​Background: At the end of September, three UNL football players knelt during the national anthem at the Northwestern University football game in Illinois. Some members of the community felt that their actions were inappropriate for uniformed representatives of the school. Hank Bounds, president of the University of Nebraska system, defended the players, and both he and UNL Chancellor Ronnie Green received email messages from students, alums, Husker fans, military service members, attorneys, and more—some in support of the players’ actions and some opposed to their actions. One of the email messages was from LPS superintendent Steve Joel.
 
It’s hard to read an LPS-focused Journal Star article, an LPS tweet, or a district PR piece without coming across the phrase “All Means All.” According to the context surrounding this oft-repeated mantra, we’re led to believe that “All Means All” signifies that Lincoln Public Schools embraces inclusion, tolerance, and diversity.
 
That’s why it’s so strange to hear the superintendent say things like this: “Thanks for your great leadership on this topic as many of us are hearing from the usual small minority who are detached from reality and what we try to teach young people.”
 
This quote is a statement by Steve Joel, superintendent of Lincoln Public Schools, in response to University of Nebraska president’s statement supporting several University of Nebraska football players kneeling during the national anthem earlier in the football season.
 
Presumably, Joel is using the phrase “usual small minority who are detached from reality” to refer to people in the community who think that students representing the university should show their respect to their nation and state when the national anthem is played. For the record, the same Omaha World-Herald article that includes Joel’s statement reports that “30 of 50 messages to University of Nebraska-Lincoln Chancellor Ronnie Green conveyed negative views of the players’ protest,” hardly the definition of a minority.
 
But even if these people did represent a minority, even a very small minority, is that cause to insult them by saying they’re “detached from reality”? Does Joel think it’s acceptable to insult minority groups whose views differ from his own?

Respect for Diversity
It’s possible to show support for one group of people without disparaging another, and we’re sure LPS administrators like Steve Joel do this all the time. For example, it’s possible to tell a child at the science fair that you really like her bean plant science experiment without saying, “It’s much better than that loser’s volcano project over there.” Respect is not a zero-sum game. If you give respect to one group, that doesn’t mean you have to take respect away from another group.
 
It’s possible to be respectful of people with many different opinions, views, value systems, and backgrounds. Instead of insulting people who disagreed with him, Joel could have said, “Thank you for your great leadership on this topic. I agree with you.” Such a statement is positive, allows him to exercise his freedom of speech, and doesn’t remind everyone in the community that “all means all” doesn’t mean what it sounds like it means.

What Does “All Means All” Really Mean?
If “All Means All” doesn’t really mean respect and tolerance for everyone, what does it mean?
 
It’s hard to say, but Joel’s statement about the national anthem protests may give us a clue. He says that the “usual small minority” is “detached from…what we try to teach young people.” In other words, LPS is trying to teach young people the “right way” to think about issues, and there are people out there who don’t see things the same way Joel does.
 
Therefore, “all means all” is not at all about diversity or tolerance or inclusion; it’s about conformity to a prescribed set of views.
 
By the time kids get to LPS high school, they’ve learned their lessons on these issues pretty well. For example, they know it’s perfectly acceptable to jeer and yell “Bigots!” when the Young Republicans are introduced at a pep rally, but it’s not at all acceptable to treat the Feminist Club the same way. They know that if they talk about their pro-life views in class they will either be attacked by their fellow students (and maybe by their teachers) or shut down. They know it’s okay to mock certain religions but not others. None of this is inclusive or respectful or tolerant, but it happens on a regular basis at LPS.
 
Conformity may have been an acceptable modus operandi in the past when Nebraska had a fairly homogeneous population. But the population in Lincoln today is quite diverse and becoming more so all the time. What do refugee students think when they begin attending school at LPS and realize that some of their own deeply held beliefs or values are “detached from reality”?

School Choice and Tolerance
The diverse citizens of Lincoln are spending a lot of money on Lincoln Public Schools. The public has hired this district to teach children to be academically prepared for adult life. It’s not up to the district to decide which values, beliefs, and views are worthy of respect and which are not.
 
The truth is, public schools aren’t very good at teaching tolerance. In fact, research shows “private schools and school choice programs promote and advance good citizenship and democratic values." Private school students are more tolerant and have a larger sense of civic duty. You can look at the results of the research here. A 2014 study also shows that “greater exposure to homeschooling is associated with more political tolerance.”
 
That’s one of the many reasons more and more people are embracing school choice. Kids shouldn’t have to go to a school where their beliefs and views are ridiculed and mocked or where they learn to mock the beliefs of others. There should be options for students to attend schools where diversity is respected and tolerance is embraced, where adults teach children that it’s possible to respect one person without putting another person down.

Earlier this month, Dr. Vicki Alger spoke about tax credit scholarships at the Platte Institute Legislative Summit. Twenty-one different tax credit scholarships currently operate across the country with participation rates ranging from less than 1% in New Hampshire to 15% in Florida. 

Tax credit scholarships are a form of school choice that allows individuals or businesses to receive a tax credit from state taxes against donations made to non-profit organizations that grant private school scholarships. This creates more options for students; if a student isn't doing well in a traditional public school, a scholarship makes it possible for her to attend a private school where she may have a better chance of success. Additionally, taxpayers benefit from tax credit scholarships because private donations help to fund education: the burden of educating K-12 students no longer rests exclusively on taxpayers.

Making Education More Efficient
​The U.S. Department of Education publishes data on "instructional" spending, which averaged $6,500 per student during the 2010-2011 school year. Of all the states in the nation, Nebraska spent the most: $7,700 per year. But that doesn't mean Nebraska students learned the most. In fact, only 39% of disadvantaged eighth graders scored proficient or better in reading and math. Contrast this with the performance of Arizona's disadvantaged eighth graders who had 51% proficiency rates in reading and math. Arizona spent $4,200 per pupil on instruction.

What's the difference?

One of the biggest differences between Nebraska and Arizona is that parents in Arizona have parental-choice scholarship programs, and parents in Nebraska don't. Schools have to compete for students in Arizona, and this competition improves all schools, public and private alike.

Nebraska state legislators are looking at tax credit scholarships, and fortunately, there are many existing programs in the country for them to examine. For example, Nevada's ESA program is universal and open to all parents while some programs are restricted to certain populations and demographics.

Some people who oppose tax credit scholarships worry that people will abuse the system, but there are ways to reduce risk of abuse. In most programs, funds are disbursed quarterly after receipts and expense reports have been submitted by parents. If abuse occurs, those parents are simply dropped from the program and their children return to traditional public schools.

Many thanks to the Platte Institute and Dr. Vicki Alger for helping us to understand the great potential of tax credit scholarships and how they could help students in Nebraska. You can read more about tax credit scholarships at the Friedman Foundation or at any of the state government websites that currently offer programs, like this one from Florida.

Here is yet another case of a teachers union misinforming educators about school choice options. This graphic appears in the October issue of The Voice, the NSEA's monthly publication for its union members. One of the columns says "Supports For Profit/Charter Schools," which is confusing and misleading.

Charter schools are public schools that are not tied to teachers unions and bureaucracies that limit their innovation and freedom. Because they're free from so much bureaucratic regulation, they tend to perform better than traditional public schools.

Nebraska's teachers unions fight vehemently against charter schools because their membership will decline if charter schools are legalized. They know this because teachers union membership has declined in many of the 43 states and Washington D.C. where charter schools exist. They also don't want to have to compete with charter schools, which disproportionately rank high in school rankings.

​Teachers unions claim to help their members, but by fighting against school choice, they limit the kinds of opportunities that teachers in other states enjoy. For instance, the Denver Schools of Science and Technology charter schools consistently rank as some of the best places to work in the city of Denver. 

Worst of all, the teachers union is limiting opportunity for Nebraska's students, especially students who are currently stuck in failing schools and have no other options. If charter schools were legal in Nebraska, parents could choose the best schools for their children and enjoy the kind of market competition they enjoy whenever they go out to eat or visit a doctor or shop for a car.

In time, parents in Nebraska will have more options to help them create individualized educations for their individual children. Until then, check out the options created by ed tech firms, universities, and organizations created by school choice in the rest of the country. See if you can find resources to help you do what's best for your kids, even though we currently live in a no-choice state.