Showing papers by "Justine S. Hastings published in 2006"

Preferences and Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in a Public School Choice Lottery

Abstract: This paper combines a model of parental school choice with randomized school lotteries in order to understand the effects of being assigned to a first-choice school on academic outcomes. We outline a simple framework in which those who place the highest weight on academics when choosing a school benefit the most academically when admitted. Although the average student does not improve academically when winning a school lottery, this average impact conceals a range of impacts for identifiable subgroups of students. Children of parents whose choices revealed a strong preference for academic quality experienced significant gains in test scores as a result of attending their chosen school, while children whose parents weighted academic characteristics less heavily experienced academic losses. This differential effect is largest for children of parents who forfeit the most in terms of utility gains from proximity and racial match to choose a school with stronger academics. Depending on one's own race and neighborhood, a preference for academic quality can either conflict with or be reinforced by other objectives, such as a desire for proximity and same-race peers.

Gender and Performance: Evidence from School Assignment by Randomized Lottery

Abstract: School choice programs are intended to improve student achievement, by allowing for better matches between students and schools. It is not clear, however, that academic achievement will improve if parents make school choice decisions over both academic and nonacademic school attributes (Justine S. Hastings et al., 2005, 2006). Indeed, many randomized studies of impacts of school choice find little or no effect of school choice on academic outcomes. For example, initial evaluations of randomized voucher experiments in Milwaukee and New York City found modest academic impacts on eligible students (John F. Witte et al., 1995; Daniel P. Mayer et al., 2002). More recently, evaluations of public school choice lotteries in Chicago and Charlotte have found no difference between the average lottery winner and loser in academic outcomes such as test scores (Julie Cullen et al., 2003; Hastings et al., 2006). When parents are choosing schools for academic and nonacademic reasons, school choice may increase utility but not necessarily improve academic outcomes. There is growing evidence that educational interventions may have heterogeneous treatment effects by gender. Analysis of the Moving To Opportunity demonstration, in which parents were randomly given the opportunity to move to nonpoverty neighborhoods, found improvements in education, mental health, and criminal behavior for females, but negative effects on males (Jeffrey R. Kling and Jeffrey B. Liebman, 2004). Similarly, Michael Anderson (2005) reanalyzed data from three randomized trials of early childhood education and found that all of the long-term benefits accrued to girls and not to boys. We use data from a public school choice program, with school assignment by lottery, to estimate the impacts on academic outcomes by race and gender of attending a first-choice school. Our data come from the CharlotteMecklenburg school district (CMS) in North Carolina, which introduced district-wide public school choice in the fall of 2002 after a racebased busing plan was terminated by the courts. The data include students’ choices, lottery numbers, school assignments, demographics, and academic achievement for the years surrounding implementation of school choice. We compare outcomes for those making similar choices, whose school assignment was determined solely by lottery number. Overall, there was no gain in academic achievement for those winning the lottery. White females did experience significant improvements in test scores when randomized into their first choice school, however. White females were also more likely to choose academically focused magnets and, among those who won the lottery, reported significant increases in time spent on homework. Our evidence suggests that school choice programs may have heterogeneous treatment effects by gender, which are related to differences in the factors driving parental choices.

Reformulating Competition?: Gasoline Content Regulation and Wholesale Gasoline Prices

Abstract: The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments stipulated gasoline content requirements for metropolitan areas with air pollution levels above predetermined federal thresholds. The legislation led to exogenous changes in the type of gasoline required for sale across U.S. metropolitan areas. This paper uses a panel of detailed wholesale gasoline price data to estimate the effect of gasoline content regulation on wholesale prices and price volatility. In addition, we investigate the extent to which the estimated price effects are driven by changes in the number of suppliers versus geographic segmentation resulting from regulation. We find that prices in regulated metropolitan areas increase significantly, relative to a control group, by an average of 3.6 cents per gallon. The price effect, however, varies by ten cents per gallon across regulated markets and the heterogeneity across markets is correlated with the degree of geographic isolation generated by the discontinuous regulatory requirements.

Preferences and Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in a Public School Choice Lottery

Abstract: This paper combines a model of parental school choice with randomized school lotteries in order to understand the effects of being assigned to a first-choice school on academic outcomes. We outline a simple framework in which those who place the highest weight on academics when choosing a school benefit the most academically when admitted. Although the average student does not improve academically when winning a school lottery, this average impact conceals a range of impacts for identifiable subgroups of students. Children of parents whose choices revealed a strong preference for academic quality experienced significant gains in test scores as a result of attending their chosen school, while children whose parents weighted academic characteristics less heavily experienced academic losses. This differential effect is largest for children of parents who forfeit the most in terms of utility gains from proximity and racial match to choose a school with stronger academics. Depending on one's own race and neighborhood, a preference for academic quality can either conflict with or be reinforced by other objectives, such as a desire for proximity and same-race peers.

The Political Economy of School Choice: Randomized School Admissions and Voter Participation

Abstract: We provide empirical evidence on the determinants of voter turnout using the randomized outcomes of a school choice lottery. We show that those losing the lottery to attend their first-choice school are significantly more likely to vote in the ensuing school board election than lottery winners. The effect of losing the school choice lottery on voting is highest among high-income families and among those who participated in prior elections. Aggregating the predicted turnout results up to the precinct level, we find evidence consistent with the hypothesis that losing the school choice lottery caused parents to vote against the incumbent school board chair, causing her to lose the election. These results have potentially important implications for political behavior: in order to maximize their chances of re-election, public officials may seek to minimize losses to high income residents and those with a history of voting rather than choosing welfare maximizing policies. The results also have important implications for the political viability of public school choice programs.