Archive

5 at Shady Side Academy named National Merit semifinalists | TribLIVE.com
Fox Chapel

5 at Shady Side Academy named National Merit semifinalists

267153herssa092518
Sixteen students at Shady Side Academy were named National Merit Semi-finalists or Commended Students.

Five Shady Side Academy seniors have been named National Merit semifinalists.

The students were selected based on their 2017 Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying test scores. About 16,000 students across the country earn the status of semifinalist from among 1.6 million who take the qualifying test. They represent less than one percent of the nation’s high school seniors.

Semifinalists must have an outstanding academic record throughout high school, be endorsed by a high school official, write an essay and earn high SAT scores.

The SSA semifinalists are Oliver Henry, Nicholas Lauer, Connor Leemhuis and Walter Navid, all of Fox Chapel, and Amanda Zeng of Murrysville.

They will compete to advance to the finalist level and vie for awards worth more than $31 million in the spring.

In addition, 11 SSA students received letters of commendation to recognize their outstanding academics. They represent the top five percent of the nation’s high school seniors.

They are Caroline Barkman, Adam Bozzone, Djibril Branche, Katherine Hart, Catalina Jegasothy, Mary “Emmie” Lau, Nicholas Sawicki, Charles Sherk, Koji Shimada, Andrew Sveda and Bradin Zaba.

Tawnya Panizzi is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tawnya at 412-782-2121, ext. 2, [email protected] or via Twitter @tawnyatrib.

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.