National Conference of State Legislatures
LEGISBRIEF
BRIEFING PAPERS
ON THE
I M P O RTA N T I S S U E S
March 2007
OF THE
D AY
V o l . 15, No. 17
State Funding for Education Technology
By Heather Grinager
States are preparing students
for a technologydriven society.
Despite recent attention given to 21st century learning and to ensuring that students have high
levels of achievement in science, technology, engineering and math, there still is a wide range of
activity from state legislatures in preparing students for a technology-driven society. In addition,
federal funding for education technology under the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has
significantly decreased since 2002, raising questions about who will provide the future funding and
vision for technology in education.
The State Education Technology Directors Association (SETDA) produces an annual National
Trends report that documents how NCLB education technology money is spent and innovations
in the classroom. In 2006, SETDA also collected data on state funding and policies for education
technology. All states and the District of Columbia were surveyed, and responses typically were
submitted by state education technology directors. A full report on the current condition of state
funding for education technology will be released soon.
State Action
Twenty-one
states support
state-level education technology programs.
Dedicated and General Funding for Education Technology. State financial commitments to
education technology differ widely. Although 33 states indicate that their state budget includes
education technology as a line item, the amount and purpose vary. Twenty-one states reported
funding state-level programs that provide support to local districts through virtual high schools,
technical assistance, or by
Funding by Program Type
providing a state portal
SEA = State education agency
LEA = Local education agency
for teachers. Eighteen
1,3
states provide funding to
1,2,3
1,4
2
local districts for equip2
1,4
1,2,3
1
2,3
ment networking or
1
1,2
1,2
1,2
2
integration. Nine states
2 1,2,3
1,2,3
4
3
1,2 1
fund regional programs
1
1,2
1,2
that serve local districts,
4
4
1,2,3
2
1
and seven states provide
1 - SEA-level programs that serve LEAs
District of
1,2
4
Columbia
4
funds for other activities. 2 - Programs that award funds to LEAs
1,3
3 - Regional programs that serve LEAs
Eighteen states provide
4 - Other
No program
Puerto Rico - not available
no dedicated funding for
Virgin Islands - not available
education technology.
Note: Because state funding processes vary, some states might include hardware and connectivity costs
within various programs, and others may not. Many states provide funding that MAY be used for technology
resources, but final funding decisions often are made at the local level.
Source: State Education Technology Directors Association, December 2006.
National Conference
of State Legislatures
Executive Director
William T. Pound
Denver
7700 East First Place
Denver, Colorado 80230
Phone (303) 364-7700
www.ncsl.org
Washington, D.C.
444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 515
Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone (202) 624-5400
In addition to funding that is specifically designated for education technology, 31 states report
they have other state funding that districts can use to purchase curriculum hardware or software.
In 2008, for example, California will provide $100 million in grants to local districts to purchase
library materials, curriculum materials or education technology. Illinois has a School Technology
Revolving Loan Program that allows schools to borrow money from the state at low interest rates to
support technology infrastructure. Although Maryland does not include education technology as
a line item in the state budget, school systems can purchase education technology under the Bridge
to Excellence Program after outlining how it will be integrated into curriculum, instruction and
high-quality professional development.
Some states
specifically fund
district technology purchases.
Does Flexibility Dilute Funding? State requirements for how districts spend education technology funds also differ. In fact, 24 states report that state education technology funds can be—but
are not required to be—spent on education technology. Although Maine started the first statewide
student laptop program, state rules and legislation allow local officials to decide how state technology funds are spent. North Carolina recommends that 20 percent to 30 percent of state education
technology funds be spent on staff development. Texas requires that funds be spent only to 1)
purchase electronic textbooks or technological equipment that contributes to student learning, or
2) train teachers in the appropriate use of electronic textbooks and to provide access to technological equipment for instructional use.
In some states,
education technology funds
need not be
spent on education technology.
Virtual and Online Learning. Twenty-four states provide direct funding for distance, virtual or
online programs, although the amounts vary from $25,000 to more than $10 million. Funding
may cover only the cost of offering state-led classes or may include connections and hardware for
local schools to offer virtual courses plus the actual cost of the courses.
Are Our Students Technologically Literate? SETDA also collected data on how states define and
assess “technology literacy,” since NCLB requires students to be technologically literate by the time
they reach eighth grade. Nineteen states have adopted a definition put forth by the International
Society for Technology in Education, while 14 states have adopted their own definitions. Nine
states allow districts to locally determine the definition, while nine states use a different process.
Only eight states currently assess eighth graders at the state level, while four are progressing toward
an assessment, and 10 are considering it.
What This Means for Legislatures. This new data reveal that states have taken different approaches to funding education technology. Several have deferred to local control and remain relatively uninvolved, others believe their role is to support districts, while others have been leaders in
expanding district successes at the state level. With the importance of American competitiveness,
coupled with a decrease in federal funding, state legislatures have an opportunity to make a difference by funding education technology.
Heather Grinager
NCSL—Denver
(303) 364-7700, ext. 1392
[email protected]
Contacts For More Information
National Conference of State Legislatures
STEM site, http://www.ncsl.org/programs/educ/STEMMain.htm
MaryAnn Wolf
State Education Technology Directors Association
(410) 647-6965
[email protected]
State Education Technology Directors Association,
http://www.setda.org
NCLB requires
students to be
technologically literate by
eighth grade.