Three voices, one decision: sharing information to support student aspirations.

Last registered on February 04, 2026

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Three voices, one decision: sharing information to support student aspirations.
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017740
Initial registration date
January 28, 2026

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
February 04, 2026, 9:42 AM EST

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
LEAP, Bocconi University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Bocconi- Dondena, SILab
PI Affiliation
Bocconi- SILab
PI Affiliation
Bocconi- SILab
PI Affiliation
ISPRA e Bocconi- CLEAN
PI Affiliation
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Milano

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-09-01
End date
2028-06-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Italy’s tracked upper‑secondary school system requires students to make binding choices at age 14, yet mismatch between chosen tracks and students’ skills or aspirations is common. Over‑placement—selecting a more demanding track than readiness—raises the risk of grade repetition, dropout, and long‑term exclusion, while under‑placement—especially among high‑ability students from low‑SES or immigrant families—limits achievement and mobility. Evidence suggests that misalignment in assessment and expectations between families and teachers, teacher bias and families’ limited knowledge of school tracks contribute to this mismatch, and that facilitating dialogue can improve outcomes for disadvantaged students.
Current orientation practices provide information but rarely foster dialogue among students, parents, and teachers, leaving valuable insights fragmented. This project, developed within an agreement with the Municipality of Milan, proposes and evaluates a scalable intervention designed to improve alignment in track preferences through structured three‑way communication and transparent information on track characteristics. The intervention (i) formalizes preference‑sharing among students, parents, and teachers and (ii) provides comparative data on curricula, workload, promotion rates, and post‑secondary prospects. The RCT will measure impacts on track selection, first‑year failure, and dropout, assessing heterogeneity by migrant status, socioeconomic background, and gender.
By addressing a critical transition point, the study aims to generate actionable evidence for policies that promote educational inclusion and reduce inequality in Italy’s tracked system, and provide empirical contribution to understand the causes of school mismatch. If effective, the intervention could be integrated into orientation practices nationwide, offering a low‑cost, high‑impact tool to improve educational trajectories and foster social mobility among vulnerable youth.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Casarico, Alessandra et al. 2026. "Three voices, one decision: sharing information to support student aspirations.." AEA RCT Registry. February 04. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17740-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The intervention identifies students whose high‑school track preferences diverge from those of their parents and teachers, and provides all agents involved with a simple “alignment chart” showing each party’s stated preference to encourage dialogue before the orientation recommendation. In a cross‑randomized design, some schools also receive a brief newsletter with comparative information on high‑school tracks (curricula, workload, promotion rates, post‑secondary options). The goal is to improve alignment, knowledge, and ultimately track choice.
Intervention Start Date
2026-10-01
Intervention End Date
2027-02-28

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Track choice outcomes: Pre-enrolment high-school track choice (student stated choice in January–February).
Self-reported final enrolment choice (end of school year).
Teacher recommendation: Non-binding “consiglio orientativo” provided to 8th-grade students.
First-year high-school grades and grade retention
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Misalignment / match quality: Alignment between student, parent, and teacher track preferences, measured through the misalignment index constructed from baseline and endline surveys.
Knowledge and information outcomes: Knowledge of high-school tracks, including curricula, workload, promotion rates, and post-secondary prospects.
Communication and decision-process outcomes: Frequency and quality of communication between parents, students, and teachers, particularly whether the intervention stimulated additional discussion about the high-school choice.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
alignment index: distance between preferences of parents, teachers, students.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The study uses an individually randomized controlled trial, combined with a school-level cross-randomization. First, all 8th-grade students, their parents, and their teachers complete baseline questionnaires reporting their preferences and expectations regarding the student’s high-school track choice. Using this information, the research team identifies students for whom these preferences diverge. These “misaligned” students are randomly assigned at the individual level to either a treatment or control group, stratified by class and by the type of misalignment (whether the student and parents are more ambitious than the teacher, or the opposite). Students in the treatment group receive an alignment chart that displays the stated preferences of the student, the parent, and the teacher. The chart is delivered through the school’s electronic register between one and three months before the high-school track choice, in order to prompt discussion among the three actors before the teacher issues the formal recommendation.
Independently, at the school level, a second treatment is randomly assigned. In treated schools, families receive a short informational newsletter describing key characteristics of each high-school track, including curricula, workload, historical promotion rates, and post-secondary prospects. This creates a cross-randomized design that allows the study to isolate the effect of preference disclosure, the effect of additional information, and their interaction.
A subgroup of 7th-grade students also receives the intervention earlier in the school path to test whether timing affects engagement and outcomes. The study measures impacts on teacher recommendations, students’ pre-enrolment choices, self-reported final enrolment decisions, knowledge of tracks, and communication within families and between families and teachers.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
individual for alignment chart treatment, school level for information treatment
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
10 schools with 1500-1800 students of which 450 in the alignment treatment
Sample size: planned number of observations
1500-1800 of which 450 in the treatment
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
225 in alignment treatment and 225 in control group ; 5 schools in newsletter treatment and 5 in control group
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Bocconi ECR
IRB Approval Date
2025-12-02
IRB Approval Number
RA000932.01