Science competition draws interest from Baldwin High student volunteers
Exposing 70-some Baldwin High School student volunteers to the Pennsylvania Junior Academy of Science competition on Feb. 2 could result in more Baldwin-Whitehall participation in the future.
“I think this is a wonderful opportunity for the students to see what science is all about,” said Rachel Neil, a science teacher at Baldwin High School, who volunteered the building and facilities for the competition. “So many of them were so impressed. It's very encouraging.”
About 660 students from Allegheny and Westmoreland counties participated in the Pennsylvania Junior Academy of Science competition on Feb. 2 at Baldwin High School.
While about 70 Baldwin High School students volunteered on the day of the competition, only one student, Victoria Schmotzer, a junior and student representative to the school board, presented a project.
The lack of participation from Baldwin students could be because many of them are involved in other extracurricular activities, Neil said.
Neil said more students might participate next year.
“That's definitely a big hope,” she said. “I think our program is outstanding.”
The school board is trying to enhance the science and math offerings.
Three to four judges listened to about 18 student presentations in each classroom, Neil said.
“They're all over the place,” Neil said. “They literally took over this building.”
Laura Van Wert is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-388-5814 or at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.