YESTERDAY'S Junior Cert higher level maths paper was the stuff of which legends are made. The second paper is traditionally regarded as the more difficult and this year the prophets of doom appeared to be have been fully justified in their forebodings.
Not since 1992 was there such a difficult paper, one teacher said.
Sister Marie McNamara, a maths teacher in St Mary's Secondary School, Nenagh, Co Tipperary, said that the paper was not a test of knowledge and that students who had worked hard for three years were not afforded an opportunity to display their talents. "It was a test of how to face a very difficult challenge, and I don't think that is fair," she added.
Students were discouraged by the difficulty of the compulsory short answer questions, Sister Marie said. "The idea is usually to ease students into a paper, but instead the questions were long and difficult. This year the average student was cut out too fast there was no leeway.
"To read some of the questions was a challenge in itself. Most questions needed to be read very carefully and a number of times, she said.
The first part of question asked students about a percentage increase in the area of a square. This part, and parts 4, 5, 6 and 10 were very difficult, she said. "The diagram with part 6 was quite off putting and it was long enough to be half of a long question rather than a mere 10 mark part."
Sister Marie also said that the term "circumcircle" in part 10 was a difficult one that a number of students may not have understood.
There was some controversy over part 2 of question 1, with one parent telephoning Exam Times to complain that the question could not be solved as there were two unknown variables in the one equation. However, a spokesman for the Department of Education said the question was fine.
Many students try to avoid the geometry questions and often bank on question 2, which is usually straightforward arithmetic. However, the first part of question 2 combined an interest calculation with a currency exchange calculation and the second part was very long.
"I usually tell students to start with a question they like. But if they started on question 2, as many undoubtedly would, they would have been very discouraged," Sister Marie said.
"Overall, there was no consolation for students. The tendency is usually to make the first question manageable for everybody and the philosophy for the longer questions has been to make the first part accessible, but this paper did not do that," she said.
Her views were echoed by Mr James Reidy, who teaches in Castlerea Community School, Co Roscommon. His higher level students found the paper much more difficult than Thurday's paper.
He also pointed to a number of the short answer questions which the students found difficult, but added that the spread of these questions was reasonable.
Some students did not even at tempt part (b) of question 2, as looked too difficult though in fact it was a relatively straightforward transposition, he said. Students would have covered most of the material for the paper, but the questions were not readily accessible and it was not immediately obvious how they could apply their knowledge.
The two theorems in questions 3 and 4 were fine, he said, but part (b) of question 5 was tricky, he added. The last two parts of question 6, the trigonometry question, also caused problems for some students. Only a handful of students found the paper manageable and the remainder were disappointed, Mr Reidy said.
Mr John McKeon, the TUI subject representative, said that the higher level paper was deemed difficult by many of his students in Maynooth Post Primary, Co Kildare.
"The compulsory questions were unusually difficult, but they are meant to cover the entire course and you will get the easy mixed with the hard," he said. He also noted the tendency of many students to rely on question 2, which was demanding this year.
In contrast, everyone seemed to agree that the ordinary level paper was fair. Sister Marie said that it followed the usual format with no hidden surprises. It was a good paper, she concluded. Mr McKeon described it as very sat is factory and said that ordinary level students were happy.