IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ttu/tuteco/20.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Primary School Choice in Tallinn: Data and Simulations

Author

Listed:
  • Andre Veski

    (Tallinn University of Technology)

  • Kaire Põder

    (Tallinn University of Technology)

Abstract

Within the first 20 years of the market economy in Estonia, the public school market has been decentralized in Tallinn. Firstly, we describe how students are allocated to primary schools in a narrative, and secondly, in a formal mechanism design language. We indicate the closest equivalent algorithms from the matching markets design theory and conclude that the current system in Tallinn is a hybrid. The decentralized part of the market namely inter-district exam schools apply autonomous school proposing deferred acceptance; and the centralized part of the market intra-district regular schools apply school random serial dictatorship. Finally using data from Tallinn primary school matching, we show by an empirical evaluation of matching mechanisms. Since the currently the collected data does not reveal the students preference ordering we simulate some potential orderings for comparison.

Suggested Citation

  • Andre Veski & Kaire Põder, 2015. "Primary School Choice in Tallinn: Data and Simulations," TUT Economic Research Series 20, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    • Handle: RePEc:ttu:tuteco:20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tutecon.eu/index.php/TUTECON/article/download/20/18
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ergin, Haluk & Sonmez, Tayfun, 2006. "Games of school choice under the Boston mechanism," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 215-237, January.
    2. Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sonmez, 2008. "Leveling the Playing Field: Sincere and Sophisticated Players in the Boston Mechanism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1636-1652, September.
    3. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Strategy-proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the New York City High School Match," NBER Working Papers 14864, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Chen, Yan & Sonmez, Tayfun, 2006. "School choice: an experimental study," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 202-231, March.
    5. Kaire Põder & Triin Lauri, 2014. "Will Choice Hurt? Compared to What? School Choice Experiment in Estonia," TUT Economic Research Series 11, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    6. Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2013. "School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 80-106, February.
    7. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Yeon-Koo Che & Yosuke Yasuda, 2011. "Resolving Conflicting Preferences in School Choice: The "Boston Mechanism" Reconsidered," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 399-410, February.
    8. Yang Chen & Juan Cuestas & Paulo Regis, 2014. "Corporate Tax Convergence in Asian and Pacific Economies," TUT Economic Research Series 17, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    9. Alvin Roth, 2008. "Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 537-569, March.
    10. Umut M. Dur & Scott Duke Kominers & Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2013. "The Demise of Walk Zones in Boston: Priorities vs. Precedence in School Choice," NBER Working Papers 18981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Kukk, Merike, 2016. "How did household indebtedness hamper consumption during the recession? Evidence from micro data," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 764-786.
    12. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez, 2006. "Changing the Boston School Choice Mechanism," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 639, Boston College Department of Economics.
    13. Tarvo Vaarmets & Kristjan Liivamägi & Tõnn Talpsepp, 2014. "The brilliant mind of investors," TUT Economic Research Series 15, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    14. Tayfun Sonmez & Parag Pathak (MIT), 2011. "Admissions Reform at Chicago's Selective High Schools: Comparing Mechanisms by their Vulnerability to Manipulation," EcoMod2011 2954, EcoMod.
    15. Merike Kukk & Karsten Staehr, 2014. "Identification of Income Underreporting by the Self-Employed: Employment Status or Reported Business Income?," TUT Economic Research Series 8, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    16. Laivi Laidroo, 2014. "Lending Growth and Cyclicality in Central and Eastern European Banks," TUT Economic Research Series 13, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    17. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Strategy-Proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the NYC High School Match," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1954-1978, December.
    18. Karsten Staehr, 2014. "Corporate Income Taxation in Estonia. Is It Time to Abandon Dividend Taxation?," TUT Economic Research Series 9, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karin Kondor-Tabun & Karsten Staehr, 2015. "EU Cohesion Policy Funding in Estonia: Background, Developments and Challenges," TUT Economic Research Series 21, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caterina Calsamiglia & Chao Fu & Maia Güell, 2014. "Structural Estimation of a Model of School Choices: the Boston Mechanism vs. Its Alternatives," Working Papers 811, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. Harless, Patrick, 2014. "A School Choice Compromise: Between Immediate and Deferred Acceptance," MPRA Paper 61417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Fuhito Kojima & M. Ünver, 2014. "The “Boston” school-choice mechanism: an axiomatic approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(3), pages 515-544, April.
    4. Basteck, Christian & Klaus, Bettina & Kübler, Dorothea, 2021. "How lotteries in school choice help to level the playing field," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 198-237.
    5. Chen, Yan & Jiang, Ming & Kesten, Onur & Robin, Stéphane & Zhu, Min, 2018. "Matching in the large: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 295-317.
    6. Alexander Westkamp, 2013. "An analysis of the German university admissions system," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 53(3), pages 561-589, August.
    7. Abdulkadiroglu, Atila & Andersson, Tommy, 2022. "School Choice," Working Papers 2022:4, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    8. Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2013. "School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 80-106, February.
    9. Nikhil Agarwal & Paulo Somaini, 2018. "Demand Analysis Using Strategic Reports: An Application to a School Choice Mechanism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 391-444, March.
    10. Andre Veski & Kaire Põder, 2016. "Strategies in the Tallinn School Choice Mechanism," Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, Tallinn School of Economics and Business Administration, Tallinn University of Technology, vol. 8(1).
    11. Ha, Wei & Kang, Le & Song, Yang, 2020. "College matching mechanisms and matching stability: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 206-226.
    12. Dur, Umut & Hammond, Robert G. & Kesten, Onur, 2021. "Sequential school choice: Theory and evidence from the field and lab," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    13. Featherstone, Clayton R. & Niederle, Muriel, 2016. "Boston versus deferred acceptance in an interim setting: An experimental investigation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 353-375.
    14. Tong Wang & Congyi Zhou, 2020. "High school admission reform in China: a welfare analysis," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 24(3), pages 215-269, December.
    15. Kesten, Onur & Unver, Utku, 2015. "A theory of school choice lotteries," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), May.
    16. Min Zhu, 2013. "College Admissions in China : A Mechanism Design Perspective," Working Papers 1327, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    17. Zhu, Min, 2014. "College admissions in China: A mechanism design perspective," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 618-631.
    18. Mennle, Timo & Seuken, Sven, 2021. "Partial strategyproofness: Relaxing strategyproofness for the random assignment problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    19. Braun Sebastian & Dwenger Nadja & Kübler Dorothea, 2010. "Telling the Truth May Not Pay Off: An Empirical Study of Centralized University Admissions in Germany," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-38, March.
    20. Wu, Binzhen & Zhong, Xiaohan, 2014. "Matching mechanisms and matching quality: Evidence from a top university in China," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 196-215.

    More about this item

    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:ttu:tuteco:20. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Anneli Kalm (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fettuee.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.