Sir, - I am one of the students who recently attempted the Leaving Cert History exam. Like many of my friends (who are not, incidentally, all from the same school) I am extremely disillusioned with the unfairness and seeming trickery which characterised the paper. These cannot be denied. Not only were "mainstream" topics abandoned but questions were put in an unrecognisable way (i.e. the one on "agriculture" seemingly really implied "land purchase") from which the hapless students can only conclude they were pawns in some kind of sadistic game. I would like to make two points in response to recent comments.
While I can't deny the topics that came up were on the syllabus, I, like presumably most other students, was never advised to read this, but learnt, as is usual, from textbooks. The syllabus is very broad, and cannot conceivably be fully covered. Therefore, we must "zone in" on areas and learn these properly.
In the lottery that is the Leaving Cert, it is common practice to use past papers, which are published to note general patterns without actually "predicting" one topic only. This is fair and is not done only in "grind schools". I did not attend such a school but blaming them, as has been done of late, is to take the focus off the inadequate test paper.
I cannot understand why, when we were tested - the word implies that we had previously been taught the material - we were asked questions on topics that were known not to have been covered. It is unjust and, for those who have worked very hard at a difficult subject for the past years, it is incomprehensible. - Yours, etc.,
Dianne Forsyth, Swords, Co Dublin.