C-J confusion or deception on charter schools

From the C-J editorialists, in the midst of a critique of the recently-passed Indiana budget...

It's understandable that Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels wants to sell his special legislative session's outcome as a victory for education, but the truth is that what the General Assembly did, and what the Governor approved, is a setback for public schools in both urban and rural areas. The big losers are districts in Indianapolis and Gary....

Two thoughts here:

-Given their statist ideology, "it's understandable that" the C-J "wants to sell" all of these things, "but the truth is..."

-Gary and Indy already spend the most money per student. How are their educational outcomes (something the C-J claims to be concerned about later in this essay)? Why should they get even more money?

The Governor took a cheap shot at critics who predicted "the end of public education as we know it." He quipped, "I say thank goodness."...

Sounds like a reasonably hyperbolic and humorous response to a "cheap shot" by the critics. "The end of public education as we know it"?! C'mon...

Lawmakers also encouraged the creation of charter schools, by declining to put a cap on the number that can be approved. — this despite national research that shows very mixed results for such experiments. They did this in order to qualify for more federal stimulus money, but the sad truth is that charters are most popular in the Indianapolis and Gary areas, where new funding cutbacks likely will throw public school districts into an ever-deepening spiral...

"Very mixed results" is in terms of quality. I don't know of any research which indicates a decline in quality-- and some indicates an increase. In any case, charter schools are less expensive and provide more choice. Even with the same quality, more choice at a lower cost is a good deal (for non-statists), right?

Here's the C-J confusion (about a basic point) or its attempt to deceive: Charter schools increase rather than decrease per-student funding to the other public schools. Charters don't get all of the money that's associated with per-student spending, so the remaining students receive services attached with more money per-student.

An "ever-deepening spiral"? I thought they were already in a spiral. Look at the data: the spiral is not related to funding. If anything, the spiral is correlated with more funding!

It's not a major issue in this newspaper's immediate circulation area, where only one charter school exists, nor is this a major Hoosier phenomenon, since there are only 49 charter schools statewide. But it's a disturbing harbinger....

The story behind this story is sad as well.

First, it's pathetic that Kentucky does not allow charter schools-- an indicator of past and future backwardness.

Second, only Schools of Education are allowed to sponsor a charter school (where a School of Business could be equally effective) and only Ball State has had the courage to step up. As a result, I'm told that some school systems across the state have discriminated against Ball State's education graduates because of this. If true, thankfully, there's a special place in Hell for the unredeemed doing that sort of thing.