It seems the urban-rural divide extends to home economics, with very different reactions to the higher-level paper from Donegal and Dublin.
Every year the gap widens between ordinary- and higher-level papers, said TUI subject representative Ms Ann McNicholl, who teaches in Carndonagh Community School, Co Donegal. "The standard and level of detail required by the higher-level students has increased dramatically and this year is no exception," she said.
Ms McNicholl criticised questions 6 and 7 as being too specific. They could only be answered by an excellent student, she said. Question 6 dealt with the causes and effects of poverty, Government strategies to alleviate poverty and the Combat Poverty Agency, while question 7 focused on social or local authority housing.
On the other hand, ASTI subject representative Ms Deirdre Healy said students at St Joseph's secondary school, Stoneybatter, Dublin, were very happy with questions 6 and 7. "In the past, questions would have tended to favour middle-class students. The local authority housing issue was very topical and would be familiar to our students." She was equally happy with the poverty question. Her overall reaction to the paper was very positive.
She said food poisoning, which came up in the first part of question 4, was topical and hotly tipped. Ms McNicholl said, however, that the last part of question 4, which asked students to describe in detail how they would prepare a chicken pie or casserole from fresh ingredients, so that it would be suitable for freezing, was too specific. It was a very long, broad course and not everyone would have covered pies and casseroles.
At ordinary level, both teachers agreed that the paper was appropriate and straightforward.
There were 22,338 entries for home economics (social and scientific), while 166 students entered for home economics (general).