Predictable but challenging technical drawing papers (building applications) kept higher and ordinary-level Leaving Cert students drawing and calculating up until the last minute.
Mr Patrick McVicar, ASTI subject representative and principal of Falcarragh Community School, Co Donegal, said the higher-level paper was "very fair, providing a thorough analysis of the course work".
At higher-level, question 1 was long and demanding in terms of time. Question 7 was also very time-consuming, making it difficult for students to reach the required high standard of draftsmanship. The ordinary-level paper was even more demanding in terms of time, said Mr McVicar. Question 4(b) asked for two cross-sections where one would have sufficed while question 6(b) and (c) would have presented difficulties for the ordinary-level candidate. TUI subject representative Mr Pat O'Dwyer said the ordinary-level paper was fine but question four was "quite awkward as it only gave a plan. The inclusion of an elevation would have helped ordinary-level students." Mr O'Dwyer, who teaches in Kenmare Vocational School, Co Kerry, noted the omission of the question headings on questions 6 and 7. Question 6 was "delightful to see. I hope they will continue to include applied conic sections."
ASTI subject representative Mr John O'Sullivan said the ordinary-level paper was lengthy but as expected. The higher-level paper was well laid out and clear with questions pitched at the right level, he said. Mr Pat Murphy of the Association of Materials Technology and Graphics Teachers said higher-level students in Wesley College, Dublin, found the paper difficult, with a heavy workload. The ordinary-level paper was as expected. Mr Padraig Kirk, chairman of the Engineering and Technology Teachers' Association, said ordinary-level students doing the engineering applications paper should have had few difficulties other than question 5, the isometric question, which was "quite awkward".
At higher-level, he said the paper is always difficult.