Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Katharine M.Conn Second,TFA places their participants in the lowest decision,matriculation decision,placement informa- income schools in America.Over 80 percent of the stu- tion,and demographic characteristics),and we utilize dents taught by TFA corps members qualify for free this information for all applicants who made it to the or reduced-price lunch(FRPL)and are either African final round of interviews in the application process for American or Hispanic.The socioeconomic make-up the 2007-2015 application cycles.While over 380,000 of the student population is intentional,as TFA seeks applied to TFA during this period,we restrict our fo- "partnership with communities where there is a dispar- cus to the third of applicants who were finalists for ad- ity in educational opportunity along lines of race and mission,and hence,at least close to being admitted. class,"and all partner schools have "at least 60 per- This amounts to a sample size of 120,417 Our primary cent of students eligible for FRPL,a common proxy focus is on alumni starting from the 2007 cohort be- for need."10 cause a selection process that involved the creation of Third,extended contextualized intergroup contact an admission cutoff score was instituted in 2007 Since between advantaged and disadvantaged populations at the time of data collection,the 2014 and 2015 cohorts occurs.As full-time teachers charged to help address were still participating in TFA,they have not fully been education inequality for two years,TFA corps mem- "treated,"and are excluded from the main analyses.For bers are actively in contact with low-income students the 2007 to 2013 cohorts,we have data on 91,752 appli- and their families for an extended period.Participants cants(see Online Appendix A for a detailed descrip- have the opportunity to view their students'well-being tion of the final sample size). and level of achievement in light of their familial, school,community,and societal context,which gives them a more nuanced view of the realities under Survey Data which systemic inequalities might form.Moreover. their interactions with disadvantaged communities Data Collection.On October 1.2015.we emailed ap plicants invitations to participate in an online survey. are contextualized within a social and institutional The survey stayed active for six months,closing on service context to advance the economic success of March 31,2016.12 Of the 91,752 TFA applicants from low-income students. the 2007-2013 cohorts that were targeted,272 at least Finally.TFA is nearly ideal from the standpoint of started the survey and 21.1 percent completed the sur- teasing out causality.In 2007 TFA instituted a selection vey.13 Among the 31,376 TFA alumni(2007-2013 corps process with a cutoff threshold that enables us to im- members),33.8 percent at least started the survey and plement a quasi-experimental regression discontinuity 271 percent completed the survey.Of the 60,376 ap- analysis.Our identification strategy exploits the fact plicants who did not participate in TFA,23.8 percent that TFA admission is a discontinuous function of an at least started the survey and 179 percent finished the applicant's selection score,which represents TFA's as- survey.The survey completion response rate(AAPOR sessment of how effective the applicant will be in the RR1 response rate)and partial response rate(AAPOR classroom.The ability to leverage a selection process RR2 response rate)information by application cycle that enables causal inference.coupled with the visibil- are shown in Figure A.1a and Figure A.1b in Online ity and attractiveness of TFA as a national service pro- Appendix A,respectively.There are no notable differ- gram for advantaged individuals to come into extended ences in response rates by application year. S5.501g contextualized intergroup contact with disadvantaged The average participant in our survey is 29 years individuals,makes TFA a strong case to consider in this old,has a college GPA of 3.52,and went to a selec- study tive undergraduate school (see Table B.2 in Online Ap- pendix B).A minority received a Pell Grant in college DATA AND MEASUREMENT (31.0 percent).Approximately 70 percent of the study sample are female (72.5 percent)and white(69.8 per- TFA selection data and an original national survey of cent),and 94.1 percent of study participants have par- TFA applicants are employed to test our predictions. ents with a post-secondary education.Over half of the Exact question wordings and coding schemes of each participants identify with a religion(58.1 percent).and of our measures are provided in Online Appendix F. nearly half of the study participants are upper class Unless noted otherwise,questions were recoded to be or upper middle class Americans (49.0 percent).Al- between 0 and 1 so that treatment effects can be inter- laying concerns of survey response bias,we find that preted in percentage point terms. our participant population is generally representative of the overall TFA applicant population that made it to the final stage of the application process on each of Selection Data TFA maintains detailed selection data (e.g.,contact in- 11 We used email addresses that applicants provided during the ap. formation,application year,selection score,admissions plication process.We did not update email addresses for alumn based on TFA records to ensure that we did not have fewer invalid emails for alumni. 12 Participants received uptoeight email reminders regarding survey 9 Source:Teach For America's "School and Student Demographics participation,and incentives were offered to increase response rates 2014-2015." see Online Appendix G for additional details) 10 Source:www.teachforamerica.org/tfa-on-the-record/responses/ Among applicants for the 2014 and 2015 cohorts,26.8 percent at april-22-2014-nation (accessed March 18,2016). least started the survey,and 19.4 percent completed the survey. 726Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Katharine M. Conn Second, TFA places their participants in the lowest income schools in America. Over 80 percent of the stu￾dents taught by TFA corps members qualify for free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL) and are either African American or Hispanic.9 The socioeconomic make-up of the student population is intentional, as TFA seeks “partnership with communities where there is a dispar￾ity in educational opportunity along lines of race and class,” and all partner schools have “at least 60 per￾cent of students eligible for FRPL, a common proxy for need.”10 Third, extended contextualized intergroup contact between advantaged and disadvantaged populations occurs. As full-time teachers charged to help address education inequality for two years, TFA corps mem￾bers are actively in contact with low-income students and their families for an extended period. Participants have the opportunity to view their students’ well-being and level of achievement in light of their familial, school, community, and societal context, which gives them a more nuanced view of the realities under which systemic inequalities might form. Moreover, their interactions with disadvantaged communities are contextualized within a social and institutional service context to advance the economic success of low-income students. Finally, TFA is nearly ideal from the standpoint of teasing out causality. In 2007, TFA instituted a selection process with a cutoff threshold that enables us to im￾plement a quasi-experimental regression discontinuity analysis. Our identification strategy exploits the fact that TFA admission is a discontinuous function of an applicant’s selection score, which represents TFA’s as￾sessment of how effective the applicant will be in the classroom. The ability to leverage a selection process that enables causal inference, coupled with the visibil￾ity and attractiveness of TFA as a national service pro￾gram for advantaged individuals to come into extended contextualized intergroup contact with disadvantaged individuals,makes TFA a strong case to consider in this study. DATA AND MEASUREMENT TFA selection data and an original national survey of TFA applicants are employed to test our predictions. Exact question wordings and coding schemes of each of our measures are provided in Online Appendix F. Unless noted otherwise, questions were recoded to be between 0 and 1 so that treatment effects can be inter￾preted in percentage point terms. Selection Data TFA maintains detailed selection data (e.g., contact in￾formation, application year, selection score, admissions 9 Source: Teach For America’s “School and Student Demographics 2014–2015.” 10 Source: www.teachforamerica.org/tfa-on-the-record/responses/ april-22-2014-nation (accessed March 18, 2016). decision, matriculation decision, placement informa￾tion, and demographic characteristics), and we utilize this information for all applicants who made it to the final round of interviews in the application process for the 2007–2015 application cycles. While over 380,000 applied to TFA during this period, we restrict our fo￾cus to the third of applicants who were finalists for ad￾mission, and hence, at least close to being admitted. This amounts to a sample size of 120,417. Our primary focus is on alumni starting from the 2007 cohort be￾cause a selection process that involved the creation of an admission cutoff score was instituted in 2007. Since at the time of data collection, the 2014 and 2015 cohorts were still participating in TFA, they have not fully been “treated,” and are excluded from the main analyses.For the 2007 to 2013 cohorts, we have data on 91,752 appli￾cants (see Online Appendix A for a detailed descrip￾tion of the final sample size). Survey Data Data Collection. On October 1, 2015, we emailed ap￾plicants invitations to participate in an online survey.11 The survey stayed active for six months, closing on March 31, 2016.12 Of the 91,752 TFA applicants from the 2007–2013 cohorts that were targeted, 27.2 at least started the survey and 21.1 percent completed the sur￾vey.13 Among the 31,376 TFA alumni (2007–2013 corps members), 33.8 percent at least started the survey and 27.1 percent completed the survey. Of the 60,376 ap￾plicants who did not participate in TFA, 23.8 percent at least started the survey and 17.9 percent finished the survey. The survey completion response rate (AAPOR RR1 response rate) and partial response rate (AAPOR RR2 response rate) information by application cycle are shown in Figure A.1a and Figure A.1b in Online Appendix A, respectively. There are no notable differ￾ences in response rates by application year. The average participant in our survey is 29 years old, has a college GPA of 3.52, and went to a selec￾tive undergraduate school (see Table B.2 in Online Ap￾pendix B). A minority received a Pell Grant in college (31.0 percent). Approximately 70 percent of the study sample are female (72.5 percent) and white (69.8 per￾cent), and 94.1 percent of study participants have par￾ents with a post-secondary education. Over half of the participants identify with a religion (58.1 percent), and nearly half of the study participants are upper class or upper middle class Americans (49.0 percent). Al￾laying concerns of survey response bias, we find that our participant population is generally representative of the overall TFA applicant population that made it to the final stage of the application process on each of 11 We used email addresses that applicants provided during the ap￾plication process. We did not update email addresses for alumni based on TFA records to ensure that we did not have fewer invalid emails for alumni. 12 Participants received up to eight email reminders regarding survey participation, and incentives were offered to increase response rates (see Online Appendix G for additional details). 13 Among applicants for the 2014 and 2015 cohorts, 26.8 percent at least started the survey, and 19.4 percent completed the survey. 726 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Shanghai JiaoTong University, on 26 Oct 2018 at 03:53:05, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000412