (figure 3.5).

Nationwide, on average there was one instructional 

computer with Internet access for every 3.8 public 

school students (table 3.5b). In rural areas, the ratio 

was one instructional computer with Internet access 

for every 3.0 public school students, which was lower 

than the corresponding ratios in suburban areas (1 

to 4.3) and cities (1 to 4.2), though not measurably 

different from the ratio in towns (1 to 3.3).

In rural areas, 19 percent of public schools provided 

teachers with hand-held computers12 for instructional 

purposes, 7 percent provided hand-held computers to 

students, and 12 percent loaned laptop computers to 

students. In general, the percentage of public schools 

providing these services to their teachers or students 

did not show much variation between rural areas 

and other locales. However, a greater percentage of 

public schools in rural areas loaned laptop computers to students (12 percent) than schools in cities (7 

percent) (figure 3.5).

3.5. Internet and computer access

Nearly all public schools, both nationally and in rural areas, had Internet access in 2005. In rural areas, 

the number of public school students per instructional computer with Internet access in school was lower 

than in suburban and city schools.

12 Hand-held computers are personal digital assistants such as Palm Pilots or Pocket PCs. Schools were asked to 

include all hand-held computers provided for instructional purposes, including those available for loan.
Status of Education in Rural America 93Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.5. Percentage of public schools offering various types of internet access and providing hand-held or 

laptop computers, by locale: 2005

1

 Percentages are based on public schools with internet access.

2

 Percentages include schools using solely wireless internet connections (both broadband and narrowband), as well as schools using both wireless and 

wired connections. 

3

 Hand-held computers are personal digital assistants, such as Palm Pilots or Pocket PCs. Schools were asked to include all hand-held computers provided 

for instructional purposes, including those available for loan, but to exclude laptop computers. 

NOTE: For estimates that are 100 percent, the event defined could have been reported by fewer schools had a different sample been drawn. All percentages 

based on all public schools unless noted.

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

Schools, Fall 2005,” FRSS 90, 2005.

Lending laptop

 computers

 to students

Hand-held

 computers

for instructional purposes provided

 to teachers3

Internet

 access in

 instructional

 rooms

Wireless

 internet

access

 in school1,2

Internet

access

 in school

99

99

100

100

50

49

40

41

88

96

98

95

19

16

14

19

7

10

11

12

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Type of access

60 70 80 90 100

City Suburban Town Rural
94 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.6 — Pupil-teacher ratio in public schools

In the 2003–04 school year, average pupil-teacher ratios in public schools were lowest in rural areas (15.3), 

followed by towns (15.9), and then cities (16.9) and 

suburbs (16.9) (table 3.6 and figure 3.6). Among the 

rural subcategories, fringe rural areas had the highest 

average pupil-teacher ratio (16.3), followed by distant rural areas (15.0) and remote rural areas (13.1). 

Average pupil-teacher ratios generally increased with 

school size for schools of all levels across all locales. 

In public schools enrolling fewer than 200 students 

in rural areas, the average pupil-teacher ratio was 12 

percent, while those enrolling 2,000 or more students 

had an average pupil-teacher ratio of 20 percent (table 

3.6). The same was true for cities, with a pupil-teacher 

ratio of 11 percent in schools enrolling fewer than 

200 students and 20 percent in those enrolling 2,000 

or more students.

Among the smallest rural public schools (those with 

enrollments under 200 students), combined schools 

had the lowest pupil-teacher ratio (9.4), followed 

by secondary schools (11.0) and elementary schools 

(12.6). 

The average pupil-teacher ratio in public elementary 

schools was lower in rural areas (15.4) than in towns 

(15.9), cities (16.6), and suburbs (16.7) (table 3.6). 

The same was true for public secondary schools: 

the pupil-teacher ratio in rural schools (15.3) was 

lower than in towns (16.2), suburbs (17.5), and cities 

(18.1). This pattern, however, did not hold true for 

public combined schools: in rural areas combined 

schools had a higher average ratio than in suburban 

areas (13.9 vs. 13.1). Pupil-teacher comparisons 

among locales varied for the different school sizes.

3.6. Pupil-teacher ratio in public schools

Rural public schools generally had fewer pupils per teacher than schools in other locales in 2003–04. 

Figure 3.6. Average pupil-teacher ratios in public schools, by locale: 2003–04

NOTE: Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 50,000 people. 

Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area or 2.5 miles or 

less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or more than 2.5 miles but 

less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an 

urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04. 

City Suburban Town Rural Rural,

fringe

Rural,

distant

Rural,

remote

0

5

10

15

20

Locale

Pupil-to-teacher ratio

16.9 16.9

15.9 15.3

16.3

15.0

13.1

National average (16.4)
Status of Education in Rural America 95Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Table 3.6. Pupil-teacher ratios in public schools, by school level, school size, and locale: 2003–04

School size and locale All schools Elementary Secondary Combined

Total 16.4 16.3 16.9 13.8

Less than 200 11.6 12.8 11.1 8.5

200 to 399 14.7 14.9 14.1 13.0

400 to 799 16.3 16.4 15.6 14.8

800 to 1,199 17.2 17.5 16.7 16.6

1,200 to 1,999 18.1 19.1 17.8 17.7

2,000 or more 19.9 22.4 19.7 21.2

City 16.9 16.6 18.1 14.1

Less than 200 10.8 12.6 11.7 8.2

200 to 399 14.6 14.7 15.9 12.3

400 to 799 16.3 16.4 15.6 14.8

800 to 1,199 17.7 18.0 17.0 16.3

1,200 to 1,999 18.5 19.9 18.1 17.4

2,000 or more 20.4 24.4 20.1 25.6

Suburban 16.9 16.7 17.5 13.1

Less than 200 10.4 12.9 10.1 7.5

200 to 399 15.1 15.3 14.6 12.9

400 to 799 16.4 16.6 15.4 12.6

800 to 1,199 17.1 17.4 16.6 16.3

1,200 to 1,999 17.9 18.7 17.6 18.0

2,000 or more 19.5 21.1 19.5 16.5

Town 15.9 15.9 16.2 14.0

Less than 200 12.7 13.9 12.5 8.6

200 to 399 14.8 15.0 14.1 14.2

400 to 799 16.1 16.3 15.6 16.9

800 to 1,199 16.8 17.0 16.7 17.8

1,200 to 1,999 17.9 18.2 17.9 16.9

2,000 or more 19.2 13.3 19.1 23.1

Rural 15.3 15.4 15.3 13.9

Less than 200 11.8 12.6 11.0 9.4

200 to 399 14.4 14.8 13.8 13.1

400 to 799 16.0 16.1 15.7 15.4

800 to 1,199 16.7 17.0 16.4 16.9

1,200 to 1,999 17.6 18.3 17.3 18.2

2,000 or more 19.8 20.5 19.7 26.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.
96 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.7 — Selected characteristics of public school teachers

During the 2003–04 school year, there were more 

than 3.2 million teachers in public elementary and 

secondary schools (table 3.7). The number of public 

school teachers working in rural areas (739,000 or 

23 percent of all such teachers) was smaller than the 

number in suburban areas (1.1 million or 34 percent) 

or cities (914,000 or 28 percent), but greater than 

in towns (472,000 or 15 percent). The distribution 

of these teachers across locales did not vary by sex, 

varied little by age, and varied markedly by education, 

teaching assignment, and race/ethnicity.

Nationally, 75 percent of public school teachers were female, a percentage that held relatively 

constant across all locales. A greater percentage 

of public school teachers across the nation were 

between 50 and 59 years old (29 percent) than 

between 40 and 49 (26 percent), between 30 and 

39 (25 percent), under 30 (17 percent), or over 60 

(4 percent). As with sex, the percentage of teachers in specific age categories was relatively constant 

across all locales. 

The percentage of public school teachers in rural areas 

who held a master’s degree or higher (43 percent) was 

lower than in suburban areas (52 percent) and cities 

(49 percent), but was not measurably different from 

the percentage in towns (45 percent) (table 3.7). 

Within rural areas, a greater percentage of teachers in 

rural fringe areas and distant rural areas had a master’s 

degree as their highest level of education (40 and 38 

percent, respectively) than in remote rural areas (32 

percent) (table A-3.7). 

Public school teachers in rural areas also differed 

somewhat from such teachers in other locales in both 

the level and subject of their teaching assignment. In 

both cities and suburbs, a larger percentage of teachers worked in elementary schools than in secondary 

schools, but in rural areas and towns there was no 

measurable difference between the percentages of 

elementary and secondary school teachers (see table 

3.7). Public schools in rural areas and towns had 

a larger percentage of secondary teachers teaching 

vocational/technical education (14 percent) than 

public schools in cities and suburbs (10 percent each). 

However, public schools in rural areas had a smaller 

percentage of secondary teachers teaching foreign 

languages (4 percent) than public schools in cities 

(5 percent) and suburbs (6 percent). Otherwise, the 

distribution of secondary teachers across specific subject areas did not differ significantly between public 

schools in rural areas and other locales. 

Some measurable differences were detected in the proportion of racial/ethnic groups in rural areas compared 

with other locales. Racial/ethnic minorities made up 

a smaller percentage of public school teachers in rural 

areas (8 percent) than in cities (29 percent), suburban 

areas (15 percent), and towns (12 percent) (figure 

3.7). American Indian/Alaska Native teachers were 

the only racial/ethnic minority with a higher proportion in rural areas than in the other locales. Overall, 

23 percent of all public school teachers worked in 

rural areas; however, among American Indian/Alaska 

Native public school teachers, 41 percent worked in 

rural areas, with 18 percent of those working in remote 

rural areas (data not shown). American Indian/Alaska 

Native teachers accounted for 2 percent of all teachers 

in remote rural areas, a higher proportion than in all 

other locales (table A-3.7).

3.7. Selected characteristics of public school teachers

Racial/ethnic minorities accounted for a smaller percentage of public school teachers in rural areas than 

in all other locales in 2003–04. A smaller proportion of rural public school teachers than suburban and 

city public school teachers had a master’s degree or higher. 
Status of Education in Rural America 97Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.7. Percentage distribution of race/ethnicity of public elementary and secondary school teachers, by 

locale: 2003–04

1

 Includes Asians/Pacific Islanders, American Indians/Alaska Natives, and those of more than one race.

NOTE: Includes part-time and full-time teachers. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Detail may not 

sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

60 70 80 90 100

White Black Hispanic Other1

Locale

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 71 15 10 4

85 6 6 2

88 5 5 2

92 4 2 2
98 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.7 — Selected characteristics of public school teachers

Table 3.7. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary school teachers, by locale and 

selected characteristics: 2003–04

Selected characteristic Total City Suburban Town Rural

Total 3,240,000 914,000 1,120,000 472,000 739,000

Percentage distribution 100.0 28.2 34.5 14.6 22.8

Sex 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Male 25.1 24.3 25.0 26.6 25.2

Female 74.9 75.7 75.0 73.4 74.8

Race/ethnicity 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

White 83.1 70.9 85.2 87.8 91.9

Black 7.9 15.0 6.0 4.8 4.1

Hispanic 6.2 10.1 6.4 5.1 1.9

Asian/Pacific Islander 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.0 0.6

American Indian/Alaska Native 0.6 0.5 0.3 ! 0.8 1.0

More than one race 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.5

Age 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 30 16.6 17.0 17.5 14.2 16.2

30 to 39 24.5 25.0 25.0 22.7 24.3

40 to 49 25.9 24.4 24.3 28.5 28.3

50 to 59 29.0 29.1 29.1 31.1 27.5

60 or more 4.0 4.5 4.1 3.4 3.8

Highest degree earned 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

No degree 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 1.0

Associate’s 0.3 0.4 ! 0.2 ! 0.2 ! 0.3

Bachelor’s 50.8 49.4 47.3 54.4 55.5

Master’s 40.9 40.6 44.2 38.8 37.5

Education specialist1 6.0 7.0 6.3 5.0 5.0

Doctor’s 1.2 1.7 1.2 0.8 ! 0.7

Level 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Elementary 52.6 55.3 53.6 51.5 48.7

Secondary 47.4 44.7 46.4 48.5 51.3

Subject2

Elementary 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

General 66.0 66.3 66.2 65.0 65.6

English 4.1 3.4 3.8 4.6 5.3

English as a second language 1.5 2.4 ! 1.6 1.0 ! 0.3 !

Mathematics 1.1 0.8 ! 0.5 ! 1.5 ! 2.2 !

Special education 13.7 15.2 13.4 13.5 12.4

Other elementary 13.6 11.9 14.5 14.3 14.3

Secondary 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

English 17.6 18.0 17.4 17.1 17.5

English as a second language 1.2 2.3 ! 1.2 0.7 ! 0.3 !

Foreign language 4.8 4.9 5.8 4.0 3.7

Mathematics 13.9 13.8 14.2 13.8 13.5

Science 12.3 13.2 12.8 11.1 11.5

Social sciences 11.6 11.5 11.6 11.8 11.8

Special education 11.3 11.2 12.0 11.6 10.4

Vocational/technical 11.0 9.6 9.6 12.1 13.9

Other secondary 16.3 15.5 15.4 17.8 17.4

! Interpret data with caution. 

1 Includes certificate of advanced graduate studies. 

2 Main teaching assignment. 

NOTE: Includes part-time and full-time teachers. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Detail may not 

sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.
This page intentionally left blank.
Table 3.8. Average number of years of teaching experience for public school teachers and percentage distribution 

of such teachers, by years of teaching experience, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04 

Locale and grade level taught

Average 

number of years of 

teaching experience

Percentage distribution by years of teaching experience

Total Less than 3 3 to 9 10 to 20 Over 20

Total 14.2 100.0 10.4 32.0 29.1 28.4

City 13.6 100.0 11.6 33.8 27.9 26.8

Suburban 14.1 100.0 10.2 33.3 29.3 27.2

Town 15.1 100.0 9.1 28.4 29.9 32.6

Rural 14.5 100.0 10.2 30.2 29.9 29.7

Fringe 14.0 100.0 11.2 32.3 28.2 28.3

Distant 14.7 100.0 9.4 30.2 30.3 30.2

Remote 15.3 100.0 9.6 26.5 32.5 31.3

Elementary 13.9 100.0 10.4 33.0 29.4 27.2

City 12.9 100.0 12.1 36.7 26.3 24.8

Suburban 13.7 100.0 10.4 33.6 30.8 25.2

Town 15.1 100.0 8.9 ! 27.4 31.3 32.5

Rural 14.8 100.0 8.9 30.7 30.2 30.2

Middle 14.3 100.0 10.2 31.0 30.3 28.4

City 13.8 100.0 11.2 31.4 31.5 25.9

Suburban 14.3 100.0 9.6 32.5 29.7 28.3

Town 15.3 100.0 9.2 27.8 29.7 33.4

Rural 14.4 100.0 10.7 30.5 30.3 28.5

High school 14.5 100.0 10.7 31.7 27.7 29.9

City 14.6 100.0 11.3 31.8 26.6 30.4

Suburban 14.3 100.0 10.4 33.9 26.8 28.9

Town 14.9 100.0 9.5 30.5 28.7 31.4

Rural 14.4 100.0 11.2 29.8 29.2 29.9

! Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: Total includes combined level schools not separately shown. Years of teaching experience counts 1 year of part-time teaching the same as 1 year 

of full-time teaching. Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Urbanized areas are densely settled areas containing at least 

50,000 people. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with a population of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized 

area or 2.5 miles or less from an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, or 

more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and 

more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may 

not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

100 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.8 — Teaching e

xperience

In the 2003–04 school year, the average amount of 

teaching experience for all public school teachers across 

the United States was 14.2 years (tables 3.8 and A-3.8). 

For rural public school teachers, the average was 14.5 

years, which was greater than the average for public 

school teachers in cities (13.6 years), but not measurably different than the average for public school teachers 

in suburbs (14.1 years) and towns (15.1 years). 

As these averages suggest, the majority of public 

school teachers have over 10 years of teaching experience. Nationally, 10 percent of public school teachers 

were beginning teachers (those with less than 3 years 

of teaching experience), 32 percent had between 3 

and 9 years of teaching experience, 29 percent had between 10 and 20 years of teaching experience, and 28 

percent had over 20 years of teaching experience. 

The percentages of public school teachers in rural 

areas with these different levels of teaching experience 

were not significantly different from the national 

percentages. When compared with the percentages of 

public school teachers in these categories of experience 

in other locales, rural public school teachers were different in two ways: a smaller percentage had between 

3 and 9 years of teaching experience (30 percent) than 

public school teachers in suburbs (33 percent) and 

cities (34 percent), and a larger percentage had over 

20 years of teaching experience (30 percent) than 

public school teachers in cities (27 percent).

3.8. Teaching experience

Compared with public school teachers in cities, rural public school teachers averaged more years of 

experience in 2003–04. 
Status of Education in Rural America 101Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.8. Percentage distribution of teachers in public schools, by years of teaching experience and detailed 

locale: 2003–04

NOTE: Years of teaching experience counts 1 year of part-time teaching the same as 1 year of full-time teaching. Cities are territories that are inside both an 

urbanized area and a principal city; suburbs are territories that are inside an urbanized area but outside a principal city. Urbanized areas are densely settled 

areas containing at least 50,000 people. A principal city is a city that contains the primary population and economic center of a metropolitan statistical area. 

Large cities and suburbs have populations of 250,000 or more; midsize cities and suburbs have populations of less than 250,000 and greater than or equal 

to 100,000; and small cities and suburbs have populations of less than 100,000. Towns are territories that are outside of any urbanized area, but inside an 

urban cluster. Urban clusters are densely settled areas with populations of 2,500 to 49,999. Fringe towns are 10 miles or less from an urbanized area; distant 

towns are more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles from an urbanized area; and remote towns are more than 35 miles from an urbanized area. 

Rural areas are located outside any urbanized area or urban cluster. Fringe rural areas are 5 miles or less from an urbanized area and 2.5 miles or less from 

an urban cluster. Distant rural areas are more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, and more than 2.5 miles but less than 

or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster. Remote rural areas are more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and more than 10 miles from an urban cluster. 

For more details on Census-defined areas, see http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04. 

3–20 More than 20

Percent

Years of teaching experience

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Less than 3

City

Suburban

Town

Rural

Detailed locale

Remote

52 39

10 59 31

Distant 9 60 30

Fringe 11 60 28

Remote 8 60 32

Distant 10 58 32

Fringe 10 57 34

Small 7 64 28

Midsize 12 61 28

Large 10 63 27

Small 9 61 30

Midsize 11 59 29

Large 13 63 24

Comparing the national averages for public elementary, middle, and high school teachers reveals no 

measurable differences in the average years of teaching 

experience. When locale is considered, however, a difference can be found between public elementary school 

teachers in rural areas and in cities (15 vs. 13 years of 

teaching experience), but not between public middle 

or high school teachers in rural areas and cities (see 

table 3.8). A greater percentage of public elementary 

school teachers in rural areas had more than 20 years 

of experience than in cities or suburban areas (30 vs. 

25 percent each). No such difference was detected 

between public middle school or high school teachers from the various locales, with the exception that a 

larger percentage of middle school teachers in towns 

had over 20 years of teaching experience than middle 

school teachers in rural areas (33 vs. 28 percent).
102 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.9 — Teacher perceptions of problems in schools

Serious problems in schools

In the 2003–04 school year, the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) asked public elementary, middle, 

and high school teachers to rate the severity of eight 

potential problems in their school: students coming 

to school unprepared to learn, lack of parental involvement, poverty, student apathy, student tardiness, 

student class cutting, students dropping out, and 

student pregnancy. Teachers were asked to rate them 

as “not a problem,” a “minor problem,” a “moderate problem,” or a “serious problem.” This analysis 

examines the percentage of public school teachers 

who reported each of these potential problems as a 

“serious problem” in their school.

Nationally, public school teachers reported students 

coming to school unprepared to learn as the most 

prevalent serious problem facing public schools, 

with 27 percent of public school teachers reporting 

3.9. Teacher perceptions of problems in schools

In general, smaller percentages of rural public school teachers reported problems as “serious” and 

behavioral problems as frequent in their schools than public school teachers across the nation as a 

whole in 2003–04.

Figure 3.9a. Percentage of public school teachers who reported potential problems as “serious problems” in their 

schools, by type of problem and locale: 2003–04

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

Student

 class

 cutting

Student

 tardiness

Poverty

Lack of 

parental

 involvement

Students

 come

 unprepared

 to learn

37

22

26

22

30

18

19

17

32

15

22

18

22

12

10

9

10

4

4

3

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Reported

as a serious

 problem

60 70 80 90 100

City Suburban Town Rural
Status of Education in Rural America 103Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Table 3.9a. Percentage of public school teachers who reported potential problems as “serious problems” in their 

schools, by type of problem, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04

Locale and grade 

level taught

Students 

come to 

school 

unprepared 

to learn

Lack of 

parental 

involvement Poverty

Student 

apathy

Student 

tardiness

Student 

class 

cutting

Students 

dropping 

out

Student 

pregnancy

Total 26.8 21.6 21.4 16.6 13.9 5.6 3.3 2.4

City 36.9 30.3 32.2 20.5 21.7 10.3 5.6 3.5

Suburban 22.2 18.3 14.6 14.3 12.4 4.3 2.0 1.4

Town 25.7 19.2 22.4 16.8 10.2 3.9 3.3 3.4

Rural 22.0 17.4 17.7 15.0 8.7 2.9 2.7 2.0

Elementary 21.7 18.5 23.2 6.2 9.1 0.6 0.4 0.1

City 32.4 27.6 35.2 8.9 15.9 1.3 0.6 0.2 !

Suburban 17.2 16.0 16.2 5.2 7.6 0.4 0.1 ‡

Town 19.1 13.8 22.6 4.4 5.0 0.2 0.1 0.1

Rural 15.5 12.7 18.1 5.0 4.7 0.3 0.6 0.2

Middle 27.9 21.0 20.8 17.7 11.2 3.1 0.7 0.4

City 36.6 28.4 30.2 20.9 15.8 6.0 1.0 0.4

Suburban 24.9 19.1 15.7 17.2 10.6 2.2 0.2 0.2

Town 27.9 18.4 22.3 19.5 8.9 1.4 1.0 1.0

Rural 22.1 16.6 16.5 13.5 7.8 2.3 0.9 0.6

High school 33.0 26.5 19.5 30.3 23.2 14.8 10.0 7.5

City 44.8 36.8 29.9 39.0 37.0 28.8 18.2 11.9

Suburban 27.1 20.9 11.0 25.5 22.0 12.4 6.6 4.8

Town 32.3 26.8 22.2 31.3 18.8 11.4 9.9 10.3

Rural 29.0 22.9 18.0 26.8 13.6 6.0 6.2 4.9

! Interpret data with caution.

‡ Reporting standards not met.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04. 

this as a serious problem in their school (table 3.9a). 

Lack of parental involvement and poverty were the 

next most common problems reported as serious (22 

and 21 percent, respectively), followed by student 

apathy (17 percent), student tardiness (14 percent), 

student class cutting (6 percent), students dropping 

out (3 percent), and student pregnancy (2 percent). 

In rural areas, the relative ranking of these problems 

by public school teachers mirrored this national order. 

However, for each potential problem (except apathy 

and student pregnancy), the percentage of rural public 

school teachers who considered the problem serious 

was lower than the national percentage. 

For each of the potential problems, a smaller percentage of public school teachers in rural areas than 

in cities and towns reported it as being a serious 

problem, with the one exception that there was no 

measurable difference between the percentages of 

teachers in rural areas and towns rating a lack of 

parental involvement as a serious problem (table 

3.9a and figure 3.9a).13 The percentages of teachers 

in rural areas who reported that poverty, student 

tardiness, and student class cutting were serious 

problems differed from those in suburban areas. A 

greater percentage of rural teachers than suburban 

teachers reported poverty as a serious problem (18 vs. 

15 percent), but a smaller percentage of rural teachers 

than suburban teachers reported student tardiness 

(9 vs. 12 percent) and student class cutting (3 vs. 4 

percent) as serious problems.

Among all rural public school teachers, a higher 

percentage of high school teachers than middle 

school teachers rated each of these problems (except 

poverty) as serious. In rural areas there were no measurable differences in the ratings for poverty across 

all three school levels.

13 For the problems of students dropping out and student pregnancy, comparisons are made only among public school 

teachers at the high school level. The percentages of public elementary and middle school teachers reporting these 

problems as serious were not measurable due to low frequencies and high standard errors.
Behavioral problems

The 2003–04 SASS also asked public elementary, middle, and high school teachers to report how often the 

following student behavioral problems occurred in their 

schools: student acts of disrespect for teachers, student 

bullying, physical conflicts among students, student 

verbal abuse of teachers, and widespread disorder in 

classrooms. This analysis examines the percentages 

of teachers who reported that the problem “happens 

daily” or “happens at least once a week” (other possible 

responses were “happens at least once a month,” “happens on occasion,” and “never happens”). 

Nationally, public school teachers reported student acts 

of disrespect for teachers as the most common of these 

behavioral problems (reported as a daily or weekly 

problem in their school by 22 percent of teachers), 

followed by student bullying (18 percent), physical 

conflicts among students and student verbal abuse of 

teachers (12 percent each), and widespread disorder 

in classrooms (5 percent) (table 3.9b). The relative 

ranking of these problems by rural public school teachers closely mirrored the national order, with the one 

exception being that student verbal abuse of teachers 

was more commonly reported than physical conflicts 

between students (8 vs. 7 percent). However, as with 

the serious problems presented in table 3.7a, all the 

behavioral problem areas were less commonly reported 

in rural areas than in the nation as a whole.

Each of the student behavior problems was reported at 

lower rates by public school teachers in rural areas than 

in cities (table 3.9b and figure 3.9b). Other differences 

Figure 3.9b. Percentage of public school teachers who reported behavioral problems occurring in their schools at 

least weekly, by type of problem and locale: 2003–04

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

Widespread

 disorder in

 classrooms

Student

 verbal

 abuse of

 teachers

Physical

 conflicts

 among

 students

Student

 bullying

Students

 acts of

disrespect

 for teachers

30

19

18

17

22

16

17

15

19

11

9

7

19

10

9

8

9

4

3

3

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Reported as

 a behavioral

 problem

60 70 80 90 100

City Suburban Town Rural

104 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.9 — Teacher perceptions of problems in schools
Status of Education in Rural America 105Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

between locales were smaller, with rural public school 

teachers reporting physical conflicts among students 

as less frequent than teachers in both towns and 

suburban areas (7 vs. 9 and 11 percent, respectively). 

Also, rural public school teachers reported student 

bullying as less frequent than teachers in towns (15 

vs. 17 percent), and rural teachers reported student 

acts of disrespect (17 vs. 19 percent), student verbal 

abuse of teachers (8 vs. 10 percent), and widespread 

disorder in classrooms (3 vs. 4 percent) as less frequent 

than suburban public school teachers.

The findings for each of the school levels (elementary, middle, and high schools) were similar to the 

findings for all schools. At all three levels student 

behavior problems were reported at lower rates by 

public school teachers in rural areas than in cities. The 

only additional differences noted at the elementary 

school level were that physical conflicts were reported 

as less frequent by public elementary school teachers 

in rural areas than in towns and suburbs (8 vs. 11 

and 12 percent, respectively). At the middle school 

level, rural public school teachers less frequently 

reported both physical conflicts (8 vs. 13 percent) 

and widespread disorder (3 vs. 5 percent) than their 

peers in suburban areas. At the high school level, rural 

public school teachers reported each of the selected 

problems as less frequent than their peers in each of 

the other locales, with the lone exception being that 

no measurable difference was detected in the reports 

on physical conflicts in rural areas and towns.

Across school levels, the percentage of rural public 

elementary school teachers reporting these student 

behaviors was generally lower than the percentages of 

rural public middle or high school teachers, with a few 

exceptions (see table 3.9b). No measurable differences 

were detected between rural public elementary and 

middle school teachers’ reports of physical conflicts 

among students and widespread disorder in classrooms, and rural public elementary school teachers 

reported physical conflicts between students as more 

frequent than their high school peers. While no measurable differences were noted between rural public 

middle and high school teachers’ reports of student 

acts of disrespect for teachers, student verbal abuse 

of teachers, and widespread disorder in classrooms, 

rural public middle school teachers reported student 

bullying and physical conflicts as more frequent than 

their high school peers.

Table 3.9b. Percentage of public school teachers who reported behavioral problems occurring in their schools at 

least weekly, by type of problem, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04

Locale and grade 

level taught

Student acts 

of disrespect 

for teachers

Student 

bullying

Physical conflicts 

among students

Student verbal 

abuse of teachers

Widespread 

disorder in 

classrooms

Total 21.6 17.7 12.1 11.8 5.0

City 30.2 22.2 19.2 18.5 9.1

Suburban 19.2 15.8 11.1 9.9 3.8

Town 18.1 17.4 9.2 9.3 3.2

Rural 16.8 15.2 6.6 8.1 2.7

Elementary 14.5 14.5 13.3 6.7 3.3

City 22.8 18.7 19.9 11.7 6.7

Suburban 11.3 12.9 11.8 5.1 2.1

Town 10.0 13.2 11.2 4.3 1.7

Rural 11.0 12.0 7.8 3.7 1.7

Middle 25.9 23.3 14.0 14.3 6.0

City 35.9 30.2 21.7 23.3 11.9

Suburban 23.4 19.5 12.9 10.6 4.6

Town 23.2 23.6 10.8 11.7 3.4

Rural 19.5 20.5 8.5 10.7 2.9

High school 27.5 17.1 8.4 16.6 6.2

City 36.7 20.3 15.5 24.8 10.0

Suburban 27.1 16.5 8.0 16.4 5.8

Town 24.2 17.2 4.9 13.1 5.0

Rural 20.9 14.6 4.0 10.7 3.7

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04. 
Teaching conditions

The 2003–04 SASS asked public elementary, middle, 

and high school teachers about their level of agreement 

with five positive statements regarding teachers’ salaries, 

the availability of necessary materials, parental support, 

class size, and support for special needs students. This 

analysis examines the percentage of teachers who said 

that they “strongly agree” or “somewhat agree” with 

these statements (other response choices were “somewhat disagree” and “strongly disagree”).

Nationally, 79 percent of public school teachers 

agreed with the statement that “necessary materials 

such as textbooks, supplies, and copy machines are 

available as needed by the staff” at their schools (table 

3.9c). A majority of teachers also responded positively 

to the following statements: “I am satisfied with my 

class size” (69 percent), “I am given the support I need 

to teach students with special needs” (64 percent), and 

“I receive a great deal of support from parents for the 

work I do” (61 percent). Less than half of teachers 

(46 percent) agreed with the statement “I am satisfied 

with my teaching salary.” 

Among rural public school teachers, agreement with 

these statements followed the same order as the national 

ranking, although the percentages were different. The 

106 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.9 — Teacher perceptions of problems in schools

Figure 3.9c. Percentage of public school teachers who reported agreement with various statements about 

teaching conditions, by condition and locale: 2003–04

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

Given

 necessary

 support

 to teach

 students with

 special needs

Satisfied

 with

 class size

Receive

 a great deal

 of support

 from parents

Necessary

 materials

 available

 as needed

 by the staff

Satisfied

 with

teaching

 salary

43

50

45

44

72

79

83

84

54

63

61

66

65

67

72

75

58

64

69

70

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent

Perceptions

 of teaching

 conditions

60 70 80 90 100

City Suburban Town Rural
Status of Education in Rural America 107Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

percentages of rural public school teachers who agreed 

with these statements about their school’s teaching 

conditions (excluding their teaching salary) was greater 

than the national percentage and the percentages of 

teachers in cities and suburbs (table 3.9c and figure 

3.9c). Larger percentages of teachers in rural areas 

than towns agreed with the statements about parental 

support (66 vs. 61 percent) and class size (75 vs. 72 

percent), but no measurable differences were noted 

between their rates of agreement with the statements 

about necessary materials and special needs support.

The percentage of public school teachers who reported being satisfied with their teaching salaries in 

rural areas (44 percent) was lower than in suburban 

areas (50 percent), but was not measurably different 

from the percentages of public school teachers in cities (43 percent) and towns (46 percent). These same 

comparisons held true within each school level, with 

one exception: no measurable difference was detected 

between the percentages of rural and suburban middle 

school teachers who reported being satisfied with their 

teaching salary.

Table 3.9c. Percentage of public school teachers who reported agreement with various statements about 

teaching conditions, by condition, locale, and grade level taught: 2003–04

Locale and grade 

level taught

I am 

satisfied with my 

teaching salary

Necessary materials 

such as textbooks, 

supplies, and copy 

machines are 

available as needed 

by the staff

I receive a 

great deal of 

support from 

parents for the 

work I do

I am 

satisfied with 

my class size

I am given the 

support I need 

to teach students 

with special need

Total 45.9 79.0 61.1 69.1 64.4

City 42.9 72.4 54.3 64.8 57.9

Suburban 50.0 79.3 63.1 67.3 64.2

Town 45.5 82.9 61.2 71.8 68.6

Rural 43.7 84.2 66.4 75.4 70.1

Elementary 43.8 80.2 64.9 72.1 64.4

City 41.0 73.1 56.9 68.6 57.6

Suburban 47.5 81.7 66.5 72.0 65.6

Town 43.7 83.3 66.6 71.5 68.6

Rural 41.4 86.0 72.9 77.7 69.2

Middle 45.5 78.8 60.2 65.8 64.0

City 42.7 72.6 54.0 60.3 57.6

Suburban 48.5 78.3 61.2 63.9 63.3

Town 45.2 84.7 60.1 71.5 68.0

Rural 44.3 83.3 66.2 71.8 70.1

High school 49.1 77.5 56.6 67.8 64.7

City 45.9 71.0 50.3 62.8 58.1

Suburban 55.3 76.7 60.0 63.3 62.9

Town 47.8 80.5 55.2 72.0 68.8

Rural 45.6 83.0 59.6 75.7 71.0

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04. 
108 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 3.10 — Average base salary for full-time public school teachers

In the 2003–04 school year, the national average 

(mean) base salary for full-time public school teachers was $44,400 (table 3.10). In order to accurately 

compare teacher salaries across various locales, the 

data presented in this indicator have been adjusted 

to reflect geographic cost differences (such as 

cost-of-living differences).14 Comparing these geographically adjusted base salaries, full-time public 

school teachers in rural areas had a lower average salary ($43,000) than their peers in towns ($45,900), 

suburbs ($45,700), and cities ($44,000).

Full-time public school teachers with a bachelor’s 

degree as their highest level of education earned 

less on average in rural areas ($38,800) than in 

towns ($41,600), but no measurable difference was 

detected between the salaries of these teachers in 

rural areas and in cities or suburbs (figure 3.10). 

Teachers with a master’s degree as their highest 

level of education also earned less on average in 

rural areas ($48,400) than in both suburban areas 

($50,600) and towns ($51,200). The average salary for rural public school teachers with a master’s 

degree as their highest degree was equivalent to the 

salary of their peers in cities. No differences were 

detected between the average salaries of teachers 

in rural areas with more than a master’s degree 

and teachers with similar educational attainment 

in other locales. However, teachers with an education specialist degree ($50,200) earned less on 

average in rural areas than their peers in suburban 

areas ($55,100). 

3.10. Average base salary for full-time public school teachers

Public school teachers in rural areas earned, on average, lower salaries in 2003–04 than their peers in 

towns, suburbs, and cities, even after adjusting for geographic cost differences. 

Table 3.10. Average base salary for full-time teachers in public elementary and secondary schools adjusted for 

geographic cost differences, by highest degree earned and locale: 2003–04

Locale All teachers1 Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Education specialist2 Doctor’s degree

Total $44,400 $39,200 $49,400 $52,900 $53,700

City 44,000 39,200 48,200 52,000 52,700

Suburban 45,700 39,800 50,600 55,100 55,600

Town 45,900 41,600 51,200 52,200 45,600

Rural 43,000 38,800 48,400 50,200 51,400

1 Includes teachers with levels of education below the bachelor’s degree (not shown separately) and some teachers not assigned to a locale. 

2 Includes certificate of advanced graduate studies.

NOTE: NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

14 NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the 

CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).
Status of Education in Rural America 109Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.10. Average base salary for full-time teachers in public elementary and secondary schools adjusted for 

geographic cost differences, by locale and highest degree earned: 2003–04

1 Includes certificate of advanced graduate studies.

NOTE: NCES’s Comparable Wage Index (CWI) was used to adjust for geographic cost differences. For more details on the CWI, see A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

$52,700

$55,600

45,600

$51,400 52,000

55,100

$52,200

50,200

48,200

50,600 51,200

48,400

39,200 39,800

41,600

38,800

City Suburban Town Rural

0

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

$ 60,000

Average salary

Locale

Bachelor’s 

degree

� Doctor’s degree Education 

specialist1

� Master’s degree

�

�

�

� �

�

�

�

�

� �

�

� �

�

�
110 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 3.11 — Difficulty hiring teachers

Nationally, 26 percent of public elementary and 

secondary schools during the 2003–04 school year 

reported stability in their teaching staff (i.e., having 

no teacher turnover or no new teaching positions that 

created a vacancy for which the school recruited and/or 

hired a new teacher). The percentage of public schools 

reporting stability in their teaching staff was higher in 

rural areas (31 percent) than in cities (25 percent) or 

suburban areas (22 percent), but was not measurably 

different from towns (29 percent) (data not shown). 

The degree of difficulty experienced by public schools 

in filling a vacancy in a particular field varied extensively depending on the field and, to a lesser extent, 

on locale. During the 2003–04 school year, across 

all locales, 63 to 83 percent of public schools with 

a teaching vacancy in general elementary education 

or social studies reported that it was “easy” to fill the 

vacancy (table 3.11). Between 41 and 65 percent 

of public schools that had a teaching vacancy in 

English/language arts, music or art, or computer 

science reported that it was “easy” to fill the vacancy. 

Between 21 and 42 percent of public schools with 

a teaching vacancy in biology or life sciences, English as a second language (ESL), foreign languages, 

physical sciences, mathematics, special education, 

or vocational or technical education reported that it 

was “easy” to fill the vacancy.

Among these teaching fields, the hardest vacancies 

to fill in rural areas during the 2003–04 school year 

were vacancies in English as a second language (ESL) 

and in foreign languages. Some 37 percent of rural 

public schools reported that ESL vacancies were “very 

difficult” to fill, and an additional 5 percent reported 

that they could not fill their ESL vacancies (figure 

3.11). Similarly, 35 percent of rural schools reported 

that foreign language vacancies were “very difficult” 

to fill, and an additional 8 percent reported that they 

could not fill their foreign languages vacancies.15

In rural areas, the percentage of public schools reporting that they could not fill teaching vacancies 

was higher for foreign languages (8 percent) than for 

computer science (3 percent), music or art (2 percent), physical sciences (2 percent), English/language 

arts (1 percent), biology or life sciences (1 percent), 

or general elementary (less than 1 percent), but not 

measurably different from the percentages that could 

not fill vacancies for vocational or technical education, ESL, special education, or mathematics.

The percentage of public schools reporting that it 

was “very difficult” to fill ESL teaching vacancies was 

higher in rural areas than in cities (37 vs. 24 percent). 

The percentage of public schools reporting that they 

could not fill these vacancies in rural areas was higher 

than in suburban areas (5 vs. 1 percent). 

The percentage of public schools reporting that it 

was “very difficult” to fill foreign language teaching 

vacancies was higher in rural areas than in suburban 

areas (35 vs. 27 percent). The percentage of public 

schools that could not fill their foreign language 

vacancies was higher in rural areas than in suburbs 

and towns (8 vs. 2 percent for both).

In comparison with public schools in cities, a lower 

percentage of rural public schools reported that 

it was “very difficult” to fill vacancies in biology 

or life sciences (17 vs. 24 percent) while a higher 

percentage of rural public schools reported this 

level of difficulty filling vacancies in music or art 

(21 vs. 13 percent). A greater percentage of rural 

public schools reported that it was “very difficult” 

to fill vacancies in English/language arts (11 percent) than the percentages of town and suburban 

public schools (6 and 5 percent, respectively). The 

percentage of rural public schools reporting this 

level of difficulty in filling social studies vacancies 

(5 percent) was also greater than the percentage of 

suburban public schools (1 percent).

Apart from the previously mentioned differences in 

the foreign language and ESL fields, the percentage 

of public schools in rural areas that reported that 

they could not fill teaching vacancies in particular 

fields was not measurably different from the percentages in other locales.

3.11. Difficulty hiring teachers

Public schools in rural areas in 2003–04 experienced the greatest difficulty filling vacancies in the fields 

of English as a second language (ESL) and foreign languages. 

15 The apparent differences between these fields (ESL and foreign languages) and the field of physical science (27 

percent reporting “very difficult”) were not statistically significant due to large standard errors.
Status of Education in Rural America 111Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.11. Percentage of public elementary and secondary schools with a teaching vacancy in selected teaching 

fields that reported filling the vacancy as “very difficult” or that the vacancy could not be filled, by 

teaching field and locale: 2003–04

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Public School Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

Could not fill vacancy

Percent

Very difficult to fill vacancy

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Teaching field

vacancy by locale

Special

education

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 26 5

25 3

25 2

27 4

Mathematics

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 30 5

23 2

22 2

26 3

Physical sciences

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 25 3

25 2

23 2

27 2

Foreign languages

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 26 5

27 2

35 2

35 8

Vocational or 

technical 

education

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 24 4

26 3

25 2

22 5

Biology or

life sciences

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 24 3

18 2

16

17

1

1

English as a

second language

Rural

Town

Suburban

City 24 4

29

27 2

37 5

1

English/

language arts

Rural

Town

Suburban

City

11 1

6 1

5 1

7 1
112 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 3.11 — Difficulty hiring teachers

Table 3.11. Percentage of public elementary and secondary schools with a teaching vacancy in selected teaching 

fields, by the school’s reported level of difficulty in filling the vacancy, teaching field, and locale: 

2003–04

Teaching field and locale

Level of difficulty filling vacancy

Easy

Somewhat 

difficult

Very difficult or could not fill vacancy

Total Very difficult

Could not 

fill the vacancy

General elementary

Total 75.0 21.1 3.9 3.4 0.5

City 67.9 26.6 5.5 4.1 1.4

Suburban 82.9 14.8 2.3 2.3 #

Town 77.6 16.8 5.7 4.9 0.8

Rural 70.9 25.7 3.4 3.2 0.3

Special education

Total 29.0 41.7 29.3 25.7 3.5

City 25.0 44.5 30.6 26.0 4.6

Suburban 30.1 42.2 27.8 24.9 2.9

Town 35.1 37.6 27.4 25.1 2.3

Rural 28.7 40.4 30.9 27.0 3.9

English/language arts

Total 58.9 32.9 8.2 7.1 1.1

City 64.7 27.3 8.0 6.8 1.2

Suburban 63.9 30.6 5.5 4.6 0.9

Town 54.5 38.8 6.7 5.7 1.0

Rural 49.8 38.2 12.1 10.9 1.2

Social studies

Total 71.6 24.4 4.0 3.6 0.4

City 77.5 17.2 5.3 4.6 0.7

Suburban 78.4 20.4 1.2 1.0 0.2

Town 65.1 30.2 4.7 4.7 0.1

Rural 62.9 31.9 5.2 4.6 0.6

Computer science

Total 50.4 33.1 16.5 14.7 1.8

City 49.8 33.7 16.5 15.4 1.1

Suburban 54.5 31.8 13.7 13.1 0.6

Town 52.9 30.3 16.8 12.9 3.9

Rural 42.8 36.3 20.9 17.7 3.3

Mathematics

Total 33.3 37.8 28.9 25.5 3.4

City 32.3 32.3 35.4 30.2 5.2

Suburban 31.2 44.1 24.7 22.7 2.1

Town 37.4 38.1 24.5 22.1 2.4

Rural 34.6 36.0 29.4 25.9 3.5

Biology or life sciences

Total 34.8 44.2 21.0 19.1 1.9

City 33.1 39.8 27.1 23.9 3.3

Suburban 34.5 45.6 19.9 18.1 1.8

Town 41.8 41.0 17.2 16.3 0.9

Rural 32.9 49.2 17.8 16.9 1.0

Physical sciences

Total 34.6 37.7 27.7 25.3 2.4

City 33.7 37.8 28.5 25.2 3.3

Suburban 32.4 40.4 27.3 24.8 2.5

Town 41.5 33.8 24.7 23.1 1.5

Rural 34.4 36.4 29.2 27.4 1.8

See notes at end of table.
Status of Education in Rural America 113Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Table 3.11. Percentage of public elementary and secondary schools with a teaching vacancy in selected teaching 

fields, by the school’s reported level of difficulty in filling the vacancy, teaching field, and locale: 

2003–04—Continued

Teaching field and locale

Level of difficulty filling vacancy

Easy

Somewhat 

difficult

Very difficult or could not fill vacancy

Total Very difficult

Could not 

fill the vacancy

English as a second language

Total 31.4 37.2 31.4 28.6 2.8

City 33.5 37.7 28.8 24.4 4.4

Suburban 34.4 35.7 29.9 29.1 0.9

Town 30.2 41.6 28.2 26.6 1.6

Rural 21.2 36.6 42.3 37.5 4.8

Foreign languages

Total 26.7 39.7 33.6 29.5 4.1

City 28.7 40.4 30.9 26.3 4.6

Suburban 27.1 44.8 28.1 26.5 1.6

Town 27.1 36.1 36.8 34.8 2.0

Rural 23.4 33.1 43.5 35.2 8.3

Music or art

Total 46.1 34.8 19.1 17.1 2.1

City 52.1 32.2 15.7 13.0 2.7

Suburban 47.5 34.3 18.2 16.5 1.7

Town 41.4 38.0 20.6 19.0 1.6

Rural 41.2 36.1 22.7 20.5 2.2

Vocational or technical education

Total 34.4 37.7 27.9 24.2 3.7

City 31.4 40.2 28.5 24.2 4.3

Suburban 30.6 40.0 29.4 26.5 3.0

Town 36.5 36.6 26.9 24.9 2.0

Rural 39.4 34.0 26.6 21.6 5.0

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Public School Questionnaire,” 2003–04.
114 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.1

2 — Use of professional support staff and paraprofessionals

Public schools employ a wide range of staff in order 

to provide and support their students’ education. 

In addition to classroom teachers, these support 

staff include licensed or certified professionals 

(such as school counselors and nurses) and also 

instructional and noninstructional aides. The 

data discussed in this indicator pertain to these 

support staff in regular public schools, and do not 

distinguish between the full-time and part-time 

status of the staff.

During the 2003–04 school year, special education 

instructional aides were the most commonly found 

public school support staff in rural areas (and in all 

other locales), with both elementary and secondary rural public schools averaging almost 3 special 

education instructional aides per school (table 

3.12). However, the average number of special 

education instructional aides per public school in 

rural areas was lower than the average in suburbs 

and cities at the elementary level (4.2 and 3.7, 

respectively) and lower than the average in towns, 

suburbs, and cities at the secondary level (4.0, 5.5, 

and 6.2, respectively).

Rural public elementary schools averaged about 

1 school counselor, nurse, speech therapist, and 

regular Title I16 instructional aide per school. City, 

suburban, and town public elementary schools also 

averaged about 1 school counselor and nurse per 

school. However, the average number of speech 

therapists per school was lower among rural elementary schools than among city and suburban 

elementary schools (1.2 and 1.3, respectively). 

Rural public secondary schools averaged about 1.6 

school counselors and 1 nurse per school. City, suburban, and town public schools also averaged about 

1 nurse per school, while secondary schools in cities, 

suburbs, and towns had a higher number of school 

counselors per school (3.9, 3.8, and 2.1, respectively) 

than rural secondary schools.

To better account for enrollment differences between 

public schools in various locales, table 3.12 also shows 

the average number of students per support staff 

member (among schools that have such staff). This 

statistic is designed to be a proxy indicator for the 

access public school students have to these services in 

their schools. Students in schools with lower numbers 

of students per support staff member have a greater 

potential for access to these support services.

In public elementary schools, the average numbers 

of students per school counselor, social worker, or 

psychologist in rural areas (317, 400, and 378, respectively) were lower than in cities (407, 467, and 

548) and suburban areas (400, 483, and 517), but 

not measurably different from the averages in towns 

(figure 3.12a). 

The average number of students per special education 

instructional aide in rural public elementary schools 

(104) was lower than in city public elementary schools 

(124), but not measurably different from suburban 

or town public elementary schools. A similar pattern 

was detected in the average number of elementary 

students per regular Title I instructional aide, where 

the average in rural areas (136) was lower than in cities 

(170), but not measurably different from suburban or 

town elementary schools. No differences across locales 

were detected in the average number of elementary 

students per English as a Second Language/bilingual 

instructional aide.

3.12. Use of professional support staff and paraprofessionals

In public schools, the average number of students per school counselor, social worker, school psychologist, 

and special education instructional aide was lower in rural areas in 2003–04 than in cities at both the 

elementary and secondary levels.

16 Title I is designed to support state and local school reform efforts tied to challenging state academic standards in order 

to reinforce and amplify efforts to improve teaching and learning for students farthest from meeting state standards. 

Individual public schools with poverty rates at or above 40 percent may use Title I funds, along with other federal, state, 

and local funds, to operate a “schoolwide program” to upgrade the instructional program for the whole school. Schools 

with poverty rates below 40 percent, or those choosing not to operate a schoolwide program, offer a “targeted assistance 

program” in which the school identifies students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s challenging 

performance standards, then designs, in consultation with parents, staff, and district staff, an instructional program to meet 

the needs of those students.
Status of Education in Rural America 115Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Figure 3.12a. Average number of students per student support staff in regular public elementary schools with 

such staff, by selected type of staff and locale: 2003–04

1 Title I is designed to support state and local school reform efforts tied to challenging state academic standards in order to reinforce and amplify efforts 

to improve teaching and learning for students farthest from meeting state standards. Individual public schools with poverty rates at or above 40 percent 

may use Title I funds, along with other federal, state, and local funds, to operate a “schoolwide program” to upgrade the instructional program for the whole 

school. Schools with poverty rates below 40 percent, or those choosing not to operate a schoolwide program, offer a “targeted assistance program” in which 

the school identifies students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s challenging performance standards, then designs, in consultation 

with parents, staff, and district staff, an instructional program to meet the needs of those students.

NOTE: The average number of students to staff is based on the total number of full- and part-time staff. This measure differs from pupil-teacher ratios, which 

are based on the total number of full-time-equivalent teachers. Student enrollment data used to calculate this ratio are for schools with such staff. Regular 

public schools do not include alternative, special education, special program emphasis, or vocational/technical schools. Data for combined elementary and 

secondary schools and for ungraded schools are excluded. ESL is English as a second language. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Public School Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400

Number of students per staff

ESL/bilingual

 teacher

instructional

 aides

Regular

 Title I

instructional

 aides1

Special

 education

instructional

 aides

Psychologists

Social

 workers

School

 counselors

Type of staff

407

400

339

317

467

483

388

400

548

517

401

378

124

110

109

104

170

156

120

136

247

335

304

297

City Suburban Town Rural
In public secondary schools, the average numbers 

of students per school counselor, social worker, or 

psychologist were lower in rural areas (298, 508, 

and 524, respectively) than in cities (334, 987, and 

1,255), suburbs (323, 941, and 1,075), or towns 

(329, 664, and 670) (figure 3.12b). 

The average number of students per special education 

instructional aide in rural public secondary schools 

(153) was lower than in suburban or city public secondary schools (198 and 187, respectively), but not 

measurably different from public secondary schools 

in towns. This same pattern was detected in the average number of secondary students per ESL/bilingual 

instructional aide, where the average in rural areas 

(586) was lower than in suburbs (854) or cities (811), 

but not measurably different from towns. The average 

number of students per regular Title I instructional 

aide in secondary schools was also lower in rural areas 

(189) than in suburban areas (486), but no measurable differences were detected between the average in 

rural areas and the averages in cities and towns.

116 Status of Education in Rural America Indicator 

3.1

2 — Use of professional support staff and paraprofessionals

Figure 3.12b. Average number of students per student support staff in regular public secondary schools with such 

staff, by selected type of staff and locale: 2003–04

! Interpret data with caution.

1 Title I is designed to support state and local school reform efforts tied to challenging state academic standards in order to reinforce and amplify efforts 

to improve teaching and learning for students farthest from meeting state standards. Individual public schools with poverty rates at or above 40 percent 

may use Title I funds, along with other federal, state, and local funds, to operate a “schoolwide program” to upgrade the instructional program for the whole 

school. Schools with poverty rates below 40 percent, or those choosing not to operate a schoolwide program, offer a “targeted assistance program” in which 

the school identifies students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s challenging performance standards, then designs, in consultation 

with parents, staff, and district staff, an instructional program to meet the needs of those students.

NOTE: The average number of students to staff is based on the total number of full- and part-time staff. This measure differs from pupil-teacher ratios, which 

are based on the total number of full-time-equivalent teachers. Student enrollment data used to calculate this ratio are for schools with such staff. Regular 

public schools do not include alternative, special education, special program emphasis, or vocational/technical schools. Data for combined elementary and 

secondary schools and for ungraded schools are excluded. ESL is English as a second language. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Public School Questionnaire,” 2003–04.

334

323

329

298

987

941

1,255

1,075

670

524

187

198

153

153

269!

486

254

189

811

854

618

586

664

508

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400

Number of students per staff

ESL/bilingual

 teacher

instructional

 aides

Regular

 Title I

instructional

 aides1

Special

 education

instructional

 aides

Psychologists

Social

 workers

School

 counselors

Type of staff

City Suburban Town Rural
Status of Education in Rural America 117Chapter 

3 — Resources for public schools

Table 3.12. Total number of teachers and student support staff in regular public schools, average number of staff 

per school, and average number of students per staff in schools with such staff, by locale, school 

level, and type of school staff: 2003–04

Type of school staff

 Total

 Average total 

number per school

 Average number of students per 

 staff in schools with such staff1

City Suburban Town Rural City Suburban Town Rural City Suburban Town Rural

Elementary

All teachers 566,000 724,000 287,000 395,000 37.8 38.6 31.4 26.6 15 15 13 13

Licensed or certified 

professionals

School counselors 16,100 20,500 9,700 14,500 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 407 400 339 317

Nurses 15,100 18,500 8,300 12,500 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 496 491 405 357

Social workers 9,200 9,600 3,600 4,800 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 467 483 388 400

Psychologists 12,200 16,200 6,000 8,200 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.6 548 517 401 378

Speech therapists 17,600 24,300 10,400 15,800 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.1 455 420 354 305

Other professionals 13,400 18,000 8,000 9,400 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.6 263 254 191 203

Aides

Instructional aides

Special education 55,800 79,700 29,000 43,100 3.7 4.2 3.2 2.9 124 110 109 104

Regular Title I2 21,500 20,900 14,500 19,100 1.4 1.1 1.6 1.3 170 156 120 136

ESL/bilingual teacher 14,300 14,200 4,600 4,400 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 247 335 304 297

Library 6,000 9,700 4,800 7,200 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 544 488 380 363

Other 26,800 37,200 16,200 29,600 1.8 2.0 1.8 2.0 135 131 110 98

Noninstructional aides

Special education 9,700 13,700 8,200 7,300 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.5 864 771 469 725

Library 2,800 5,300 2,900 ! 3,000 0.2 0.3 0.3 ! 0.2 566 499 290 ! 361

Other 11,300 18,300 6,700 7,800 0.8 1.0 0.7 0.5 196 179 151 176

Secondary

All teachers 211,000 331,000 136,000 182,000 80.7 79.0 47.9 35.0 17 16 15 14

Licensed or certified 

professionals

School counselors 10,100 15,800 6,100 8,600 3.9 3.8 2.1 1.6 334 323 329 298

Nurses 2,700 4,600 2,700 4,400 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.9 1,113 1,017 678 489

Social workers 1,700 2,700 1,100 1,700 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.3 987 941 664 508

Psychologists 2,200 4,200 1,800 2,900 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.6 1,255 1,075 670 524

Speech therapists 2,400 4,100 2,300 3,700 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.7 1,215 1,134 660 485

Other professionals 2,600 4,100 1,600 2,600 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.5 574 561 437 318

Aides

Instructional aides

Special education 16,300 23,000 11,400 13,700 6.2 5.5 4.0 2.6 187 198 153 153

Regular Title I2 1,900 ! 1,400 ! 1,600 1,800 0.7 ! 0.3 ! 0.6 0.3 269 ! 486 254 189

ESL/bilingual teacher 2,200 3,000 1,400 800 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.2 811 854 618 586

Library 1,500 2,500 1,400 2,100 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 1,118 907 688 490

Other 2,100 2,600 1,300 1,700 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 542 597 435 331

Noninstructional aides

Special education 3,200 4,200 2,000 2,800 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.5 1,079 1,278 1,013 933

Library 1,000 2,200 900 1,400 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3 1,020 935 654 456

Other 1,900 3,800 1,100 1,900 0.7 0.9 0.4 0.4 483 382 439 294

! Interpret data with caution.

1 The average number of students to staff is based on the total number of full- and part-time staff. This measure differs from pupil-teacher ratios, which are 

based on the total number of full-time-equivalent teachers. Student enrollment data used to calculate this ratio are for schools with such staff. 

2 Title I is designed to support state and local school reform efforts tied to challenging state academic standards in order to reinforce and amplify efforts 

to improve teaching and learning for students farthest from meeting state standards. Individual public schools with poverty rates at or above 40 percent 

may use Title I funds, along with other federal, state, and local funds, to operate a “schoolwide program” to upgrade the instructional program for the 

whole school. Schools with poverty rates below 40 percent, or those choosing not to operate a schoolwide program, offer a “targeted assistance program” 

in which the school identifies students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s challenging performance standards, then designs, in 

consultation with parents, staff, and district staff, an instructional program to meet the needs of those students. 

NOTE: All statistics shown do not distinguish between full- and part-time status of staff. Regular public schools do not include alternative, special education, special program emphasis, or vocational/technical schools. Data for combined elementary and secondary schools and for ungraded schools are 

excluded. ESL is English as a second language. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Public School Questionnaire,” 2003–04.
This page intentionally left blank.
Imazeki, J., and Reschovsky, A. (2003). Financing 

Adequate Education in Rural Settings. Journal of 

Education Finance, 29(2): 137–156.

McClure, C., and Reeves, C. (2004). Rural Teacher 

Recruitment and Retention Review of the Research and Practice Literature. Charleston, WV: 

Appalachian Education Laboratory.

Nelson, C.G. (2004). The Diversity Challenge in 

Rural Education. English Journal, 93(6): 22.

Office of Management and Budget (2000). Standards 

for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas; Notice. Federal Register (65) No. 249.

Rosenkoetter, S.E., Irwin, J.D., and Saceda, R.G. 

(2004). Addressing Personnel Needs for Rural 

Schools. Teacher Education and Special Education, 

27(3): 276–291.

Seastrom, M., Chapman, C., Stillwell, R., McGrath, 

D., Peltola, P., Dinkes, R., and Xu, Z. (2006). 

User’s Guide to Computing High School Graduation 

Rates, Volume 1: Review of Current and Proposed 

Graduation Indicators (NCES 2006-604). U.S. 

Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Smith, M., Hill, G.C., Evans, B., and Bandera, M. 

(2000). Perspectives & Issues Relating to Violence 

in a Rural School. Rural Educator, 22(1): 19–25.

Taylor, L.L., and Fowler W.J., Jr. (2006). A Comparable Wage Approach to Geographic Cost Adjustment (NCES 2006-321). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics.

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). History 

of IDEA. Retrieved September 27, 2006, from 

http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/leg/idea/history30.html. 

Waits, T., Setzer, J.C., and Lewis, L. (2005). Dual 

Credit and Exam-Based Courses in U.S. Public High 

Schools: 2002–03 (NCES 2005-009). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National 

Center for Education Statistics.

Wenger, K.J., and Dinsmore, J. (2005). Preparing 

Rural Preservice Teachers for Diversity. Journal of 

Research in Higher Education, 20(10): 1–15.

Williams, J.H. (2005). Cross-National Variations in 

Rural Mathematics Achievement: A Descriptive 

Overview. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 

20(5): 1–18.

References
This page intentionally left blank.
The supplemental tables in this section include distributions at the detailed locale or twelve-locale level. 

Definitions for these twelve locale codes are provided 

on the next page; key concepts for these definitions 

are provided on this page. The supplemental tables 

are numbered to correspond with their respective 

indicators.

The new urban-centric classification system has four 

major locale categories—city, suburban, town, and 

rural—each of which is subdivided into three subcategories. Cities and suburbs are subdivided into the 

categories small, midsize, or large; towns and rural areas 

are subdivided by their proximity to an urbanized area 

into the categories fringe, distant, or remote. These 

twelve categories are based on several key concepts 

that Census uses to define an area’s urbanicity: princiAppendix A. 

 Supplemental Tables

pal city, urbanized area, and urban cluster. A principal

city is a city that contains the primary population and 

economic center of a metropolitan statistical area, 

which, in turn, is defined as one or more contiguous 

counties that have a “core” area with a large population nucleus and adjacent communities that are highly 

integrated economically or socially with the core. 

Urbanized areas and urban clusters are densely settled 

“cores” of Census-defined blocks with adjacent densely 

settled surrounding areas. Core areas with populations 

of 50,000 or more are designated as urbanized areas; 

those with populations between 25,000 and 50,000 

are designated as urban clusters. For more information 

on urbanized areas and urban clusters, see http://www

.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html. Rural areas are 

designated by Census as those areas that do not lie 

inside an urbanized area or urban cluster.
122 Status of Education in Rural America

Locale Definition

City

Large Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with population of 250,000 

or more 

Midsize Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with population less than 250,000 

and greater than or equal to 100,000

Small Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with population less than 

100,000

Suburban

Large Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with population of 250,000 

or more

Midsize Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with population less than 

250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000

Small Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with population less than 

100,000

Town

Fringe Territory inside an urban cluster that is less than or equal to 10 miles from an urbanized 

area

Distant Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles 

from an urbanized area

Remote Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 35 miles from an urbanized area

Rural

Fringe Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles from an urbanized area, as 

well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5 miles from an urban cluster

Distant Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles 

from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is more than 2.5 miles but less than or 

equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster

Remote Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an urbanized area and is also 

more than 10 miles from an urban cluster

SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget (2000). Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan 

Statistical Areas; Notice. Federal Register (65) No. 249.

Several of the following supplemental tables include 

distributions at the detailed locale or twelve-locale 

level. Definitions for these twelve locale codes are 

provided here:

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 123Appendi

x A

Table A-1.1. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary districts, schools, and 

students, by detailed locale: 2003–04

Detailed locale Districts Schools Students

Number

 Total 14,076 95,726 48,353,523

City, large 243 11,943 7,569,739

City, midsize 166 5,436 3,105,077

City, small 422 7,218 4,010,393

Suburban, large 2,242 21,963 14,482,027

Suburban, midsize 334 2,768 1,638,248

Suburban, small 224 1,858 1,017,236

Town, fringe 624 3,793 1,902,039

Town, distant 989 5,740 2,457,556

Town, remote 959 5,030 1,863,193

Rural, fringe 1,568 10,176 5,305,303

Rural, distant 3,062 11,036 3,438,256

Rural, remote 3,243 8,765 1,564,456

Percentage distribution

 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

City, large 1.7 12.5 15.7

City, midsize 1.2 5.7 6.4

City, small 3.0 7.5 8.3

Suburban, large 15.9 22.9 30.0

Suburban, midsize 2.4 2.9 3.4

Suburban, small 1.6 1.9 2.1

Town, fringe 4.4 4.0 3.9

Town, distant 7.0 6.0 5.1

Town, remote 6.8 5.3 3.9

Rural, fringe 11.1 10.6 11.0

Rural, distant 21.8 11.5 7.1

Rural, remote 23.0 9.2 3.2

NOTE: Schools not reporting enrollment are included in school totals but excluded from student totals. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey” and “Local Education Agency Universe Survey,” 2003–04.
124 Status of Education in Rural America

Table A-1.2. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary schools, by school size 

and detailed locale: 2003–04

Detailed locale Total

Less than 200 

students

200 to 399 

students

400 to 799 

students

800 to 1,199 

students

1,200 or more 

students

Number

 Total 92,816 19,203 23,248 34,868 9,468 6,029

City, large 11,736 1,662 2,480 4,690 1,644 1,260

City, midsize 5,229 666 1,218 2,289 610 446

City, small 6,944 1,051 1,778 2,762 749 604

Suburban, large 21,433 1,960 4,018 9,817 3,316 2,322

Suburban, midsize 2,719 330 549 1,260 364 216

Suburban, small 1,811 256 385 834 233 103

Town, fringe 3,673 485 926 1,725 377 160

Town, distant 5,449 976 1,621 2,290 422 140

Town, remote 4,767 1,076 1,764 1,580 251 96

Rural, fringe 9,714 1,575 2,238 4,134 1,158 609

Rural, distant 10,762 3,615 4,028 2,754 294 71

Rural, remote 8,579 5,551 2,243 733 50 2

Percentage distribution

 Total 100.0 20.7 25.1 37.6 10.2 6.5

City, large 100.0 14.2 21.1 40.0 14.0 10.7

City, midsize 100.0 12.7 23.3 43.8 11.7 8.5

City, small 100.0 15.1 25.6 39.8 10.8 8.7

Suburban, large 100.0 9.1 18.8 45.8 15.5 10.8

Suburban, midsize 100.0 12.1 20.2 46.3 13.4 7.9

Suburban, small 100.0 14.1 21.3 46.1 12.9 5.7

Town, fringe 100.0 13.2 25.2 47.0 10.3 4.4

Town, distant 100.0 17.9 29.8 42.0 7.7 2.6

Town, remote 100.0 22.6 37.0 33.1 5.3 2.0

Rural, fringe 100.0 16.2 23.0 42.6 11.9 6.3

Rural, distant 100.0 33.6 37.4 25.6 2.7 0.7

Rural, remote 100.0 64.7 26.2 8.5 0.6 #

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Schools with no reported enrollment are not included. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 125Appendi

x A

Table A-1.4. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by detailed locale, region, 

and state and District of Columbia: 2003–04

Region and state Total

City Suburban Town Rural

Large Midsize Small Large Midsize Small Fringe Distant Remote Fringe Distant Remote

 Total 100.0 15.7 6.4 8.3 30.0 3.4 2.1 3.9 5.1 3.9 11.0 7.1 3.2

Northeast 100.0 17.6 3.4 6.3 43.6 3.6 1.8 4.4 2.6 1.1 9.3 5.3 1.3

Connecticut 100.0 0.0 14.6 12.8 43.8 10.5 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 12.5 1.3 0.0

Maine 100.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 8.1 4.5 8.0 4.9 9.4 16.7 22.8 13.9

Massachusetts 100.0 6.6 6.3 7.9 60.6 5.3 0.1 1.9 0.6 0.0 9.6 1.0 0.0

New Hampshire 100.0 0.0 8.5 6.4 9.4 13.9 9.6 6.2 6.4 5.5 13.5 15.6 5.0

New Jersey 100.0 3.4 0.0 6.5 75.0 2.0 1.6 2.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.8 0.0

New York 100.0 37.9 2.1 3.7 33.2 1.1 1.2 3.5 3.3 1.0 6.0 5.8 1.2

Pennsylvania 100.0 14.0 1.7 5.8 37.4 3.7 3.3 8.2 4.1 1.1 12.3 7.2 1.2

Rhode Island 100.0 0.0 18.0 14.8 51.9 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 10.4 2.3 0.0

Vermont 100.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.0 10.8 0.0 2.7 14.7 12.3 10.8 26.7 15.4

Midwest 100.0 12.8 5.5 8.1 27.4 2.5 2.0 4.6 7.0 5.6 9.7 9.5 5.4

Illinois 100.0 20.7 5.0 6.2 39.9 3.3 1.6 2.4 5.1 4.0 5.0 5.3 1.4

Indiana 100.0 11.0 8.4 8.6 20.9 1.8 1.4 4.9 12.0 0.8 15.0 14.5 0.8

Iowa 100.0 0.0 10.6 15.6 7.7 1.1 0.5 3.7 8.8 15.7 7.8 14.7 13.8

Kansas 100.0 9.9 13.6 1.5 12.6 0.8 0.0 3.7 7.2 16.8 12.6 8.8 12.4

Michigan 100.0 9.8 6.8 10.3 30.9 3.5 3.5 5.1 3.6 3.7 10.2 8.9 3.5

Minnesota 100.0 11.2 0.0 10.8 28.7 0.8 0.9 4.8 7.5 9.1 9.6 6.0 10.4

Missouri 100.0 11.8 2.2 5.2 27.6 1.0 2.1 3.9 7.2 9.1 10.4 11.3 8.2

Nebraska 100.0 22.3 11.3 0.0 10.5 1.1 0.0 0.8 3.8 19.1 5.8 7.5 17.8

North Dakota 100.0 0.0 0.0 26.8 0.0 5.0 2.8 0.0 2.1 18.4 4.1 6.1 34.9

Ohio 100.0 13.5 2.9 5.3 34.7 1.8 2.5 6.8 7.6 0.6 12.6 11.4 0.4

South Dakota 100.0 0.0 15.2 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.9 3.1 5.0 22.3 5.7 6.4 31.8

Wisconsin 100.0 11.5 4.8 13.0 12.9 6.6 3.3 6.6 10.7 2.8 9.3 10.9 7.7

South 100.0 12.9 6.8 8.4 25.1 3.6 2.0 3.7 6.5 3.5 15.0 9.5 3.2

Alabama 100.0 0.0 15.9 7.4 10.1 3.9 2.5 6.1 7.0 1.6 19.2 19.4 7.0

Arkansas 100.0 0.0 5.4 19.8 7.6 1.9 0.6 5.2 9.1 9.8 16.5 14.8 9.4

Delaware 100.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 41.8 0.0 6.0 12.9 7.3 0.0 11.1 4.8 0.0

District of Columbia 100.0 99.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.21 0.0 0.0

Florida 100.0 8.3 5.3 11.5 46.3 8.1 1.4 1.8 3.2 0.6 10.6 2.6 0.3

Georgia 100.0 3.4 5.8 6.2 36.7 1.3 1.8 4.3 5.9 2.6 21.6 7.9 2.5

Kentucky 100.0 10.2 0.0 3.5 17.3 1.5 1.6 3.6 11.2 8.5 18.1 15.5 9.0

Louisiana 100.0 9.4 14.0 8.5 11.0 5.5 4.4 6.4 9.9 2.3 14.0 11.1 3.5

Maryland 100.0 10.9 0.0 5.2 51.4 6.0 3.4 3.0 2.8 0.3 12.3 4.5 0.2

Mississippi 100.0 0.0 6.2 5.4 6.3 3.5 1.4 2.4 5.7 22.4 16.4 21.0 9.5

North Carolina 100.0 8.9 8.2 8.2 8.3 6.4 1.1 4.8 8.8 0.4 25.6 16.6 2.7

Oklahoma 100.0 18.9 0.0 2.4 17.2 0.1 2.1 3.8 11.8 9.6 11.4 13.3 9.3

South Carolina 100.0 0.0 2.1 10.3 22.0 4.1 4.4 5.5 11.4 0.8 24.4 13.9 1.2

Tennessee 100.0 18.8 5.8 5.9 14.2 2.1 1.4 4.1 8.2 3.7 19.4 13.5 2.9

Texas 100.0 27.9 8.1 9.6 21.1 1.4 1.6 3.1 5.3 4.3 9.5 5.6 2.4

Virginia 100.0 6.3 13.8 5.1 35.1 1.4 2.7 2.3 4.6 0.8 15.3 10.0 2.6

West Virginia 100.0 0.0 0.0 13.4 0.0 10.6 5.3 6.1 13.2 7.1 15.8 19.3 9.4

West 100.0 21.2 9.0 9.8 29.9 3.8 2.5 3.5 3.0 4.7 7.3 2.7 2.6

Alaska 100.0 33.3 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 3.6 5.0 14.5 8.7 1.9 22.3

Arizona 100.0 41.8 5.2 3.7 19.3 0.0 2.1 1.7 2.5 6.5 10.3 4.0 2.9

California 100.0 23.7 10.7 10.3 33.6 4.9 2.7 3.0 2.8 0.9 5.5 1.5 0.5

Colorado 100.0 24.8 5.0 5.8 29.3 1.5 4.4 4.5 1.5 5.7 8.6 4.3 4.5

Hawaii 100.0 24.4 0.0 0.0 26.3 7.4 0.0 0.9 0.0 21.1 15.6 3.1 1.2

Idaho 100.0 0.0 12.1 17.0 6.7 0.0 8.9 3.2 9.5 11.8 12.1 9.8 9.0

Montana 100.0 0.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 0.8 1.7 1.2 0.0 34.6 6.0 9.7 24.0

Nevada 100.0 22.8 15.3 5.7 34.6 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.3 4.8 10.2 1.1 2.3

New Mexico 100.0 22.4 0.0 10.3 9.8 1.9 1.2 3.2 2.9 22.9 13.4 3.4 8.6

Oregon 100.0 10.9 8.8 11.5 18.6 4.4 0.7 11.8 6.2 9.7 9.3 4.4 3.6

Utah 100.0 0.0 7.7 11.5 54.9 0.0 2.7 4.2 5.0 4.9 3.6 1.8 3.8

Washington 100.0 4.7 10.0 12.9 34.5 7.9 1.7 4.6 3.8 3.7 9.0 4.5 2.8

Wyoming 100.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 42.6 8.9 4.4 18.6

1

These students are funded by the District of Columbia public school system, but attend school outside of the District.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04. 
126 Status of Education in Rural America

Table A-1.7. Percentage distribution of families with children under 18, by poverty level, locale, and family 

type: 2004

Locale and family type Total

Below the poverty 

threshold

100–185 percent 

of the poverty 

threshold

Above 185 percent 

of the poverty 

threshold

Total 100.0 15.5 17.2 67.4

Married couple 100.0 6.9 13.6 79.5

Male householder, no wife present 100.0 18.2 24.0 57.9

Female householder, no husband present 100.0 37.6 24.8 37.6

City 100.0 21.2 20.0 58.8

Married couple 100.0 9.3 16.5 74.2

Male householder, no wife present 100.0 21.3 26.5 52.2

Female householder, no husband present 100.0 41.6 24.6 33.8

Suburban 100.0 10.4 13.5 76.1

Married couple 100.0 4.8 10.0 85.2

Male householder, no wife present 100.0 13.4 20.5 66.1

Female householder, no husband present 100.0 28.4 23.1 48.6

Town 100.0 21.6 20.8 57.6

Married couple 100.0 9.1 17.4 73.5

Male householder, no wife present 100.0 23.6 27.4 49.1

Female householder, no husband present 100.0 47.3 26.1 26.6

Rural 100.0 13.1 17.9 68.9

Married couple 100.0 6.8 15.0 78.1

Male householder, no wife present 100.0 18.0 23.5 58.5

Female householder, no husband present 100.0 37.9 28.2 33.9

NOTE: A family is a group of two people or more residing together (one of whom is the householder) who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. 

Unmarried couples with children of their own are classified as either “Female householder, no husband present” or “Male householder, no wife present,” 

determined by the householder of record. The householder of record is the person living or staying in the household in whose name the house or apartment 

is owned, being bought, or rented. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 127Appendi

x A

Table A-1.8. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of 

students in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and detailed locale: 2003–04

Detailed locale

Number and 

percent eligible 

for free or 

reduced-price 

lunch

10 percent

 or less

11–25

 percent

26–50

 percent

51–75

 percent

More than 

75 percent

Number

Total 43,126,448 6,449,924 8,862,597 12,557,762 8,769,074 6,487,091

City, large 6,088,009 357,606 567,326 1,137,561 1,561,586 2,463,930

City, midsize 2,945,060 308,308 398,132 784,876 726,707 727,037

City, small 3,776,503 429,492 726,426 1,240,461 848,661 531,463

Suburban, large 13,040,346 3,537,750 3,335,298 3,022,649 1,858,258 1,286,391

Suburban, midsize 1,560,705 294,402 406,154 510,381 253,228 96,540

Suburban, small 948,745 114,645 284,784 350,059 148,124 51,133

Town, fringe 1,722,070 230,105 479,768 603,066 285,121 124,010

Town, distant 2,188,465 66,665 367,432 884,215 619,999 250,154

Town, remote 1,717,264 40,069 235,065 715,218 512,685 214,227

Rural, fringe 4,748,997 900,458 1,262,186 1,494,091 802,882 289,380

Rural, distant 2,973,841 147,550 667,832 1,195,216 698,936 264,307

Rural, remote 1,416,443 22,874 132,194 619,969 452,887 188,519

Percentage distribution

Total 40.7 15.0 20.6 29.1 20.3 15.0

City, large 61.2 5.9 9.3 18.7 25.7 40.5

City, midsize 49.5 10.5 13.5 26.7 24.7 24.7

City, small 42.2 11.4 19.2 32.9 22.5 14.1

Suburban, large 31.2 27.1 25.6 23.2 14.3 9.9

Suburban, midsize 32.4 18.9 26.0 32.7 16.2 6.2

Suburban, small 33.2 12.1 30.0 36.9 15.6 5.4

Town, fringe 34.8 13.4 27.9 35.0 16.6 7.2

Town, distant 45.6 3.1 16.8 40.4 28.3 11.4

Town, remote 47.6 2.3 13.7 41.7 29.9 12.5

Rural, fringe 32.5 19.0 26.6 31.5 16.9 6.1

Rural, distant 41.1 5.0 22.5 40.2 23.5 8.9

Rural, remote 49.6 1.6 9.3 43.8 32.0 13.3

NOTE: The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at or 

below 130 percent of the poverty threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. Approximately 13,704 schools did not report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this information is missing for 5,227,075 students. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04.
128 Status of Education in Rural America

Table A-1.9. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students 

in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, detailed locale, and race/ethnicity: 2003–04

Detailed locale and race/ethnicity Total

10 percent

 or less 11–25 percent 26–50 percent 51–75 percent

More than 75 

percent

Total1 100.0 15.0 20.6 29.1 20.3 15.0

White 100.0 20.7 27.6 33.2 14.9 3.7

Black 100.0 4.2 9.4 24.5 29.8 32.2

Hispanic 100.0 6.0 9.3 21.7 28.4 34.7

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 22.5 22.0 26.4 18.2 10.9

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 5.1 12.2 27.5 29.8 25.5

City, large1 100.0 5.9 9.3 18.7 25.7 40.5

White 100.0 13.8 22.9 30.4 19.8 13.1

Black 100.0 2.3 4.4 15.4 29.2 48.8

Hispanic 100.0 3.3 4.2 12.5 26.3 53.8

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 8.7 12.2 26.0 27.0 26.1

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 4.1 11.6 22.5 24.5 37.3

City, midsize1 100.0 10.5 13.5 26.7 24.7 24.7

White 100.0 16.7 21.6 33.3 20.0 8.4

Black 100.0 1.6 5.3 22.4 31.2 39.7

Hispanic 100.0 7.5 7.9 21.2 26.3 37.1

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 23.4 21.5 25.6 17.9 11.7

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 7.8 14.8 28.9 28.7 19.8

City, small1 100.0 11.4 19.2 32.9 22.5 14.1

White 100.0 14.0 26.3 37.1 17.6 5.0

Black 100.0 3.3 8.8 28.4 30.8 28.8

Hispanic 100.0 8.0 9.1 27.1 29.5 26.3

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 27.4 24.8 27.3 14.4 6.1

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 6.2 17.0 36.7 27.3 12.8

Suburban, large1 100.0 27.1 25.6 23.2 14.3 9.9

White 100.0 38.3 32.1 20.9 7.0 1.7

Black 100.0 8.2 16.5 30.8 25.4 19.1

Hispanic 100.0 7.5 13.2 23.9 27.1 28.3

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 30.8 25.3 23.0 14.8 6.2

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 15.0 26.8 31.5 18.0 8.7

Suburban, midsize1 100.0 18.9 26.0 32.7 16.2 6.2

White 100.0 22.3 30.3 32.8 12.0 2.6

Black 100.0 5.6 13.3 37.4 25.9 17.9

Hispanic 100.0 12.3 14.9 28.0 29.5 15.3

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 17.7 25.6 36.6 14.9 5.3

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 13.5 25.6 36.5 17.9 6.5

Suburban, small1 100.0 12.1 30.0 36.9 15.6 5.4

White 100.0 14.0 33.5 38.0 12.2 2.3

Black 100.0 5.6 17.8 38.2 27.0 11.5

Hispanic 100.0 4.6 19.4 32.5 26.4 17.2

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 22.5 35.3 26.9 9.7 5.7

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 6.1 28.5 41.9 17.3 6.2

See notes at end of table.

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 129Appendi

x A

Table A-1.9. Percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students 

in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, detailed locale, and race/ethnicity: 2003–04—

Continued

Detailed locale and race/ethnicity Total

10 percent

 or less 11–25 percent 26–50 percent 51–75 percent

More than 75 

percent

Town, fringe1 100.0 13.4 27.9 35.0 16.6 7.2

White 100.0 16.1 33.1 36.8 12.2 1.8

Black 100.0 4.1 10.5 32.8 34.0 18.6

Hispanic 100.0 4.3 10.5 26.5 29.1 29.6

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 14.6 27.5 31.1 18.7 8.1

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 7.4 17.5 40.0 26.2 8.9

Town, distant1 100.0 3.1 16.8 40.4 28.3 11.4

White 100.0 3.2 21.9 46.9 23.7 4.2

Black 100.0 1.3 3.4 22.7 40.4 32.2

Hispanic 100.0 4.3 5.7 27.0 38.2 24.8

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 4.4 19.9 39.9 24.1 11.8

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 1.4 6.0 29.0 39.6 24.0

Town, remote1 100.0 2.3 13.7 41.7 29.9 12.5

White 100.0 2.9 18.2 49.0 25.7 4.2

Black 100.0 0.5 2.0 16.5 39.3 41.8

Hispanic 100.0 1.4 3.6 27.6 40.5 26.9

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 2.1 13.2 53.2 26.9 4.6

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 2.8 10.0 33.5 33.5 20.2

Rural, fringe1 100.0 19.0 26.6 31.5 16.9 6.1

White 100.0 22.5 30.4 32.6 12.7 1.9

Black 100.0 6.1 14.9 29.8 31.8 17.4

Hispanic 100.0 9.0 14.6 26.9 28.2 21.3

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 27.1 29.9 27.5 12.9 2.6

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 6.1 14.1 30.4 32.3 17.1

Rural, distant1 100.0 5.0 22.5 40.2 23.5 8.9

White 100.0 5.7 26.0 43.7 21.1 3.5

Black 100.0 1.3 5.5 23.0 32.8 37.4

Hispanic 100.0 2.3 9.0 28.6 35.5 24.6

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 6.5 21.6 35.7 24.9 11.3

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 1.1 6.5 20.9 35.3 36.2

Rural, remote1 100.0 1.6 9.3 43.8 32.0 13.3

White 100.0 1.8 11.3 50.9 30.7 5.4

Black 100.0 0.4 0.9 11.5 37.0 50.3

Hispanic 100.0 1.9 3.9 26.9 39.1 28.1

Asian/Pacific Islander 100.0 2.4 10.5 43.2 34.7 9.2

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0 1.0 2.3 17.9 33.9 45.0

1

Includes other racial/ethnic groups not separately shown.

NOTE: The National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program. To be eligible, a student must be from a household with an income at 

or below 130 percent of the poverty threshold for free lunch or between 130 percent and 185 percent of the poverty threshold for reduced-price lunch. 

Approximately 13,704 public schools did not report information on the number of students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch. Therefore, this 

information is missing for 5,227,075 public school students. For a comparison of poverty definitions, see appendix B. Race/ethnicity categories exclude 

persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School 

Universe Survey,” 2003–04. 
130 Status of Education in Rural America

Table A-1.10. Percentage of children ages 5–17 who spoke a language other than English at home and who 

spoke English with difficulty, by age, locale, and race/ethnicity: 2004

Spoke a language other than English at home

Spoke English with difficulty1

Locale and race/ethnicity Total Total Ages 5–9 Ages 10–17

 Total2 18.9 5.2 6.8 4.3

City2 29.0 8.6 11.3 6.8

White 8.8 2.0 2.4 1.8

Black 4.9 1.3 1.3 1.3

Hispanic 71.5 22.3 28.8 17.8

Asian 68.2 19.0 23.2 16.4

Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 38.5 7.5 9.5 6.2

American Indian/Alaska Native 6.9 2.2 2.9 1.8

Suburban2 19.4 4.8 6.1 4.1

White 5.9 1.2 1.1 1.3

Black 6.2 1.4 1.7 1.3

Hispanic 66.9 17.9 21.8 15.1

Asian 60.9 15.3 19.3 12.7

Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 32.5 5.9 7.2! 5.1!

American Indian/Alaska Native 10.5 1.9 4.3 0.6

Town2 11.9 3.2 4.1 2.7

White 2.4 0.7 0.4 0.8

Black 2.5 0.8 0.4 1.1

Hispanic 59.9 16.0 21.7 12.2

Asian 53.3 17.4 15.7 18.5

Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 38.8! 11.3! 14.2! 9.1!

American Indian/Alaska Native 13.8 1.4 2.6 0.8

Rural2 7.0 2.3 2.6 2.2

White 3.3 1.4 1.2 1.4

Black 1.1 0.6 # 0.9

Hispanic 52.8 16.3 19.6 14.2

Asian 57.2 13.4 17.4 11.0

Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 13.3! 1.5 # 1.9

American Indian/Alaska Native 18.5 1.4 2.2 1.1

#Rounds to zero.

!Interpret data with caution.

1

Respondents were asked if each child in the household spoke a language other than English at home. If they answered “yes,” they were asked how well 

each child could speak English. Categories used for reporting were “very well,” “well,” “not well,” and “not at all.” All those who reported speaking English less 

than “very well” were considered to have difficulty speaking English.

2

Includes other racial/ethnic groups not separately shown.

NOTE: Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2004, previously unpublished data.

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 131Appendi

x A

Table A-2.4. Percentage of 16- to 24-year-olds who were high school status dropouts, by race/ethnicity and 

locale: 2004

Locale Total White Black Hispanic Asian

Native 

Hawaiian/

Pacific 

Islander

American 

Indian/Alaska 

Native

 Total 11.1 7.5 12.2 23.9 3.9 6.5! 16.6

City 12.8 6.5 12.8 25.5 4.3 3.1! 16.3

Suburban 9.0 5.7 9.5 21.4 3.3 5.0! 13.5!

Town 12.1 8.9 16.3 25.0 6.7! 18.4! 20.9

Rural 11.1 10.1 13.6 23.9 1.6! 5.6! 16.4

!Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: The data presented here represent the status dropout rate, which is the percentage of civilian, noninstitutionalized 16- to 24-year-olds who are not in 

high school and who have not earned a high school credential (either a diploma or equivalency credential such as a GED). The status dropout rate includes 

all dropouts regardless of when they last attended school, as well as individuals who may have never attended school in the United States, such as immigrants who did not complete a high school diploma in their home country. Another way of calculating dropout rates is the event dropout rate, which is the 

percentage of 15- to 24-year-olds who dropped out of grades 10 through 12 in the 12 months preceding the fall of each data collection year. For a comparison of measures of educational attainment, see appendix B. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2004, previously unpublished data.
132 Status of Education in Rural America

Table A-3.7. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary school teachers, by 

detailed locale and selected characteristics: 2003–04

City Suburban

Selected characteristic Total Large Midsize Small Large Midsize Small

 Total 3,240,000 435,000 190,000 289,000 924,000 109,000 84,000

Race/ethnicity 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

White 83.1 61.2 73.3 83.9 84.5 88.2 89.5

Black 7.9 20.0 15.3 7.2 6.5 3.7 2.8

Hispanic 6.2 13.0 8.6 6.7 6.5 5.4 6.2

Asian/Pacific Islander 1.5 3.7 1.5 1.2 1.5 2.1 0.7

American Indian/Alaska Native 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3

More than one race 0.7 1.5 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.6

Age 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 30 16.6 18.0 17.1 15.4 18.3 13.2 14.1

30 to 39 24.5 25.9 22.9 25.0 24.5 27.8 26.7

40 to 49 25.9 23.4 27.0 24.3 24.2 24.2 26.0

50 to 59 29.0 27.8 28.6 31.4 28.8 30.9 30.1

60 or more 4.0 4.9 4.3 3.8 4.2 3.9 3.0

Highest degree earned 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

No degree 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.7 1.5

Associate’s 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.6

Bachelor’s 50.8 49.4 49.5 49.4 45.5 56.5 56.1

Master’s 40.9 40.5 39.9 41.3 46.0 35.2 36.8

Education specialist1 6.0 7.0 7.6 6.7 6.5 5.9 4.8

Doctor’s 1.2 1.8 2.1 1.4 1.3 1.5 0.3

See notes at end of table.

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 133Appendi

x A

Table A-3.7. Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary school teachers, by 

detailed locale and selected characteristics: 2003–04—Continued

Town Rural

Selected characteristic Fringe Distant Remote Fringe Distant Remote

 Total 144,000 191,000 138,000 300,000 283,000 156,000

Race/ethnicity 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

White 89.5 88.0 85.8 91.6 92.7 91.1

Black 3.4 6.8 3.6 4.1 4.2 3.8

Hispanic 5.1 3.4 7.4 2.1 1.6 2.2

Asian/Pacific Islander 0.8 0.8 1.6 1.0 0.2 0.4

American Indian/Alaska Native 0.6 0.6 1.2 0.6 0.8 2.1

More than one race 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.4

Age 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 30 15.1 15.6 11.3 19.0 14.8 13.4

30 to 39 22.3 22.0 24.0 25.1 24.6 22.2

40 to 49 24.8 31.4 28.5 24.6 29.9 32.3

50 to 59 34.4 27.7 32.5 27.2 27.4 28.3

60 or more 3.4 3.3 3.7 4.1 3.3 3.8

Highest degree earned 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

No degree 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.3 0.8 0.7

Associate’s 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3

Bachelor’s 51.5 54.4 57.3 52.1 55.5 62.4

Master’s 41.0 39.5 35.6 40.4 37.6 31.7

Education specialist1 6.1 4.4 4.7 5.0 5.3 4.4

Doctor’s 0.8 0.5 1.2 0.9 0.7 0.5

1

Includes certificate of advanced graduate studies.

NOTE: Includes part-time and full-time teachers. Race/ethnicity categories exclude persons of Hispanic origin unless otherwise specified. Detail may not 

sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04.
134 Status of Education in Rural America

Table A-3.8. Average number of years of teaching experience for public school teachers and percentage 

distribution of such teachers, by detailed locale, years of teaching experience, and grade level 

taught: 2003–04

Years of teaching experience and grade 

level taught

City Suburban

Total Large Midsize Small Large Midsize Small

Total

Average number of years 14.2 12.7 14.2 14.6 14.0 14.1 14.3

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 10.4 13.1 11.4 9.4 10.2 11.8 7.5

3 to 9 32.0 36.3 32.0 31.3 33.6 29.6 34.0

10 to 20 29.1 27.0 27.5 29.4 29.0 30.9 30.5

Over 20 28.4 23.6 29.2 29.9 27.1 27.7 28.1

Elementary 

Average number of years 13.9 12.0 13.5 14.0 13.6 14.0 14.3

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 10.4 13.9 12.1 9.3! 10.6 12.5! 5.6!

3 to 9 33.0 38.6 33.6 35.4 34.3 28.0 32.8

10 to 20 29.4 25.8 27.0 26.9 30.0 34.3 35.2

Over 20 27.2 21.7 27.3 28.4 25.1 25.2 26.4

Middle 

Average number of years 14.3 12.4 14.5 15.1 14.4 14.0 13.9

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 10.2 12.9 10.6 9.5 9.7 11.0! 5.5!

3 to 9 31.0 35.0 31.5 26.5 31.9 31.1 40.9

10 to 20 30.3 32.2 26.8 33.4 30.2 28.9 25.5!

Over 20 28.4 19.9 31.2 30.5 28.2 29.0 28.1

High school

Average number of years 14.5 14.0 14.9 15.2 14.2 14.5 14.7

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 10.7 12.4 11.3 9.6 10.2 11.5 12.6

3 to 9 31.7 34.0 29.7 30.1 34.6 30.9 29.3

10 to 20 27.7 24.0 28.8 28.8 26.7 27.8 26.9

Over 20 29.9 29.6 30.2 31.5 28.6 29.8 31.2

See notes at end of table.

Supplemental Tables
Status of Education in Rural America 135Appendi

x A

Table A-3.8. Average number of years of teaching experience for public school teachers and percentage 

distribution of such teachers, by detailed locale, years of teaching experience, and grade level 

taught: 2003–04—Continued

Years of teaching experience and grade level 

taught

Town Rural

Fringe Distant Remote Fringe Distant Remote

Total

Average number of years 15.3 14.8 15.4 14.0 14.7 15.3

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 9.5 9.8! 7.6 11.2 9.4 9.6

3 to 9 29.5 28.0 27.8 32.3 30.2 26.5

10 to 20 27.0 30.2 32.5 28.2 30.3 32.5

Over 20 34.0 32.0 32.1 28.3 30.2 31.3

Elementary 

Average number of years 15.2 14.7 15.6 13.8 15.2 15.7

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 7.1! 10.9! 7.5! 11.5 6.7! 8.3

3 to 9 33.7 24.8 24.6 33.7 30.2 26.2

10 to 20 24.5 33.1 36.0 27.0 31.9 32.9

Over 20 34.7 31.3 31.8 27.8 31.3 32.6

Middle 

Average number of years 14.9 15.3 15.9 14.3 14.0 15.7

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 12.5 8.3! 6.7! 11.1 10.6 9.8!

3 to 9 25.3 29.7 27.7 30.9 32.0 25.5

10 to 20 30.9 27.9 30.8 30.1 29.8 32.2

Over 20 31.2 34.1 34.8 27.9 27.7 32.5

High school

Average number of years 15.6 14.5 14.7 14.0 14.5 14.7

Years of teaching experience

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Less than 3 10.2 9.8 8.6 11.1 11.6 10.8

3 to 9 27.8 31.8 31.4 32.1 28.8 27.6

10 to 20 27.8 27.7 30.5 27.9 28.3 32.3

Over 20 34.2 30.8 29.6 29.0 31.3 29.4

!Interpret data with caution.

NOTE: Total includes combined level schools not separately shown. Years of teaching experience counts 1 year of part-time teaching the same as 1 year of 

full-time teaching. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, “Teacher Questionnaire,” 2003–04. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Technical Notes

This report includes data from both universe and 

sample surveys. In the case of universe data, all individuals or institutions of interest are included in 

the data collection. There is no sampling error; thus, 

observed differences are reported as true. In the case 

of sample surveys, a nationally representative set of 

respondents is selected and asked to participate in the 

data collection. In order to allow for representative 

samples at the locale level, the samples are stratified. 

Since the sample represents just one of many possible 

samples that could be selected, there is error associated 

with the sample. To avoid reaching false conclusions 

about differences between groups or differences over 

time measured by sample survey data, sampling error is taken into account in statistical tests that are 

conducted to support statements about differences. 

Thus, all statements about differences in this report 

are supported by the data, either directly in the case of 

universe surveys or with statistical significance testing 

in the case of sample survey data. In addition, there 

are occasional references to apparent differences that 

are not statistically significant. Apparent differences 

that are not statistically significant are discussed in 

order to aid the reader in interpreting the data. 

All significance tests of differences are tested at the 

.05 level of significance. Several test procedures were 

used, depending on the type of data interpreted and 

the nature of the statement tested. The most commonly used test procedures were t tests, linear trend 

tests, and equivalency tests. The t tests were not adjusted to compensate for multiple comparisons being 

made simultaneously. Equivalence tests at the 0.15 

level were used to determine whether two statistics 

were substantively equivalent or different by using a 

hypothesis test to determine whether the confidence 

interval of the difference between sample estimates 

was significantly greater or less than a preset substantively important difference. In most cases involving 

percentages, a difference of 3.0 percentage points was 

used to determine substantive equivalence or difference. In some indicators involving only very small 

percentages, a lower value was used. 

The appearance of a “!” symbol (meaning “Interpret 

data with caution”) in a table or figure indicates an 

unstable estimate; therefore, the reader should use 

caution when interpreting the data. These unstable 

estimates are discussed, however, when statistically 

significant differences are found despite large standard errors.

The indicators in this report present data from a 

variety of sources. The sources and their definitions 

of key terms are described in appendix C. Most 

of these sources are federal surveys and many are 

conducted by the National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES). The majority of the sources are 

Appendix B. 

Technical Notes and 

Glossary
138 Status of Education in Rural America Technical Notes

sample surveys; these are the sources of the estimates 

for which standard errors are provided on the NCES 

website: http://nces.ed.gov/. A few sources provide 

universe data, meaning that they collect information 

on the entire population of interest, and therefore no 

standard errors are needed. 

Although percentages reported in the tables are 

generally rounded to one decimal place (e.g., 76.5 

percent), percentages reported in the text and figures are rounded from the original number to whole 

numbers (with any value of 0.50 or above rounded 

to the next highest whole number). Due to rounding, 

cumulative percentages may sometimes equal 99 or 

101 percent, rather than 100. In addition, sometimes 

a whole number in the text may seem rounded incorrectly based on its value when rounded to one decimal 

place. For example, the percentage 14.479 rounds to 

14.5 at one decimal place, but rounds to 14 when 

reported as a whole number. 

Counts or numbers from universe data are reported 

unrounded. Estimated counts or numbers from 

sample survey data are reported rounded to hundreds 

when they are four- and five-digit numbers, and to 

thousands when they are six-digit numbers. 

Comparison of poverty measures

In this report, the definition of poverty varies by 

data source. A comparison of these different poverty 

definitions is provided below. 

Data on household income and the number of people 

living in the household are combined with estimates 

of the poverty threshold published by the Bureau of 

the Census to classify children (or adults) as “below 

the poverty threshold” or “at or above the poverty 

threshold” in indicator 1.5. The thresholds that are 

used to determine whether an individual is below 

or at or above poverty differ for each survey year. 

(For background on how poverty is measured, see 

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty

.html. For the weighted average poverty thresholds 

for various household sizes and years, see http://www

.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/threshld.html.) 

Indicators 1.7, 2.4, and 2.9 use the categories of 

“poor,” “near-poor,” and “nonpoor.” Poor is defined 

to include those families below the poverty threshold, 

near-poor is defined as those at 100–185 percent of 

the poverty threshold, and nonpoor is defined as those 

above 185 percent of the poverty threshold. 

Eligibility for the National School Lunch Program 

also serves as a proxy measure of poverty status. The 

National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program operated in public and private 

nonprofit schools and residential child care centers. 

Unlike the poverty thresholds discussed above, which 

rely on dollar amounts determined by the Census 

Bureau, eligibility for the National School Lunch Program relies on the federal income poverty guidelines 

of the Department of Health and Human Services. 

To be eligible for free lunch, a student must be from 

a household with an income at or below 130 percent 

of the federal poverty threshold; to be eligible for 

reduced-price lunch, a student must be from a household with an income at or below 185 percent of the 

federal poverty threshold. Title I basic program funding relies on free and reduced-price lunch eligibility 

numbers as one (of four) possible poverty measures for 

levels of Title I federal funding. In indicators 1.8 and 

1.9, moderate-to-high poverty schools are defined as 

schools with more than 50 percent of students eligible 

for free or reduced-price lunch. 

In indicators 3.1 and 3.2, district poverty was determined by ranking school districts by the percentage 

of enrolled children ages 5–17 from families with 

an income below the poverty threshold, and then 

dividing these districts into five categories with equal 

proportions of the total enrollment. The low-poverty 

district category consists of the 20 percent of students 

nationally in districts with the lowest percentages 

of poor school-age children. Conversely, the highpoverty district category consists of the 20 percent 

of students nationally in districts with the highest 

percentages of poor school-age children.

Measures of educational attainment

Various measures of educational attainment have been 

developed to provide information about the highest 

level of formal education completed by individuals 

or various population groups. 

Indicator 2.4 uses American Community Survey 

(ACS) data to report on the high school status dropout 

rate among 16- to 24-year-olds. The high school status 

dropout rate is defined as the percentage of the civilian, noninstitutionalized population ages 16 through 

24 who are not in high school and who have not 

earned a high school credential (either a diploma or 

equivalency credential such as a General Educational 

Development [GED] certificate), irrespective of when 

they dropped out. Status dropout rates measure the 

extent of the dropout problem for a population and 

as such can be used to estimate the need for further 

education and training in that population. 
Status of Education in Rural America 139Appendi

x B

Indicator 2.5 examines the percentage of public high 

school students who graduate by using the averaged 

freshman graduation rate (AFGR). The AFGR is an 

estimate of the percentage of the incoming freshman 

class that graduates with regular diplomas 4 years 

later. The AFGR is the number of graduates with 

regular diplomas divided by the estimated count 

of freshmen 4 years earlier as reported through the 

NCES Common Core of Data (CCD), the survey 

system based on state education departments’ annual administrative records. The estimated count of 

freshmen is calculated by summing 10th-grade enrollment 2 years before the graduation year, 9th-grade 

enrollment 3 years before the graduation year, and 

8th-grade enrollment 4 years before the graduation 

year and dividing this amount by 3. The intent of 

this averaging is to account for the high rate of grade 

retention in the freshman year, which adds 9th-grade 

repeaters from the previous year to the number of 

students in the incoming freshman class each year. 

Enrollment counts include a proportional distribution of students not enrolled in a specific grade. 

Indicators 1.14 and 2.9 use American Community 

Survey (ACS) data to examine levels of educational 

attainment among parents of school-age children 

and among adults age 25 and over, respectively. The 

levels of educational attainment reported by ACS 

include less than a high school diploma or equivalent, 

a high school diploma or equivalent, some college 

or an associate’s degree, a bachelor’s degree, and a 

graduate or professional degree. The “less than a high 

school diploma or equivalent” category includes those 

currently enrolled in high school, while the “high 

school diploma or equivalent” category includes 

those currently enrolled in college. ACS data do 

not differentiate between those who graduated from 

public schools, graduated from private schools, or 

who earned an equivalency credential such as a GED. 

The data include individuals who never attended high 

school in the United States and is limited to the civilian, noninstitutionalized population. Indicator 1.14 

reports on the percentages of students ages 6–18 with 

a mother who had completed the various levels of attainment and the percentages of such students with a 

father who had completed these levels of educational 

attainment. Indicator 2.9 examines the percentages 

of adults age 25 and older with these levels of educational attainment. 

Indicator 1.15 uses National Household Education 

Survey (NHES) data to report on parents’ expectations for their children’s highest level of educational 

attainment. The levels of attainment used by NHES 

differ slightly from those used by ACS. They include less than a high school diploma, a high school 

diploma, vocational or technical school, 2 or more 

years of college, a 4- or 5-year college degree, and a 

graduate or professional degree.
140 Status of Education in Rural America Glossary

Glossary

Advanced Placement (AP) course A course within the 

Advanced Placement program (a set of college-level 

courses sponsored by the College Board). Each AP 

course is associated with a standardized AP examination, and students with qualifying AP examination 

scores are granted credit, placement, or both at most 

colleges and universities in the United States and 

Canada, and at institutions in more than 40 other 

countries.

Associate’s degree A degree granted for the successful 

completion of a subbaccalaureate program of studies, 

usually requiring at least 2 years (or equivalent) of 

full-time college-level study. This includes degrees 

granted in a cooperative or work-study program. 

Averaged freshman graduation rate A rate that provides an estimate of the percentage of public high 

school students who graduate on time. The rate is 

the number of graduates divided by the estimated 

count of freshmen 4 years earlier. The estimated averaged freshman enrollment count is the sum of the 

number of 8th-graders 5 years earlier, the number of 

9th-graders 4 years earlier (because this is when current-year seniors were freshmen), and the number of 

10th-graders 3 years earlier, divided by 3. Enrollment 

counts include a proportional distribution of students 

not enrolled in a specific grade. The averaging is intended to account for higher grade retentions in the 

9th grade. Graduates include only those who earned 

regular diplomas or diplomas for advanced academic 

achievement (e.g., honors diplomas) as defined by 

the state or district. 

Bachelor’s degree A degree granted for the successful 

completion of a baccalaureate program of studies, 

usually requiring at least 4 years (or equivalent) of 

full-time college-level study. This includes degrees 

granted in a cooperative or work-study program.

Capital outlay Funds for the acquisition of land 

and buildings; building construction, remodeling, 

and additions; the initial installation or extension of 

service systems and other built-in equipment; and 

site improvement. The category also encompasses 

architectural and engineering services, including the 

development of blueprints.

Carnegie unit The number of credits a student received for a course taken every day, one period per day, 

for a full year; a factor used to standardize all credits 

indicated on transcripts across studies. 

Catholic school A private school over which a Roman Catholic church group exercises some control or 

provides some form of subsidy. Catholic schools for 

the most part include those operated or supported by 

a parish, a group of parishes, a diocese, or a Catholic 

religious order. 

Combined elementary and secondary school A school 

that encompasses instruction at both the elementary 

and the secondary levels; includes schools starting with 

grade 6 or below and ending with grade 9 or above. 

Computer science A group of instructional programs 

that describes computer and information sciences, 

including computer programming, data processing, 

and information systems. 

Constant dollars Dollar amounts that have been 

adjusted by means of price and cost indexes to eliminate inflationary factors and allow direct comparison 

across years. 

Consumer Price Index (CPI) This price index measures 

the average change in the cost of a fixed market basket 

of goods and services purchased by consumers. 

Current dollars Dollar amounts that have not been 

adjusted to compensate for inflation. 

Current expenditures (elementary/secondary) The 

expenditures for operating local public schools, excluding capital outlay and interest on school debt. 

These expenditures include such items as salaries 

for school personnel, fixed charges, student transportation, school books and materials, and energy 

costs. Beginning in 1980–81, expenditures for state 

administration are excluded. 

Degree-granting institutions Postsecondary institutions that are eligible for Title IV federal financial aid 

programs and grant an associate’s or higher degree. For 

an institution to be eligible to participate in Title IV 

financial aid programs, it must offer a program of at 

least 300 clock hours in length, have accreditation recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, have 

been in business for at least 2 years, and have signed a 

participation agreement with the Department.

Doctor’s degree An earned degree carrying the title 

of Doctor. The Doctor of Philosophy degree (Ph.D.) 

is the highest academic degree and requires mastery 

within a field of knowledge and demonstrated ability to perform scholarly research. Other doctorates 

are awarded for fulfilling specialized requirements in 

professional fields, such as education (Ed.D.), musical arts (D.M.A.), business administration (D.B.A.), 
Status of Education in Rural America 141Appendi

x B

and engineering (D.Eng. or D.E.S.). Many doctor’s 

degrees in academic and professional fields require an 

earned master’s degree as a prerequisite. First-professional degrees, such as M.D. and D.D.S., are not 

included under this heading. 

Dual credit course A course for which high school 

students can earn both high school and postsecondary credit.

Educational attainment The highest grade of regular 

school attended and completed. 

Elementary school A school classified as elementary 

by state and local practice and composed of any span 

of grades not above grade 8. In this publication, prekindergarten and kindergarten programs are included 

under this heading. 

Elementary/secondary school As reported in this publication, includes only regular schools (i.e., schools 

that are part of state and local school systems and most 

not-for-profit private elementary/secondary schools, 

both religiously affiliated and nonsectarian). Schools 

not reported include subcollegiate departments of 

institutions of higher education, residential schools 

for exceptional children, federal schools for American 

Indians, and federal schools on military posts and 

other federal installations. 

Employment Includes civilian, noninstitutional persons who (1) worked during any part of the survey 

week as paid employees; worked in their own business, profession, or farm; or worked 15 hours or more 

as unpaid workers in a family-owned enterprise; or 

(2) were not working, but had jobs or businesses from 

which they were temporarily absent due to illness, 

bad weather, vacation, labor-management dispute, 

or personal reasons regardless of whether or not they 

were seeking another job.

English A group of instructional programs that 

describes the English language arts, including composition, creative writing, and the study of literature. 

Enrollment The total number of students registered 

in a given school unit at a given time, generally in 

the fall of a year. 

Expenditures Charges incurred, whether paid or 

unpaid, which are presumed to benefit the current 

fiscal year. For elementary/secondary schools, these 

include all charges for current outlays plus capital 

outlays and interest on school debt. For institutions 

of higher education, these include current outlays 

plus capital outlays. For government, these include 

charges net of recoveries and other correcting transactions other than for retirement of debt, investment in 

securities, extension of credit, or as agency transactions. Government expenditures include only external 

transactions, such as the provision of perquisites or 

other payments in kind. Aggregates for groups of 

governments exclude intergovernmental transactions 

among the governments. 

Expenditures per pupil Charges incurred for a particular period of time divided by a student unit of 

measure, such as average daily attendance or average 

daily membership. 

Family A group of two persons or more (one of 

whom is the householder) related by birth, marriage, 

or adoption and residing together. All such persons 

(including related subfamily members) are considered 

as members of one family. 

Federal funds Amounts collected and used by the 

federal government for the general purposes of the 

government. There are four types of federal fund 

accounts: the general fund, special funds, public 

enterprise funds, and intragovernmental funds. The 

major federal fund is the general fund, which is derived from general taxes and borrowing. Federal funds 

also include certain earmarked collections, such as 

those generated by and used to finance a continuing 

cycle of business-type operations. 

First-professional degree A degree that signifies 

both completion of the academic requirements for 

beginning practice in a given profession and a level 

of professional skill beyond that normally required 

for a bachelor’s degree. This degree usually is based 

on a program requiring at least 2 academic years of 

work prior to entrance and a total of at least 6 academic years of work to complete the degree program, 

including both prior required college work and the 

professional program itself. By NCES definition, 

first-professional degrees are awarded in the fields 

of dentistry (D.D.S. or D.M.D.), medicine (M.D.), 

optometry (O.D.), osteopathic medicine (D.O.), 

pharmacy (D.Phar.), podiatric medicine (D.P.M.), 

veterinary medicine (D.V.M.), chiropractic (D.C. 

or D.C.M.), law (J.D.), and theological professions 

(M.Div. or M.H.L.). 

Foreign languages A group of instructional programs 

that describes the structure and use of language that 

is common or indigenous to people of the same community or nation, the same geographical area, or the 

same cultural traditions. Programs cover such features 

as sound, literature, syntax, phonology, semantics, 
142 Status of Education in Rural America Glossary

sentences, prose, and verse, as well as the development of skills and attitudes used in communicating 

and evaluating thoughts and feelings through oral 

and written language. 

High school A secondary school offering the final 

years of high school work necessary for graduation, 

usually including grades 10, 11, 12 or grades 9, 10, 

11, and 12.

Household All the persons who occupy a housing 

unit. A house, apartment, mobile home, or other 

group of rooms, or a single room, is regarded as a 

housing unit when it is occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, that is, when the 

occupants do not live and eat with any other persons 

in the structure and there is direct access from the 

outside or through a common hall. 

Impact Aid Impact Aid was designed to assist local 

school districts that have lost property tax revenue 

due to the presence of tax-exempt Federal property, 

or that have experienced increased expenditures due 

to the enrollment of federally connected children, 

including children living on Indian lands.

Instruction (elementary and secondary) Instruction 

encompasses all activities dealing directly with the 

interaction between teachers and students. Teaching 

may be provided for students in a school classroom, 

in another location such as a home or hospital, and in 

other learning situations such as those involving cocurricular activities. Instruction may be provided through 

some other approved medium, such as television, radio, 

telephone, and correspondence. Instruction expenditures include salaries, employee benefits, purchased 

services, supplies, and tuition to private schools.

Instructional staff In local schools, includes all public 

elementary and secondary (junior and senior high) 

day-school positions that are in the nature of teaching or in the improvement of the teaching-learning 

situation. Instructional staff includes consultants or 

supervisors of instruction, principals, teachers, guidance personnel, librarians, psychological personnel, 

and other instructional staff, and excludes administrative staff, attendance personnel, clerical personnel, 

and junior college staff. 

International Baccalaureate (IB) program High school 

program including an international curriculum certified by the International Baccalaureate Organization. 

IB courses compose a 2-year liberal arts curriculum 

that leads to an IB diploma. Like AP courses, IB 

courses may earn students college credits. 

Labor force Persons employed as civilians, unemployed but looking for work, or in the armed services 

during the survey week. The “civilian labor force” 

comprises all civilians classified as employed or unemployed. See also Unemployed.

Master’s degree A degree awarded for successful completion of a program generally requiring 1 or 2 years 

of full-time college-level study beyond the bachelor’s 

degree. One type of master’s degree, including the 

Master of Arts degree, or M.A., and the Master of 

Science degree, or M.S., is awarded in the liberal arts 

and sciences for advanced scholarship in a subject 

field or discipline and demonstrated ability to perform 

scholarly research. A second type of master’s degree is 

awarded for the completion of a professionally oriented 

program, for example, an M.Ed. in education, an 

M.B.A. in business administration, an M.F.A. in fine 

arts, an M.M. in music, an M.S.W. in social work, 

and an M.P.A. in public administration. A third type 

of master’s degree is awarded in professional fields for 

study beyond the first-professional degree, for example, 

the Master of Laws (L.L.M.) and Master of Science in 

various medical specializations. 

Mathematics A group of instructional programs that 

describes the science of numbers and their operations, 

interrelations, combinations, generalizations, and 

abstractions and of space configurations and their 

structure, measurement, transformations, and 

generalizations.

Operation and maintenance services Includes salary, 

benefits, supplies, and contractual fees for supervision 

of operations and maintenance, operating buildings 

(heating, lighting, ventilating, repair, and replacement), care and upkeep of grounds and equipment, 

vehicle operations and maintenance (other than student transportation), security, and other operations 

and maintenance services.

Private school or institution A school or institution 

that is controlled by an individual or agency other 

than a state, a subdivision of a state, or the federal 

government. It is usually supported primarily by other 

than public funds, and the operation of its program 

rests with other than publicly elected or appointed 

officials. Private schools and institutions include both 

not-for-profit and for-profit institutions.

Public school or institution A school or institution 

controlled and operated by publicly elected or appointed officials and deriving its primary support 

from public funds. 
Status of Education in Rural America 143Appendi

x B

Pupil-to-teacher ratio The enrollment of pupils at a 

given period of time, divided by the full-time-equivalent number of classroom teachers serving these pupils 

during the same period. 

Racial/ethnic group Classification indicating general 

racial or ethnic heritage based on self-identification, 

as in data collected by the Census Bureau, or based 

on observer identification, as in data collected by the 

Office for Civil Rights. These categories are in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget 

standard classification scheme presented below: 

White A person having origins in any of the 

original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or 

the Middle East. Normally excludes persons of 

Hispanic origin. 

Black A person having origins in any of the 

black racial groups in Africa. Normally excludes 

persons of Hispanic origin. 

Hispanic A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, 

Cuban, Central or South American, or other 

Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. 

Asian A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the 

Indian subcontinent, e.g., China, India, Japan, 

the Philippines, Vietnam, and Korea. Normally 

excludes persons of Hispanic origin. 

Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander A person 

having origins in any of the original peoples of the 

Pacific Islands, e.g., Hawaii, Guam, and Samoa. 

Normally excludes persons of Hispanic origin. 

American Indian or Alaska Native A person 

having origins in any of the original peoples of 

North America and South America and maintaining their cultural identification through tribal 

affiliation or community recognition. Normally 

excludes persons of Hispanic origin. 

Region The regions of the United States are defined 

by state as follows:

Northeast Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

Midwest Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North 

Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. 

South Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, 

Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia. 

West Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, 

Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

Revenue All funds received from external sources, 

net of refunds, and correcting transactions. Noncash 

transactions, such as receipt of services, commodities, 

or other receipts in kind are excluded, as are funds 

received from the issuance of debt, liquidation of 

investments, and nonroutine sale of property. 

Salary The total amount regularly paid or stipulated 

to be paid to an individual, before deductions, for 

personal services rendered while on the payroll of a 

business or organization. 

School A division of the school system consisting 

of students in one or more grades or other identifiable groups and organized to give instruction of a 

defined type. One school may share a building with 

another school or one school may be housed in 

several buildings. 

School district An education agency at the local level 

that exists primarily to operate public schools or to 

contract for public school services. Synonyms are 

“local basic administrative unit” and “local education agency.” 

Science The body of related courses concerned with 

knowledge of the physical and biological world and 

with the processes of discovering and validating this 

knowledge. 

Secondary school A school comprising any span of 

grades beginning with the next grade following an 

elementary or middle school (usually 7, 8, or 9) and 

ending with or below grade 12. Both junior high 

schools and senior high schools are included. 

Social sciences A body of related courses concerned 

with knowledge of the social life of human groups 

and individuals, including economics, geography, 

history, political science, psychology, social studies, 

and sociology. 

Status dropout rate The percentage of civilian, noninstitutionalized 16- to 24-year-olds who are not in 

high school and who have not earned a high school 

credential (either a diploma or equivalency credential 

such as a GED). The status dropout rate includes all 

dropouts regardless of when they last attended school, 
144 Status of Education in Rural America

as well as individuals who may have never attended 

school in the United States, such as immigrants who 

did not complete a high school diploma in their 

home country.

Student An individual for whom instruction is 

provided in an educational program under the jurisdiction of a school, school system, or other education 

institution. No distinction is made between the terms 

“student” and “pupil,” though “student” may refer to 

one receiving instruction at any level while “pupil” 

refers only to one attending school at the elementary 

or secondary level. A student may receive instruction 

in a school facility or in another location, such as at 

home or in a hospital. Instruction may be provided 

by direct student-teacher interaction or by some 

other approved medium, such as television, radio, 

telephone, and correspondence. 

Title I Title I is designed to support State and local 

school reform efforts tied to challenging State academic standards in order to reinforce and amplify 

efforts to improve teaching and learning for students 

farthest from meeting State standards. Individual 

public schools with poverty rates above 40 percent 

may use Title I funds, along with other Federal, State, 

and local funds, to operate a “schoolwide program” 

to upgrade the instructional program for the whole 

school. Schools with poverty rates below 40 percent, 

or those choosing not to operate a schoolwide program, offer a “targeted assistance program” in which 

the school identifies students who are failing, or 

most at risk of failing, to meet the State’s challenging 

performance standards, then designs, in consultation 

with parents, staff, and district staff, an instructional 

program to meet the needs of those students.

Unadjusted dollars See Current dollars. 

Unemployed Civilians who had no employment but 

were available for work and (1) had engaged in any 

specific job-seeking activity within the past 4 weeks; 

(2) were waiting to be called back to a job from which 

they had been laid off; or (3) were waiting to report 

to a new wage or salary job within 30 days. 

Vocational education (or Career/Technical education) Organized educational programs, services, and 

activities that are directly related to the preparation 

of individuals for paid or unpaid employment, or for 

additional preparation for a career, requiring other 

than a baccalaureate or advanced degree.

Glossary
U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau

American Community Survey (ACS)

The American Community Survey (ACS) is a sample 

survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. The 

ACS was first implemented in 1996 and has expanded 

in scope in subsequent years. The ACS will replace the 

long-form survey in the Decennial Census by 2010. 

For more information on the American Community 

Survey, see http://www.census.gov/acs.

U.S. Department of Education

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

Common Core of Data (CCD), Public Elementary/

Secondary School Universe Survey

The Common Core of Data (CCD) is a universe 

survey database with comprehensive, annually updated information. The Public Elementary/Secondary 

School Universe Survey compiles data from state 

education agencies based on school records to provide 

a complete listing of all public elementary and secondary schools in the country and basic information 

and descriptive statistics on all schools, their students, 

and their teachers. American Indian/Alaska Native 

students on reservations are not included in the Public 

Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey.

For more information on the CCD, see http://nces

.ed.gov/ccd/index.asp.

Fast Response Survey System (FRSS)

The Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) was established in 1975 to collect issue-oriented data quickly 

and with minimum response burden. The FRSS, 

whose surveys collect and report data on key education issues at the elementary and secondary levels, 

was designed to meet the data needs of Department 

of Education analysts, planners, and decisionmakers 

when information could not be collected quickly 

through NCES’s large recurring surveys. 

For more information on the FRSS, see http://nces

.ed.gov/surveys/frss.

National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP)

The National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) is a nationally representative and continuing 

assessment of what America’s students know and can 

do in various subject areas. For over three decades, 

assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, writing, history, geography, 

and other subjects. 

For more information on NAEP, see http://nces

.ed.gov/nationsreportcard.

The National Household Education Surveys Program 

(NHES)

The National Household Education Surveys Program 

(NHES) was developed by NCES to complement its 

Appendix C. 

 Guide to Sources
146 Status of Education in Rural America

institutional surveys. This program is the principal 

mechanism for addressing topics that cannot be addressed in institutional data collections. By collecting 

data directly from households, NHES enables NCES 

to gather data on a wide range of issues, such as 

early childhood care and education, children’s readiness for school, parent perceptions of school safety 

and discipline, before- and after-school activities of 

school-age children, participation in adult and continuing education, parent involvement in education, 

and civic involvement.

For more information on the NHES Program, see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nhes. 

The Private School Universe Survey (PSS)

The target population for the PSS consists of all private schools in the United States that meet the NCES 

definition (i.e., a private school is not supported primarily by public funds, it provides instruction for one 

or more of grades K–12 or comparable ungraded levels, and it has one or more teachers. Organizations or 

institutions that provide support for homeschooling 

without offering classroom instruction for students 

are not included.). The PSS, conducted every 2 

years, began with the 1989–90 school year and was 

administered again in 1991–92, 1993–94, 1995–96, 

1997–98, 1999–2000, 2001–02, 2003–04.

For more information on the PSS, see http://nces

.ed.gov/surveys/pss.

Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS)

SASS has four core components: the School Questionnaire, the Teacher Questionnaire, the Principal 

Questionnaire, and the School District Questionnaire, 

which was known as the Teacher Demand and Shortage 

Questionnaire until the 1999–2000 SASS administration. These questionnaires are sent to respondents in 

public, private, and Bureau of Indian Affairs/tribal 

schools. In 1999–2000, public charter schools were 

also included in the sample. For the 2003–04 SASS, 

a sample of public charter schools are included in the 

sample as part of the public school questionnaire.

For more information on SASS, see http://nces

.ed.gov/surveys/sass.

Guide to Sources