Following his 1955 essay “The Role of Government in Education,” Milton Friedman emerged as an early advocate for school choice. Granting parents greater control over their children’s education, Friedman argued, will result in a competitive marketplace for schools that ultimately bolsters their quality. Today, cities including Boston, Chicago, and New York employ district-wide school choice models in which students are assigned to schools based on their families’ preferences, rather than where they live.
This paper measures the impact of school choice on student achievement. The authors study the Zones of Choice (ZOC) program, an initiative of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), that introduced school choice in roughly 30-40% of the district. The ZOC program combined existing catchment zones into “Zones of Choice” and allowed students residing in a Zone of Choice to attend any school within their Zone. The remaining neighborhoods maintained existing attendance zone boundaries.
This context offers the authors a unique setting in which to study the market-level effects of choice by comparing changes in outcomes between students living in Zones of Choice to students in traditional school catchment zones. They use data on students’ enrollment, demographics, home addresses, standardized test scores, and college outcomes, along with information on families’ rank-ordered preference submissions, and find the following:
This research provides one of the first pieces of evidence demonstrating that the increasingly popular district-wide choice reforms can meaningfully improve student outcomes and reduce educational inequality. In addition, the authors provide compelling evidence that competition in the public sector is a key mechanism explaining the improvements in student outcomes. The mechanisms through which schools adjust, the factors contributing to parents’ ability to distinguish between effective and ineffective schools, and the long-run effects of the program are important topics for future research.