School Choice with Control

Controlled choice over public schools is a common policy of school boards in the United States. It attempts giving choice to parents while maintaining racial and ethnic balance at schools. This paper provides a foundation for controlled school choice programs. We develop a natural notion of fairness and show that assignments, which are fair for same type students and constrained non-wasteful, always exist in controlled choice problems; a "controlled" version of the student proposing deferred acceptance algorithm (CDAA) always finds such an assignment which is also weakly Pareto-optimal. CDAA provides a practical solution for controlled school choice programs.

«School choice with controlled choice constraints: hard bounds versus soft bounds»

Controlled choice over public schools attempts giving options to parents while maintaining diversity, often enforced by setting feasibility constraints with hard upper and lower bounds for each student type. We demonstrate that there might not exist assignments that satisfy standard fairness and non-wastefulness properties; whereas constrained non-wasteful assignments which are fair for same type students always exist. We introduce a "controlled" version of the deferred acceptance algorithm with an improvement stage (CDAAI) that finds a Pareto optimal assignment among such assignments. To achieve fair (across all types) and non-wasteful assignments, we propose the control constraints to be interpreted as soft bounds-flexible limits that regulate school priorities. In this setting, a modified version of the deferred acceptance algorithm (DAASB) finds an assignment that is Pareto optimal among fair assignments while eliciting true preferences. CDAAI and DAASB provide two alternative practical solutions depending on the interpretation of the control constraints. JEL C78, D61, D78, I20.

Respecting Priorities when Assigning Students to Schools

We consider the problem of assigning students to schools on the basis of priorities. Students are allowed to have equal priority at a school. We characterize the efficient rules which weakly/strongly respect students’ priorities. When priority orderings are not strict, it is not possible to simply break ties in a fixed manner. All possibilities of resolving the indifferences need to be considered. Neither the deferred acceptance algorithm nor the top trading cycle algorithm successfully solve the problem of efficiently assigning the students to schools whereas a modified version of the deferred acceptance algorithm might. In this version tie breaking depends on students’ preferences.

Strategy-proof tie-breaking

We study a general class of priority-based allocation problems with weak priority orders and identify conditions under which there exists a strategy-proof mechanism which always chooses an agent-optimal stable, or constrained efficient, matching. A priority structure for which these two requirements are compatible is called solvable. For the general class of priority-based allocation problems with weak priority orders,we introduce three simple necessary conditions on the priority structure. We show that these conditions completely characterize solvable environments within the class of indifferences at the bottom (IB) environments, where ties occur only at the bottom of the priority structure. This generalizes and unifies previously known results on solvable and unsolvable environments established in school choice, housing markets and house allocation with existing tenants. We show how the previously known solvable cases can be viewed as extreme cases of solvable environments. For sufficiency of our conditions we introduce a version of the agent-proposing deferred acceptance algorithm with exogenous and preference-based tie-breaking.

Strategy-proofness makes the difference: deferred-acceptance with responsive priorities

In college admissions and student placements at public schools, the admission decision can be thought of as assigning indivisible objects with capacity constraints to a set of students such that each student receives at most one object and monetary compensations are not allowed. In these important market design problems, the agent-proposing deferred-acceptance (DA-)mechanism with responsive strict priorities performs well and economists have successfully implemented DA-mechanisms or slight variants thereof. We show that almost all real-life mechanisms used in such environments - including the large classes of priority mechanisms and linear programming mechanisms - satisfy a set of simple and intuitive properties. Once we add strategy-proofness to these properties, DA-mechanisms are the only ones surviving. In market design problems that are based on weak priorities (like school choice), generally multiple tie-breaking (MTB)procedures are used and then a mechanism is implemented with the obtained strict priorities. By adding stability with respect to the weak priorities, we establish the first normative foundation for MTB-DA-mechanisms that are used in NYC.

La concurrence entre écoles accroît-elle les effets de composition ?

La ségrégation entre écoles se caractérise par des différences dans la composition des établissements qui peuvent être analysées à partir d’une diversité de points de vue. Dans ce texte, les auteurs s’intéressent en particulier aux effets de composition, c’est-à-dire à l’influence sur chacun des élèves des caractéristiques globales de l’ensemble des élèves de leur établissement. Ils y proposent un schème d’interprétation qui a pour but de raisonner sur les conditions institutionnelles favorables à l’émergence des effets de composition. Ce schème vise à rendre compte de la diversité des résultats de recherches relatives aux effets de composition, en posant l’hypothèse que ceux-ci sont maximisés dans un environnement institutionnel qui combine une latitude dans le choix de l’école et une autonomie importante des établissements.