Sample paper · GCSE Foundation · grades 1–5
GCSE Foundation sample Paper 1 (non-calculator)
The real Paper 1 is 1.5 hour 30 minutes and 80 marks, non-calculator, and all three papers carry equal weight. This sample is 20 original questions in the same content proportions as the Foundation qualification — number 25%, algebra 20%, ratio, proportion and rates of change 25%, geometry and measures 15%, probability 7.5%, statistics 7.5% — with no calculator-only items. AO1 / AO2 / AO3 at this tier: 50% / 25% / 25%.
Non-calculatorGCSE Foundation
Answer key: GCSE Foundation sample Paper 1 (non-calculator)
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (a) 18 — Method: round each number to the nearest whole number, then square each rounded number and add the results. Working: 2.9 rounds to 3 and 3.1 rounds to 3, so the estimate is 3² + 3² = 9 + 9. Answer: 18. The distractors: 36 comes from adding before squaring, working out (3 + 3)² instead of 3² + 3²; 12 comes from doubling each rounded number instead of squaring it, adding 6 and 6; 6 comes from adding the two rounded numbers and forgetting to square them at all.
- (a) 2 — The common ratio is 54 ÷ 162 = 1/3, confirmed by 18 ÷ 54 = 1/3 and 6 ÷ 18 = 1/3. The next term is 6 × 1/3 = 2. A candidate who wrongly treats the sequence as arithmetic and subtracts the last difference (18 − 6 = 12) again gets 6 − 12 = −6. A candidate who multiplies by 3 instead of dividing, effectively reversing the sequence, gets 18. A candidate who guesses the ratio is 1/2 gets 6 × 1/2 = 3.
- (b) 1:200000 — '1 cm represents 2 km' means 1 cm on the map is 2 km in real life. Convert 2 km into centimetres, the same unit as the 1: 2 km = 2000 m = 200 000 cm. So the scale is 1 : 200 000. Converting only as far as metres gives 1 : 2000 — the conversion to centimetres was never finished. Losing a zero in the conversion gives 1 : 20 000, ten times too small. Writing 1 : 2 without converting units at all compares 1 cm to 2 km directly, which is not a valid ratio since the units do not match.
- (b) 62 — Method: co-interior (allied) angles between parallel lines add up to 180°. Working: 180 − 118 = 62. Answer: 62°. A candidate who treats co-interior angles as equal, like corresponding angles, gives 118. A candidate who uses 360° instead of 180°, working out 360 − 118, gets 242. A candidate who subtracts as if the angles were complementary, working out 118 − 90, gets 28.
- (c) 0.37 — Method: pool the two runs into one combined set of results, then find the relative frequency of red across all of the spins together. Working: total reds = 16 + 21 = 37. Total spins = 40 + 60 = 100. Relative frequency = 37 ÷ 100 = 0.37. Answer: 0.37. Watch out: writing down 0.40 uses only the first run, 16 ÷ 40, and throws away the extra evidence from the second 60 spins. Writing down 0.35 uses only the second run, 21 ÷ 60, and throws away the first run instead. And writing down 0.375 averages the two runs' separate rates, (0.40 + 0.35) ÷ 2, which treats a run of 40 spins and a run of 60 spins as equally weighted, when pooling the actual counts gives the larger run its fair share of influence.
- (a) 23 minutes — Method: the equation of a line of best fit converts a value of x into a predicted value of y, so substitute the known number of pages for x and evaluate. Working: x is the number of pages, so put x = 10 into y = 2x + 3. Multiplication is carried out before addition, so 2 × 10 + 3 = 23. Answer: 23 minutes, and it is a prediction of the trend rather than a promise about any one chapter. The distractors: 20 minutes comes from working out 2 × 10 and stopping there, leaving out the 3 that the line adds; 26 minutes comes from reading the equation as y = 2(x + 3), adding first and then doubling, so 2 × 13 = 26; 13 minutes comes from adding 10 and 3 and never using the gradient at all, which treats the 2 as though it were not there.
- (c) 2000 mm — Put both lengths into the same unit first. There are 1000 mm in a metre, so the ribbon is 2.4 × 1000 = 2400 mm, and there are 10 mm in a centimetre, so the piece cut off is 40 × 10 = 400 mm. The length left is 2400 − 400 = 2000 mm. 2360 mm subtracts 40 mm instead of 400 mm, 200 mm works in centimetres and then labels the result as millimetres, and 2800 mm adds the piece that was cut off instead of subtracting it.
- (a) x + 14 — Expand each bracket separately: 3(x + 4) = 3x + 12, and −2(x − 1) = −2x + 2 (multiply −2 by both x and −1). Combine: 3x + 12 − 2x + 2 = x + 14. Writing x + 10 comes from taking −2(x − 1) as −2x − 2, not flipping the sign of the −1 inside the bracket. Writing 5x + 10 comes from treating the second bracket as +2(x − 1) instead of subtracting it, so the x-terms are added rather than subtracted. Writing x + 13 comes from only multiplying the 2 by the x, and carrying the −1 across unmultiplied.
- (a) 4 hours — This is inverse proportion: more pumps take less time. Multiply the original numbers to find the total pump-hours needed: 2 × 10 = 20 pump-hours. Divide by the new number of pumps: 20 ÷ 5 = 4 hours. Working out 10 × 5 ÷ 2 = 25 hours treats it as direct proportion, as if more pumps needed more time. Stopping at 20 gives the total pump-hours, not the number of hours. Working out 10 − (5 − 2) = 7 hours subtracts the extra number of pumps straight from the number of hours, treating pumps and hours as the same kind of quantity. 5 pumps take 4 hours.
- (a) 31.4 — Method: first find the circumference of one turn using π × diameter, then multiply by the number of turns. Working: circumference = 3.14 × 0.5 = 1.57 m; total distance = 1.57 × 20 = 31.4 m. A student who answers 15.7 has mistakenly halved the diameter again before multiplying, using 0.25 m instead of 0.5 m. A student who answers 3.14 has simply written down π itself, without completing the circumference or multiplying by the number of turns. A student who answers 62.8 has mistakenly doubled the diameter to 1 m before multiplying, treating the given length as a radius. Answer: 31.4 m.
- (b) (48/52) × (47/51) — Method: for two deals one after the other with nothing put back, multiply the probability of the first by the probability of the second worked out from the cards that are left. Working: 52 − 4 = 48 cards are not aces, so the first card is not an ace with probability 48/52. One card has now gone and it was not an ace, so 51 cards remain and 47 of them are not aces, giving 47/51. Answer: the probability is (48/52) × (47/51). The distractors: (48/52) × (48/52) comes from leaving the pack at 52 cards for the second deal, which is only true if the first card is replaced; (4/52) × (3/51) comes from working out the probability that both cards ARE aces instead of neither; (4/52) × (4/51) comes from the same misreading with the ace count left at 4 while the total is reduced, adjusting only half of the second fraction.
- (d) 0.3 — Converting the fractions to decimals, 1/4 = 0.25 and 2/5 = 0.4, so any decimal between 0.25 and 0.4 is a valid answer, and 0.3 fits. Confusing 1/4 with 1/5 and converting it as 0.2 instead of 0.25 gives a value below the true lower bound. Confusing 2/5 with 1/2 and converting it as 0.5 instead of 0.4 gives a value above the true upper bound. Converting the fractions correctly but choosing a decimal above the true upper bound of 0.4 instead of between the two values gives 0.45.
- (a) 5 — The symbol ≤ means n can equal 5 or any number less than 5, so 5 is included and is the largest integer value. A candidate who treats the inequality as strict, as if it were n < 5, answers 4. A candidate who confuses ≤ with ≥ and looks for a value just above the boundary answers 6. A candidate who makes a sign error and reads the inequality as n ≤ −5 answers −5.
- (d) 7/4 — A part-to-part ratio a : b gives the fraction a/b when the first quantity is written as a fraction of the second, so 7 : 4 gives 7/4. Writing 4/7 puts the parts the wrong way round — blue as a fraction of red, not red as a fraction of blue. Writing 7/11 uses the total number of counters, 7 + 4 = 11, as the denominator instead of the number of blue counters — that is red as a fraction of the whole bag, not red as a fraction of blue. Writing 11/7 has both the wrong denominator and the parts inverted.
- (a) Similar, but AAA alone does not prove congruence — Three equal corresponding angles (AAA) show that the two triangles are similar — the same shape — but says nothing about their size, so it does not prove congruence. They could be congruent, or one could simply be an enlargement of the other; without matching side lengths, congruence is not established, so 'congruent because AAA proves congruence' is wrong. Equal angles do not force equal sides — a triangle can be enlarged to any size while keeping the same angles, so that option is also wrong. Something CAN be said here — that the triangles are similar — so 'no relationship can be determined' is wrong too.
- (a) x⁶ — Method: work through the powers in order — multiplying powers of the same base means adding indices, and dividing powers of the same base means subtracting indices. Working: first, x⁵ × x³ = x⁸ (adding 5 and 3); then x⁸ ÷ x² = x⁶ (subtracting 2 from 8). x⁴ comes from swapping the two rules — subtracting for the multiplication, 5 − 3 = 2, and then adding for the division, 2 + 2 = 4. x¹⁰ comes from adding all three indices, 5 + 3 + 2 = 10, treating the division the same as a multiplication. 6x comes from correctly reaching a total index of 6 but then writing it as a coefficient of x instead of as its power. Answer: x⁶.
- (a) Tuesday, by 2 km/h — Monday's speed is 15 ÷ 2.5 = 6 km/h and Tuesday's speed is 12 ÷ 1.5 = 8 km/h, so Tuesday was faster, by 8 − 6 = 2 km/h. A candidate who works out the correct speeds but mislabels which day is faster gets Monday, by 2 km/h. A candidate who divides 15 ÷ 2.5 incorrectly as 5 instead of 6 gets a difference of 8 − 5 = 3 km/h, still crediting Tuesday. A candidate who forgets to find Monday's speed and gives Tuesday's speed itself as the difference states Tuesday, by 8 km/h.
- (a) 180 g flour and 120 g butter — The ratio 3 : 2 means flour and butter must scale by the same factor. Scaling both parts by 60 gives 180 g flour and 120 g butter, since 3 × 60 = 180 and 2 × 60 = 120, which is the correct pair. Swapping the amounts gives 120 g flour and 180 g butter, which is in the ratio 2 : 3 — butter to flour, not flour to butter. Scaling the flour by 60 but the butter by only 45 gives 180 g flour and 90 g butter, using two different scale factors on the two parts of the ratio. Scaling the flour by 60 but the butter by 70 gives 180 g flour and 140 g butter, the opposite inconsistency.
- (a) 24 — Method: rearrange the relationship so that the lowest common multiple stands alone; it is the product of the two numbers divided by their highest common factor. Working: 48 = 2 × the lowest common multiple, so the lowest common multiple is 48 ÷ 2 = 24. Checking, 24 is in the 6 times table and in the 8 times table. Answer: 24. The distractors: 48 comes from giving the product of the two numbers and never dividing by the highest common factor; 96 comes from multiplying by the highest common factor instead of dividing by it; 12 comes from dividing by the highest common factor twice, once for each of the two numbers.
- (d) 7/5 — The number of unbroken crayons is 60 − 25 = 35. The comparison is with the broken crayons, so the broken crayons are the denominator: 35/25. Both parts divide by 5: 35 ÷ 5 = 7 and 25 ÷ 5 = 5. The fraction is 7/5, which is greater than 1 because there are more unbroken crayons than broken ones.
How the 20 questions are shared out
- Number — 5 questions (25% of the qualification)
- Algebra — 4 questions (20% of the qualification)
- Ratio, proportion and rates of change — 5 questions (25% of the qualification)
- Geometry and measures — 3 questions (15% of the qualification)
- Probability — 2 questions (7.5% of the qualification)
- Statistics — 1 question (7.5% of the qualification)
Where an area has fewer printable questions than its share, the shortfall is filled from the other areas. These are original questions, not past papers.