The first maths paper should have elicited a sigh of relief from most Leaving Cert students. Many of the questions on the higher-level maths paper should have been familiar to students from past papers, said Mr Mark Slocum, a maths teacher at Loreto Secondary School, Youghal, Co Cork. There were a few difficult parts, notably part (c) of question 4, the sequence and series question, and part (b) of question 5 where the proof by induction was difficult because of the inequality involved as well as the factorial function.
Mr Cammie Gallagher, chairman of the Irish Maths Teachers Association, said the higher-level paper was fair. He also pointed to 4(c) as testing and said the proof required in question 6(b) was a particularly difficult one.
But Mr John Evans, a teacher at Mount Temple Comprehensive, Malahide, Co Dublin, said higher-level students at his school didn't like the paper. "One student had to be offered the services of a witness protection programme after announcing `well, that was easy'. I think students will have performed better than they think," he said.
"Question 4C(i) was too condensed for my taste . . . question 8 was hard. Integration poses a problem for both paper-setters and students. Surely something better than question 8C(i) could have been found?" asked Mr Evans.
Ordinary-level students should have been pleased with a straightforward paper. ASTI subject representative Ms Maria Kelly said there were no surprises. Part (c) of questions 2, 4 and 5 were challenging. Students at Bishopstown Community School were pleased with paper 1, she said.
Mr Slocum said there was nothing to complain of in a predictable ordinary-level paper. TUI subject representative Mr John McKeon said ordinary- and higher-level students at Post Primary School, Maynooth, Co Kildare, were pleased with the morning's papers.
At foundation level, Mr Evans said, question 1 was a "thorough test of the accurate and efficient use of the calculator". Question 2(b), the average speed question, could have been put on the higher or ordinary paper. The remaining questions fairly tested the relevant topics, he said. His only quibble here: "The phrase `scientific notation' would have been helpful in question 4(a)."
