U.S. Department of Education

Institute of Education Sci enc es

NCES 2004–076

National Center forEducation Sta tis tics
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
U.S. Department of Education

Institute of Education SciencesNCES 2004–076

The Conditionof Education 2004in BriefJune 2004EditorsAndrea LivingstonMPR Associates, Inc.John WirtNational Center forEducation Statistics
U.S. Department of Education

Rod PaigeSecretaryInstitute of Education SciencesGrover J. WhitehurstDirectorNational Center for Education StatisticsRobert LernerCommissionerThe National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to education in tStates and other nations. It fulfi lls a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of edu

United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and signifi cance of such statistics; assist state and local educatioimproving their statistical systems; and review and report on education activities in other countries.NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, com plete, and accurate indicators of ed u ca titrends; and report timely, useful, and high quality data to the U.S. De part ment of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, pdata users, and the general public.We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a variety of audiences. You, as our customer, ajudge of our success in communicating information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other U.S. Department oNational Center for Ed u ca tion Statistics 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 20006–5651June 2004The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is: http://nces.ed.govThe NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearchSuggested Citation:Livingston, A., and Wirt, J. (2004). The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief (NCES 2004–076). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educatio

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Offi ce.For additional information, contact John Wirt, National Center for Education Statistics (phone: 202-502-7478; e-mail: john.wirt@ed.gov).

To order this pub li ca tion or the complete volume, write:U.S. Department of Education, ED Pubs, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794–1398or call toll free 1–877–4ED–PUBS. The complete volume also appears on the NCES web site (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe).
What’s Inside

This publication contains a sample of the 38 indicators in The Condition of Education 2004. To order the entire printeThe Condition, call ED PUBS (1-877-4ED-PUBS). The indicators in this publication are numbered sequentially, rather than according to their numbers in the complete eContents page offers a cross reference between the two publications.Since 1870, the federal government has gathered data about students, teachers, schools, and education fund ing. As maCongress, the U.S. De part ment of Ed u ca tion’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) annually publishes a sta tis on the status and progress of ed u ca tion in the United States. The Condition of Education in cludes data and analysis o

variety of issues. The indicators in the 2004 edition are in six sections:

● Participation in Education● Learner Outcomes● Student Effort and Educational Progress● Contexts of Elementary and Secondary Education● Contexts of Postsecondary Education● Societal Support for Learning

The indicators in The Condition of Education use data from government and private sources. The complete publicatioa special analysis on changes in undergraduate student fi nancial aid between 1989–90 and 1999–2000. It also contains tables and notes related to each in di ca tor.The Condition of Education in Brief and the complete edition are available on the NCES web site (http://nces.ed.gov).
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Contents

Indicator 1 Trends in Full- and Half-Day Kindergarten (Indicator 3)...............................................................................Indicator 2 Past and Projected Elementary and Secondary School Enrollments (Indicator 4).............................

Indicator 3 Concentration of Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity and Poverty (Indicator 5)...........................................

Indicator 4 Past and Projected Undergraduate Enrollments (Indicator 6)...................................................................

Indicator 5 Students’ Reading and Mathematics Achievement Through 3rd Grade (Indicator 8) ......................

Indicator 6 Reading Performance of Students in Grades 4 and 8 (Indicator 9)..........................................................

Indicator 7 Writing Performance of Students in Grades 4, 8, and 12 (Indicator 10)..................................................Indicator 8 Mathematics Performance of Students in Grades 4 and 8 (Indicator 11)..............................................Indicator 9 Youth Neither Enrolled nor Working (Indicator 13) .......................................................................................

Indicator 10 Event Dropout Rates by Family Income, 1972–2001 (Indicator 16) .........................................................

Indicator 11 Degrees Earned by Women (Indicator 20) ........................................................................................................

Indicator 12 Trends in Science and Mathematics Coursetaking (Indicator 21) ............................................................Indicator 13 Out-of-Field Teaching in Middle and High School Grades (Indicator 24) ..............................................Indicator 14 Parental Choice of Schools (Indicator 25)..........................................................................................................

Indicator 15 Employees Who Study (Indicator 29)..................................................................................................................

Indicator 16 Remedial Coursetaking (Indicator 31) ................................................................................................................

Indicator 17 Distance Education at Postsecondary Institutions (Indicator 32).............................................................

Indicator 18 Public Elementary and Secondary Expenditures (Indicator 35)................................................................

Indicator 19 Institutional Aid at 4-Year Colleges and Universities (Indicator 37).........................................................

Participation in EducationLearner OutcomesStudent Effort andEducational ProgressContexts of Elementaryand Secondary EducationContexts ofPostsecondary EducationSocietal Supportfor Learning
Page 2 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 1Trends in Full- and HalfDay KindergartenSOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey (CPS), October Supplement, selected years 1977–2001, previously unpublished tabulation (December 2003).

Participation in 

Total enrollment in kindergarten among children ages 4–6 increased from 3.2 million in 1977 1992, before decreasing to 3.7 million in 2001. The trend refl ects changes in the number of population ages 4–6 and their enrollment rate. In 2001, the most common age of enrollment wBetween 1977 and 2001, the distribution of kindergartners shifted from half-day to full-day 1977, a higher percentage of children attended a half-day than a full-day program (73 vs. 27 percthis distribution had reversed, and in 2001, full-day kindergarten was generally more common kindergarten, with 60 percent of kindergartners attending full day and 40 percent attending hEnrollment among 4- to 6-year-olds in kindergarten increased from 1977 to 2001, as did proportion of students enrolled full day. By 1995, it was larger than the proportion enrol

KINDERGARTEN ENROLLMENT: Percentage distribution of children ages 4–6 enrolled in kindergarten, by tySelected years October 1977–2001

0

20406080

100

Percent

1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001

Year

Full-day

Half-day
The Condition of Education 2004 in 

As a result of rising immigration and the baby boom echo—the 25 percent increase in the number of annual births beginning in the mid-1970s—enrollment in public schools for prekindergarten through grade 12 increased in the latter part of the 1980s and the 1990s, reaching an estimated 48.0 million in 2003. Public enrollment for prekindergarten through grade 12 is projected to be 48.2 million in 2004 and to increase to an all-time high of 49.7 million in 2013. Public enrollment in prekindergarten through grade 8 is projected to decrease from 2003 through 2005 and then to increase through 2013, whereas public enrollment in grades 9 through 12 is projected to increase through 2007 and then to decrease.

Past and 

Elemen

Seconda

Enr

NOTE: Includes kindergarten and menrollment.SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Nof Education Statistics to 2013 (NCES 204 and (forthcoming) Digest of Educatio2004–024), table 37. Data from U.S. DeNCES, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Sof Public Elementary/Secondary Edand “Statistics of Public Elementary aSystems,” various years.

Participation in Ed u ca tion

Public elementary and secondary enrollment is projected to increase to 49.7 million in 2013. 

SCHOOL ENROLLMENT: Public elementary and secondary enrollment in prekindergarten through grade 12 (in thousands), by grade level, with projections: Fall 1965–2013

0

10,00020,00030,00040,00050,000

Number (in thousands)

Fall of year

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2013

Projected

Grades 9–12

Grades preK–8

Total
Page 4 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

In addition to being more likely than White students to be from low-income families, Black students are more likely to be concentrated in high-poverty schools. In 2003, as the proportioHispanic students increased, so did the proportion of students in the school eligible for free or lunch, a proxy measure of low-income family status. Six percent of Black and Hispanic 4th-gthe lowest-poverty schools (with 10 percent or less of students eligible) in 2003 versus 29 pe4th-graders. In contrast, 47 percent of Black and 51 percent of Hispanic 4th-graders were poverty schools (with more than 75 percent eligible) versus 5 percent of White 4th-graders. 

Concentration of Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity and Poverty1Black includes African American and Hispanic includes Latino. 

Racial categories exclude Hispanic origin.NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 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 185 percent of the poverty level for reduced-price lunch or at or below 130 percent of the poverty level for free lunch.SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, NCES, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2003 Reading Assessment, previously unpublished tabulation (January 2004).

Participation in 

Black and Hispanic 4th-graders are more likely than White 4th-graders to be in schools wlevels of low-income students and less likely to be in schools with low levels of low-incom

Indicator 3

POVERTY CONCENTRATION: Percentage distribution of 4th-graders by the percentage of students in the for free or reduced-price lunch, by race/ethnicity: 2003

0

20406080

100

Percent

Race/ethnicity1

More than75 percenteligible

51–75 percenteligible

11–25 percenteligible

26–50 percenteligible

10 percentor lesseligible

21 17 23 19 21

29

22

28

16

6 5 7

17

23

47

6 8

13

22

5

Total Black White Hispanic
The Condition of Education 2004 in 

Participation in Ed u ca tion 

Past and 

Under

Enr

NOTE: Projections are based upon thassumptions concerning the economimputed using alternative procedures. SOURCE: U.S. Department of EducationDigest of Education Statistics 2003 (NCES and (2003) Projections of Education St

2004–013), tables 16, 18, and 19. Data of Education, NCES, 1969–1986 HighInformation Survey (HEGIS), “Fall EnroUniversities” and 1987–2001 Integrated tion Data System, “Fall Enrollment Surv

Total undergraduate enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions has generally increased in the past three decades and is projected to continue doing so throughout the next 10 years. These increases have been accompanied by changes in students’ attendance status, the type of institution attended, and the proportion of students who are women. In the next decade, full-time undergraduate enrollment is expected to increase at a faster rate than parttime enrollment, and 4-year undergraduate enrollment—which has also increased over the past three decades—is expected to increase at a faster rate than enrollment in 2-year institutions. Women’s undergraduate enrollment, which exceeds that of men, is projected to continue growing at a faster rate than men’s in the next 10 years.In the next 10 years, undergraduate enrollment in 4-year institutions is projected to increase faster than in 2-year institutions and women’s enrollment is expected to increase faster than men’s.

UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT: Total undergraduate enrollment in degree-granting 2- and 4-year postsecondary institutions (in thousands), by sex, attendance status, and type of institution, with projections: Fall 1970–2013

0

1,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

10,00011,00012,000

Enrollment (in thousands)

1970–2001: Actual 2002–2013: Projected

Female

Male

Full-time

Part-time

4-year2-year

Year

Projected

1970 1980 1990 2000 2013

Projected

1970 1980 1990 2000 2013

Projected

1970 1980 1990 2000 2013
Page 6 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Students’ Reading and Mathematics Achievement Through 3rd Grade1Family risk factors include living below the poverty level, 

primary home language was non-English, mother’s highest education was less than a high school diploma/GED, and living in a single-parent household, as measured in kindergarten. NOTE: The fi ndings are based on children who entered kindergarten for the fi rst time in fall 1998 and were assessed in fall 1998, spring 1999, spring 2000, and spring 2002. Estimates refl ect the sample of children assessed in English in all assessment years (approximately 19 percent of Asian children and approximately 30 percent of Hispanic children were not assessed). Although most of the sample was in 3rd grade in spring 2002, 10 percent were in 2nd grade, and about 1 percent were enrolled in other grades. SOURCE: Rathbun, A., and West, J. (forthcoming). From Kindergarten Through Third Grade: Children’s Beginning School Experiences (NCES 2004–007), tables A-4 and A-5. Data from U.S. Department of Education, NCES, Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–99 (ECLS-K), Longitudinal Kindergarten-First Grade Public-Use data fi le and Third Grade Restricted-Use data fi le, Fall 1998, Spring 1999, Spring 2000, and Spring 2002.

According to fi ndings from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 19assesses children’s achievement in reading and mathematics through the early elementary gradof family risk factors1 is negatively associated with children’s initial performance and achi

in reading and mathematics. As the number of family risk factors increased, children expergains from the start of kindergarten in fall 1998 through the end of 3rd grade in spring 2002 iareas. Children with no family risk factors had an average gain of 84 points in reading, while 2 or more family risk factors had a 73-point gain.

Children without family risk factors, such as poverty, experience a larger gain in readinmathematics mean scale scores than their peers from the start of kindergarten throug

Learner 

Indicator 5

EARLY READING AND MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE: Children’s reading and mathematics scale scores for fall 199dergartners from kindergarten through 3rd grade, by family risk factors: Fall 1998, spring 1999, spring 2000, a

20408060

100120

Scale score Reading Mathematics

Kindergarten

0

2 or morisk fact0 family 1 family 

Spring

1st

grade

Spring

3rd

grade

Fall Spring

Kindergarten

Spring

1st

grade

Spring

3rd

grade

Fall Spring
The Condition of Education 2004 in 

Reading Perfor

Students in Grad

*Signifi cantly different from 2003.1Testing accommodations (e.g., extended 

ing) for children with disabilities and limstudents were not permitted.NOTE: In addition to allowing for aaccommodations-permitted results at differ slightly from previous years’ resulreported results for 1998 and 2000, duweighting procedures. Beginning in 20sample was obtained by aggregating tstate, rather than by obtaining an innational sample. As a consequence, the sple increased, and smaller differences bettypes of students were found to be statiwould have been detected in previous reading assessment did not include stuNAEP includes students in public and pSOURCE: U.S. Department of EducatiNation’s Report Card: Reading Highlights 2and NAEP web data tool (http://nces.ed.naepdata/search.asp). Data from U.S. tion, NCES, National Assessment of Educaselected years 1992–2003 Reading Ass

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assessed reading performance in grades 4 and 8 in selected years between 1992 and 2003. The average reading scale score of 4th-graders in 2003 was not signifi cantly different from that in 1992. After decreasing in the late 1990s, the average score increased from 2000 to 2002, with the score in 2003 not signifi cantly different from that in 2002. The average score of 8th-graders was higher in 2003 than in 1992 but decreased 1 point from 264 in 2002 to 263 in 2003. In both grades, females outperformed males, and White and Asian/Pacifi c Islander students had higher average scores than American Indian, Hispanic, and Black students. While 8th-grade reading performance increased between 1992 and 2003, no difference was detected in the performance of 4th-graders.Learner Outcomes 

READING PERFORMANCE: Average reading scale scores for 4th- and 8th-graders: Selected years 1992–2003

Scale score

200250

300

175225275

Grade 8 withoutaccommodations1Grade 8 withaccommodationsGrade 4 withaccommodationsGrade 4 withoutaccommodations1

0

>

<

Year

1992 1994 1998 2000 2002 2003

217 214* 217 217

213*

219 218

263 264* 263264 260* 260*

215*
Page 8 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 7 Learner Writing Performance of Students in Grades 4, 8, and 12*Signifi cantly different from 2002.NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. The NAEP includes students in public and private schools.SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, NCES. (2003). The Nation’s Report Card: Writing 2002 (NCES 2003–529), table 2.1 and NAEP web data tool (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/). Data from U.S. Department of Education, NCES National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998 and 2002 Writing Assessments.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assessed the performance of 412th-graders in writing in 1998 and 2002. In 2002, 28 percent of 4th-graders, 31 percent oand 24 percent of 12th-graders performed at or above the Profi cient level in writing. The p

4th- and 8th-graders at or above Profi cient were higher in 2002 than in 1998, as was the 

4th-graders at or above Basic. The percentage of 12th-graders at or above Basic decreased. A

2 percent of students in each grade performed at Advanced in 2002, at all three grades, trepresented an increase.The percentages of 4th- and 8th-graders who performed at or above the Profi cient le

increased between 1998 and 2002.

WRITING PERFORMANCE: Percentage distribution of students performing at each writing achievement 1998 and 2002

0

20406080

100

Bas

Bel

Adv

Pro

Percent

1998 2002 1998 2002 1998 2002

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

16*61*22*

1*

145826

2

16

58*25*

1*

155429

2

22*57*

21

1*

265122

2
The Condition of Education 2004 in 

Mat

Performance of 

in Grade

*Signifi cantlydifferent from 2003.1Testing accommodations (e.g., extended 

ing) for children with disabilities and limstudents were not permitted.NOTE: In addition to allowing for accommodations-permitted results (1996–20previous years’ results, and from previou1996 and 2000, due to changes in samplThe NAEP national sample in 2003 was ing the samples from each state, ratheindependently selected national samplesize of the national sample increased, abetween years or between types of stbe statistically signifi cant than would previous assessments. The 2003 mathenot include students in grade 12. The Nin public and private schools.SOURCE: U.S. Department of EducatiNation’s Report Card: Mathematics H2004–451) and NAEP web data toonationsreportcard/naepdata/searchDepartment of Education, NCES, NaEducational Progress (NAEP), selectMathematics Assessments.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assessed mathematics performance in grades 4 and 8 in selected years between 1990 and 2003. Average scale scores for 4th- and 8th-graders were higher in 2003 than in previous assessments. The average score in grade 4 increased from 226 in 2000 to 235 in 2003, and from 273 to 278 in grade 8. In both grades, males, on average, scored higher than females. Asian/Pacifi c Islanders scored higher than Whites, and both groups scored higher than other racial/ethnic groups. In grade 4, all 42 participating states and jurisdictions experienced an increase between 1992 and 2003; in grade 8, the average score of the 38 participants increased between 1990 and 2003. The mathematics performance of 4th- and 8th-graders increased steadily from 1990 to 2003. For both grades, the average scale scores in 2003 were higher than in all previous assessments.Learner Outcomes 

MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE: Average mathematics scale scores for 4th- and 8th-graders: Selected years 1990–2003

275

Scale score

200250

300

175

225

Grade 8 withoutaccommodations1Grade 8 withaccommodationsGrade 4 withaccommodationsGrade 4 withoutaccommodations1

0

>

<

Year

1990 1992 1996 2000 2003

228*

226*

224*

224*

272*

270*

268*

263*213*

220*

275*

273*

235

278
Page 10 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 9Youth Neither Enrolled nor Working1American Indian includes Alaska Native, Black includes African American, Pacifi c Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and 

Hispanic includes Latino. Racial categories exclude Hispanic origin. Other race/ethnicities are included in the total but are not shown separately.NOTE: In 1994, the survey methodology for the Current Population Survey (CPS) was changed and weights were adjusted. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey (CPS), March Supplement, selected years 1986–2003, previously unpublished tabulation (December 2003).

Learner 

The percentage of persons ages 16–24 who were neither enrolled in school nor working vracial/ethnic backgrounds in 2003. For example, the percentages of White and Asian/Pacifi c Iwho were not enrolled in school or working were lower than the percentages of HispanAmerican Indian youth. The percentage of Hispanic youth was lower than the percentages American Indian youth. Between 1986 and 2003, the percentages of Black, White, and Hispa16–24 who were not enrolled in school or working decreased, while the percentages of Amand Asian/Pacifi c Islander youth showed no clear trend between 1988 and 2003.

In 2003, 13 percent of all persons ages 16–24 were neither enrolled in school nor workdecrease from 1986.

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT: Percentage of persons ages 16–24 who were neither enrolled in school nor woethnicity: Selected years 1986–2003

Percent

204010

0

3050

HispWhitAsiaIslanAmeTotaBlac

Year

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2003
The Condition of Education 2004 in B

Event Drop

by Famil

19

NOTE: The numerator of the event dropnumber of people ages 15–24 surveyenrolled in high school in October 200October 2001, and had not completed 2001. The denominator of the event dropouts (i.e., the numerator) plus the ages 15–24 who attended grades 10–still enrolled in 2001 or had graduated ocredential. Data on family income are mily income is divided into the lowest 2incomes, the middle 60 percent, and thSOURCE: Kaufman, P., and Chapman, C. (Rates in the United States: 2001 (NCA-1. Data from U.S. Department of CoCensus, Current Population Survey (CPS1972–2001. 

Student Effort and Educational ProgressEvent dropout rates represent the percentage of students who drop out of high school each year. During the 12 months ending in October 2001, high school students from low-income families (the lowest 20 percent) dropped out of school at six times the rate of their peers from high-income families. About 11 percent of students from low-income families dropped out of high school, whereas 5 percent of middle-income students and 2 percent of high-income students did so. Since 1990, event dropout rates for all income groups have stabilized, with the rates for low-income youth varying between 10 and 13 percent and the rates for middleand high-income youth fl uctuating between 4 and 6 percent and 1 and 3 percent, respectively.During the 1970s and 1980s, event dropout rates declined, but rates remained unchanged for all income groups during the 1990s. 

EVENT DROPOUTS: Event dropout rates of 15- through 24-year-olds who dropped out of grades 10–12, by family income: October 1972–2001

High income

Middle income

Low income

1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2001

Year

Percent

201510

5

0

Total
Page 12 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Student Effort and Education

Women earn a greater proportion of bachelor’s degrees than they did 30 years ago. In 1970–71, wopercent of all bachelor’s degrees, but since 1981–82, they have earned at least half of all bachelor’s deIn 2001–02, women were awarded 57 percent of all bachelor’s degrees. Some fi elds that were femal1970–71 remained so in 2001–02, including health professions and related sciences, education, Englisliterature/letters, and visual and performing arts. Though women earned less than half of the bachelortraditionally male-dominated fi elds of mathematics, agriculture and natural resources, physical scieand information sciences, and engineering in 2001–02, they have made substantial gains since 197

Women have earned more than half of all bachelor’s degrees every year since 1981–8trail men in certain fi elds but have made substantial gains since 1970–71. 

1Includes other fi elds not shown separately.

NOTE: Based on data from all degree-granting institutions. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, NCES. (2003). Digest of Education Statistics 2002 (NCES 2003–060), tables 246, 276–297 and (forthcoming) Digest of Education Statistics 2003 (NCES 2004–024), tables 265, 268, and 271. Data from U.S. Department of Education, NCES, 1969–86 Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), “Degrees and Other Formal Awards Conferred” and 1987–2002 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, “Completions Survey” (IPEDS-C:87–02), fall 2002. Indicator 11

Degrees Earned by Women

BACHELOR’S DEGREES: Percentage of bachelor’s degrees earned by women and change in the percentagwomen from 1970–71 to 2001–02, by fi eld of study: 1970–71, 1984–85, and 2001–02

Percentage po

Field of study 1970–71 1984–85 2001–02

1970–71 

to 

1984–85

1984–2001–

 Total1 43.4 50.7 57.4 7.4 

Health professions and related sciences 77.1 84.9 85.5 7.8 Education 74.5 75.9 77.4 1.3 English language and literature/letters 65.6 65.9 68.6 0.3 Visual and performing arts 59.7 62.1 59.4 2.4 -Psychology 44.4 68.2 77.5 23.7 Social sciences and history 36.8 44.1 51.7 7.3 Communications 35.3 59.1 63.5 23.8 Biological sciences/life sciences 29.1 47.8 60.8 18.7 1Business 9.1 45.1 50.0 36.0 Mathematics 37.9 46.2 46.7 8.3 Physical sciences 13.8 28.0 42.2 14.2 1Computer and information sciences 13.6 36.8 27.6 23.2 -Agriculture and natural resources 4.2 31.1 45.9 26.9 1Engineering 0.8 13.1 20.7 12.3 
The Condition of Education 2004 in B

Trends i

and Mat

Cou

NOTE: Not displayed are the percentacompleted no or low academic sciecourses. Advanced level science repreof at least one course that is more acathan general biology. Advanced level mthe completion of at least one course cally challenging than algebra II or geoII mathematics represents the completintroduction to analysis course; Advancerepresents the completion of a calculus calculus course. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Educatioand Beyond Longitudinal Study of 19Follow-up” (HS&B-So:80/82); Nationdinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/92), “SeSchool Transcript Survey, 1992”; and NEducational Progress (NAEP), selected ySchool Transcript Studies (HSTS).

Contexts of Elementary and Secondary Education Since the early 1980s, when states began to increase the number of required courses to receive a high school diploma, the percentage of high school graduates completing advanced coursework in science and mathematics has increased. In 1982, 35 percent of high school graduates had completed advanced science coursework. This percentage had increased to 63 percent by 2000, with most of it attributable to increases in the rates at which graduates completed chemistry I and/or physics I. The percentage of graduates completing courses in advanced academic mathematics also increased, from 26 percent in 1982 to 45 percent in 2000; the percentage completing advanced level II more than tripled; and the percentage completing advanced level III doubled. 

The percentage of high school graduates who had completed advanced courses in science and mathematics increased between 1982 and 2000.

COURSETAKING LEVELS: Percentage of high school graduates who completed regular and advanced levels of science and middle and advanced levels of mathematics, by highest level of coursetaking completed: Selected years 1982–2000

0

20406080

100

Percent Science Mathematics

1982 1987 1990 1992 1994 1998 2000 1987 1990 1992 1994 1998 2000

Level IIILevel IILevel ILevel IILevel IChemistry II or physics II

or advanced biology

AdvancedAdvanced academicRegularMiddle academic

Chemistry I and physics IChemistry I or physics IGeneral biology

Mathematics

Science

1982

Year
Page 14 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 13 Contexts of Elementary and Secondary Out-of-Field Teaching in Middle and High School GradesNOTE: The data used for this analysis are from a nationally representative sample of full- and part-time teachers rather than of students. Thus, this indicator presents the percentage of the sampled set of middle and high school grade teachers’ students who are in classes with a teacher teaching outside his or her fi eld. For ease of presentation, this percentage will be referred to as the percentage of students who are taught by an out-of-fi eld teacher. Major refers to a teacher’s primary fi elds of study for a bachelor’s, master’s, doctorate, fi rst-professional, or education specialist degree. Major fi eld can be an academic or education major. “High-minority” refers to schools in which 75 percent or more of their enrollments are minority students; “low-minority” refers to schools with a minority enrollment of less than 10 percent. “High-poverty” refers to a school in which 75 percent or more of students are eligible to participate in the federal free or reduced-price lunch program, a common proxy measure of poverty; “low-poverty” refers to schools in which less than 10 percent of students are eligible to participate in this program. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, NCES, Schools and Staffi ng Survey (SASS), 1999–2000, “Public School Survey” and “Public Charter School Survey.” 

“Out-of-fi eld” teachers are teachers who have neither a major nor certifi cation in the subject 

the high school grade level in 1999–2000, students in high-poverty schools were more likely in low-poverty schools to be taught English, science, and mathematics by an out-of-fi eld teacheld true for students in high-minority schools compared with students in low-minority schooable difference was detected in social studies. By contrast, in the middle grades, where out-ofis most likely, the only difference detected was that students in low-minority schools were motaught social studies by an out-of-fi eld teacher than students in high-minority schools. 

In 1999–2000, high school grade students in high-minority and high-poverty public schools were moEnglish, science, and math by out-of-fi eld teachers than their counterparts in low-minority and low-p

OUT-OF-FIELD TEACHERS: Percentage of public high school students taught selected subjects by teacherfi cation or a major in the fi eld they teach, by minority concentration and school poverty: 1999–2000

05

10152025

Low-minority High-minority Low-poverty High-poverty

Percent

Mathematics English Science Social Studies

7

15

7

14

5

10

12

5

10

5

16

6

9

5

8

4
The Condition of Education 2004 in B

Parent

o

1Public school choice programs allow 

another public school or district outsidwithout justifi cation based on special can include within-district or out-of-disin this indicator are based on parents’ may or may not know whether such chNOTE: Includes homeschooled studentprivate schools for 9 or more hours pesum to totals because of rounding.SOURCE: U.S. Department of EducReadiness Survey of the 1993 NationaSurveys Program (NHES) (SR–NHES:19Discipline Survey of the 1993 NHES (SS&and Family Involvement/Civic InvolvemNHES (PFI/CI–NHES:1996), Parent Sur(Parent–NHES:1999), and Parent and Education Survey of the 2003 NHES (PF

Contexts of Elementary and Secondary Education Between 1993 and 2003, the percentage of students in grades 1–12 attending a “chosen” public school1 (a public 

school other than their assigned public school) increased from 11 to 15 percent, while the percentage attending assigned public schools decreased from 80 to 74 percent. The percentages of students attending private schools also increased during this period (0.9 percentage points for private church-related schools and 0.8 percentage points for private not church-related schools). When asked whether they could send their child to a chosen public school, the parents of 51 percent of students reported having such a choice. Parents of 24 percent of students reported that they moved to their current neighborhood to enroll their children in their current school. 

The percentage of children whose parents enrolled them in chosen public schools increased between 1993 and 2003.

DIFFERENCES IN PARENTAL CHOICE: Percentage distribution of students in grades 1–12 by type of school: 1993 and 2003

 Percentage point Percent Type of school 1993 2003 difference changePublic, assigned 79.9 73.9 -6.0 -7.5Public, chosen 11.0 15.4 4.4 40.0Private, church-related 7.5 8.4 0.9 12.0Private, not church-related 1.6 2.4 0.8 50.0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Public, assigned Public, chosen Private, church-related Private, not church-related

Percent

20031993

73.9 15.4 8.4 2.4

79.9 11.0 7.5 1.6
Page 16 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 15 Contexts of Postsecondary 

Employees Who Study

SOURCE: Berker, A., and Horn, L. (2003). Work First, Study Second: Adult Undergraduates Who Combine Employment and Postsecondary Enrollment (NCES 2003–167), tables 2, 4, 5, 8, and 10. Data from U.S. Department of Education, NCES, 1999–2000 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:2000).

In 1999–2000, 43 percent of undergraduates were age 24 and above; of those students, 82 pwhile enrolled. About two-thirds of these older working students characterized themselves as pployees who studied,” as opposed to “students who worked to meet their educational expensewho studied were more likely to be married, have dependents other than a spouse, and havdid not attend college. Refl ecting their primary focus on their jobs, they were more likely to and to be enrolled part time. In addition, employees who studied were less likely than studentto be enrolled in a bachelor’s degree program, and if they were enrolled, to complete it.

Many older undergraduates are employees fi rst and students second. They are less likely their postsecondary programs than are older students who work to meet their educatio

CHARACTERISTICS OF OLDER UNDERGRADUATES: Percentage of undergraduates age 24 and above with teristics, by student/employee role: 1999–2000

0

20406080

100

Students who work Employees who study

31

52

43

57

43

53

45

23

18

68

Percent

Work full time

and enrolled

part time

Enrolled in

bachelor’s

degree program

Parents’ education:

high school or less

One or more

dependents

Married
The Condition of Education 2004 in B

Remedial Cou

Contexts of Postsecondary Education 

According to postsecondary institutions, 28 percent of entering freshmen enrolled in any remedial coursework1 (reading, writing, or mathematics) in fall 2000; 22 percent undertook remediation in mathematics, 

14 percent in writing, and 11 percent in reading. Freshmen at public 2-year colleges were the most likely group to enroll in a remedial course (42 vs. 12 to 24 percent of freshmen at other types of institutions). Among 4-year colleges, freshmen at public institutions were more likely than those at private institutions to do so (20 vs. 12 percent). In addition to enrolling at higher rates, freshmen at public 2-year colleges spent more time, on average, in remediation than freshmen at 4-year institutions in fall 2000.

Postsecondary institutions provided remedial coursework for 28 percent of entering freshmen in fall 2000; public 2-year colleges provided such coursework for 42 percent of their entering students. 

1Remedial education includes “courses 

mathematics for college students lacksary to perform college-level work at th[sampled] institution.”NOTE: Data reported for fall 2000 are bagranting institutions that enrolled frcategories used for analyzing these datprivate 2-year, public 4-year, and privaData from private not-for-profi t and foreported together because there are toinstitutions in the sample to report theSOURCE: Parsad, B., and Lewis, L. (2003)Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institut2004–010), table 4. Data from U.S. DeNCES, Postsecondary Education Quic(PEQIS), “Survey on Remedial EducatioInstitutions,” fall 2000.

PARTICIPATION IN REMEDIAL EDUCATION: Percentage of entering freshmen at degree-granting institutions who enrolled in remedial courses, by type of institution and subject area: Fall 2000

0

1020304050

28

11

14

22

42

35

24

17 18

20

16

12

7 8

5

9

6

9

23

20

Percent

Any Reading Writing Mathematics

All institutions Public 2-year Private 2-year Public 4-year Private 4-year
Page 18 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 17 Contexts of Postsecondary Distance Education at Postsecondary Institutions In 2000–01, 56 percent of all postsecondary institutions offered distance education courses (up fro

years earlier). Continued growth is expected, with additional institutions planning to offer these coursector is more likely than the private sector to offer distance education, with 90 percent of public percent of public 4-year institutions doing so in 2000–01 versus 40 percent of private 4-year institutless, growth is also occurring in the private sector: the percentage of private 4-year institutions ofeducation approximately doubled between 1997–98 and 2000–01. Course enrollments have incrmillion to 3.1 million during this period,1 with growth particularly notable at public 2-year institut

The number of course enrollments in distance education nearly doubled between 1992000–01; by 2000–01, about half of these enrollments were at public 2-year institution

DISTANCE EDUCATION OFFERINGS AND ENROLLMENT: Percentage of 2-year and 4-year postsecondary institdistance education courses or planning to offer them within the next 3 years of the survey and total courby type of institution: 1997–98 and 2000–01

1Some students enroll in more than one distance education 

course, so the total enrollment is greater than the number of students.NOTE: Percentages for 1997–98 are based on the estimated 5,010 2- and 4-year postsecondary education institutions in the nation. Percentages for 2000–01 are based on the estimated 4,130 2- and 4-year Title IV-eligible, degree-granting institutions in the nation. Data for private 2-year institutions are not reported in a separate category because too few private 2-year institutions in the sample offered distance education courses to make reliable estimates. Data for private 2-year institutions are included in the totals and in analyses by other institutional characteristics.

SOURCE: Lewis, L., Snow, K., Farris, E., and Levin, D. (1999). Distance Education at Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1997–98 (NCES 2000–013), tables 2 and 5; and Waits, T., and Lewis, L. (2003). Distance Education at Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institutions: 2000–2001 (NCES 2003–017), tables 1 and 4. Data from U.S. Department of Education, NCES, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System (PEQIS), “Survey on Distance Education at Postsecondary Education Institutions,” 1998–99 and “Survey on Distance Education at Higher Education Institutions,” 2000–01.

0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent

Offered distance education Planned to offer distance education within the next 3 years of the 

Public

2-year

All

institutions

Public

4-year

131

To

enr

distan

Private

4-year 2000–01

1997–982000–011997–982000–011997–982000–011997–98

40 16

19 22

89 3

78 12

90 5

62 20

56 12

34 20
The Condition of Education 2004 in B

Public Elemen

Secondary Expe

Societal Support for LearningTotal expenditures per student include all expenditures allocable to per student costs divided by fall enrollment.1

Between 1991–92 and 2000–01, total expenditures per student increased by 25 percent from $6,950 to $8,700. Much of this increase occurred after 1995–96. The highest total expenditures ($9,450) were in large cities and in urban fringes of large cities ($9,150). Expenditures per student in midsize cities ($8,580) and in rural areas ($8,420) were below the average, while those in urban fringes of midsize cities ($7,900), small towns ($7,700), and large towns ($7,530) were the lowest. Expenditures per student increased by 30 percent in rural areas and midsize cities. Expenditures increased the least in urban fringes of midsize cities (11 percent). 

Total expenditures per student, adjusted for infl ation, increased between 1991–92 and 2000–01, with the largest increases in midsize cities and rural areas. 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES PER STUDENT: Public school district expenditures per student (in constant 2000–01 dollars), by location: 1991–92, 1992–93, and 1994–95 to 2000–01

1Total expenditures exclude expenditu

and secondary programs that include adult education, and other. 

2Includes rural, within a metropolitan and rural, outside an MSA.SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Data (CCD), “Public School District Univ1992–93, and 1994–95 to 2000–01; Financial Survey,” 1991–92, 1992–2000–01; and Geographic Cost of Eduavailable from the Education Fina(http://nces.ed.gov/edfi n/). 

6,0007,0008,0009,000

5,5006,5007,5008,500

9,500

Expenditures per student

$10,000

Urban fringe ofa midsize cityLarge townSmall townRural2Large cityUrban fringe of

a large city

Midsize city

0

1991–92 1992-93 1994–95 1995–96 1996–97 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01

>

<

Years
Page 20 | The Condition of Education 2004 in Brief

Indicator 19 Societal Support fo

Institutional Aid at 4-Year Collegesand Universities Institutional aid is awarded to undergraduate students in the form of grants, fellowships, assistantsh

institution-sponsored work-study, but almost all is grant aid. Institutions can award aid to students baneed, merit (academic, athletic, or other), or a combination of need and merit. The use of institutioninstitutions has been increasing. In 1992–93, some 17 percent of full-time undergraduates at public i47 percent at private not-for-profi t institutions received institutional aid. By 1999–2000, the respecthad increased to 23 and 58 percent. During this period, the average award (adjusted for infl ation) $2,200 to $2,700 at public institutions and from $5,900 to $7,000 at private not-for-profi t institut

The percentage of full-time undergraduates receiving institutional aid and the averagawarded increased at both public and private not-for-profi t 4-year institutions during 

NOTE: Both dependent and independent students are included in this analysis, but students’ income quarters are determined with reference only to students with the same dependency status.SOURCE: Horn, L., and Peter, K. (2003). What Colleges Contribute: Institutional Aid to Full-Time Undergraduates Attending 4-Year Colleges and Universities (NCES 2003–157), fi gures A and B. Data from U.S. Department of Education, NCES, 1992–93, 1995–96, and 1999–2000 National Postsecondary Student Aid Studies (NPSAS:93, 96, and 2000).

INSTITUTIONAL AID: Percentage of full-time undergraduates enrolled in 4-year institutions who receiveaid, and among recipients, the average amounts received (in constant 1999 dollars), by control of institu1995–96, and 1999–2000

0

20 17 20 23

47

55 58

406080

100

Percent

1992–93 1995–96 1999–2000

Private not-for-profit

4-year institutions

Public 4-year institutions

Average amount:1992–93 $2,200 $5,9001995–96 2,500 6,0001999–2000 2,700 7,000
Po

U.S. D

United StatesDepartment of EducationED Pubs8242–B Sandy CourtJessup, MD 20794–1398Offi cial BusinessPenalty for Private Use, $300