We have a new working paper: “The (Un)importance of School Assignment”. 1/9

Wij deden hier 14 jaar geleden onderzoek naar en vinden dat het ongelijkheid flink kan verminderen:

RT @ThomasBuser: New paper: "Adversarial Economic Preferences Predict Right-Wing Voting" .Competitiveness predicts….

RT @JPubEcon: Recently published paper in the @JPubEcon :. "Fertility and Parental Retirement".Vol 226 (Oct 2023). by Julius Ilciukas (@Jul….

Eerst dit lezen.

Ben wel benieuwd wat de dochter vindt van de visie van de vader ten aanzien van Engelstalige programma’s:

Perhaps of interest to: @ChrisANeilson @andbjn @c_r_walt @KiraboJackson @CamilleTerrier1 @prof_parag @metrics52 @BlueprintMIT @m_urquiola @Lnavarrosola.

Joint with three great coauthors: @nadineketel @SandorSovago @BasvdKlaauw 9/9.

Our results even indicate that lottery losers score better on attitudes towards diversity. It seems therefore that exposure to more diverse peers (and teachers) boosts attitudes towards diversity without harming any other outcome. 8/9.

Concerns of parents about their children’s school assignment therefore appear to be based on characteristics of schools (which parents can observe) and not on the effects schools have academic or non-academic outcomes (which parents do not observe). 7/9.

Our key result is that we also find no negative effects on any of the other outcomes including attitudes towards school, behavior inside and outside school, school satisfaction, civic engagement, personality traits and friends. 6/9.

Despite the less attractive school characteristics, losing the admission lottery has no negative effects on students’ academic outcomes. Lottery losers are equally likely to graduate from the academic track on time and equally likely enroll in university. 5/9.

Losing the admission lottery results in placement in a school with less attractive characteristics. Distance increases, it’s more likely that the school offers lower tracks, more teachers in lower pay scales and more peers are lower performing or from lower income families. 4/9.

We combine unique survey data with data from the school match and register data to answer this question. We focus on students in the academic track. 3/9.

Secondary schools in Amsterdam use DA with ties broken by lottery numbers. 20% of the students are not assigned to the school they rank first. Is that detrimental for outcomes that parents and students care about? 2/9.

Perhaps of interest to @JoshGoodman_BU, @ChrisANeilson, @adamaltmejd, @andres_bafer, @Dejan_KovacHR, @camulhern, @josefaaguirre, @AdeGendre, @chriskarbownik, @HelenaSkyt.

Joint with three great coauthors: @stnavdeev, @nadineketel, @BasvdKlaauw. 8/8.

Our preferred explanation is that the homogenous quality of universities in the Netherlands (compared to Chile, Croatia, Sweden and the US) makes differences in the prestige of fields of study more prominent. 7/8.

Our findings deviate from the results of Altmejd et al. (2021) and Aguirrea and Matta (2021) who use admission thresholds. Because we find similar effects for applicants in the lowest ability group, the different research designs do not explain the different findings. 6/8.

Sibling spillovers are larger among same-sex siblings, suggesting a role model effect. Neighbor spillovers are larger when the age difference is smaller. Sibling and cousin spillovers are larger in high-income families suggesting a role of parental resources. 5/8.