|
Julien Lafortune
|
Publications |
"The Impact of School Facility Investments on Students and Homeowners: Evidence from Los Angeles,"
with David Schönholzer. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 14(3), July 2022. We study school facility investments using administrative records from Los Angeles. Exploiting quasi-random variation in the timing of new facility openings and using a residential assignment instrument, we find positive impacts on test scores, attendance, and house prices. Effects are not driven by changes in class size, peers, teachers, or principals, but some evidence points toward increased facility quality. We evaluate program efficiency using implied future earnings and housing capitalization. For each dollar spent, the program generated $1.62 in household value, with about 24 percent coming directly through test score gains and 76 percent from capitalization of non-test-score amenities. [policy brief] In the news: Education Week "School Capital Expenditure Rules and Distribution," with Barbara Biasi and David Schönholzer. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 111, May 2021. We provide descriptive evidence on the level and within-state distribution of school capital expenditures over the past two decades. We relate these to the fiscal institutions governing capital funding across states. Within-state differences in capital expenditures between the highest- and lowest-income school districts fell considerably following the Great Recession. Spending declined in the highest-income districts, while state support for low-income districts remained stable. Suggestive evidence points to the importance of constraints on districts' ability to raise local funding and the structure of state support in explaining these differences and trends over time. "School Finance Reform and the Distribution of Student Achievement," with Jesse Rothstein and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 10(2), April 2018. We study the impact of post-1990 school finance reforms, during the so-called “adequacy” era, on absolute and relative spending and achievement in low-income school districts. Using an event study research design that exploits the apparent randomness of reform timing, we show that reforms lead to sharp, immediate, and sustained increases in spending in low-income school districts. Using representative samples from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, we find that reforms cause increases in the achievement of students in these districts, phasing in gradually over the years following the reform. The implied effect of school resources on educational achievement is large. [pre-publication version] [policy brief] In the news: NY Times; Bloomberg View; Slate; The Seventy Four |
Working Papers
|
"What Works and For Whom? Efficiency and Effectiveness of School Capital Investments Across the U.S."
(Revise & Resubmit, Quarterly Journal of Economics) with Barbara Biasi and David Schönholzer. This paper identifies which investments in school facilities help students and are valued by homeowners. Using novel data on school district bonds, test scores, and house prices for 29 U.S. states and a research design that exploits close elections with staggered timing, we show that increased school capital spending raises test scores and house prices on average. However, impacts differ vastly across types of funded projects. Spending on basic infrastructure (such as HVAC) or on the removal of pollutants raises test scores but not house prices; conversely, spending on athletic facilities raises house prices but not test scores. Socio-economically disadvantaged districts benefit more from capital outlays, even conditioning on project type and the existing capital stock. Our estimates suggest that closing the spending gap between high- and low-SES districts and targeting spending towards high-impact projects may close as much as 25% of the observed achievement gap between these districts. "Advanced Math Tracking and Student Achievement: Evidence from North Carolina" In most U.S. schools, a significant track diversion occurs in 8th grade: high-achieving students are tracked into Algebra, while low-achieving students take Algebra in 9th grade or later. Using a fuzzy regression discontinuity design around prior-year test score proficiency thresholds, I examine the impact of tracking into Algebra in 8th grade rather than in high school. For students near the 80th percentile in the 7th grade state math distribution, advanced track enrollment leads to large increases in mathematics course-taking, AP course participation, and college entrance exam scores. However, for students near the 30th percentile in the 7th grade math distribution, advanced track enrollment is associated with large decreases in Algebra performance, with little indication of any longer-term gains. Results imply that advanced math tracking in secondary schools has heterogeneous impacts on students with different prior math achievement. Expanding access to advanced math courses among high-achieving but not low-achieving students could yield large improvements in mathematics skills and college preparedness. |
Selected Works in Progress |
"Supermajority Requirements and Voter Preferences in U.S. School Capital Investments," with Barbara Biasi and David Schönholzer
"The Impact of School District Reorganizations on Students and Communities," with Barbara Biasi, Tomas Monarrez, and David Schönholzer "Assessing Transitional Kindergarten's Effect on Elementary School Trajectories,'" with Laura Hill. PPIC Policy Report and Policy Brief. "Targeting Students Equitably and Efficiently: Evidence from California's Local Control Funding Formula." PPIC Policy Report and Policy Brief. "Local Economic Shocks and Human Capital Accumulation," with Nick Gebbia. |
