Last Updated: January 28, 2015
This article appeared in the January 2015 Rural Policy Matters.
Editor's note: Links are free and current at time of posting, but may require registration or expire over time.
Schools and libraries will see a significant increase in funding to improve technology and high-speed internet access thanks to a December decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
The E-Rate program was created in 1996 to provide schools and libraries with resources for computers and telecommunications services. It is the federal government’s largest educational technology program.
But annual funding for the program had been capped for years at $2.25 billion and needs in most schools far outstripped financial resources. Further, many E-rate policies and rules had not kept pace with needs associated with evolving technology.
This past summer the FCC approved a number of rule changes to emphasize broadband and wi-fi connectivity.
The funding increase raises the annual E-rate spending cap to $3.9 million and will be largely directed toward improving high-speed access. Fees for consumer telecommunications services will cover the costs. Those fees will cost most U.S. households about 16¢ a month or $1.90 a year per phone line.
In addition, funding for older technologies like pagers and voicemail will be phased out, freeing up some additional monies for more up-to-date technologies.
Many education and technology groups have applauded both the funding increase and the new rules.
New rules: more flexibility, transparency
The rule changes reflect a shift in E-rate emphasis toward connectivity and high-speed access. They also address some of the most challenging problems rural areas face is gaining broadband services. This is especially the case with getting fiber optic cable in remote communities and those with low population densities.
While no new funding is specifically set aside to help rural school districts get broadband, several of the rule changes are intended to make it easier and more affordable for them to do so. Some of these changes include:
Widespread disparities in school technology and high-speed access
Schools vary widely in the quality of telecommunications services available to their students. This reality relates both to the financial ability of the district to purchase services and to the costs of those services, which vary widely by location and circumstance. Several studies and surveys released this year document these disparities.
Ethnicity, Income, Rural Locale. Earlier this year the Alliance for Excellent Education and the LEAD Commission issued a report that documents some of these disparities as they relate to student ethnicity and location. The report, Schools and Broadband Speeds: An Analysis of Gaps in Access to High-Speed Internet for African-American, Latino, Low-Income, and Rural Students, found that only about 34% of students across the country have access to high-speed internet (100 Mbps or more) and that access varies significantly. For example,
Capacity and Costs. The majority of U.S. schools lack the technology infrastructure they need to provide curriculum resources, online testing, and communications. According to a survey conducted earlier this year by the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN), the chief impediments are affordability and adequate funding.
The survey documented large disparities in both access and costs. For example,
Bargaining power in wealthier districts. In April of this year the non-profit organization EducationSuperHighway issued a paper, Connecting America’s Students: Opportunities for Action, which examines data based on districts’ E-rate requests. The paper found that districts with lower poverty rates tend to have better technology infrastructure and get better rates for telecommunications services than districts with higher poverty rates.
The paper includes comparisons of districts that had already met the Obama administration’s ConnectED initiative to promote high-quality educational technology and training. The paper reports that higher-wealth districts are more likely than low wealth districts to meet ConnectED goals. Wealthier districts have much larger technology budgets and pay less for technology services than other districts. For example,
The report found that districts that received multiple bids for technology projects paid between two and three times less for certain services than other districts.
Schools and Broadband Speeds: An Analysis of Gaps in Access to High-Speed Internet, Alliance for Excellent Education and the Lead Commission, including access to Executive Summary, full report, and state-by-state e-rate information, updated in December 2014
CoSN survey of E-rate and infrastructure survey:
EducationSuperHighway report, Connecting America’s Students
Read more from the January 2015 Rural Policy Matters.