ShareThis Page
News

Valley High School team shines at national Physics Bowl

| Saturday, June 5, 2004

A team of seven Valley High School seniors scored third-highest in the nation in a physics test against about 9,000 students from 350 schools.

The national Physics Bowl is a pencil-and-paper test that was given in April. It has 40 problems about physics and is devised by the American Association of Physics Teachers.

This team from Valley High School, made up of second-year physics students, also scored second in the Pennsylvania-New Jersey region.

Them members were Jessica Bell, Bryan Bischof, Erika Capo, Jen Claassen, Jordan Elias, Dennis Sopchak and Matt Yeamans.

Matt's score was the second highest in the Pennsylvania-New Jersey region.

The Physics 1 team, made up of four juniors who were first-year physics students, scored third in the Pennsylvania-New Jersey region.

Those students were Greg Baker, Zach Chalkan, Jen Pallone and Glenn Rapsinski.

Nationally, the first-year physics students placed 15th.

"Doing as well as they did in the first year is very good. Doing as well as they did in the second year is first-rate," said Courtney Willis, the American Association of Physics Teachers examinations editor, who is responsible for writing and grading the test.

"Doing as well in both first- and second-year means they obviously have a very good physics program -- it's not just that they had a smart couple kids this year."

Their teacher was Jim Musolino, who retired June 3 after 35 years teaching physics at Valley High School.

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.

click me