(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)
HT to Asness on the title
I stopped reading Jonathan Chait’s piece on charter schools when I came across this:
The most successful charter systems tend to be highly regulated, with controls to require high-quality operators and close down low-performing schools.
This statement is the precise opposite of the truth. High regulation charter sectors seem extremely adept at preventing charter schools from opening, but not much else. Meanwhile we have multiple examples of states with low NACSA scores for their charter laws but very promising student outcomes (Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, New Mexico, Utah).
Let me help you out JC:
The most successful charter systems tend to be highly lightly regulated, with controls competition to require high-quality operators and close down low-performing schools.
Happy to be of service. Carry on.
Jay P. Greene's Blog 
I think you mean “MISTRAITED.”
Good call- I suspect there will be further atrocities against empirical reality forthcoming from Chait, so I will put it on hot standby.
If Chait’s statement were his answer to a word problem in my class, he’d only earn a 2/8 for stating his thesis, but no proof to substantiate his statement.
Did anyone convey his/her criticisms to Chait? And get a reply?