Does barely getting into an elite high school lower early earnings?
Core argument: Marginal assignment to an elite high school causes a 3.2pp decline in the probability of ever having held a formal job five years later at ages 19–20, a 16% drop from the 20% base rate for students just below the cutoff.
[We] trace out the [harmful] causal impact of [marginal] assignment to an elite school [as opposed to just missing the admissions cutoff] on formal private labor market outcomes over time. Five years after the assignment process (at ages 19-20, beyond high school age), elite assignment [based on a test score marginally above the cutoff] causes a 3.2pp decline in the probability of ever having held a formal job. This is a 16% decline relative to the base rate of 20% for students missing the elite cutoff by one point. Over time, this elite disadvantage declines: after 10 years (at ages 24-25, after the typical age of college graduation), the effect is -2.1pp, while after 15 years (at ages 29-30) the estimated -0.2pp impact is statistically insignificant. While the negative effect on formal employment eventually fades, it leaves elite students with a deficit in formal labor market experience. After 5 years, elite assignment reduces the cumulative number of months with a formal job by 14%. Conditional on formal employment, marginal elite assignment causes a reduction in wages that fades out over time. Five years after assignment, elite assignment reduces wages by 5.3%. This reduction declines to 2.6% after 10 years, and [essentially vanishes] after 15 years.


