THE ordinary level home economics papers presented few problems to students yesterday morning, but there were mixed views on the higher level paper. Time was not a factor in either paper and, in some instances, the students left the exam hall well before time was up.
At ordinary level, the 20 questions in the short answer section covered the course well, Ms Noreen Fleming, home economics teacher in Alexandra College, Dublin, said.
The long answer section included a food studies question which focused on the nutritional value of cheese. This was a nice question, Ms Fleming commented. She also praised the question on consumer studies, which included four general guidelines for drawing up a weekly shopping list, as manageable for ordinary level students.
Students may have felt a certain amount of empathy with question 3, which dealt with one of the major hassles of teenage life. Students were asked to name four parts of the skin, list four of its functions, and to give four guidelines for maintaining healthy skin as well as explaining the functions of moisturiser, deodorant and sun screen.
She was also pleased with question 4, which began with water services and then broadened to include other household services. The only question which may have caused difficulties was question 5, which was a little detailed for ordinary level students, Ms Fleming added.
However, Ms Margaret McCluskey, ASTI subject representative, said students should not have had much trouble with the question, though the word "guidelines" might have been a little off putting for some students.
The layout of both ordinary and higher level papers was good and the diagrams were clear, Ms Fleming said. Ms McCluskey praised the diagram in the ordinary level paper, showing the composition of a slice of cheese.
The language used in this paper was simple and appropriate to the level of student, she said. However, she added, it would be helpful for students if the marks for the various sections of each question were indicated on the papers - as was the case in yesterday's business studies papers.
Ms Fleming was disappointed that the higher level paper did not include more consumer studies, with the current emphasis on the topic. She would also have liked to seen more linkage in the topics, as in the water services question on the ordinary level paper.
The short answer section on the higher level paper was fine, she said, though question 19, which asked students to name two chemicals in modern washing powders and liquids was unexpected and may have caused problems for some students. In section B, the long answer section, the first two questions concentrated on the food studies area. While the questions were reasonable, it would be usual to include a certain amount of consumer studies here, she said.
Question 3, the consumer studies question, could have been more detailed, Ms Fleming said. However, the social studies question, which dealt with stress and self esteem, was fine.
Overall, both Ms Fleming and Ms McCluskey were agreed that the higher level paper was very manageable and that students were happy leaving the exam halt.
However, Ms Kay O'Connor, FCJ, Bunclody, Co Wexford, said the higher level paper was quite difficult. "It was definitely for the honours rather than the middle of the road student. It covered a realty wide range of topics and a lot of detailed information was needed. But, in some questions, particularly questions 5 and 6, practical skills would have helped," she added.
For students sitting home economics, it should be kept in mind that the written paper only accounts for 40 per cent of the marks for ordinary level students and 50 per cent for higher level students, Ms McCluskey said.