In the recent Examwatch 2024, students participating in the Junior Cycle and Leaving Cert had to navigate through an array of unexpected and challenging questions in the agricultural science higher level paper. Many learners found the exam to be somewhat intimidating, particularly due to the unpredicted and complex problems presented.
However, according to Catriona Hendry, who tutors Agricultural science at the Institute of Education, students who maintained a broad revision perspective were presented with multiple avenues to score marks. Hendry pointed out that learners who opted for rigid, tactical approaches in their studies struggled because the questions covered a vast territory of the key syllabus contents.
Hendry highlighted that the first question of the paper proved to be a “hard commencement” for many. It was a visual identification question, delving into specific apparatus, which, although had been referenced during the courses, did not have a definitive list to guide revisions. It was not something that students could isolate and practice on. Many might recall it as an unfavorable experience, tarring future impressions about the exam.
The second question (B) was more easily digestible, serving as a decent assessment and communication question, albeit with a surprising beginning. Despite its intimidating feel, she expressed that the text acted as a good introductory text, easing the students into the main topic.
Section one also unveiled significant surprises. Most notably, the recurring question titled “in a named enterprise” was missing. This question enabled students to choose an activity and systematically go through its constituents. The theme of enterprises was present but in a divided and specific format, thereby limiting the needed content. Interestingly, there were no experiments in this section, something that usually fills an entire page.
Lastly, question 3 (B) presented an open-ended format, providing a whole page for an answer without any outlined subdivisions, a structure she referred to as “removing the support scaffolding”.
According to her, the challenge of the exam didn’t lie in the difficulty of the content, but rather in understanding how to structure answers optimally. This made it particularly tricky for students who were not seasoned in exam techniques. Nonetheless, she highlighted that there were many questions that were “pleasant, manageable and fair”.
In her view, the maths in the paper were quite simple. In fact, she noted that the table provided in Question nine was practically a replication of what the students would have come across in their revision materials. She also pointed out that while some terminologies might seem unfamiliar, such as “agroforestry”, students who took a moment to analyse the question should find that it was essentially a familiar task.
For Section B, she found it to be predictably standard with more straightforward questions. Elements like grass, sileage, cattle farming, soil, and how young animals are fed all came up, which would appeal to a well-revised student. However, she noted with interest that there was hardly any reference to tillage, seeding and only a fleeting mention of pigs through an image.
When reflecting on their performance, many students will likely be contented with their performance, although the process of completing the paper may have been more demanding than expected. She asserted that students who prepared well and could adjust their approach to different questions would be rewarded with a collection of small yet meaningful victories.