According to the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) approach, anecdotes about policy can be used to clarify whether and how policy narratives impact individual public opinion, which in turn shapes aggregate public opinion. This study focuses on the effect of narratives in shaping opinions regarding charter schools, one of the most controversial policy alternatives in the school-choice debate. This policy lends itself well to being examined using an NPF approach, since both the supporters and skeptics use strong and distinct narratives to present their case and to advocate for their cause. To examine whether different policy narratives on charter schools influence individuals opinions and attitudes and preferred policy outcome, a quasiexperimental design is used to compare baseline and follow-up opinion data for individuals who read policy narratives reflecting different positions. The results indicate that policy narratives influence public opinion, and that congruence and issue familiarity matter in the nature of the change.