The value of information in centralized school choice systems

Strategy-proofness and assurance of a fair matching are desirable qualities for school choice mechanisms. Although these qualities are theoretical properties of the unrestricted-list deferred acceptance mechanism (DA), it has proven to be hard to go without list-size restrictions in practice. This paper shows how a simple modification to the restricted-list DA, in which students are provided more information about vacancies and offered higher-value options in the event of rejection, can mitigate uncertainty and yield matches very close to what would be obtained under the unrestricted-list DA. I estimate an application-portfolio choice model using administrative data from Tunisia, where a sequential implementation of the DA is used to assign high-school graduates to universities. This sequential implementation creates quasi-experimental variation that allows to separate the identification of students’ preferences for programs from their expectations about their admission probabilities. Counterfactual simulations show that the average student’s expected ex post utility is significantly lower when assignments are made using the standard restricted-list DA than what it would be in the unrestricted-list DA match. Using a sequential implementation, as is done in Tunisia, instead of the standard restricted-list DA, can reduce this welfare loss by 90%. ∗Email address: mluflade@sas.upenn.edu †I am extremely grateful to Meryam Zaiem whose insights about the context, help with obtaining the data, and encouragement have been critical to the realization of this project. I am grateful to Arnaud Maurel, Peter Arcidiacono, Joe Hotz, and Matt Masten for help and suggestions, as well as continuous support and encouragement. I thank Atila Abdulkadiroğlu, Eli Liebman, Pedro Mira, Derek Neal, Aviv Nevo, Seth Sanders, Modibo Sidibé, Petra Todd, and the participants at the Duke Labor and Microeconometrics workshops and at many other seminars, for very helpful comments and discussions. I thank the Ministry of Higher Education of Tunisia for providing the data. All errors are mine.

[1]  Thierry Magnac,et al.  Gaming the Boston School Choice Mechanism in Beijing , 2012 .

[2]  Xiaoxia Shi,et al.  Inference Based on Conditional Moment Inequalities , 2010 .

[3]  Yinghua He,et al.  Beyond Truth-Telling: Preference Estimation with Centralized School Choice and College Admissions , 2019, American Economic Review.

[4]  Aviv Nevo,et al.  Usage-Based Pricing and Demand for Residential Broadband , 2015 .

[5]  Peter Arcidiacono,et al.  Modeling College Major Choices Using Elicited Measures of Expectations and Counterfactuals , 2010, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[6]  Flip Klijn,et al.  Constrained school choice , 2009, J. Econ. Theory.

[7]  M. Keane,et al.  The Career Decisions of Young Men , 1997, Journal of Political Economy.

[8]  David Kjellberg Measuring Expectations , 1999, Identification Problems in the Social Sciences.

[9]  Daniel Waldinger,et al.  Targeting In-Kind Transfers through Market Design: A Revealed Preference Analysis of Public Housing Allocation , 2021 .

[10]  Amanda Pallais Small Differences That Matter: Mistakes in Applying to College , 2013, Journal of Labor Economics.

[11]  Ralph Stinebrickner,et al.  A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout , 2013 .

[12]  Caterina Calsamiglia,et al.  Constrained School Choice: An Experimental Study , 2009 .

[13]  Florian Heiss,et al.  Likelihood approximation by numerical integration on sparse grids , 2008 .

[14]  Alvin E. Roth,et al.  The Economics of Matching: Stability and Incentives , 1982, Math. Oper. Res..

[15]  Yan Chen,et al.  School Choice : An Experimental Study ∗ , 2004 .

[16]  Matthew Wiswall,et al.  Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports How Do College Students Respond to Public Information about Earnings? , 2022 .

[17]  N. Agarwal,et al.  Latent indices in assortative matching models , 2017 .

[18]  Justine S. Hastings,et al.  (Un)Informed College and Major Choice: Evidence from Linked Survey and Administrative Data , 2015 .

[19]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  Leveling the Playing Field: Sincere and Sophisticated Players in the Boston Mechanism , 2008 .

[20]  Todd R. Stinebrickner,et al.  Academic Performance and College Dropout: Using Longitudinal Expectations Data to Estimate a Learning Model , 2013, Journal of Labor Economics.

[21]  Adam J. Kapor,et al.  Heterogeneous Beliefs and School Choice , 2016 .

[22]  Thayer Morrill,et al.  Identifying the Harm of Manipulable School-Choice Mechanisms , 2018 .

[23]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation , 2011 .

[24]  Philip Oreopoulos,et al.  Information and College Access: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment , 2012 .

[25]  C. Hoxby,et al.  What High-Achieving Low-Income Students Know About College , 2015 .

[26]  Alvin E. Roth Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions , 2008, Int. J. Game Theory.

[27]  Justine S. Hastings,et al.  Information, School Choice, and Academic Achievement: Evidence from Two Experiments , 2007 .

[28]  Yeon-Koo Che,et al.  Expanding 'Choice' in School Choice , 2008 .

[29]  A. Roth The Evolution of the Labor Market for Medical Interns and Residents: A Case Study in Game Theory , 1984, Journal of Political Economy.

[30]  Aytek Erdil,et al.  What's the Matter with Tie-Breaking? Improving Efficiency in School Choice , 2008 .

[31]  Atila Abdulkadiroglu,et al.  School Choice: A Mechanism Design Approach , 2003 .

[32]  Robert T. Jensen,et al.  The (Perceived) Returns to Education and the Demand for Schooling , 2010 .

[33]  M. Balinski,et al.  A Tale of Two Mechanisms: Student Placement , 1999 .

[34]  Florian Heiss,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[35]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  Changing the Boston School Choice Mechanism: Strategy-proofness as Equal Access , 2006 .

[36]  Yan Chen,et al.  Information acquisition and provision in school choice: An experimental study , 2021, J. Econ. Theory.

[37]  P. Chiappori,et al.  The Econometrics of Matching Models , 2016 .

[38]  Costas Meghir,et al.  Heterogeneity in Human Capital Investments: High School Curriculum, College Major, and Careers , 2012 .

[39]  L. S. Shapley,et al.  College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage , 2013, Am. Math. Mon..

[40]  T. Magnac,et al.  College Choice Allocation Mechanisms: Structural Estimates and Counterfactuals , 2014 .

[41]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation. NBER Working Paper No. 16783. , 2011 .

[42]  David A. Freedman,et al.  Machiavelli and the Gale-Shapley Algorithm , 1981 .

[43]  Jeremy T. Fox,et al.  Linear Regression Estimation of Discrete Choice Models with Nonparametric Distributions of Random Coefficients , 2007 .

[44]  Hector Chade,et al.  Simultaneous Search , 2006 .

[45]  Daniel McFadden,et al.  Modelling the Choice of Residential Location , 1977 .

[46]  Paulo Somaini,et al.  Demand Analysis Using Strategic Reports: An Application to a School Choice Mechanism , 2014 .

[47]  Meryam Zaiem,et al.  Do elite schools improve students performance? Evidence from Tunisia , 2024, Economics of Education Review.

[48]  N. Agarwal An Empirical Model of the Medical Match , 2014, The American economic review.

[49]  Peter S. Arcidiacono,et al.  The Analysis of Field Choice in College and Graduate School: Determinants and Wage Effects , 2015 .

[50]  Caterina Calsamiglia,et al.  Structural Estimation of a Model of School Choices: The Boston Mechanism versus Its Alternatives , 2018, Journal of Political Economy.

[51]  A. Yaron,et al.  Sources of Lifetime Inequality , 2007 .

[52]  Nicolas Pistolesi Advising students on their field of study: Evidence from a French University reform , 2017 .

[53]  David S. Lee,et al.  Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics , 2009 .

[54]  Daniel A. Ackerberg A new use of importance sampling to reduce computational burden in simulation estimation , 2001 .

[55]  Kehinde F. Ajayi,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of School Choice Under Uncertainty , 2015 .

[56]  Alan David Hutson,et al.  Resampling Methods for Dependent Data , 2004, Technometrics.

[57]  M. Akbarpour,et al.  School Choice with Unequal Outside Options , 2018 .

[58]  Yusuke Narita Match or Mismatch: Learning and Inertia in School Choice , 2016 .

[59]  J. Hahn,et al.  IDENTIFICATION AND ESTIMATION OF TREATMENT EFFECTS WITH A REGRESSION-DISCONTINUITY DESIGN , 2001 .

[60]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  Changing the Boston School Choice Mechanism , 2006 .

[61]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  The Welfare Effects of Coordinated Assignment: Evidence from the New York City High School Match , 2017 .