There were sighs of relief all around as Leaving Cert students handed up their answer books for the second, final maths paper. Mr John Evans, TUI subject representative, said there was a varied response among students to the second higher-level paper, with some finding it difficult and others very pleased. It also raised issues for teachers, he added.
The only designated proof to be examined in the two higher-level papers was in question 2(c), part (i). However, there are in trigonometry - for instance - 12 standard proofs, which take a long time to teach. "The syllabus seems to be saying one thing and the exam another," he said. Teachers might ask why they spent all those hours teaching the 12 identities.
He was also concerned that transformation geometry was only examined as an optional topic. "The Department of Education is indicating that it doesn't want teachers to teach proofs and transformation geometry. The Minister talks about transparency. Perhaps they might say this clearly rather than via exam-paper semaphore."
The ASTI subject representative, Ms Eileen Scanlon, said there were no major shocks on the higher-level paper. It was long but she was confident that any difficult questions would be taken care of in the marking conference.
Ms Scanlon singled out questions 8 for praise. "That's very important as it is the question most students would have attempted first."
In recent years, there's been a move to make maths accessible to a wider range of students and the papers are beginning to reflect this, she added.
Mr Mark Slocum, a maths teacher in CBS Youghal, Co Cork, said higher-level students were happy in general with both maths papers. The standard was easier in comparison to other years and much of the material had been asked previously, he explained; he agreed that much of the course is left out of the exam.
Ordinary-level students were also very pleased with a straightforward paper, Mr Slocum said. There were no real catches and students felt it was a lot easier than yesterday's paper.
However, question 11(b) - linear programming - upset some students. An optional question, it contained a lot of information, with different quantities involved, "It was difficult to formulate the equations," Mr Slocum said. "But if students worked their way through they should have been able to attain the marks." The layout also contributed to the difficulties, he noted.
Ms Scanlon complimented the diagrams on the ordinary-level paper. The students seemed to be more relaxed than on Thursday and found the second paper easier than the first. The foundation-level paper was "very nice, clear and student-friendly", she said.
"The three levels reflect the broad syllabus available in ours schools. We're very lucky to have such a broad range of papers which examine all the talents," Ms Scanlon concluded.
