TECHNICAL graphics students in St Patrick's College, Tuam, Co Galway, were reasonably happy with both the ordinary and higher level papers, though a number of students reported problems with time management.
Their teacher, Mr Eugene Flynn, who represents the Association of Materials Technology and Graphics Teachers, said some students spent too long on section A, the "quick fire questions".
Mr Philip O'Callaghan, ASTI subject representative, said that both papers were testing but not unfair. The presentation was excellent, he added.
The short answer section in the ordinary level paper was similar to last year, he noted. The only difficult question was question 3 where students would need an indepth knowledge of computer aided design (CAD). This question was inappropriate not just for ordinary level but for Junior Cert, Mr O'Callaghan, who teaches in CBS Naas, Co Kildare, said.
Mr Flynn said the short answer section was designed to make students recall the entire three years of the course. There were no surprises in this section, he said. In the longer questions, he noted the predicable appearance of the eclipse question, for which students should have been well prepared.
Question 4, based on the design of a computer game character, had no curves so it should have been reasonably easy, he said. However, there were a tot of lines in the transformation question, which could have been confusing.
The longer questions were very fair, Mr O'Callaghan said. He particularly liked the final question which had a diagram of a motorcycle helmet. Students were asked to reproduce the helmet, with the visor open, as shown, and then had to draw the helmet with the visor closed.
At higher level, the short questions were testing, Mrs O'Callaghan said. Questions 5, 7 and 9 were difficult, while question 12, which asked students to sketch the shadow cast by the solid shown in the diagram, was very time consuming for a question that is meant to be done in about four minutes. The longer questions were fine, he said - they followed a similar format to last year.
Mr O'Flynn praised the short answer question that included a diagram of a plug. Students relate to everyday objects, he said. Some classes might not have covered the last section of question I, in the long answer section, which asked for an auxiliary elevation of a surface which would show its true shape. The weaker student might have found it difficult to set up question 2, which was based on the elevation and plan of a flag containing a logo, he added.
Mr O'Flynn noted that all of his students opted for question 3, the axonometric question. They had been given part of the solution and they had to complete it. "Everyone I spoke to got it out," he said. On question 4, the development of a simple object, he said students with good spatial perception would have got it out. If students had covered the transformation geometry topic in class they should have had no problem with question 5, where a circle with a logo had to be transformed through various points. The final question was somewhat similar to last year, Mr O'Flynn said.
The paper contained nothing that hadn't come up before in a past or mock paper, Mr O'Flynn said. "Overall, students were happy, but time was the biggest factor.