Shell Science Lab Challenge Announces 2015 Grand Prize Winner and National Finalists

ARLINGTON, Va.--()--Shell Oil Company and the National Science Teachers Association today announced the grand prize winner and four national finalists in the fourth annual Shell Science Lab Challenge. The competition encouraged teachers (grades 6-12) in the U.S. and Canada, who have found innovative ways to deliver quality lab experiences with limited school and laboratory resources, to share their approaches for a chance to win a school science lab makeover valued at $20,000.

“Students with access to a safe lab environment to ask questions, explore, construct, test and interpret observations are more likely to cultivate skills that could motivate them to pursue science disciplines,” said Dr. Frazier Wilson, VP Shell Oil Company Foundation and Manager of Social Investment. “The Shell Lab Challenge seeks to better equip high schools labs for quality outcomes, especially for science teachers who create innovative experiences for students despite limited lab environments.”

“We’re honored to be able to reward dynamic and captivating teachers who, by their example, inform and inspire others,” said Dr. Juliana Texley, NSTA President. “We applaud the grand prize winner and national finalists of the Shell Science Lab Challenge for their hard work, creative ideas, and dedication to their students’ education.”

To enter the Shell Science Lab Challenge, science teachers of grades 6-12 in the U.S. and Canada were asked to describe their school’s current laboratory resources, explain why the school’s laboratory facilities might be classified as “limited” resources, and describe their approach to science education instruction utilizing their school’s current lab facilities. A panel of science educators then reviewed and selected the top entries.

Grand Prize Winner – Latiffe Amado: Alliance Environmental Science and Technology High School, Los Angeles, Calif.

  • Amado describes her school’s lab as “a hodgepodge of items collected throughout the years, from DonorsChoose donations, laboratory donations from technology companies, and our 99-cent-only store purchases.” While she and her colleagues are able to teach scientific skills, she says they can’t teach “the technology component” with the materials they have.

    If provided the essential scientific equipment and “the technology needed for uttermost success in college,” Amado contends that students will have numerous opportunities for real-world experimentation on campus and in the community, including monitoring a local river, analyzing soil on campus, and monitoring carbon monoxide at the train servicing station near the school.

National Finalist – H. Marie Lemon: Greenville Early College, Greenville, S.C.

  • Lemon takes an inquiry-based approach to build on the inquisitive nature of her middle school students. By using their curiosity and prior experiences to engage them, she is teaching them how to think through problems and solutions while helping them realize that science does not have to be intimidating—in fact, they often “do” science at home.

    To make the most of what she does have, Lemon cycles students through stations and supplements her supplies with items purchased from her own funds. She brings in a variety of materials from home, including plants and science equipment to ensure her students have a variety of experiences to spark their interest in science.

National Finalist – Pamela Skinner: Maranatha Christian School, Williams Lake, British Columbia, Canada

  • Skinner’s small private school was formerly an elementary school and has not been completely retrofitted as a K-12 school. Its science lab budget isn’t large enough to support the purchase of new equipment. The lab facilities are extremely limited and can only accommodate 14 students at a time. Storage, equipment, and supplies are at a premium, forcing the school to rely on online resources, common household supplies, and Skinner’s previous experience as a lab technician.

National Finalists – Steven Ward and Dave Yarmchuk: Cesar Chavez Public Charter Schools for Public Policy, Washington, D.C.

  • Located in a former warehouse, the Cesar Chavez Public Charter School for Public Policy has limited facilities. “With no sink nor drain, no permanent storage space, no refrigerator, and very few electrical outlets, Ward’s high school biology classroom can only barely be called a laboratory space,” says Principal Zenada Mahon, adding the biology dissection lab had to be relocated to a different part of the building due to the biology classroom’s inadequacies.

    Without storage space, Ward and his fellow science teachers have not been able to purchase supplies. Instead, they rely on dry labs, paper models, teacher demonstrations, and fieldwork as they challenge their students to think critically and often become the first in their families to go to college.

    Ward says the “goal for each lesson is to re-connect students’ science education to the professional research of scientists and activities in the scientific community at large” while tying it to current events in students’ loves and communities.

National Finalist – Melissa Zwilling: St. Joseph’s High School, Westchester, Ill.

  • In a video highly praised by the judges, Zwilling detailed the chemistry’s lab’s outdated and non-functioning equipment; lack of appropriate chemical disposal options; lack of a gas source for Bunsen burners; and shortage of consumables, glassware, and chemicals. “While I do my best to emphasize the excitement that I feel is innate in chemistry, some students benefit most from seeing the fascinating reactions that occur during experiments,” she contends, noting that it is not always possible with the lab in its current condition.

    St. Joseph’s serves many minority students and those from low-income homes, Zwilling points out. “These are the very students we should be encouraging toward STEM careers,” she maintains, adding that an upgraded lab would allow teachers to conduct more exciting, engaging experiments that would increase students’ interest and their understanding of scientific concepts.

As the grand prize winner, Amado will receive a science lab makeover support package for her school valued at $20,000. The prize package includes an $8,000 Shell cash grant, $8,000 in donated lab equipment, $1,000 in NSTA prizes—to include an NSTA bookstore gift certificate and NSTA conference registrations, NSTA memberships and NSTA Learning Center subscriptions for two teachers. Amado also received an expense-paid trip to attend the 2015 NSTA National Conference on Science Education in Chicago last month.

The four national finalists will each receive a science lab makeover support package for their school valued at $8,500. The prize package includes a $3,000 Shell cash grant, $3,000 in donated lab equipment, $1,000 in NSTA prizes—to include an NSTA bookstore gift certificate and NSTA conference registrations, NSTA memberships and NSTA Learning Center subscriptions for two teachers. The national finalists also received an expense-paid trip to attend the 2015 NSTA National Conference.

Ward’s Science is also supporting the Shell Science Lab Challenge by providing equipment to the winners.

Recognizing that the laboratory experience is integral to science education and that many schools, especially schools in urban and rural areas, do not have the resources to invest in quality lab equipment, NSTA and Shell partnered on the Shell Science Lab Challenge to bring much needed lab materials and resources to school districts nationwide and in Canada.

For more information about the Challenge, visit the competition web site.

About NSTA

The Arlington, VA-based National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) is the largest professional organization in the world promoting excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all. NSTA's current membership includes approximately 55,000 science teachers, science supervisors, administrators, scientists, business and industry representatives, and others involved in science education.

About Shell Oil Company

Shell Oil Company is an affiliate of the Royal Dutch Shell plc, a global group of energy and petrochemical companies with 93,000 employees in more than 90 countries. In the U.S., Shell operates in 50 states and employs nearly 20,000 people working to help tackle the challenges of the new energy future. Shell Oil Company is a leading oil and gas producer in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, a recognized pioneer in oil and gas exploration and production technology, and one of America’s leading oil and natural gas producers, gasoline and natural gas marketers, and petrochemical manufacturers.

FOR INQUIRIES CONTACT: Shell Oil Company Media Line +1 (713) 241- 4544

Disclaimer statement

The companies in which Royal Dutch Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate entities. In this presentation “Shell”, “Shell group” and “Royal Dutch Shell” are sometimes used for convenience where references are made to Royal Dutch Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer to subsidiaries in general or to those who work for them. These expressions are also used where no useful purpose is served by identifying the particular company or companies. ‘‘Subsidiaries’’, “Shell subsidiaries” and “Shell companies” as used in this presentation refer to companies in which Royal Dutch Shell either directly or indirectly has control. Companies over which Shell has joint control are generally referred to as “joint ventures” and companies over which Shell has significant influence but neither control nor joint control are referred to as “associates”. The term “Shell interest” is used for convenience to indicate the direct and/or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in a venture, partnership or company, after exclusion of all third-party interest.

This announcement contains forward-looking statements concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Shell and the Shell Group. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management's current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Shell and the Shell Group to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as "anticipate", "believe", "could", "estimate", "expect", "goals", "intend", "may", "objectives", "outlook", "plan", "probably", "project", "risks", "seek", "should", "target", "will" and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Shell and the Shell Group and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this announcement, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for Shell's products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserves estimates; (f) loss of market share and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, fiscal and regulatory developments including regulatory measures addressing climate change; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; and (m) changes in trading conditions. All forward-looking statements contained in this announcement are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional factors that may affect future results are contained in Shell's 20-F for the year ended 31 December 2014 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov). These factors also should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this announcement, May 20, 2015. Neither Shell nor any of its subsidiaries nor the Shell Group undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this announcement.

Contacts

NSTA
Kate Falk, 703-312-9211
kfalk@nsta.org

Release Summary

Shell and NSTA announce the winner and national finalists of the 2015 Shell Science Lab Challenge.

Contacts

NSTA
Kate Falk, 703-312-9211
kfalk@nsta.org