Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

As parents are increasingly given flexibility to enroll their children in a school of their choice, understanding parents’ preferences for school qualities is essential. Using a randomized survey experiment, this study adds to the existing literature by assessing parents’ preferences in a controlled environment, where they can be isolated from information asymmetries and constraints. Results suggest that achievement matters to parents but status matters more when evaluating quality and growth matters more when choosing between schools. Additionally, student demographics affect both parents’ perception of school quality and their likelihood of selecting into a school. This article has important implications for the theory and practice of accountability as it offers new insights on parents’ latent preferences for school qualities.

Keywords

experimental survey methods parent preferences school choice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdulkadiroglu

Pathak

Schellenberg

Walters

(2017). Do parents value school effectiveness? (No. w23912). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23912

Adnett

Davies

(2003). Markets for schooling: An economic analysis. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203164853

Amazon Mechanical Turk. (2018). Human intelligence through an API. https://www.mturk.com/get-started

Andre-Bechely

(2007). Finding space and managing distance: Public school choice in an urban California district. Urban Studies, 44(7), 1355–1376. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980701302304

Arne

R. H.

(2015). DCREATE: Stata module to create efficient designs for discrete choice experiments (Statistical Software Components No. S458059). Boston College Department of Economics. https://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s458059.html

Ball

S. J.

Vincent

(1998). “I heard it on the grapevine”: “Hot” knowledge and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 19(3), 377–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569980190307

Barrows

Henderson

Peterson

P. E.

West

M. R.

(2016). Relative performance information and perceptions of public service quality: Evidence from American school districts. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(3), 571–583. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muw028

Bayer

Ferreira

McMillan

(2007). A unified framework for measuring preferences for schools and neighborhoods (Working Paper No. 13236). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w13236

Becker

G. S.

(1962). Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 70(5, Part 2), 9–49. https://doi.org/10.1086/258724

10.

Becker

G. S.

(1994). Human capital revisited. In Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education (3rd ed., pp. 15–28). University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226041223.001.0001

11.

Bell

(2005). All choices created equal? How good parents select “failing” schools. National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Teachers College.

12.

Bell

C. A.

(2007). Space and place: Urban parents’ geographical preferences for schools. Urban Review, 39(4), 375–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-007-0059-5

13.

Bergman

Chan

E. W.

Kapor

(2020). Housing search frictions: Evidence from detailed search data and a field experiment (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3535290). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3535290

14.

Berinsky

A. J.

Huber

G. A.

Lenz

G. S.

(2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20(3), 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr057

15.

Bifulco

Ladd

H. F.

Ross

S. L.

(2009). The effects of public school choice on those left behind: Evidence from Durham, North Carolina. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560902810104

16.

Billingham

C. M.

Hunt

M. O.

(2016). School racial composition and parental choice: New evidence on the preferences of White parents in the United States. Sociology of Education, 89(2), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040716635718

17.

Black

S. E.

(1999). Do better schools matter? Parental valuation of elementary education. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2), 577–599. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355399556070

18.

Burgess

Street

D. J.

(2005). Optimal designs for choice experiments with asymmetric attributes. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 134(1), 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2004.03.021

19.

Burnette

(2017, October 25). ESSA brings user-friendly makeover of state report cards. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/10/25/essa-brings-user-friendly-makeover-of-state-report.html

20.

Carlsson

Martinsson

(2003). Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics. Health Economics, 12(4), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.729

21.

Chmielewski

Kucker

S. C.

(2020). An MTurk crisis? Shifts in data quality and the impact on study results. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(4), 464–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619875149

22.

Chubb

J. E.

Moe

T. M.

(1990). Politics, markets, and America’s schools. Brookings Institution.

23.

Clinton

J. D.

Grissom

J. A.

(2015). Public information, public learning and public opinion: Democratic accountability in education policy. Journal of Public Policy, 35(3), 355–385. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X14000312

24.

CloudResearch. (2019). Innovation rooted in understanding. https://www.cloudresearch.com/why-cloudresearch/

25.

Cook

R. D.

Nachtsheim

C. J.

(1980). A comparison of algorithms for constructing exact D-optimal designs. Technometrics, 22(3), 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1980.10486162

26.

Coppock

(2019). Generalizing from survey experiments conducted on Mechanical Turk: A replication approach. Political Science Research and Methods, 7(3), 613–628. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.10

27.

Corcoran

Jennings

J. L.

Cohodes

Sattin-Bajaj

(2018). Leveling the playing field for high school choice: Results from a field experiment of informational interventions (No. w24471). National Bureau of Economics Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24471

28.

Cucchiara

M. B.

Horvat

E. M.

(2014). Choosing selves: The salience of parental identity in the school choice process. Journal of Education Policy, 29(4), 486–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2013.849760

29.

Davidson

Reback

Rockoff

J. E.

Schwartz

(2015). Fifty ways to leave a child behind: Idiosyncrasies and discrepancies in states’ implementation of NCLB. Educational Researcher, 44(6), 347–358. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15601426

30.

de Bekker-Grob

E. W.

Ryan

Gerard

. (2012). Discrete choice experiments in health economics: A review of the literature. Health Economics, 21(2), 145–172. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1697

31.

Deming

D. J.

(2011). Better schools, less crime? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 2063–2115. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr036

32.

DeShazo

J. R.

Fermo

(2002). Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: The effects of complexity on choice consistency. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44(1), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2001.1199

33.

DeVellis

R. F.

(2012). Scale development: Theory and applications (3rd ed). Sage.

34.

Education Week . (2017, April 19). Approved ESSA plans: Explainer and key takeaways from each state. https://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/key-takeaways-state-essa-plans.html

35.

Ellison

Aloe

A. M.

(2019). Strategic thinkers and positioned choices: Parental decision making in urban school choice. Educational Policy, 33(7), 1135–1170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818755470

36.

Figlio

D. N.

Lucas

M. E.

(2004). What’s in a grade? School report cards and the housing market. American Economic Review, 94(3), 591–604.

37.

Follmer

D. J.

Sperling

R. A.

Suen

H. K.

(2017). The role of MTurk in education research: Advantages, issues, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 46(6), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17725519

38.

Fong

Faude

(2018). Timing is everything: Late registration and stratified access to school choice. Sociology of Education, 91(3), 242–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718785201

39.

Friedman

(1962). Capitalism and freedom (40th anniversary ed.). University of Chicago Press.

40.

Glazerman

Dotter

(2017). Market signals: Evidence on the determinants and consequences of school choice from a citywide lottery. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(4), 593–619. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373717702964

41.

Glazerman

Nichols-Barrer

Valant

Burnett

(2018). Presenting school choice information to parents: An evidence-based guide (NCEE 2019-4003). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

42.

Gross

DeArmond

Denice

(2015). Common enrollment, parents, and school choice: Early evidence from Denver and New Orleans (Making School Choice Work Series). Center on Reinventing Public Education.

43.

Groves

R. M.

Fowler

F. J., Jr.

Couper

M. P.

Lepkowski

J. M.

Singer

Tourangeau

(2009). Survey methodology (2nd ed.). Wiley.

44.

Haderlein

S. K.

(2020). Choosing wisely: A three paper dissertation exploring how parents evaluate and choose schools [Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California].

45.

Hamlin

(2020). Flight to safety in deindustrialized cities: Perceptions of school safety in charter and public schools in Detroit, Michigan. Education and Urban Society, 52(3), 394–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19888013

46.

Hamlin

Cheng

(2020). Parental empowerment, involvement, and satisfaction: A comparison of choosers of charter, Catholic, Christian, and district-run public schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(4), 641–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19888013

47.

Harris

D. N.

Larsen

M. F.

(2017). Demand, information, and the market for schooling: Evidence on revealed preferences from post-Katrina New Orleans. Education Research Alliance for New Orleans.

48.

Hastings

Kane

Staiger

(2005). Parental preferences and school competition: Evidence from a public school choice program (No. w11805). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w11805

49.

Hastings

J. S.

Kane

T. J.

Staiger

D. O.

(2008). Heterogeneous preferences and the efficacy of public school choice (NBER Working Paper 2145). https://paperzz.com/doc/6824046/heterogeneous-preferences-and-the-efficacy-of-public

50.

S. Y.

Giuliano

(2018). School choice: Understanding the trade-off between travel distance and school quality. Transportation, 45, 1475–1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-017-9773-3

51.

Henig

J. R.

(1996). The local dynamics of choice: Ethnic preferences and institutional responses. In Fuller

B. F.

Elmore

(Eds.), Who chooses? Who loses? Culture, institutions and the unequal effects of school choice (pp. 95–117). Teachers College Press.

52.

Holme

J. J.

(2002). Buying homes, buying schools: School choice and the social construction of school quality. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 177–206. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.2.u6272x676823788r

53.

Houston

D. M.

Henig

J. R.

(2019). The effects of student growth data on school district choice: Evidence from a survey experiment (EdWorkingPaper No. 19-87). Brown University. http://www.edworkingpapers.com/sites/default/files/ai19-87.pdf

54.

Hoxby

C. M.

(Ed.). (2003). The economics of school choice. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226355344.001.0001

55.

Hoxby

C. M.

Rockoff

J. E.

(2004). The impact of charter schools on student achievement. Harvard University.

56.

Huber

Zwerina

(1996). The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. Journal of Marketing Research, 33(3), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379603300305

57.

Jann

(2008). A Stata implementation of the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition. Stata Journal, 8(4), 453–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0800800401

58.

Katz

(2006). Rethinking (and remodeling) customer satisfaction. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference (pp. 143–156). Sawtooth Software.

59.

Kennedy

Clifford

Burleigh

Waggoner

P. D.

Jewell

Winter

N. J. G.

(2020). The shape of and solutions to the MTurk quality crisis. Political Science Research and Methods, 8(4), 614–629. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2020.6

60.

Kimelberg

S. M.

Billingham

C. M.

(2013). Attitudes toward diversity and the school choice process: Middle-class parents in a segregated urban public school district. Urban Education, 48(2), 198–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912449629

61.

Kleitz

Weiher

G. R.

Tedin

Matland

(2000). Choice, charter schools, and household preferences. Social Science Quarterly, 81(3), 846–854.

62.

Koedel

Mihaly

Rockoff

J. E.

(2015). Value-added modeling: A review. Economics of Education Review, 47, 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.01.006

63.

Kuhfeld

W. F.

(2005). Marketing research methods in SAS: Experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.69.2574&rep=rep1&type=pdf

64.

Lancsar

Louviere

(2008). Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: A user’s guide. PharmacoEconomics, 26(8), 661–677. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004

65.

Litman

Robinson

(2020). Conducting online research on Amazon Mechanical Turk and beyond. Sage.

66.

Loeb

Valant

Kasman

(2011). Increasing choice in the market for schools: Recent reforms and their effects on student achievement. National Tax Journal, 64(1), 141–163. https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2011.1.06

67.

Mangham

L. J.

Hanson

McPake

(2009). How to do (or not to do): Designing a discrete choice experiment for application in a low-income country. Health Policy and Planning, 24(2), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czn047

68.

Marshall

Bridges

J. F. P.

Hauber

Cameron

Donnalley

Fyie

Johnson

F. R.

(2010). Conjoint analysis applications in health—how are studies being designed and reported? An update on current practice in the published literature between 2005 and 2008. The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 3(4), 249–256. https://doi.org/10.2165/11539650-000000000-00000

69.

Mullinix

K. J.

Leeper

T. J.

Druckman

J. N.

Freese

(2015). The generalizability of survey experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 2(2), 109–138. https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2015.19

70.

Owens

(2018). Income segregation between school districts and inequality in students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 91(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717741180

71.

Peer

Vosgerau

Acquisti

(2014). Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 46(4), 1023–1031. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0434-y

72.

Quillian

(2002). Why is Black-White residential segregation so persistent? Evidence on three theories from migration data. Social Science Research, 31(2), 197–229. https://doi.org/10.1006/ssre.2001.0726

73.

Quillian

(2014). Does segregation create winners and losers? Residential segregation and inequality in educational attainment. Social Problems, 61(3), 402–426. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2014.12193

74.

Reed Johnson

Lancsar

Marshall

Kilambi

Mühlbacher

Regier

D. A.

Bresnahan

B. W.

Kanninen

Bridges

J. F. P

. (2013). Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. Value in Health, 16(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223

75.

Revelt

Train

(1998). Mixed logit with repeated choices: Households’ choices of appliance efficiency level. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(4), 647–657. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465398557735

76.

Richter

M. K.

(1966). Revealed preference theory. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 34(3), 635–645. https://doi.org/10.2307/1909773

77.

Roda

Wells

A. S.

(2013). School choice policies and racial segregation: Where White parents’ good intentions, anxiety, and privilege collide. American Journal of Education, 119(2), 261–293. https://doi.org/10.1086/668753

78.

Ryan

Bate

Eastmond

Ludbrook

(2001). Use of discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences. Quality in Health Care, 10(Suppl 1), i55–i60. https://doi.org/10.1136/qhc.0100055

79.

Ryan

Kolstad

J. R.

Rockers

P. C.

Dolea

(2012). How to conduct a discrete choice experiment for health workforce recruitment and retention in remote and rural areas: A user guide with case studies (English). World Health Organization. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/586321468156869931/How-to-conduct-a-discrete-choice-experiment-for-health-workforce-recruitment-and-retention-in-remote-and-rural-areas-a-user-guide-with-case-studies

80.

Samuelson

P. A.

(1948). Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference. Economica, 15(60), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2549561

81.

Schneider

Jacobsen

White

R. S.

Gehlbach

(2018). The (mis) measure of schools: How data affect stakeholder knowledge and perceptions of quality. Teachers College Record, 120(6), 1–40.

82.

Schneider

Teske

Marshall

Roch

(1998). Shopping for schools: In the land of the blind, the one-eyed parent may be enough. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 769. https://doi.org/10.2307/2991729

83.

Smith

S. M.

Roster

C. A.

Golden

L. L.

Albaum

G. S.

(2016). A multi-group analysis of online survey respondent data quality: Comparing a regular USA consumer panel to MTurk samples. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3139–3148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.002

84.

Street

D. J.

Burgess

Louviere

J. J.

(2005). Quick and easy choice sets: Constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 22(4), 459–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.09.003

85.

Tourangeau

Rips

L. J.

Rasinski

(2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819322

86.

Tversky

Kahneman

(1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9

87.

Valant

(2014). Better data, better decisions: Informing school choosers to improve education markets. American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.

88.

Valant

Loeb

(2015). Information, choice, and decision-making: Field experiments with adult and student school choosers [Working paper]. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9

89.

Van Dunk

Meissner

Browne

(1998). Parental involvement and school choice: A look at private school choice in Cleveland and Milwaukee. Public Policy Forum.

90.

Wong

(2006). Foundations of Paul Samuelson’s revealed preference theory: A study by the method of rational reconstruction. Routledge.

91.

Zwerina

Huber

Kuhfeld

W. F.

(2000). A general method for constructing efficient choice designs (SAS Techinical Papers MR-2010E). SAS Institute. http://support.sas.com/techsup/technote/mr2010e.pdf

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.15 MB

How Do Parents Evaluate and Select Schools? Evidence From a Survey Experiment

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material