It is interesting how public school critics of charter schools want to apply standards (like those implicit in this report) to charters that they don't apply to their own regular public schools.
If one charter schools fails to outperform the average public school, that is a reason to close that school down. But where are the calls to close down regular public schools that don't outperform the average public school?
If charter schools in general don't outperform public schools (by somewhat dubious measures), that is a reason not to have charters. But bad public schools are never considered a reason for not have public schools.
There are some pretty awful public schools. But what does the same establishment that wants to shut down a bad charter do in response to this criticism? Everything but closing it down.
One of the interesting things about this most recent report is that it things there should be more oversight of charters by state agencies. But the only reason it knows about the fraud and mismanagement it bemoans is through other entities than state agencies:
Indeed, the vast majority of fraud was uncovered by whistleblowers and media exposés, not by the state’s oversight agencies.I don't have much of a problem with more oversight in regard to fraud and mismanagement, but it seems to me the regular public schools have enough of a problem in their own back yard, as evidenced by recent revelations when whistleblowers and media exposes uncovered irregularities in Kentucky's two biggest school districts.
Anyone who wants to use the likelihood of mismanagement as a reason not to has charters need only look at two recent headlines:
State audit highlights 'chronic mismanagement' of Fayette schools budget, finances
State audit slams top-heavy JCPS bureaucracy
People who live in glass schools shouldn't throw stones.