Reaction to 2026 Leaving Certificate Design and Communication Graphics (Higher Level) by Rob Kiernan, DCG teacher at The Institute of Education.
- Very manageable paper with a few curveballs that will push the students think conceptually.
- Some students might have kneejerk reactions to diagrams, but if they kept their heads screwed on they will have found very approachable questions.
Opening the paper to Section A: Core, students will have started on a confident note with QA-1. True length and true angle should be in their arsenals since the beginning of 5th year, so this will be a nice familiar entry into the paper. Similarly, QA-3 on Surface Development was approachable in its clear implementation of fundamental ideas. It was nice to see a resurgence of Solids in Contact in QA-2, which is an area that really suits those that gravitate towards visualisation tasks or fields like architecture. The interaction of the of the cylinder and sphere was unorthodox and so students might have had a negative initial reaction. But the subject requires students to push their skills and solve problems, so this question reflected that value perfectly. Something similar happens in QA-4 as the diagram shows an axis being off centre, not the usual perfectly vertical or horizontal from past papers. The topic itself was nice as students tend to favour the parabola in Conic Sections thanks to the regular eccentricity ratio of 1-to-1. Those who weren’t startled by novelty will have found a really nice question and leave the section content with their performance.
In Section B, the question setter as made sure to make every question accessible while also including a twist in the final stretch to get the students thinking. After its absence on last year’s paper, the return of Axonometric axes in QB-1 will have been anticipated by many. Those who prepared this topic will find most of the question drawn from standard stuff. Looking at QB-2, many will have had a kneejerk reaction to the large number of curves in this Orthographic task and instantly decided to expend their energies elsewhere. In that case the Coordinate Geometry of QB-3 was a great option as it was built on the bread and butter of the course. Using a structure in Dublin Port as a launching point, the core concepts like dihedral angles and angles of inclination will be clear to most.
Section C: Applied Graphics, contains five topics and which one a student attempts is often down to their teacher and the range of subjects available in their school. For those attempting C-1 on Geologic Geometry, the question was standard and fair. The same goes for C-4 on Dynamic Mechanisms (popular with those who do Engineering) and C-5
on Assemblies. For the latter those who relish precision and procedure will have been pleased, but this is a marmite question for many: love it or hate it. The marking scheme is very strict in enforcing the standards, conventions and tolerances, so rigour is essential. For C-2: Structural Forms, the hyperbolic paraboloid was highly anticipated, and everyone should be very happy with these questions. It was lovely and didn’t include any additional complex geometry. C-3 on Surface Geometry was similar, but students will have needed to keep their heads screwed on at the sight of the curve and to make sense of “R900”. But those who kept cool will have been really happy with this question.
Overall, the paper examined the real skills of DCG. Not just the numbers and lines but the core concepts at the heart of the subjects. Those who could conceptualise the objects, think through the problem as well as follow the procedures should be very happy with that exam.