You'll also notice that California was mentioned in the link I gave, to https://www.the74million.org/article/whitmire-5-ways-to-stop-bad-charters-from-derailing

You'll also notice that California was mentioned in the link I gave, to https://www.the74million.org/article/whitmire-5-ways-to-stop-bad-charters-from-derailing-education-reform https://www.the74million.org/article/whitmire-5-ways-to-stop... . > Whitmire: 5 Ways to Stop Bad Charters from Derailing Education Reform > 2. Charter advocates need to name names. > That’s a sensitive one. Already, charters are under attack from teachers unions and many superintendents. Why pile on by naming the low-performers among you? That probably explains why so few state charter organizers single out charters for closure. But there’s an important exception: California, home to the most robust charter system in the nation. > “About five years ago we realized we had a quality problem,” said Elizabeth Robitaille, who oversees performance issues at the California Charter Schools Association. By controlling for socioeconomic factors, the group could see that its schools tended to fall on opposite ends of a scatter graph — a disproportionate number of both high- and low-performers. The critique is that most districts don't hold charters to the same standards as public schools. You point out the only state where that isn't true. And it was put into place to address exactly that critique. So you can't defend charter schools as a whole from that critique by pointing to the one state which took that critique to heart.