![](media/image1.png){width="1.125in"
height="1.2055555555555555in"}**THE BLUE RIBBON SCHOOLS PROGRAM**

**RECOGNIZING EXCELLENT AMERICAN SCHOOLS**

The Blue Ribbon Schools Program honors public and private elementary,
middle and high schools that are either academically superior or that
demonstrate dramatic gains in student achievement for disadvantaged
students. The Program is part of a larger Department of Education effort
to identify and disseminate knowledge about best school leadership and
teaching practices. Since its inception in 1982 by Secretary Terrel H.
Bell, the U. S. Department of Education's Blue Ribbon Schools Program
has honored many of America's most successful schools. A Blue Ribbon
School flag waving overhead has become a mark of excellence, a symbol of
quality recognized by everyone from parents to policy-makers in
thousands of communities.

Initially, this paper provides a history of the Department, and
secondly, places the Blue Ribbon Schools Program in [historical
context](#recognition_programs), [describes how it works](#applying),
and offers some [suggestions](#The_Impact) for how schools and state
departments of education can use the award to disseminate best
educational practices to a wider audience.

**A Brief History of the U.S. Department of Education**

The Constitution is silent on education. The 10th Amendment, claiming,
as state rights any powers not explicitly claimed by the federal
government, is the legal basis for the presumption of local control of
education. Federal interest in education, however, predates the
Constitution and has never really gone away. The Northwest Ordinance of
1787 mandated that in settling the "western territories" (Ohio,
Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Michigan), a section of each township
be reserved for "maintenance of public education." Twenty-three years
later, in 1820, Congress authorized the collection of state education
funds through the sale of public lands.

Although a small education bureau tasked with gathering education
statistics was created in 1837 under President Andrew Jackson, the
federal role in education did not expand significantly until the Civil
War. Through the Morrill Act of 1862, a newly assertive federal
government made a massive investment in public education by donating
30,000 of acres of land to each of the (then 34) states to create
land-grant colleges and universities for the promotion of a "liberal and
practical education" for citizens. While the Morrill Act focused on
post-secondary education, many of the new colleges would professionalize
teaching through schools of education. A formal National Bureau of
Education was created in 1867 and two years later was made part of the
Department of the Interior.

High school graduation rates skyrocketed in the new century, climbing
from about 6% in 1900 to 60% by 1950. The federal government made
numerous investments in public education, beginning with the
Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, which granted states money to establish
vocational education programs. In the 1930s, numerous school buildings
were built as part of the federal Work Progress Administration. As the
Second World War ended, the GI bill underwrote college educations for
thousands of veterans, nearly a quarter of a million of whom trained to
be schoolteachers. In 1953, Education moved from the Interior Department
to the newly created Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

Two forces animated federal interest in education in the 1950s. The
first was civil rights, an issue that had been building since
Emancipation, moved to the forefront of national consciousness. The
*Brown v. Board of Education Topeka* decision of 1954 overturned local
and state educational decisions based on race, and when President
Eisenhower commanded the Arkansas National Guard to intervene in
Arkansas to ensure the lawful de-segregation of Central High School in
Little Rock it was clear that educational equity would require federal
might.

Second, the successful 1957 launch of Sputnik by the USSR quickened
federal involvement in education once more. Scientists and educators
were brought together to develop rigorous curricula and harness the new
medium of television to stimulate science teaching. The generation of
scientists and engineers who followed would go on to invent the computer
and the Internet, among other products of scientific knowledge and
education. The National Defense Education Act of 1958 made significant
federal investments in science, mathematics, and foreign language
education and also created a student loan program for promising but
needy students who wished to pursue post-secondary education in
mathematics and science.

Education became the hope on which much of the succeeding Great Society
depended. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) aimed to
redress social inequities through direct grants to schools serving
low-income students (Title I) and by preparing low-income children for
success in school (Head Start). With these measures a role for the
federal government in ensuring equal educational opportunity and
advancing professional knowledge through research appear to have been
accepted as arguably fair uses of federal dollars,

Under President Johnson, money was allocated for a research effort that
ultimately became the Regional Education Laboratories. The National
Diffusion Network (NDN), initiated under President Nixon in 1974 as part
of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, sought to
disseminate "best practices" throughout the country. A federal NDN panel
reviewed demonstration projects and underwrote efforts for developers of
winning projects to offer professional development in the use of the
projects. A state facilitator network served to match schools and
programs.

**Education Gains Cabinet Status**

After a little more than a century of debate, education earned a full
Cabinet seat in 1979, the fulfillment of a campaign promise made by
President Jimmy Carter. With Carter's loss in the 1980 election,
however, President Ronald Reagan sought to remove education from federal
control. Specifically, his administration hoped to close down the
Department of Education by instituting block grants to the states and
gradually ending the practice of categorical grants begun in the 1960s.
He charged his Secretary of Education, Terrel H. Bell, with the task of
dismantling the Department---or at least reducing it once more to a
statistics-collecting institution. Instead, Bell spearheaded an
education reform movement that continues today and initiated a program
to highlight successful U.S. schools. The Department of Education's
budget from 1981 to 1988 shows the struggle. In 1981, the president
proposed \$14.1 billion in education; \$14.7 billion were appropriated.
The next year, the president proposed \$13.2 billion; Congress
appropriated \$14.7. In 1983 the President proposed \$10.5 billion;
Congress gave the Department \$15.3 million. In1984 the proposed budget
was \$13.3 billion; \$15.3 billion were appropriated. From that point
forward, the President's education budget never dipped below \$15
billion. By 1988, the last year of Reagan's presidency, the federal
education budget topped \$20 billion.

Indeed, in his second presidential campaign, Reagan gave dozens of
speeches on school reform. The value of education was apparent, although
by the end of the Reagan Administration, many federal programs,
including Title I, had taken heavy budget cuts, and funding for block
grants for special programs had been reduced by 28% over the eight-year
period. Federal involvement in education was reduced overall, but Bell
managed to keep it from returning to statistics gathering by retaining
such controversial research programs as the Nixon-era National Institute
of Education (NIE).

Bell advanced the notion that the federal government's role was to build
the capacity of state governments to produce high-quality public
education, leaving room for federal financial assistance, if not
outright control. He asked Reagan to appoint a commission on education
and when Reagan declined, established his own commission. After 18
months, the commission concluded in its landmark report, *A Nation at
Risk: The Imperative of Educational Reform*, that "a rising tide" of
mediocre education threatened to render its citizens unfit for the
future. While the report did not directly generate any legislation, it
began a powerful reform effort that continues to this day, *A Nation at
Risk* is sometimes credited with ending the long-standing threat to
dissolve the department. Certainly by 1984 the Administration ceased to
champion the dissolution of the Department of Education,

**Recognition Programs for Great Schools and School Leaders**

[]{#recognition_programs .anchor}In 1982, to showcase the success of
some outstanding schools to an Administration wary of education spending
as a federal concern, Terrel H. Bell, President Reagan's Secretary of
Education, launched two recognition programs to bring the best U.S.
schools to public attention. The Blue Ribbon Schools Program and the
National Distinguished Principals Programs---products of work with the
National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP)---both
highlight outstanding models of American schools and school leadership.

The first 1982 cohort of Blue Ribbon Schools comprised 152 public high
schools from 42 states and the District of Columbia. The Program was
initially designed to honor public secondary schools, but after the
first year, the program was opened to private schools, Private schools
applied through the Council for American Private Education. Within three
years of its founding, a pattern of alternating secondary and elementary
Blue Ribbon Schools, aided by the National Association of Elementary
School Principals (NAESP), was in place. Beginning in 2003, the Blue
Ribbon was awarded to both secondary and elementary schools in the same
year.

The Blue Ribbon Schools program served both as a means of annually
recognizing outstanding schools and as a school improvement process.
Originally, schools nominated themselves for Blue Ribbon awards through
their state departments of education. Eligible schools had to have been
in existence for at least five years and not won a Blue Ribbon award for
five years. Schools applied for Blue Ribbon recognition through a
self-evaluation process that brought teachers, students, parents, and
community representatives together to assess the school's strengths and
weaknesses and develop improvement plans. This process might take a few
years before a school formally submitted its application to the state
Blue Ribbon liaison.

Coordinated by the U. S. Department of Education, written applications
from state liaisons went to a national review panel of more than 100
respected educators, many of them previous Blue Ribbon principals. The
panel used a research-based rubric to score applications in eight
categories with 47 individual questions, choosing the most promising
schools for site visits by experienced educators to substantiate the
claims made on Blue Ribbon Schools applications. After considering the
detailed site visit reports, the review panel made recommendations to
the U.S. Secretary of Education, who announced the schools selected for
Blue Ribbon recognition.

The number of Blue Ribbon Schools a state could nominate was originally
based on a state's Congressional representation. In the mid 1990s the
formula for determining nomination numbers began reflecting a state's
school-age population. Some states worked hard to solicit schools to
apply for the Blue Ribbon and offered assistance in the application
process. A few states took the Blue Ribbon Schools nomination extremely
seriously, running rigorous internal competitions for Blue Ribbon
nominations,

**Applying for the Blue Ribbon as a Transformative Process**

[]{#applying .anchor}The criteria by which Blue Ribbon Schools were
evaluated were based on the effective schools research in the 1980's
stimulated by the publication of *A Nation at Risk*. Those criteria
were 1) student focus and support, 2) school organization and culture,
3) challenging standards and curriculum, 4) active teaching and
learning, 5) professional community, 6) leadership and educational
vitality, 7) school, family, and community partnerships, and 8)
indicators of success. Blue Ribbon School applications had to
demonstrate how a school met these criteria comprehensively and
non-prescriptively, and used them in conducting a self-assessment,

Each criterion fit into a larger concept of school improvement. Student
focus and support, challenging standards and curriculum, and active
teaching and learning were understood as key elements of the critical
relationship among students, the teacher, and content. School
organization and culture, professional community, and leadership and
educational vitality were understood as key elements of the school
context, culture, and interpersonal relationships, Indicators of success
looked at results---both the use of data to refine educational practice
and evidence of student success. In the years before states required
testing, schools reported grade-level scores on nationally
norm-referenced or state or district criterion-referenced tests. Schools
applying for Blue Ribbon status could demonstrate consistent high
achievement, or significant growth over time (about half a standard
deviation's growth in test scores over five years),

The program saluted exemplary schools and, through the process of
self-nomination and application, often shifted cultures and improved
schools, "Holding \[our\] work up to standards of excellence, getting
the entire faculty involved, getting parents involved, getting the
community involved---that in itself is such a tremendous tool for school
improvement." recalled one principal in *The Blue Ribbon Challenge*, a
1999 brief documentary on Blue Ribbon Schools.

Applying to become a Blue Ribbon School involved a great planning and
organizational effort to gather and synthesize information about a
school; many schools applied more than once before winning. Many
described the application process, including feedback from the national
review panel, as one of their most profound professional development
experiences. Principals described earning the Blue Ribbon as less an end
point than a journey.

The process, though daunting---involved everyone associated with the
schools from faculty and students to parents, staff, and community
members in gathering information that exposed both strengths and
weaknesses---was validating. Noted a principal, "We proved so much more
than was in the report to begin with because we believed in ourselves
and we saw the kids could do it and we wanted to fly with it." Others
took notice of Blue Ribbon Schools; "Businesses and foundations love ...
excellence" said one principal, explaining how it was easier to obtain
grant money, and another noted with pleasure that "Schools that had kind
of ignored \[our\] school began to come to see and look at what we were
doing and replicate that for their own schools."

Blue Ribbon Schools were encouraged to share their best practices with
other schools; after 1994, schools reapplying for Blue Ribbon were
required to demonstrate how they had shared their knowledge with other
schools. States and the federal government were expected to facilitate
such sharing. Two volumes of *Best Ideas from America's Blue Ribbon
Schools: What Award-Winning Elementary and Middle School Principals Do*
were published in 1994 and 1998.

**Changes to the Blue Ribbon Schools Program**

The program's focus shifted somewhat under each federal administration.
Under President George H. W. Bush, the nation's governors took up the
call issued by *A Nation at Risk*, and developed a set of national
education goals which were ultimately picked up by Bush's successor,
Bill Clinton, and recast as Goals 2000. The next reauthorization of ESEA
in 2001, known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), initiated perhaps the
most profound exercise of federal involvement in education to date.

The Administration of President George W. Bush reorganized the Office of
Education Research and Improvement (OERI) into the Institute of
Education Sciences. After some discussion of eliminating the Blue Ribbon
Schools Program entirely---countered by many letters of support for the
program from Blue Ribbon Schools---the Program was moved from the OERI
to the Office of Communications and Outreach. The renamed No Child Left
Behind-Blue Ribbon Schools Program received several key modifications.
Under NCLB, the Blue Ribbon Schools Program focused more explicitly on
schools in low-income neighborhoods, requiring states to nominate at
least one-third of their schools from those with 40% or more of their
students from disadvantaged backgrounds (i.e., eligible for free or
reduced-price meals). By highlighting schools that "beat the odds," the
NCLB-Blue Ribbon Program directly addresses equity issues,

The NCLB-Blue Ribbon Program also paid much closer attention to academic
outcomes, making test scores on state achievement tests the primary
indicator of eligibility. In the current program, "high-achieving"
schools must be in the top 10% of their state's schools as measured by
state assessments in both reading and mathematics. "Dramatically
improved" schools must have at least 40% of their students from
disadvantaged backgrounds, show improved student performance over the
last five years, and be in the top 40% of schools in their state as
measured by state assessments in both reading and mathematics. All
public schools must also make Adequate Yearly Progress, an NCLB
educational benchmark, during the school year in which they are
nominated. In another change, schools no longer nominate themselves to
their state liaisons; today the state liaisons and state accountability
officers coordinate the nomination of high-achieving schools that are in
the top 10% and the dramatically improved schools in the top 40%. Due to
the complexity of the current nomination process, the U.S. Education
Department provides more technical assistance to the state liaisons.

The push to identify schools that have high or dramatically improving
percentages of proficient students has had mixed results. Some argue
that differences in state definitions of proficiency are problematic:
Blue Ribbon Schools may not have similar academic standards from state
to state. To be sure, it is no longer possible for a school to meet high
standards in the first seven Blue Ribbon categories (student focus,
school culture, challenging standards and curriculum, active teaching
and learning, professional community, leadership and educational
vitality, and school-family-community partnerships) but do poorly in the
eighth: indicators of success.

At the same time, the focus on state assessment results has diminished
the professional development and school community self-assessment
experience the earlier incarnation of Blue Ribbon Schools provided.
Indeed, today only a handful of site visits take place, and after
schools are chosen. These visits document the variables that are working
in the Blue Ribbon Schools, while previous site visits were a rigorous
look at whether a school's reality confirmed its positive
self-assessment. However, identifying schools that are academically
excellent or have gone from academic inferiority to academic excellence
offers new opportunities to learn from the practices of successful
schools.

During its 26 years, -from its inception in 1982-1983 through the
2007-2008 award year-, the Blue Ribbon has been awarded approximately
5,850 times. About 5,150 different schools have been recognized; some
schools have been selected two or more times. Of the nation's 133,000
public, charter, private, and parochial schools serving grades K-12,
approximately 4.3 % have been recognized as Blue Ribbon Schools,

**A Near-Term Retrospective: 2004 to 2008**

For the past six years, the current annual quota for Blue Ribbon School
nominations has been 413 schools, The number of possible public school
applicants from each state ranges from a minimum of three to a maximum
of 35; the total number of private schools is limited to 50. In the last
six years, as the U.S. Department of Education has lent greater support
and technical assistance to state Blue Ribbon School liaisons, the
numbers of nominated and recognized public schools have increased. Last
year 319 public schools submitted applications and 279 received the Blue
Ribbon award. This was the greatest number and the highest percentage
(87%) of nominated schools in recent history. The number of
participating states remains fairly constant at 44 states.

As indicated in the four summary tables below, more middle, high, and
charter schools have applied in recent years, and the 2008 numbers
represent the highest percentage of urban schools recognized. In earlier
years except 2003, rural and suburban schools were more prominent. The
tables also show that states are consistently nominating more than the
minimum one-third of schools with students from disadvantaged
backgrounds.

Table 1: National Participation of Public Schools in Blue Ribbon Schools
Program, 2003-2008

  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- -------------- --------------
              **Nominated**    **Recognized**   **%            **\# of
                                                Recognized**   States**

  2008        319              279              87%            45

  2007        322              239              74%            43

  2006        309              242              78%            42

  2005        311              246              79%            45

  2004        316              239              76%            44

  2003        306              187              61%            42

  Total       1883             1432             76% (average)  43.5 (average)
  Schools                                                      
  ----------- ---------------- ---------------- -------------- --------------

Table 2: Types of Public Schools Recognized by Blue Ribbon Schools
Program, 2003-2008

  ---------- ---------------- ------------ ---------- --------- ------------- ----------------
             **Elementary**   **Middle**   **High**   **K --    **Charter**   **Recognized**
                                                      12**                    

  2008       165 (59%)        40 (14%)     56 (20%)   3 (1%)    15 (5%)       279

  2007       168 (70%)        25 (10%)     38 (16%)   1 (0%)    7 (3%)        239

  2006       156 (64%)        31 (13%)     48 (20%)   4 (2%)    3 (1%)        242

  2005       194 (79%)        12 (5%)      38 (15%)   2 (1%)    \* (0%)       246

  2004       172 (72%)        30 (13%)     33 (14%)   4 (2%)    \* (0%)       239

  2003       148 (79%)        18 (10%)     19 (10%)   2 (1%)    \* (0%)       187

  Total      1003             156          232        16        25            1432
  Schools                                                                     
  ---------- ---------------- ------------ ---------- --------- ------------- ----------------

\*Data not gathered.

Table 3: Geographic Distribution of Public Schools Recognized by Blue
Ribbon Schools Program, 2003-2008

  ---------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ----------------
             **Rural/Small   **Suburban      **Urban         **Recognized**
             Town Settings** Settings**      Settings**      

  2008       97 (35%)        87 (31%)        95 (34%)        279

  2007       81 (34%)        98 (41%)        60 (25%)        239

  2006       88 (36%)        85 (35%)        69 (29%)        242

  2005       96 (39%)        84 (34%)        66 (27%)        246

  2004       96 (40%)        67 (28%)        76 (32%)        239

  2003       54 (29%)        58 (31%)        75 (40%)        187

  Total      512             479             441             1432
  Schools                                                    
  ---------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ----------------

Table 4: Assessment Criteria and Percent of Students from Disadvantaged
Backgrounds in Public Schools Recognized by Blue Ribbon Schools Program,
2003-2008

  --------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- ----------------
            **Public schools   **Public schools  **Public schools  **Recognized**
            in the top 10% in  with dramatically in the top 10%    
            their state with   improved student  with less than    
            at least 40% of    performance with  40% of students   
            students from      at least 40% of   from              
            disadvantaged      students from     disadvantaged\    
            backgrounds**      disadvantaged     backgrounds**     
                               backgrounds**                       

  2008      67 (24%)           62 (22%)          150 (54%)         279

  2007      48 (20%)           58 (24%)          133 (56%)         239

  2006      48 (20%)           70 (29%)          124 (51%)         242

  2005      54 (22%)           66 (27%)          126 (51%)         246

  2004      43 (18%)           115 (48%)         81 (34%)          239

  2003      19 (10%)           94 (50%)          74 (40%)          187

  Total     279                465               688               1432
  Schools                                                          
  --------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- ----------------

**Celebrating Blue Ribbon Schools**

Each year, the Blue Ribbon Schools process culminates in a recognition
ceremony in Washington. This national ceremony is truly a big deal for
Blue Ribbon School winners. This celebratory event has often included
White House participation and on several occasions the ceremony was held
at the White House. Over the years, Congressional representatives have
called the schools in their district to announce the award. Currently,
the principal, one teacher, and often the principal that served the
school at the time of the application are invited to the two-day
national ceremony, although schools often bring others to join in some
of the festivities, A few years ago, a small rural school in New Mexico
came to the ceremony with an entire busload of teachers and parents. For
some attendees this may be their first, and perhaps only, visit to the
nation's capitol. Frequently they visit Congress and tour Washington by
night on a special Blue Ribbon Schools bus trip.

Expenses to attend the ceremony are absorbed by the schools, but they
rarely decline attendance to the national ceremony. Schools are invited
to submit proposals to present workshops at the ceremony, and the series
of selected Blue Ribbon workshops is well attended. The ceremony also
includes an address by the National Teacher of the Year and previous
Blue Ribbon winners have also been invited to discuss the benefits of
the award for their schools and communities. Because leadership has been
documented as a critical factor in Blue Ribbon Schools, beginning in the
mid 1990s principals have been recognized through the Terrel H. Bell
Award for School Leadership; sixteen principals have won the Bell Award
since 2000. The Blue Ribbon Schools Program's partner associations, the
National Association of Elementary School Principals, the National
Middle School Association, and the National Association of Secondary
School Principals, hold a leadership breakfast to present the Bell
award. Each year, some banquet celebrations for Blue Ribbon events are
underwritten by a host of generous corporate sponsors, including
AIGVALIC, GlaxoSmithKline, Riverdeep Interactive Learning, AT&T,
American General Financial Group, United Parcel Service, UPS Foundation,
Chrysler Fund, and Daimler-Chrysler Corporation Fund.

The Blue Ribbon School teams return from Washington with an honorary
plaque and a Blue Ribbon flag that is hung prominently in their school.
Schools, districts, and states often hold their own Blue Ribbon Schools
celebrations before or after the national ceremony. These events receive
press coverage from local and national media, and schools regard them as
an important milestone in their progress toward meeting the needs of all
of their students.

[]{#The_Impact .anchor}**The Impact of Blue Ribbon Schools**

Blue Ribbon Schools continue to be beacons of school effectiveness and
school leadership and the effect of the award on schools and local
communities remains powerful. As one educator said, "Blue Ribbon begins
a process you cannot stop." A Blue Ribbon School becomes a real estate
sales pitch for a neighborhood or town, and Blue Ribbon Schools report
success in gaining business partners and other private financial
assistance. Principals and teachers add the Blue Ribbon award to their
resumes. If school choice is an option, student applications to Blue
Ribbon Schools increase. Less quantifiably, the award inspires students:
"You have pride, knowing your school worked so hard to reach that goal,"
a student reported. The award re-energizes staff and parents; teachers
talk time and time again of a renewed commitment to exchanging new ideas
with one another. A principal credited the Blue Ribbon award with
generating student pride and staff confidence. With the award, her
students began to believe in themselves, she said, "And when you believe
in yourself you can do things you never thought you could."

The program offers valuable information on successful schools through
its presence on the U.S. Education Department Website, where interested
schools can read profiles of winning schools and study winning
applications. In an informal survey of profiled schools, more than half
had received inquiries from other school leaders who had seen the
Website profiles. The profiled schools have welcomed visits from other
school leaders, given telephone and email consultations, and used their
profiles in presentations to legislators, institutions of higher
education, and at professional conferences. Several states are
sponsoring dialogues about "significant or signature" practices at Blue
Ribbon Schools. For example, Texas includes the Blue Ribbons Schools as
part of its Best Practices Clearinghouse. California is developing a
visitor's guide to high-performing schools with Blue Ribbon Schools in
mind. Ohio is using Blue Ribbon practices as part of a diagnostic review
process with poorly performing schools.

Initiated by a beleaguered Secretary of Education as a way of
"countering the harsh criticism of education and educators," as Terrel
Bell put it in a 1993 retrospective of *A Nation at Risk*, today the
Blue Ribbon Schools Program has inspired principals and staff at schools
across the country. Many principals place winning the award on their
list of goals for their schools, and since 1982, some 5,000 principals
have raised the Blue Ribbon flag at their schools. The program
represents both a high aspiration and a potent resource of practitioner
knowledge.

Blue Ribbon Schools are frequently profiled in the Department's
publication *The Achiever*, on its award-winning satellite TV show,
"*Education News Parents Can Use*," and on the Department's Institute of
Education Sciences' *What Works Clearinghouse* Website. More locally,
Blue Ribbon Schools often give presentations at state and regional
meetings about their successful educational practices, such as formative
assessments, teacher mentoring, and approaches to teacher recruitment
and retention. Other opportunities for leveraging the effective teaching
and learning that take place in Blue Ribbon Schools include working with
state-level educators to use Blue Ribbon Schools as mentors to work with
schools with similar demographics to replicate accountability systems,
provide tips on centralized and distributive leadership, and offer ideas
on motivating and engaging students. Blue Ribbon Schools could also take
advantage of free digital technology (e.g., twitter, wikis, blogs,
social networks, etc.) to facilitate online conversations among Blue
Ribbon Schools and interested others about successful programs and
practices.

\# \# \#