THERE were conflicting views on yesterday afternoon's higher-level technology paper, but the ordinary-level paper was judged fair.

Mr David Morris, ASTI subject representative and a teacher in Clochar na nUrsulach, Thurles, Co Tipperary, said that the higher-level paper was a testing one with a greater than usual emphasis on the knowledge of materials. "Students would need a wide and comprehensive knowledge of the course to do well," he said.

Mr Noel O'Neill, a representative of the Association of Materials Technology and Graphics Teachers, said that the higher-level paper was quite a fair paper and in keeping with the model of previous years. There was the same balance and spread of questions, he added.

However, Mr Morris said his students - all girls - had done all of the previous years' papers and this year's paper did not bear too close a resemblance to them.

Students would be hard pushed to select 25 from the 30 questions in section A. The detailed knowledge required for sections B and C assumed that technology teachers had all the resources and equipment necessary in the school. This is not the case," Mr Morris said.

In particular, he pointed to section B of question 1, based on a sketch of a sticky-tape dispenser. The plan was difficult for the vast majority of students, he said, and all of his students opted for the alternative question based on a design for an acrylic bird house.

In section C, where students had to choose one question from a total of four, he said the only question his students felt comfortable with was question 5. Questions 4 and 6 could not be attempted without working models being available.

There was definitely a "gear up in standard from previous years", he said, "but 50 per cent of the course is awarded for practical work and the projects were quite manageable, so it will level itself out."

On the positive side,, he described the paper as nicely laid out and said that questions were well spaced.

Mr Morris and Mr O'Neill were agreed that the ordinary-level paper should present few problems to students. Questions ranged from designing a logo for a recycling company to listing two functions for computers in industry to explaining the contribution made to technology by either Samuel Morse, Alexander Graham Bell, James Watt or Johann Gutenberg.

The same level of detail was not required and all answers were written into the answer book, Mr Morris noted. The language was clear and simple, he said.