Mental health, gender equity and the female reproductive system were just some of the issues examined in the Junior Certificate home-economics papers yesterday.

Both papers were described by teachers as "fairly straightforward", though questions on the ordinary-level paper were said to be "searching and tough enough". It was felt, for example, that the short question on gender equity on the ordinary-level paper may well have been too difficult for many students. The higher-level paper was widely liked, however, and no major problems were reported. Ms Margaret McCluskey, ASTI subject representative, a teacher at Ballymun Boys' Comprehensive School in Dublin and a member of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment Junior Cert committee, said the higher-level paper was aimed correctly at 14-year-olds.

The NCCA committee is currently looking at the very wide course and how it can be narrowed, she said. The short questions in the higher-level paper "covered all the different areas and there were no tricky things either". The language in one or two places may have been a bit difficult, she said. Section B included questions on topics that would have been relevant for students, such as questions about vegetables and diet, budgets, fabrics and redecorating a bedroom. "It all relates to students and it's very down to earth," Ms McCluskey said.

As to the ordinary-level paper, she said the short questions were "straightforward". Home-economics students at ordinary level will already have received up to 60 per cent of their final mark based on their project work, while higher-level students will have been marked already on 50 per cent of their assessment. Ms Maureen McGivern of Raphoe Vocational School, Co Donegal, a TUI subject representative, said the ordinary-level paper "was searching enough", in particular for those students who have reading difficulties. "They would find the 20 short questions hard enough," she said. "There's so much writing." Also with regard to section B, she said she would be worried about how they fared in the first question, if they chose to do it.

She said the higher-level paper posed "no great difficulty". Students should have been able to cope with the 20 short questions. The choice throughout the rest of the paper was excellent, and well suited to the age and interests of the students. She agreed it was time the wide-ranging course was reviewed and narrowed down somewhat.

She welcomed the questions on budgets and mental health - adding that it was good to raise these issues as "a lot of students leave school at this stage".