This panel will explore the causes and consequences of student mobility (and immobility) in the United States. The papers in this panel examine a multiple types of including residential and school across multiple geographic contexts including Las Vegas, New York City, and Florida. Paper #1 provides a comprehensive analysis of between and mid-year student mobility in Clark County, NV, documenting structural and non-structural school moves and disentangling the differential impacts of these types of moves on student performance. Using longitudinal data from academic years 2007-08 to 2012-13, the author identifies effects by decomposing student academic growth into two components: the portion attributable to changes in school quality and the portion attributable to the costs of moving. Further, he examines whether the effects of mobility differ based on the time of year a move is made. Results indicate that there are high rates of mobility among Clark County students: about one third of all students make any type of move in a given school year, with 10 percent of students moving within school years and 3 percent of students changing schools both within and between years. Furthermore, there is significant heterogeneity the types of movers, with students Paper #2 examines the effects of negative equity on children’s educational outcomes. Using longitudinal data on Florida public school students, the authors use student, purchase year by current year, and zip code by year effects to isolate the effect of negative equity on student test scores. Findings indicate that students most at risk of experiencing negative equity and foreclosure experience the largest increases in test scores. The authors hypothesize that improvements in student performance may reflect reduced mobility due to spatial lock-in, specifically, families experiencing negative equity may be less likely to move because of the losses they would incur with the sale of their homes. Finally, paper #3 examines the causal effects of residential mobility on student performance in New York City and provides evidence of heterogeneity in these effects. Specifically, it begins by examining the effects of residential mobility on student performance and then further disaggregates mobility various types: residential moves made with no school move versus those made with an accompanying school move, moves within versus between neighborhoods, moves induced by foreclosure, etc. In order to identify the effects of residential mobility, the authors use rich longitudinal data on New York City public school students and estimate both a student fixed effects and instrumental variables model. Findings indicate that certain moves, such as those made in conjunction with school moves lead to increases in student performance while others, including those made in response to foreclosure, lead to decreases in student performance. Through this panel, we hope to demonstrate the myriad ways in which mobility impacts students’ education, highlight the important intersections in housing and education policy, and illuminate the importance of this issue for policy.