Now, the obvious retort to this line of reasoning is that charters are still subject to government oversight and thus cannot get away with inferior results. There are two flaws to this retort. Firstly, the method by which the federal, state, and local governments collect performance data, namely standardized testing, is flawed. It is perfectly possible to direct a curriculum to meet the demands of the test while providing a poor education. Of course, this is a problem with public schools to, but as charters can run more efficiently than public schools, they could implement such a misdirected curriculum more easily. Secondly, and more importantly, as for-choice schools, charter schools in general are likely to attract students whose parents are more involved with their education. And once again, generally a child with involved parents is more likely to do well in school than one without involved parents. Thus, in general, students at charters should, on the whole, outperform students at regular schools even if the quality of education between the two options is equal.