IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp16776.html

Setting Priorities in School Choice Enrollment Systems: Who Benefits from Placement Algorithm Preferences?

Author

Listed:
  • Valant, Jon

    (Brookings Institution)

  • Walker, Brigham

    (Tulane University)

Abstract

Many cities with school choice programs employ algorithms to determine which applicants get seats in oversubscribed schools. This study explores whether the New Orleans placement algorithm favored students of certain races or socioeconomic classes via its use of priorities such as geographic and sibling priority. We find that when Black and White applicants submitted the same first-choice request for kindergarten, Black applicants were 9 percentage points less likely to receive it, while students in poverty were 6 percentage points less likely to receive a first-choice placement than their peers. We examine these priorities and simulate placements under alternate policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Valant, Jon & Walker, Brigham, 2024. "Setting Priorities in School Choice Enrollment Systems: Who Benefits from Placement Algorithm Preferences?," IZA Discussion Papers 16776, IZA Network @ LISER.
    • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp16776
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp16776.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Anne & Ingram, Helen, 1993. "Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 334-347, June.
    2. Lincove, Jane Arnold & Valant, Jon & Cowen, Joshua M., 2018. "You can't always get what you want: Capacity constraints in a choice-based school system," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 94-109.
    3. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Parag A. Pathak & Jonathan Schellenberg & Christopher R. Walters, 2020. "Do Parents Value School Effectiveness?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(5), pages 1502-1539, May.
    4. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tayfun Sönmez, 2003. "School Choice: A Mechanism Design Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 729-747, June.
    5. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Yeon-Koo Che & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth & Olivier Tercieux, 2020. "Efficiency, Justified Envy, and Incentives in Priority-Based Matching," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 425-442, December.
    6. Parag A. Pathak, 2011. "The Mechanism Design Approach to Student Assignment," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 513-536, September.
    7. Adam J. Kapor & Christopher A. Neilson & Seth D. Zimmerman, 2020. "Heterogeneous Beliefs and School Choice Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(5), pages 1274-1315, May.
    8. Jane A. Lincove & Joshua M. Cowen & Jason P. Imbrogno, 2018. "What's in Your Portfolio? How Parents Rank Traditional Public, Private, and Charter Schools in Post-Katrina New Orleans’ Citywide System of School Choice," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 13(2), pages 194-226, Spring.
    9. Sarah Cohodes & Sean Corcoran & Jennifer Jennings & Carolyn Sattin-Bajaj, 2022. "When Do Informational Interventions Work? Experimental Evidence from New York City High School Choice," NBER Working Papers 29690, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Ariel H. Bierbaum & Alex Karner & Jesus M. Barajas, 2021. "Toward Mobility Justice," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 87(2), pages 197-210, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dur, Umut & Paiement, Scott, 2024. "A characterization of the top trading cycles mechanism for the school choice problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 93-100.
    2. Zhiyi Xu & Robert G. Hammond, 2024. "Designing school choice mechanisms: A structural model and demand estimation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 505-524, April.
    3. Mariana Laverde, 2022. "Distance to Schools and Equal Access in School Choice Systems," Working Papers 2022-002, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    4. Cao, Yuan, 2020. "Centralized assignment mechanisms and assortative matching: Evidence from Chinese universities," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 255-276.
    5. Derek Neal & Joseph Root, 2024. "The Provision of Information and Incentives in School Assignment Mechanisms," NBER Chapters, in: New Directions in Market Design, pages 179-209, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Gandil, Mikkel Høst, 2021. "Substitution Effects in College Admissions," Memorandum 3/2021, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    7. Bo, Shiyu & Liu, Jing & Shiu, Ji-Liang & Song, Yan & Zhou, Sen, 2019. "Admission mechanisms and the mismatch between colleges and students: Evidence from a large administrative dataset from China," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 27-37.
    8. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.
    9. Lauren Sartain & Lisa Barrow, 2022. "The Pathway to Enrolling in a High-Performance High School: Understanding Barriers to Access," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 17(3), pages 379-407, Summer.
    10. Dur, Umut Mert & Wiseman, Thomas, 2019. "School choice with neighbors," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 101-109.
    11. Olivier de Groote & Anaïs Fabre & Margaux Luflade & Arnaud Maurel, 2025. "Sequential College Admission Mechanisms and Off-Platform Options," Working Papers hal-05212878, HAL.
    12. Ismail Saglam, 2014. "Simple Heuristics as Equilibrium Strategies in Mutual Sequential Mate Search," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 17(1), pages 1-12.
    13. Guillen, Pablo & Hing, Alexander, 2014. "Lying through their teeth: Third party advice and truth telling in a strategy proof mechanism," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 178-185.
    14. Zhang, Luosai, 2025. "The properness of weak stability notions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    15. Ha, Wei & Kang, Le & Song, Yang, 2020. "College matching mechanisms and matching stability: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 206-226.
    16. Di Feng, 2023. "Endowments-swapping-proofness and Efficiency in Multiple-Type Housing Markets," Discussion Paper Series DP2023-14, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    17. Morrill, Thayer & Roth, Alvin E., 2024. "Top trading cycles," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    18. Shu-Heng Chen & Connie Houning Wang & Weikai Chen, 2017. "Matching Impacts of School Admission Mechanisms: An Agent-Based Approach," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(2), pages 217-241, March.
    19. Chen, Li & Sebastián Pereyra, Juan, 2019. "Self-selection in school choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 59-81.
    20. Mehmet Ekmekci & M. Bumin Yenmez, "undated". "Integrating Schools for Centralized Admissions," GSIA Working Papers 2014-E20, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:iza:izadps:dp16776. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: Mark Fallak (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaalu.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.