On the Right Track? Evaluating the Achievement and Inequality Effects of Academic Tracking

Academic tracking enables educators to tailor instruction to students’ abilities. However, critics argue that tracking may lead schools to underinvest in lower-performing students, widening achievement gaps and amplifying existing inequalities. We test these hypotheses by examining the most widespread tracking program in the U.S.: Advanced Placement (AP). Using the rapid expansion of AP in Texas following a statewide policy reform, along with detailed longitudinal microdata on students’ postsecondary and labor-market outcomes, we find that the introduction of AP courses increased students’ graduation rate by 3.9 pp on average, boosting college enrollment by 2.1 pp, college completion by 1.2 pp, and annual earnings by 3.3%. As predicted by our conceptual model, the largest absolute gains accrued to students with the highest pre-high school test scores. However, lower-performing students, who rarely participate in AP courses, also experienced modest absolute improvements — but large relative gains — in educational outcomes, suggesting lower-performing students received more tailored instruction and positive spillover effects within schools. Contrary to concerns that AP disadvantages non-college-bound students, our estimates reject that tracking harms the secondary, postsecondary, or labor-market outcomes of any academic, racial, or socioeconomic group.

When 10:45 am - 12:00 pm on 23 January 2025
Building LAW, Room 250, 765 Commonwealth Ave