IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/edfpol/v14y2019i1p1-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

School Choice in Amsterdam: Which Schools are Chosen When School Choice is Free?

Author

Listed:
  • Nienke Ruijs

    (Dutch Inspectorate of Education 3544 AC Utrecht The Netherlands Author email: n.m.ruijs@owinsp.nl)

  • Hessel Oosterbeek

    (Amsterdam School of Economics University of Amsterdam 1018 WB Amsterdam The Netherlands Author email: h.oosterbeek@uva.nl)

Abstract

Using discrete choice models, this paper investigates the determinants of secondary school choice in the city of Amsterdam. In this city, there are many schools to choose from and school choice is virtually unrestricted (no catchment areas, low or no tuition fees, short distances). We find that school choice is related to exam grades and the quality of incoming students, but not to progression in lower grades, no delay in higher grades, and a composite measure of quality published by a national newspaper. Furthermore, students appear to prefer schools that are close to their home and schools that many of their former classmates in primary school attend.

Suggested Citation

  • Nienke Ruijs & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2019. "School Choice in Amsterdam: Which Schools are Chosen When School Choice is Free?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 14(1), pages 1-30, Winter.
  • Handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:1-30
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/edfp_a_00237
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anders Böhlmark & Mikael Lindahl, 2015. "Independent Schools and Long-run Educational Outcomes: Evidence from Sweden's Large-scale Voucher Reform," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82(327), pages 508-551, July.
    2. Angrist, Joshua D., 2014. "The perils of peer effects," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 98-108.
    3. Gregory R. Weiher & Kent L. Tedin, 2002. "Does choice lead to racially distinctive schools? Charter schools and household preferences," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 79-92.
    4. Simon Burgess & Ellen Greaves & Anna Vignoles & Deborah Wilson, 2015. "What Parents Want: School Preferences and School Choice," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(587), pages 1262-1289, September.
    5. Charles F. Manski, 1993. "Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 531-542.
    6. Caroline M. Hoxby, 2000. "Does Competition among Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1209-1238, December.
    7. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, Fall.
    8. Bruce Sacerdote, 2001. "Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth Roommates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(2), pages 681-704.
    9. Julie Berry Cullen & Brian A Jacob & Steven Levitt, 2006. "The Effect of School Choice on Participants: Evidence from Randomized Lotteries," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(5), pages 1191-1230, September.
    10. Caroline M. Hoxby, 2000. "The Effects of Class Size on Student Achievement: New Evidence from Population Variation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(4), pages 1239-1285.
    11. Calsamiglia, Caterina & Güell, Maia, 2014. "The Illusion of School Choice: Empirical Evidence from Barcelona," IZA Discussion Papers 8202, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Giacomo De Giorgi & Michele Pellizzari & Silvia Redaelli, 2010. "Identification of Social Interactions through Partially Overlapping Peer Groups," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 241-275, April.
    13. Borghans Lex & Golsteyn Bart H. H. & Zölitz Ulf, 2015. "Parental Preferences for Primary School Characteristics," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, January.
    14. Hsieh, Chang-Tai & Urquiola, Miguel, 2006. "The effects of generalized school choice on achievement and stratification: Evidence from Chile's voucher program," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(8-9), pages 1477-1503, September.
    15. Pierre Koning & Karen van der Wiel, 2013. "Ranking The Schools: How School-Quality Information Affects School Choice In The Netherlands," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 466-493, April.
    16. Caroline M. Hoxby, 2007. "Does Competition Among Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers? Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 2038-2055, December.
    17. Alan Collins & Martin Snell, 2000. "Parental preferences and choice of school," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(7), pages 803-813.
    18. Jesse Rothstein, 2007. "Does Competition Among Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers? Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 2026-2037, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Trajkovski, Samantha & Zabel, Jeffrey & Schwartz, Amy Ellen, 2021. "Do school buses make school choice work?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    2. Bles, Per & van der Velden, Rolf & Ariës, Roel J., 2020. "Is there an opportunity-performance trade-off in secondary education?," Research Memorandum 022, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2009. "Econometric Methods for Causal Evaluation of Education Policies and Practices: A Non-Technical Guide," CESifo Working Paper Series 2877, CESifo.
    2. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    3. Song, Yang, 2019. "Sorting, school performance and quality: Evidence from China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 238-261.
    4. Bramoullé, Yann & Djebbari, Habiba & Fortin, Bernard, 2019. "Peer Effects in Networks: a Survey," CEPR Discussion Papers 14260, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. López-Torres, Laura & Nicolini, Rosella & Prior, Diego, 2017. "Does strategic interaction affect demand for school places? A conditional efficiency approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 89-103.
    6. Verena Wondratschek & Karin Edmark & Markus Frolich, 2013. "The Short- and Long-term Effects of School Choice on Student Outcomes - Evidence from a School Choice Reform in Sweden," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 111-112, pages 71-101.
    7. Gordon B. Dahl & Katrine V. L?ken & Magne Mogstad, 2014. "Peer Effects in Program Participation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(7), pages 2049-2074, July.
    8. Silvia Mendolia & Alfredo R Paloyo & Ian Walker, 2018. "Heterogeneous effects of high school peers on educational outcomes," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(3), pages 613-634.
    9. Caterina Calsamiglia & Francisco Martínez-Mora & Antonio Miralles, 2015. "School Choice Mechanisms, Peer Effects and Sorting," Discussion Papers in Economics 15/01, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    10. Antonia Grohmann & Sahra Sakha, 2015. "The Effect of Peer Observation on Consumption Choices: Experimental Evidence," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1525, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    11. Brodaty, Thibault & Gurgand, Marc, 2016. "Good peers or good teachers? Evidence from a French University," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 62-78.
    12. Bet Caeyers & Marcel Fafchamps, 2016. "Exclusion Bias in the Estimation of Peer Effects," NBER Working Papers 22565, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. González, Felipe, 2020. "Collective action in networks: Evidence from the Chilean student movement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    14. Bukowski, Paweł & Kobus, Martyna, 2018. "The threat of competition and public school performance: Evidence from Poland," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 14-24.
    15. Verena Wondratschek & Karin Edmark & Markus Frölich, 2013. "The Short- and Long-Term Effects of School Choice on Student Outcomes - Evidence from a School Choice Reform in Sweden," CESifo Working Paper Series 4438, CESifo.
    16. Akyol, Pelin & Krishna, Kala, 2017. "Preferences, selection, and value added: A structural approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 89-117.
    17. Salvador Contreras & Frank Badua & Mitchell Adrian, 2012. "Peer Effects on Undergraduate Business Student Performance," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 11(1), pages 57-66.
    18. Richard Murphy & Felix Weinhardt, 2014. "Top of the Class: The Importance of Ordinal Rank," CESifo Working Paper Series 4815, CESifo.
    19. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus & J. Jong, 2013. "Competition and educational quality: evidence from the Netherlands," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(4), pages 607-634, November.
    20. W. Bentley MacLeod & Miguel Urquiola, 2018. "Is Education Consumption or Investment? Implications for the Effect of School Competition," NBER Working Papers 25117, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:1-30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://www.mitpressjournals.org/ .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ann Olson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mitpressjournals.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.