What Schools Do Families Want (and Why)? Evidence on Revealed Preferences From New Orleans

Harris, Douglas N.; Larsen, Matthew F.

doi:10.3102/01623737221134528

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Students may apply to any school in the city, and its extensive public transit system-which is subsidized for students-provides access to a large number of schools (Corcoran, 2018). However, prior studies have found that families have a strong preference for proximity when choosing schools (Glazerman & Dotter, 2017;Harris & Larsen, 2015;Hastings, Kane, & Staiger, 2006). Thus, we might expect residentially proximate families to make more similar choices, all else equal.…”

Section: The Role Of Choices School Supply and Preferences On Peer Co...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the demand side, prior research has found variation in school preferences by family background, with high-socioeconomic status (SES) parents and parents of higher-achieving students more likely to prioritize schools with high test scores than low-SES parents and parents of lower-achieving students (Abdulkadiroğlu et al, 2020;Glazerman & Dotter, 2017;Harris & Larsen, 2015;Hastings et al, 2006). Families also differ in preferences for the racial composition of schools (Bell, 2009;Billingham & Hunt, 2016;Goyette, 2008;Hailey, 2022b;Schneider & Buckley, 2002) and school safety (Hailey, 2022a).…”

Section: The Role Of Choices School Supply and Preferences On Peer Co...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Choosing Alone? Peer Continuity Disparities in Choice-Based Enrollment Systems

Mark

Corcoran

Jennings

2023

Educational Researcher

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We provide novel evidence on the broader impacts of school choice systems by quantifying disparities in peer continuity from middle to high school in New York City. We find that Black and Hispanic students and those in high-poverty neighborhoods attend high school with a much smaller fraction of their middle school or neighborhood peers than their White, Asian, and low-poverty neighborhood counterparts. Disparities also emerge in peer isolation: 27% and 20% of Black and Hispanic students transitioned with no other student from their middle school, while only 7% to 8% of White and Asian students did. Group differences in choice similarity, which in part reflects systematic variation in the number of local school options, drive this result.

show abstract

Section: The Role Of Choices School Supply and Preferences On Peer Co...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Role Of Choices School Supply and Preferences On Peer Co...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Choosing Alone? Peer Continuity Disparities in Choice-Based Enrollment Systems

Mark

Corcoran

Jennings

2023

Educational Researcher

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The other is the expressed or stated preference approach, which focuses on what parents say about the school choice process, using interviews or survey data (Jabbar & Lenhoff, 2020). Studies from both approaches highlight some important considerations when choosing schools: families care about schools' achievement test scores or other measures of academic quality, distance to home, tuition, school's socioeconomic composition, among other factors (Altenhofen et al, 2016;Burgess et al, 2015;Cooper, 2005;Denice & Gross, 2016;Elacqua et al, 2006;Harris & Larsen, 2015;Hofflinger et al, 2020;Madero Cabib & Madero Cabib, 2012;Mandic et al, 2017;Maroulis et al, 2019). Both approaches are imperfect and necessarily simplify what is inherently a complex process (Cooper, 2005;Ellison & Aloe, 2018;Hastings & Weinstein, 2008;Hill & Scott, 2017;Jabbar & Lenhoff, 2020;Maroulis et al, 2010).…”

Section: School Choice Decision-making Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanisms Underlying Choice-Set Formation: The Case of School Choice in Chile

Canals

Maroulis

Canessa

et al. 2022

Social Science Computer Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many decisions involve selecting among many more options than an individual can effectively examine and consider. Therefore, people usually consider smaller and different “choice sets” as viable options. To better understand the processes affecting choice-set formation, we developed a computational model of how households become aware of potential choices in a context for which understanding household decision-making has important public policy implications: market-based reforms in education. In the model, households learn about the schools to which they can send their children through three mechanisms: find out about geographically proximate schools, access to publicly available information, and information gathered from interactions with other households. We calibrated the model using data from four cities in Chile, where students are not required to attend their neighborhood school. We then used the model to conduct hypothetical computational experiments that assessed how each mechanism impacted the sets of schools known to households before they make their choice (their “awareness set”). We found that the inclusion of a social interaction mechanism was crucial for producing simulated awareness sets that matched the awareness sets provided in a survey conducted by the Chilean Ministry of Education. We also found that the social interaction mechanism played the largest role in determining the quality and price range of the choices available in households’ awareness sets. Our findings highlight the importance of social interactions in a stage of decision-making before the direct impact of other individuals is typically made explicit. Moreover, it validates an approach that can be used in future models where understanding how decision-makers become aware of their options may be as important as the way they choose among them.

show abstract

“…Dominant school choice discourses position parents as rational actors who gather information about potential schools, evaluate that information, and effectively choose the highest performing options for their children (Blast & Walberg, 2004; Chubb & Moe, 1990). Though there is evidence that parents of all racial and socioeconomic backgrounds consider perceived academic quality when making school choice decisions (Glazerman & Dotter, 2017; Kleitz et al, 2000), evidence is also growing that nonacademic factors can influence school choice decisions as much as, if not more than, academic considerations (Billingham & Hunt, 2016; Garcia, 2008; Harris & Larsen, 2014; Jacobs, 2013; Ladd & Turaeva, 2020). In particular, many marginalized students—including students of color, linguistic or ethnic minority students, and LGBTQ+ students—and their families consider supportive social environments that reduce the risk of discrimination to be a top priority in their school choice decisions (Cooper, 2005; Fox & Buchanan, 2014; Posey-Maddox et al, 2021; Wilson, 2016).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pursuing Diversity: The Context, Practices, and Diversity Outcomes of Intentionally Diverse Charter Schools

Seifert

Porter

Cordes

et al. 2022

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In the United States, students’ experiences are shaped by racioethnic, socioeconomic, and linguistic segregation. School choice, and especially charter schools, generally exacerbate existing levels of school segregation. Counter to this trend, hundreds of intentionally diverse charter schools (IDCS), with a mission to promote school diversity, have opened across the country. Purpose: This study aims to clarify how IDCS operationalize their mission to serve diverse populations. To do so, we examine contextual factors that influence diversification efforts, the strategies that IDCS use to pursue diverse enrollments, and whether sample IDCS are more diverse than comparison schools. Research Design: This study uses a convergent mixed-methods design, in which qualitative and quantitative data were independently collected and analyzed, then merged for final analysis. The qualitative phase included thematic analyses of 101 interviews and 40 focus groups with IDCS staff and leaders to identify key contextual factors and practices that shape diversification efforts. For quantitative analyses, we used student and school-level administrative data from sample and comparison schools in New York, Colorado, and California. We explored researcher-created diversity outcomes for sample and comparison schools, including a racioethnic diversity index representing the probability that any two students chosen at random will be of a different race/ethnicity, and locally created diversity goals of having 40%–50% of enrolled students qualify for free/reduced price lunch (FRL) and no racial majority group among enrolled students. Conclusions/Recommendations: We found that local context, including race-neutral state policies and local housing patterns, created barriers to recruiting and enrolling diverse students. To overcome these barriers, IDCS staff developed data-driven recruitment and enrollment practices that were differentiated by the target group. Practices focused on increasing awareness of the school, building trust, and investing parents in the schools’ diversity mission. Enrollment data show that sample IDCS are more diverse than a set of comparison schools, with mixed results when analyzing diversity outcomes with locally defined goals. We conclude that, despite contextual barriers, choice schools have considerable agency in fostering school diversity.

show abstract

What Schools Do Families Want (and Why)? Evidence on Revealed Preferences From New Orleans

Cited by 18 publications

References 56 publications

Choosing Alone? Peer Continuity Disparities in Choice-Based Enrollment Systems

Choosing Alone? Peer Continuity Disparities in Choice-Based Enrollment Systems

Mechanisms Underlying Choice-Set Formation: The Case of School Choice in Chile

Pursuing Diversity: The Context, Practices, and Diversity Outcomes of Intentionally Diverse Charter Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About