NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Contact:

Bernie Greene

202-502-7348

Authors:

Anne Cattagni

Elizabeth Farris

Westat

Statistics in Brief May 2001

Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools

and Classrooms: 1994 – 2000

Since 1994, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has surveyed

public schools to measure what proportion of them are connected to the Internet.

These annual surveys enable the U.S. Department of Education to monitor the

progress made by public schools in providing access for all students and teachers

to information technology in their classrooms and schools. In the fall of each

academic year, a new nationally representative sample of approximately 1,000

public schools has been surveyed about Internet access and, since 1996, about the

types of Internet connections used. In 2000, questions were also asked about

access to the Internet at times outside of regular school hours and on “acceptable

use policies.”

How much progress have public schools made in connecting to the Internet?

By the fall of 2000, almost all public schools in the United States had access to

the Internet: 98 percent were connected. In comparison, 35 percent of public

schools had access to the Internet in 1994 (table 1). Unlike in previous years,

there were virtually no differences in school access to the Internet by school

characteristics (e.g., poverty level1 and metropolitan status) in 1999 or 2000.

The increase in Internet access over the years may have been aided by the

allocation of funds through the Education rate (E-rate) program. The E-rate

program was established in 1996 to make services, Internet access, and internal

connections available to schools and libraries at discounted rates based upon the

income level of the students in their community and whether their location is

urban or rural.2 As of February 28, 2001, $5.8 billion has been committed to Erate applicants throughout the nation.3

 

1Throughout this report, poverty level is measured by the percentage of students eligible for free or reducedprice lunch.

2The poorest applicants receive the largest discounts (90 percent), and rural communities receive up to a 10

percent additional discount.

3The E-rate program funding commitment data were found at the Web site of the School and Libraries Division

(SLD), Universal Service Administrative Company (http://www.sl.universalservice.org/whatsnew/).

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 2001-071
2

Table 1.—Percent of public schools with Internet access, by school characteristics: 1994–2000

Public schools with Internet access School characteristic

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

All public schools ............................... 35 50 65 78 89 95 98

Instructional level1

Elementary.............................................. 30 46 61 75 88 94 97

Secondary............................................... 49 65 77 89 94 98 4100

School size

Less than 300.......................................... 30 39 57 75 87 96 96

300 to 999............................................... 35 52 66 78 89 94 98

1,000 or more ......................................... 58 69 80 89 95 96 99

Metropolitan status

City......................................................... 40 47 64 74 92 93 96

Urban fringe ........................................... 38 59 75 78 85 96 98

Town ...................................................... 29 47 61 84 90 94 98

Rural....................................................... 35 48 60 79 92 96 99

Percent minority enrollment2

Less than 6 percent................................. 38 52 65 84 91 95 98

6 to 20 percent........................................ 38 58 72 87 93 97 100

21 to 49 percent ...................................... 38 55 65 73 91 96 98

50 percent or more.................................. 27 39 56 63 82 92 96

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch3

Less than 35 percent ............................... 39 60 74 86 92 95 99

35 to 49 percent ...................................... 36 48 59 81 93 98 99

50 to 74 percent ...................................... 31 41 53 71 88 96 97

75 percent or more.................................. 20 31 53 62 79 89 94

1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.

2

Percent minority enrollment was not available for some cases. In 1994, this information was missing for 100 schools. In subsequent years, the

missing information ranged from 46 schools (1995) to 6 (1997).

3The breakouts for the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch have been revised this year and therefore are

different from the ones reported in previous Internet access reports.

4

In this case, the estimate fell between 99.5 percent and 100 percent and therefore was rounded to 100 percent.

NOTE: All of the estimates in this report were recalculated from the raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, the

estimates presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from previously published results.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced

Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 51 (1994); “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,”

FRSS 57 (1995); “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall

1997,” FRSS 64; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75;

and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
3

Another key measure of Internet access in

schools is the proportion of instructional rooms

connected to the Internet.4

 Since 1994, when 3

percent of instructional rooms had computers

with Internet access, public schools have made

consistent progress in this area: in fall 2000, 77

percent of instructional rooms were connected to

the Internet, up from 64 percent in 1999 (table

2). However, in 2000, as in previous years,

there were differences in Internet access in

instructional rooms by school characteristics.

For example, in schools with the highest

concentration of students in poverty (75 percent

or more students eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch), a smaller percentage of

instructional rooms were connected to the

Internet (60 percent) than in schools with lower

concentrations of poverty (77 to 82 percent of

instructional rooms). A similar pattern occurred

by minority enrollment. In schools with the

highest minority enrollment (50 percent or

more), a smaller percentage of instructional

rooms had Internet access (64 percent) than in

schools with lower minority enrollment (79 to

85 percent of instructional rooms). Despite

these continuing differences, however, the

percentage of instructional rooms with Internet

access increased between 1999 and 2000 in

these schools: from 38 to 60 percent in schools

with the highest concentration of poverty, and

from 43 to 64 percent in schools with the highest

minority enrollment.

What is the ratio of students to instructional

computers in public schools?

By the fall of 2000, the ratio of students to

instructional computers in public schools had

decreased to 5 to 1, the ratio that “many experts

consider . . . a reasonable level for the effective

use of computers within the schools”

(President’s Committee of Advisors on

Science and Technology 1997, p. 14). The ratio

improved from a national average of 6 to 1 in

1999 (not shown in tables).

 

4

Instructional rooms include classrooms, computer and other labs,

library/media centers, and any other rooms used for instructional

purposes.

Similarly, the ratio of students to instructional

computers with Internet access in public schools

improved from 9 to 1 in 1999 to 7 to 1 in 2000

(table 3). However, differences by school

characteristics persisted. For example, the ratio

of students to instructional computers with

Internet access was still greater in schools with

the highest concentration of students in poverty

than in schools with the lowest concentration of

poverty (9 to 1 compared with 6 to 1).

Nonetheless, in schools with the highest

concentration of poverty, the ratio of students to

computers with Internet access improved from

17 to 1 in 1999 to 9 to 1 in 2000.

How are public schools connected to the

Internet?

Over the years, changes have occurred in the

type of network connections used by public

schools and the speed at which they are

connected to the Internet. In 1996, dial-up

Internet connections were used by almost threefourths (74 percent) of public schools having

Internet access (Heaviside, Riggins, and Farris

1997). By 2000, schools tended to use faster

dedicated-line Internet connections, such as

56Kb, T1/DS1, fractionalized T1, T3/DS3, and

fractionalized T3 lines (table 4). Seventy-seven

percent of the nation’s public schools that were

connected to the Internet used dedicated lines,

11 percent used dial-up (not continuous)

connections, and 24 percent of schools used

other (continuous) connection types, including

ISDN, wireless connections, and cable

modems.5

 There were differences by

instructional level; secondary schools (86

percent) were more likely to use dedicated lines

than elementary schools (74 percent).

 

5

Percentages add to more than 100 because schools may use more

than one type of connection.
4

Table 2.—Percent of instructional rooms with Internet access in public schools, by school

characteristics: 1994–2000

Instructional rooms with Internet access School characteristic

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

All public schools ............................... 3 8 14 27 51 64 77

Instructional level1

Elementary.............................................. 3 8 13 24 51 62 76

Secondary............................................... 4 8 16 32 52 67 79

School size

Less than 300.......................................... 3 9 15 27 54 71 83

300 to 999............................................... 3 8 13 28 53 64 78

1,000 or more ......................................... 3 4 16 25 45 58 70

Metropolitan status

City......................................................... 4 6 12 20 47 52 66

Urban fringe ........................................... 4 8 16 29 50 67 78

Town ...................................................... 3 8 14 34 55 72 87

Rural....................................................... 3 8 14 30 57 71 85

Percent minority enrollment2

Less than 6 percent................................. 4 9 18 37 57 74 85

6 to 20 percent........................................ 4 10 18 35 59 78 83

21 to 49 percent ...................................... 4 9 12 22 52 64 79

50 percent or more.................................. 2 3 5 13 37 43 64

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch3

Less than 35 percent ............................... 3 9 17 33 57 73 82

35-49 percent.......................................... 2 6 12 33 60 69 81

50-74 percent.......................................... 4 6 11 20 41 61 77

75 percent or more.................................. 2 3 5 14 38 38 60

1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.

2

Percent minority enrollment was not available for some cases. In 1994, this information was missing for 100 schools. In subsequent years, the

missing information ranged from 46 schools (1995) to 6 (1997).

3The breakouts for the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch have been revised this year and therefore are

different from the ones reported in previous Internet access reports.

NOTE: All of the estimates in this report were recalculated from the raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, the

estimates presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from previously published results.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced

Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 51 (1994); “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,”

FRSS 57 (1995); “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall

1997,” FRSS 64; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75;

and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
5

Table 3.—Ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet access in public schools, and

percent of public schools allowing students to access the Internet outside of regular

school hours, by school characteristics: 1998–2000

Students per instructional

School characteristic computers with Internet access

1998 1999 2000

Internet available to

students outside of regular

school hours: 2000

All public schools .............................................................................. 12 9 7 54

Instructional level1

Elementary............................................................................................. 14 11 8 46

Secondary.............................................................................................. 10 7 5 80

School size

Less than 300......................................................................................... 9 6 4 49

300 to 999.............................................................................................. 12 9 7 53

1,000 or more ........................................................................................ 13 10 7 79

Metropolitan status

City........................................................................................................ 14 11 8 56

Urban fringe .......................................................................................... 13 9 7 58

Town ..................................................................................................... 12 8 6 45

Rural...................................................................................................... 9 7 5 53

Minority enrollment2

Less than 6 percent................................................................................ 10 7 6 46

6 to 20 percent....................................................................................... 11 8 6 59

21 to 49 percent ..................................................................................... 12 9 7 54

50 percent or more................................................................................. 17 13 8 61

Students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch3

Less than 35 percent .............................................................................. 11 8 6 58

35 to 49 percent ..................................................................................... 11 9 6 47

50 to 74 percent ..................................................................................... 16 10 7 52

75 percent or more................................................................................. 17 17 9 56

1Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.

2

Percent minority enrollment was not available for 9 schools in 1998 and 2000.

3The breakouts for the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch have been revised this year and therefore are

different from the ones reported in previous Internet access reports.

NOTE: All of the estimates in this report were recalculated from the raw data files using the same computational algorithms. Consequently, the

estimates presented here may differ trivially (i.e., 1 percent) from previously published results.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,

Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
6

To what extent are public schools making the

Internet available to students outside of

regular school hours in 2000?

Making the Internet accessible outside of regular

school hours allows students who would not

otherwise have access to the Internet to use this

resource for school-related activities like

homework. In 2000, 54 percent of public

schools with access to the Internet reported that

computers with access to the Internet were

available to students outside of regular school

hours (table 3). Secondary schools were more

likely to make the Internet available to students

outside of regular school hours than elementary

schools (80 percent compared to 46 percent).

Similarly, large schools (1,000 or more students)

were more likely to make the Internet accessible

Table 4.—Percent of public schools with Internet access using the following types of connections, by

school characteristics: 1998–2000

Dedicated line1 Dial-up connection Other types of connection2

School characteristic

1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000

All public schools................................ 65 72 77 22 15 11 26 23 24

Instructional level3

Elementary.......................................... 62 68 74 22 16 12 29 25 25

Secondary............................................ 77 85 86 24 8 7 18 17 19

School size

Less than 300 ...................................... 63 70 76 28 21 18 18 15 19

300 to 999 ........................................... 64 72 77 20 13 8 30 26 26

1,000 or more...................................... 79 76 82 21 11 9 24 23 24

Metropolitan status

City ..................................................... 58 70 72 18 15 15 38 23 28

Urban fringe........................................ 69 71 77 21 12 7 24 27 28

Town................................................... 65 71 77 24 14 13 28 24 19

Rural ................................................... 69 75 83 27 19 10 15 16 17

Percent minority enrollment4

Less than 6 percent.............................. 66 72 80 24 15 12 21 21 18

6 to 20 percent..................................... 72 78 76 15 12 9 24 22 26

21 to 49 percent................................... 67 69 79 21 15 7 28 23 22

50 percent or more .............................. 56 68 74 28 18 15 36 24 28

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch5

Less than 35 percent............................ 67 75 78 18 10 10 28 23 23

35 to 49 percent................................... 72 74 75 20 13 9 27 24 26

50 to 74 percent................................... 66 69 82 26 23 11 20 18 20

75 percent or more .............................. 53 62 71 33 22 15 28 25 28

1

Includes 56Kb, T1/DS1, fractionalized T1, T3/DS3, and fractionalized T3 lines.

2

Includes ISDN, wireless connections, and cable modems (generally continuous connections, similar to dedicated lines).

3Data for combined schools are included in the totals and in analyses by other school characteristics but are not shown separately.

4

Percent minority enrollment was not available for 9 schools in 1998 and 2000.

5The breakouts for the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch have been revised this year and therefore are

different from the ones reported in previous Internet access reports.

NOTE: Percentages are based on the percent of public school having Internet access: 89 percent in 1998, 95 percent in 1999, and 98 percent in

2000. Percentages add to more than 100 because schools may use more than one type of connection.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,

Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
7

to students outside of regular school hours than

medium-sized and small schools (79 percent

compared with 53 and 49 percent, respectively).

In addition, schools with the highest minority

enrollment reported Internet availability outside

of regular school hours more frequently than

schools with the lowest minority enrollment (61

percent compared with 46 percent). Of the 54

percent of schools making the Internet available

to students outside of regular school hours, 98

percent made it available after school, 84

percent before school, and 16 percent on

weekends (figure 1).

Figure 1.—Percent of public schools allowing

students to access the Internet

outside of regular school hours

giving students access after

school, before school, and on

weekends: 2000

NOTE: Percentages are based on 53 percent of all public schools

(98 percent with Internet access times 54 percent allowing students

to access the Internet at times other than regular school hours).

Percentages add to more than 100 because schools may have more

than one time of availability.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet

Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.

How are public schools preventing students

from accessing inappropriate material on the

Internet in 2000?

Given the diversity of the information carried on

the Internet, student access to inappropriate

material is a major concern of many parents and

teachers. In 2000, almost all public schools with

Internet access (98 percent) had “acceptable use

policies” (AUPs) and used various technologies

or procedures, such as blocking or filtering

software, an intranet system, honor codes for

students, or teacher/staff monitoring, to control

student access to inappropriate material on the

Internet (not shown in tables). Across all types

of schools, between 95 and 100 percent had

AUPs. Of those schools with AUPs, 94 percent

reported having student access to the Internet

monitored by teachers or other staff members

(figure 2). Three-fourths (74 percent) used

blocking or filtering software, 64 percent had

honor codes, and 28 percent used their intranet.

As these numbers suggest, most of the schools

(91 percent) used more than one procedure or

technology as part of their policy (calculated

from table 5). Fifteen percent of public schools

Figure 2.—Percent of public schools having

acceptable use policies (AUPs)

using the following technologies

or procedures: 2000

NOTE: Percentages are based on 96 percent of all public schools

(98 percent with Internet access times 98 percent having AUPs).

Percentages add to more than 100 because schools may use more

than one type of AUP.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet

Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.

16

84

98

0 20 40 60 80 100

On weekends

Before school

After school

Percent

28

64

74

94

0 20 40 60 80 100

Intranet

Honor codes

Blocking/filtering

software

Teacher/staff monitoring

Percent
8

used all of the procedures and technologies

listed above; 29 percent used blocking/filtering

software, teacher/staff monitoring, and honor

codes; and 19 percent used blocking/filtering

software and teacher/staff monitoring (table 5).

In addition, 95 percent of public schools having

AUPs used at least one of these technologies or

procedures on all Internet-connected computers

used by students (not shown in tables).

Methodology

The Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) was

established in 1975 by the National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department

of Education. FRSS is designed to collect small

amounts of issue-oriented data with minimal

burden on respondents and with a relatively

short timeframe.

The sample of elementary and secondary

schools for the FRSS survey on Internet access

in public schools was selected from the 1997–

1998 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD)

Public School Universe File, the most up-to-date

file available at the time the sample was drawn.

Over 84,000 regular schools are contained in the

1997–1998 CCD Public School Universe File.

For this survey, regular elementary and

secondary/combined schools were selected.

Special education, vocational education, and

alternative schools were excluded from the

sampling frame, along with schools with a

highest grade below first grade and those outside

the 50 states and the District of Columbia. With

these exclusions, the final sampling frame

consisted of about 81,400 schools, of which

about 61,000 were classified as “elementary”

schools and about 20,400 as “secondary/

combined” schools.

A sample of 1,218 schools was selected from the

public school frame. To select the sample, the

frame of schools was stratified by instructional

level (elementary and secondary/combined

schools), enrollment size class (less than 300

students, 300 to 999, 1,000 to 1,499, and 1,500

or more), and percentage of students eligible for

free or reduced-price lunch (less than 35 percent,

35 to 49 percent, 50 to 74 percent, 75 percent or

more). Schools in the highest poverty category

(schools with 75 percent or more students

Table 5.—Percent of public schools with acceptable use policies (AUPs) using various combinations

of procedures and/or technologies to prevent student access to inappropriate material on

the Internet: 2000

Combination of four procedures and/or technologies Percent

Use all four procedures/technologies (blocking/filtering software, intranet, teacher/staff

monitoring, and honor codes)............................................................................................................

15

Use three procedures/technologies .................................................................................................... 40

Blocking/filtering software, teacher/staff monitoring, and honor codes........................................ 29

Blocking/filtering software, teacher/staff monitoring, and intranet ............................................... 7

Others............................................................................................................................................ 4

Use two procedures/technologies ...................................................................................................... 36

Blocking/filtering software and teacher/staff monitoring.............................................................. 19

Teacher/staff monitoring and honor codes.................................................................................... 15

Others............................................................................................................................................ 2

Use one procedure or technology only............................................................................................... 9

Teacher/staff monitoring.............................................................................................................. 5

Blocking/filtering software............................................................................................................ 3

Others............................................................................................................................................ 1

NOTE: Percentages are based on 96 percent of all public schools (98 percent with Internet access times 98 percent having AUPs).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
9

eligible for free or reduced-price lunch) were

oversampled to permit analyses for that

category.

The two-page survey instrument was designed

by Westat and NCES. The questions included

on the survey addressed access to Internet in

public schools and classrooms, the types of

Internet connections used, student access to the

Internet outside of regular school hours, and

acceptable use policies.

In September 2000, questionnaires were mailed

to the principals of the 1,218 sampled schools.

The principal was asked to forward the

questionnaire to the person at the school most

knowledgeable about Internet access and other

advanced telecommunications offered at the

school. Telephone followup of nonrespondents

was initiated in early October, and data

collection was completed in December. Six

schools were closed, two were outside the scope

of the survey, and 1,104 schools completed the

survey. Thus, the final response rate was 90.6

percent (1,104 of 1,210 eligible schools). The

weighted response rate was 90.7 percent. The

weighted nonresponse rate for individual

questionnaire items ranged from 0 to 1.3

percent; imputation for item nonresponse was

not implemented.

The survey responses were weighted to produce

national estimates (table A). The weights were

designed to adjust for the variable probabilities

of selection and differential nonresponse. The

findings in this report are based on the sample

selected and, consequently, are subject to

sampling variability. The standard error is the

measure of the variability of estimates due to

sampling. It indicates the variability of a sample

estimate that would be obtained from all

possible samples of a given design and size.

Standard errors are used as a measure of the

precision expected from a particular sample. If

all possible samples were surveyed under similar

conditions, intervals of 1.96 standard errors

below to 1.96 standard errors above a particular

statistic would include the true population

parameter being estimated in about 95 percent of

the samples. This is a 95 percent confidence

interval. For example, the estimated percentage

of public schools with Internet access in 2000 is

98 percent, and the estimated standard error is

0.5 percent. The 95 percent confidence interval

for the statistics extends from 98 – (0.5 times

1.96) to 98 + (0.5 times 1.96), or from 97 to 99

percent. Estimates of standard errors for this

report were computed using a technique known

as the jackknife replication method (standard

error tables are found in the appendix). All

specific statements of comparison made in this

report have been tested for statistical

significance using chi-square tests and t-tests

adjusted for multiple comparisons using the

Bonferroni adjustment and are significant at the

95 percent confidence level or better. However,

not all significant differences are reported.

The survey estimates are also subject to

nonsampling errors that can arise because of

nonobservation (nonresponse or noncoverage)

errors, errors of reporting, and errors made in

collection of the data. These errors can

sometimes bias the data. Nonsampling errors

may include such problems as the difference in

the respondents’ interpretation of the meaning of

the question; memory effects; misrecording of

responses; incorrect editing, coding, or data

entry; differences related to the particular time

the survey was conducted; or errors in data

preparation. While general sampling theory can

be used in part to determine how to estimate the

sampling variability of a statistic, nonsampling

errors are not easy to measure and, for

measurement purposes, usually require that an

experiment be conducted as part of the data

collection procedures or that data external to the

study be used. To minimize the potential for

nonsampling errors, the questionnaire on

Internet access in public schools was pretested in

1994, and again each time it was substantially

modified. The pretesting was done with public

school technology coordinators and other

knowledgeable respondents like those who

completed the survey. No pretesting was

necessary in 2000. During the design of the

survey, an effort was made to check for

consistency of interpretation of questions and to

eliminate ambiguous items. The questionnaire

and instructions were intensively reviewed by
10

Table A.—Number and percent of responding public schools in the study sample and estimated

number and percent of public schools the sample represents, by school characteristics:

2000

Respondent sample National estimate

School characteristic

Number Percent Number Percent

All public schools.......................................................... 1,104 100 80,127 100

Instructional level

Elementary......................................................................... 579 54 59,782 76

Secondary.......................................................................... 485 46 18,414 24

School size

Less than 300..................................................................... 162 15 20,067 25

300 to 999.......................................................................... 684 62 51,887 65

1,000 or more .................................................................... 258 23 8,173 10

Metropolitan status

City.................................................................................... 332 30 21,115 26

Urban fringe ...................................................................... 375 34 26,584 33

Town ................................................................................. 163 15 11,879 15

Rural.................................................................................. 234 21 20,550 26

Percent minority enrollment

Less than 6 percent ............................................................ 280 26 25,083 32

6 to 20 percent ................................................................... 244 22 19,017 24

21 to 49 percent ................................................................. 214 20 15,481 19

50 percent or more............................................................. 357 33 19,856 25

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 35 percent .......................................................... 490 44 36,563 46

35 to 49 percent ................................................................. 161 15 12,414 16

50 to 74 percent ................................................................. 205 19 17,030 21

75 percent or more............................................................. 245 22 13,912 17

NOTE: Details may not add to totals because of rounding on missing data. There were very small amounts of missing data for the following

variables: percent minority enrollment in school (9 cases) and percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (3 cases). Forty schools

were combined schools and therefore are missing in the instructional level counts used here, but those cases were included in the totals and in

analysis by other school characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79, 2000.
11

the National Center for Education Statistics.

Manual and machine editing of the questionnaire

responses were conducted to check the data for

accuracy and consistency. Cases with missing

or inconsistent items were recontacted by

telephone to resolve problems. Data were keyed

with 100 percent verification.

The survey was performed under contract with

Westat, using the NCES Fast Response Survey

System (FRSS). Westat’s Project Director was

Elizabeth Farris, and the Survey Manager was

Anne Cattagni. Catrina Williams was the

Survey Manager during the design phase of the

survey. Bernie Greene was the NCES Project

Officer.

To obtain definitions of terms for this Statistics

in Brief, a copy of the questionnaire, or

additional information about the Fast Response

Survey System or the FRSS Internet surveys,

contact Bernie Greene at NCES, 202–502–7348.

To order additional copies of this Statistics in

Brief or other NCES publications, call 1–800–

424–1616. NCES publications are also available

on the Internet (http://www.nces.ed.gov/pub

search).

This report was reviewed by the following

individuals:

Outside NCES:

• Stephanie Cronen, American Institutes for

Research

• Laura Johns, Office of Educational

Technology, U.S. Department of Education

• Lawrence Lanahan, American Institutes for

Research

• Jackie Shrago, Tennessee Department of

Education

Inside NCES:

• Arnold Goldstein, Analysis and Reporting

Program Assessment Division

• Bill Hussar, Early Childhood, International,

and Crosscutting Studies Division

• Paula Knepper, Postsecondary Studies

Division

• Marilyn McMillen, Chief Statistician

• Valena Plisko, Associate Commissioner,

Early Childhood, International, and

Crosscutting Studies Division

• Susan Wiley, Elementary/Secondary and

Libraries Studies Division

Related information

This survey is part of an overall NCES effort to

track the availability and use of technology in

schools. The references below contain the

source information about publications for the

series of public school surveys on advanced

telecommunications and Internet access. In

addition to collecting information from public

schools, NCES surveyed private schools about

advanced telecommunications in 1995 and 1999.

NCES has also collected information on

teachers’ use of technology. A report on this

topic was released in summer 2000.

References and related reports

Bare, J., and Meek, A. 1998. Internet Access in

Public Schools (NCES 98-031). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

Heaviside, S., and Farris, E. 1997. Advanced

Telecommunications in U.S. Private Schools,

K-12, Fall 1995 (NCES 97-394). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

Heaviside, S., Farris, E., and Malitz, G. 1995.

Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public

Schools, K-12 (NCES 95-731). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for
12

Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

Heaviside, S., Farris, E., and Malitz, G. 1996.

Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public

Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1995

(NCES 96-854). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

Heaviside S., Riggins, T., and Farris, E. 1997.

Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public

Elementary and Secondary Schools, Fall 1996

(NCES 97-944). U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

Heaviside, S., Rowand, C., Hurst, D., and

McArthur, E. 2000. What Are the Barriers to

the Use of Advanced Telecommunications for

Students with Disabilities in Public Schools?

(NCES 2000-042). U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

Levin, D., Hurst, D., and Burns, S. 2000.

Computer and Internet Access in U.S. Private

Schools and Classrooms: 1995 and 1998

(NCES 2000-044). U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

President’s Committee of Advisors on Science

and Technology, Panel on Educational

Technology. 1997. Report to the President

on the Use of Technology to Strengthen K-12

Education in the United States. This report is

available online (http://www.ostp.gov/PCAST/

K-12ed.html).

Riley, R., Holleman, F., and Roberts, L. 2000.

eLearning: Putting a World-Class Education

at the Fingertips of All Children.U.S.

Department of Education, Office of

Educational Technology. This document

is available online (http://www.ed.gov/

Technology/elearning/e-learning.pdf).

Rowand, C. 1999. Internet Access in Public

Schools and Classrooms: 1994-98 (NCES

1999-017). U.S. Department of Education,

National Center for Education Statistics.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing

Office.

Smerdon, B., Cronen, S., Lanahan, L.,

Anderson, J., Iannotti, N., and Angeles, J.

2000. Teachers' Tools for the 21st Century: A

Report on Teachers' Use of Technology

(NCES 2000-102). U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

Williams, C. 2000. Internet Access in Public

Schools and Classrooms: 1994-99 (NCES

2000-086). U.S. Department of Education,

National Center for Education Statistics.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing

Office.
13

Appendix

Standard Error Tables
14
15

Table 1a.—Standard errors of the percent of public schools with Internet access, by school

characteristics: 1994–2000

Public schools with Internet access School characteristic

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

All public schools ............................... 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.3 0.8 0.5

Instructional level

Elementary.............................................. 1.9 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.0 0.7

Secondary............................................... 2.4 2.7 1.8 1.7 2.1 0.8 0.2

School size

Less than 300.......................................... 3.4 3.9 4.4 3.8 3.4 1.5 1.7

300 to 999............................................... 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.4 1.0 0.5

1,000 or more ......................................... 3.0 4.1 3.4 2.5 2.4 1.7 0.6

Metropolitan status

City......................................................... 3.1 4.3 4.5 3.8 2.1 1.5 1.1

Urban fringe ........................................... 2.9 3.8 3.3 2.8 2.8 1.2 1.2

Town ...................................................... 2.3 3.7 4.0 4.6 3.2 2.5 1.2

Rural....................................................... 2.7 3.8 3.3 3.2 3.4 1.4 0.9

Percent minority enrollment

Less than 6 percent................................. 2.4 3.2 3.4 2.7 2.9 1.5 1.2

6 to 20 percent ........................................ 3.3 4.7 3.0 2.7 2.5 1.2 (+)

21 to 49 percent ...................................... 3.2 4.1 3.2 4.1 2.5 1.8 1.2

50 percent or more.................................. 2.9 3.8 4.6 4.7 2.9 1.9 1.2

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 35 percent ............................... 2.4 2.4 2.3 1.8 2.0 1.1 0.7

35 to 49 percent ...................................... 4.9 3.9 4.8 3.9 2.2 0.9 0.7

50 to 74 percent ...................................... 5.0 4.6 5.1 4.0 3.0 1.7 1.3

75 percent or more.................................. 4.9 4.4 5.5 5.3 3.7 3.1 1.7

(+) Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced

Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 51 (1994); “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,”

FRSS 57 (1995); “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall

1997,” FRSS 64; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75;

and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
16

Table 2a.—Standard errors of the percent of instructional rooms with Internet access in public

schools, by school characteristics: 1994–2000

Instructional rooms with Internet access School characteristic

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

All public schools ............................... 0.3 0.7 1.0 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.1

Instructional level

Elementary.............................................. 0.4 1.0 1.5 1.9 2.3 1.8 1.5

Secondary............................................... 0.6 1.0 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.6 1.6

School size

Less than 300.......................................... 0.7 1.6 2.9 4.3 3.7 3.2 2.8

300 to 999............................................... 0.5 1.0 1.2 2.0 2.2 1.9 1.5

1,000 or more ......................................... 0.6 1.0 2.1 2.4 3.9 3.0 2.2

Metropolitan status

City......................................................... 0.8 1.3 1.6 2.2 3.2 2.6 2.2

Urban fringe ........................................... 0.8 1.4 2.2 2.9 2.9 2.5 2.0

Town ...................................................... 0.6 2.0 1.9 3.9 4.0 3.4 2.6

Rural....................................................... 0.4 1.5 2.2 3.6 3.6 3.0 1.7

Percent minority enrollment

Less than 6 percent................................. 0.7 1.4 2.4 3.5 2.7 2.3 1.9

6 to 20 percent........................................ 0.8 1.5 1.7 3.0 3.3 3.1 2.1

21 to 49 percent ...................................... 1.0 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.7 3.1 2.3

50 percent or more.................................. 0.3 1.0 1.8 1.8 3.2 2.8 2.4

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 35 percent ............................... 0.5 1.1 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.3 1.5

35-49 percent.......................................... 0.5 1.4 2.2 4.3 5.1 3.4 2.9

50-74 percent.......................................... 1.9 1.9 2.8 3.7 3.9 3.1 2.8

75 percent or more.................................. 1.0 1.0 1.8 2.4 4.3 4.4 3.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Survey on Advanced

Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 51 (1994); “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,”

FRSS 57 (1995); “Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall

1997,” FRSS 64; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75;

and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
17

Table 3a.—Standard errors of the ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet

access in public schools, and percent of public schools allowing students to access the

Internet outside of regular school hours, by school characteristics: 1998–2000

Students per instructional

School characteristic computers with Internet access

1998 1999 2000

Internet available to

students outside of regular

school hours: 2000

All public schools .............................................................................. 0.6 0.3 0.1 1.9

Instructional level

Elementary............................................................................................. 1.0 0.4 0.2 2.6

Secondary.............................................................................................. 0.5 0.3 0.2 1.9

School size

Less than 300......................................................................................... 0.7 0.4 0.3 4.1

300 to 999.............................................................................................. 0.7 0.4 0.2 2.2

1,000 or more ........................................................................................ 1.1 0.6 0.3 3.2

Metropolitan status

City........................................................................................................ 1.2 0.8 0.4 3.8

Urban fringe .......................................................................................... 1.0 0.4 0.2 2.8

Town ..................................................................................................... 1.2 0.6 0.3 4.6

Rural...................................................................................................... 0.9 0.4 0.3 3.4

Minority enrollment

Less than 6 percent................................................................................ 0.6 0.3 0.2 3.5

6 to 20 percent....................................................................................... 1.1 0.5 0.2 3.8

21 to 49 percent ..................................................................................... 1.2 0.7 0.3 3.6

50 percent or more................................................................................. 1.7 1.1 0.4 3.2

Students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 35 percent .............................................................................. 0.6 0.3 0.2 2.8

35 to 49 percent ..................................................................................... 1.2 0.4 0.4 4.3

50 to 74 percent ..................................................................................... 1.4 0.8 0.4 4.1

75 percent or more................................................................................. 2.5 2.2 0.7 4.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,

Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
18

Table 4a.—Standard errors of the percent of public schools with Internet access using the following

types of connections by school characteristics: 1998–2000

Dedicated line Dial-up connection Other types of connection

School characteristic

1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000

All public schools............................ 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.6 1.3 1.5

Instructional level

Elementary........................................... 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.7 2.1 1.6 1.9

Secondary............................................. 2.1 2.1 1.8 2.5 1.5 1.2 1.8 2.1 2.4

School size

Less than 300 ....................................... 4.0 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.4

300 to 999 ............................................ 2.3 1.9 1.7 2.1 1.7 1.2 2.1 1.7 1.9

1,000 or more....................................... 3.6 3.1 3.0 3.4 2.1 2.1 3.8 3.0 3.3

Metropolitan status

City ...................................................... 4.4 4.0 2.8 2.8 2.7 3.0 4.9 3.2 2.4

Urban fringe......................................... 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.4 2.1 1.6 3.3 2.6 3.0

Town.................................................... 5.0 4.6 4.3 4.3 4.0 3.9 4.3 4.4 3.2

Rural .................................................... 3.5 3.7 2.9 3.7 3.4 2.5 2.4 2.9 2.7

Percent minority enrollment

Less than 6 percent............................... 2.9 2.7 3.0 3.3 2.8 2.3 2.3 2.9 2.8

6 to 20 percent...................................... 4.1 3.5 3.5 2.9 2.9 2.6 4.0 3.5 3.8

21 to 49 percent.................................... 4.0 3.9 2.9 3.7 2.9 2.0 3.9 3.0 3.5

50 percent or more ............................... 4.7 3.5 3.1 3.6 2.9 2.6 5.1 2.9 2.9

Percent of students eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 35 percent............................. 2.7 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.7 1.6 2.5 2.0 2.3

35 to 49 percent.................................... 5.3 3.8 4.5 4.0 2.7 2.9 4.3 3.6 3.8

50 to 74 percent.................................... 4.3 4.7 3.3 4.1 4.4 2.6 3.9 3.5 3.5

75 percent or more ............................... 5.7 5.1 3.5 5.4 4.5 2.8 6.0 3.9 3.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 1998,” FRSS 69; “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools,

Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
19

Table 5a.—Standard errors of the percent of public schools with acceptable use policies (AUPs)

using various combinations of procedures and/or technologies to prevent student access

to inappropriate material on the Internet: 2000

Combination of procedures and/or technologies Standard error

Use all four procedures/technologies (blocking/filtering software, intranet,

teacher/staff monitoring, honor codes) .............................................................................................. 1.4

Use three procedures/technologies .................................................................................................... 1.9

Blocking/filtering software, teacher/staff monitoring, and honor codes........................................ 1.8

Blocking/filtering software, teacher/staff monitoring, and intranet ............................................... 1.0

Others............................................................................................................................................ 0.6

Use two procedures/technologies ...................................................................................................... 1.9

Blocking/filtering software and teacher/staff monitoring.............................................................. 1.5

Teacher/staff monitoring and honor codes.................................................................................... 1.4

Others............................................................................................................................................ 0.6

Use one procedure or technology only............................................................................................... 1.1

Teacher/staff monitoring.............................................................................................................. 0.8

Blocking/filtering software............................................................................................................ 0.6

Others............................................................................................................................................ 0.5

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 2000,” FRSS 79.
20

Table 6a.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables

Item Estimate Standard error

Figure 1: Percent of public schools allowing students to access the Internet outside of regular

school hours giving students access after school, before school, and on weekends: 2000

After school...................................................................................................................................... 98 0.6

Before school.................................................................................................................................... 84 1.7

On weekends.................................................................................................................................... 16 1.9

Figure 2: Percent of the public schools having acceptable use policies (AUPs) using the

following technologies or procedures: 2000

Teacher/staff monitoring .................................................................................................................. 94 0.9

Blocking/filtering software............................................................................................................... 74 1.7

Honor codes...................................................................................................................................... 64 2.0

Intranet ............................................................................................................................................. 28 1.9

Section: What is the ratio of students to instructional computers in public schools?

Ratio of students to instructional computers in public schools in 1999 ............................................ 6 0.1

Section: How are public schools preventing students from accessing inappropriate material

on the Internet in 2000?

Of the public schools with Internet access, percent having AUPs in 2000....................................... 98 0.5

Of the public schools having AUPs, percent using at least one technology or procedure on all

Internet-connected computers used by students in 2000................................................................... 95 1.0

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, “Internet Access in U.S.

Public Schools, Fall 1999,” FRSS 75; and “Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 2000”, FRSS 79.