Reaction to 2026 Leaving Certificate Applied Mathematics (Higher Level) by Oliver Murphy, Applied Mathematics teacher at The Institute of Education.
- Clear questions and good diagrams with the occasional tricky moment but nothing from the beyond.
- Heavy emphasis on difference and differential equations
Opening the paper to Q1, students will have been pleased to start on a very regular note. They will be well-versed on the different algorithms as they have appeared in various combinations every year. The second question on a non-homogeneous difference equation was very clear and doable. Q2 began with a tricky task that required some cleverness and mental dexterity as there was no sorting algorithm on which to rely. Students will have had to use their own procedural insights to work this out effectively. This was balanced with a much more familiar second stage to the question. Q3 was the first appearance on the new course of a classic question: a jolt. This was a nicely scaffolded collection of questions that will have helped students progress through the version stages of the scenario. Q4 on Collisions was very fair as even though the second part on oblique angles in snooker balls might have challenged some, it was nothing out of the ordinary for those who were prepared. Q5 on Circular Motion started a very nice question before increasing the difficulty in the second part with the introduction of gravity into vertical motion. This is a classic and while it poses more difficulty than regular circular motion on the horizontal, it does so in a very standard manner.
Moving into the latter half of the questions, we find an abundance of difference and differential equations. These appear every year but never with such emphasis. Q6 opened with a very nice differential equational before introducing an interesting scenario: an object dropped from a hot air balloon. The substance of this question was nice but students will have need to catch that be balloon is ascending when the object is dropped, so it is already in motion. Q7 was a difference equation, with its inhomogeneous equation being akin to Q1. Q8 on Acceleration started with a very nice question that ultimately was based in material from the log tables before moving into yet another difference equation.
Q9 on Integration by Parts might have become daunting for some students, not least because Part A contains an error in that it involves the natural log of zero, which doesn’t exist. The 2nd part of the question on vectors gave the students the answer to aim for but rather than assuring them, it may have been a perturbance. This question involved a large quantity of numbers running around the page and so could easily become ungainly. Some students might have queried the question as the quantity of numbers increased, the space on the page decreased, and the final target answer seemed distant. Hopefully students remembered that they just needed to keep moving and not get distracted. In pleasant contrast, the final question on Scheduling worked out nicely and neatly.
Overall, students should be happy with this paper. The questions were very clear and supported by good diagrams. Some mental dexterity was necessary, but this was applied in a very fair manner.