Addressing Inequalities in High School Track Choice

Last registered on February 28, 2024


Trial Information

General Information

Addressing Inequalities in High School Track Choice
Initial registration date
January 12, 2023

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
January 23, 2023, 6:02 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
February 28, 2024, 1:04 PM EST

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.


There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Harvard Kennedy School

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Harvard University
PI Affiliation
Bocconi University

Additional Trial Information

On going
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
In most OECD countries characterized by tracking, high-school choice is highly segregated by socioeconomic status (SES). Using rich administrative data on the population of Italian students, we document stark SES gaps in high-school track choice that mirrors track recommendations by teachers. Students from low SES are less likely to be recommended (and choose) top-tier high school tracks compared to students from high SES with the same standardized test scores and grades, with potentially negative implications for upward mobility of disadvantaged students. Why are low SES students recommended to lower tracks compared to students from high SES with similar performance? If teachers became aware of the bias in their recommendations, would they change their behavior?
The intent of this research is twofold. First, we aim at understanding the determinants of SES gaps in teachers' track recommendations through a combination of surveys and experiments with teachers, investigating the role of (i) biased beliefs about their own past recommendations, (ii) biased beliefs about future gaps in academic performance and returns to different tracks by students' SES. Second, we evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention that provides information to teachers on the bias in their past recommendations. Specifically, teachers in control schools receive only general information about the academic performance in high school of their past students, while teachers in the treatment group receive additional information about the gap in their track recommendations by students' SES. We will evaluate the impact of this intervention on teachers' track recommendations and on students' choices.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Carlana, Michela, Francesca Miserocchi and Eleonora Patacchini. 2024. "Addressing Inequalities in High School Track Choice." AEA RCT Registry. February 28.
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details


Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The outcomes will include:
(1) administrative outcomes on students' high school track choice and teachers' track recommendations
(2) data collected from a teachers' questionnaire that will be implemented in January-February 2023, including teachers' beliefs about their own track recommendations, teachers' beliefs on students' future performance in high school and return to schooling by SES, self-reported track recommendations for their students, and track recommendations for hypothetical students' profiles.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Information intervention with teachers and lab-in-the-field experiment in teachers' survey.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
The unit of randomization is the school.
Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
230 schools in total (85 schools in the first year, 150 additional schools in the second year)
Sample size: planned number of observations
Around 1400 teachers and 10,000 students in total (Around 4,000 pupils and 600 teachers in the first year of implementation, 780 teachers and 6,000 students in the second year).
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
In the first year of implementation, around 300 teachers in control group and 300 in treatment group.
In the second year of implementation, around 180 additional teachers in control, 300 in first treatment group, 300 in second treatment group.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Considering ICC of 0.07, 230 schools, 40 students per school, the MDE is 0.113 SD or 0.05 in terms of percentage points change assuming 20% of students are recommended toward a top-tier track.

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number