IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/31375.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who Benefits from a Smaller Honors Track?

Author

Listed:
  • Zachary Szlendak
  • Richard K. Mansfield

Abstract

Most U.S. high school courses separate classrooms into standard and honors tracks. This paper characterizes the efficiency and distributional impact of changing the share of students enrolling in honors classrooms. Using a sorting model where students choose tracks by course but schools influence the share choosing honors, we show that administrators’ optimal choices of honors track size require knowledge of treatment effect functions capturing the impact of alternative honors enrollment shares on different parts of the student predicted performance distribution. Using administrative data from North Carolina public high schools, we estimate these treatment effect functions by predicted performance quintile. Across various specifications, we find that smaller honors tracks (20%-30% of students) yield moderate performance gains for the top quintile (~.05-.07 test score SDs relative to no tracking) that decline monotonically across quintiles toward zero for the bottom quintile. However, expanding the honors share beyond 30-35% generates further (small) achievement increases only for the middle quintile, while reducing top quintile gains and causing substantial bottom quintile losses. Since many courses feature honors shares above 35% or do not track, we predict that enrolling ~25% of students in honors in each high school course would improve all quintiles’ statewide performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Zachary Szlendak & Richard K. Mansfield, 2023. "Who Benefits from a Smaller Honors Track?," NBER Working Papers 31375, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:31375
    Note: ED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w31375.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:31375. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.