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
- (b) (60 + 4.5π) cm² — Method: find the area of the rectangle and the area of the semicircle separately, then add them. Working: the rectangle has area 10 × 6 = 60 cm². The semicircle has radius 3 cm, so its area is half of π × 3² = half of 9π = 4.5π cm². Total area = (60 + 4.5π) cm². Answer: (60 + 4.5π) cm². (60 + 18π) cm² comes from using the diameter (6 cm) as the radius in the semicircle area formula: half of π × 6² = 18π. (60 + 9π) cm² comes from forgetting to halve the full circle's area: π × 3² = 9π. (60 + 3π) cm² comes from finding the semicircle's arc length instead of its area: half of 2 × π × 3 = 3π.
- (b) An identity, since both sides are equal for every x. — Expanding the left-hand side: 5(2x−3)=10x−15, which is exactly the same as the right-hand side for every value of x, so it is an identity, not an equation that is only true for one particular x. A candidate who treats every equals-sign statement as an equation, without checking whether it holds for all values of x, would choose the equation option. A candidate who mistakes it for a formula is assuming it relates two different letters or quantities, but only x appears — there is no second variable such as area or cost — so it is not a formula. A candidate who mistakes it for an inequality is assuming the two sides are only equal for particular values of x, but expanding shows they are identical for every value, not just some.
- (c) £22.50 — Method: find the cost of 1 kg, then multiply by the mass wanted. Working: £36 ÷ 2.4 = £15 per kilogram, and 1.5 × £15 = £22.50. Answer: £22.50. The distractors: £15 is the price of 1 kg, which is the first step and not what the question asks for; £54 comes from multiplying the £36 by 1.5 without first reducing it to a price per kilogram; £57.60 comes from using the scale factor upside down, multiplying £36 by 2.4 ÷ 1.5 = 1.6 instead of by 1.5 ÷ 2.4.
- (c) Dodecagon — Deca- means 10, so Decagon names a 10-sided polygon, two sides short of this one, so it is wrong. Hendeca- means 11, one side short of 12, so Hendecagon is also wrong. Icosa- means 20, double the number of sides given here, so Icosagon is wrong too. Dodeca- means 12, so Dodecagon correctly names this polygon.
- (b) 39 — Method: put the counts into a two-way table and fill each missing cell by subtracting along a row or down a column. Working: the number of female members is 150 − 80 = 70. The pool column holds 66 members and 35 of them are male, so the number of female pool users is 66 − 35 = 31. Subtracting along the female row, 70 − 31 = 39 female members use the gym. Answer: 39 female members use the gym. The distractors: 45 comes from subtracting along the male row instead, 80 − 35 = 45, which counts male gym users; 31 is the female pool cell, written down one step before the gym cell; 84 is 150 − 66 and counts every gym user, male and female together.
- (d) 19 kg — Method: estimate the mean of grouped data by multiplying each class's midpoint by its frequency, adding the four totals, then dividing by the total frequency. Working: the midpoints are 5, 15, 25 and 35 kg. The weighted totals are 11 × 5 = 55, 5 × 15 = 75, 5 × 25 = 125 and 9 × 35 = 315, which add to 570. Dividing by the 30 dogs gives an estimate of 570 ÷ 30 = 19 kg. Giving 5 kg reads off the midpoint of the modal class, 0 < m ≤ 10, the class with the most dogs — but the class with the most dogs is not where the mean falls, and neither is a substitute for actually calculating it. Giving 20 kg averages the four midpoints, (5 + 15 + 25 + 35) ÷ 4, treating every class as equally likely and ignoring that far more dogs are in the lightest and heaviest classes than in the middle two. Giving 570 kg stops after finding the correct weighted total and forgets the final division by the 30 dogs. Always weight each midpoint by its own frequency, and always finish by dividing by the total frequency, not the number of classes.
- (d) 60 — Method: round each number to 1 significant figure and multiply; the estimate then shows whether the calculator answer is sensible. Working: 3.1 rounds to 3 and 19.6 rounds to 20, so the estimate is 3 × 20 = 60. Answer: 60. Hannah's 6.076 is about ten times too small, which is what happens when 19.6 is keyed in as 1.96. The distractors: 62 comes from rounding 19.6 only and leaving 3.1 as it stands, giving 3.1 × 20 = 62; 6 comes from trusting the calculator display rather than checking it against an estimate; 600 comes from rounding 19.6 to 200 instead of to 20, a place-value slip, giving 3 × 200 = 600.
- (c) S = P + C — Method: S has C subtracted from it, so undo that subtraction by adding C to both sides. Working: P + C = S − C + C, so P + C = S, which is written S = P + C. Answer: S = P + C. S = P − C repeats the formula's own operation instead of its inverse. S = C − P subtracts the wrong way round. S = PC multiplies the two given quantities instead of adding them.
- (d) Yes, because 4 × 9 = 6 × 6 — Method: two ratios are equal when their cross-products are equal, so multiply the first part of each ratio by the second part of the other. Working: 4 × 9 = 36 and 6 × 6 = 36; the two products match, so the ratios are equal, and simplifying both to 2:3 shows the same thing. Answer: yes, because 4 × 9 = 6 × 6. The distractors: the reason that the number 6 appears in both ratios reaches the right verdict from a surface match, since a figure shared by two ratios says nothing about equivalence — 4:6 and 6:5 share a 6 and are not equal; the reason built on 9 − 6 and 6 − 4 compares the differences inside each ratio, 3 against 2, which is additive thinking and ends at a verdict of no; the reason built on 4 × 6 and 6 × 9 multiplies the two parts of each ratio together instead of across the pair, giving 24 against 54 and again a verdict of no.
- (c) 21 cm — Method: the perimeter is the distance all the way round the edge, so every side is counted once and the three side lengths are added. Working: the two equal sides give 8 + 8 = 16 cm, and the third side adds 5 cm to that. Answer: the perimeter is 21 cm. The distractors: 16 cm comes from adding the two 8 cm sides and handing that total in before the third side has been included; 13 cm comes from adding one 8 cm side to the 5 cm side, as though the badge carried only the two different lengths printed on it rather than three sides; 24 cm comes from taking all three sides to be 8 cm and working out 3 × 8, which would be the perimeter only if the badge were equilateral.
- (b) 3/10 — Method: on a tree diagram, follow the path that matches the description and multiply the probabilities written along it; with nothing put back, the second set of branches is worked out from the counters that are left. Working: 3 of the 5 counters are yellow, so the first branch of the path is 3/5. A yellow counter has been kept out, so 4 counters remain and both green counters are still there, making the second branch 2/4. Multiplying along the path gives 6/20. Answer: the probability is 3/10. The distractors: 6/25 comes from using 2/5 on the second branch, which is the tree for a counter that is put back; 3/20 comes from taking one off the green count as well as off the total, using 1/4 on the second branch; 3/5 comes from reading the first branch only and never multiplying along the path.
- (c) £80 — Method: a unit fraction acts as an operator, so finding 1/9 of a price means dividing that price by 9. Working: £720 ÷ 9 = £80. Answer: £80. The distractors: £6480 comes from multiplying by the denominator instead of dividing by it, giving £720 × 9 = £6480; £640 comes from working out what is left of the £720 once the case is paid for, £720 − £80, instead of the cost of the case itself; £72 comes from dividing by 10 instead of 9, treating one ninth as one tenth.
- (a) y = (x − 2)² + 3 — Since (x − 2)² is never negative, (x − 2)² + 3 is always at least 3, so y can never equal 0 and the graph never crosses the x-axis. The other three graphs are all given in a factorised or difference-of-squares form that shows two real roots: y = (x − 2)(x + 3) crosses at x = 2 and x = −3; y = x² − 9 = (x − 3)(x + 3) crosses at x = 3 and x = −3; y = (x + 4)(x − 1) crosses at x = −4 and x = 1.
- (d) 500 ml — Varnish covers a surface, so the amount needed scales with the area scale factor, which is the square of the length scale factor. The length scale factor is 50 ÷ 20 = 2.5, so the area scale factor is 2.5 × 2.5 = 6.25. The varnish needed for the larger statue is 80 × 6.25 = 500 ml. Using 2.5 on its own would scale a length, not a surface.
- (a) 0.1 m — Method: the sloping surface is the hypotenuse and the vertical rise is the side opposite the 30° angle, so rise = 4.8 × sin 30°; then compare that rise with the limit. Working: the exact value of sin 30° is one half, so the rise = 4.8 × 1/2 = 2.4 m. The limit is 2.5 m, and 2.5 − 2.4 = 0.1. Answer: the ramp is 0.1 m below the limit. Working out the rise and stopping there gives 2.4 m, which answers a question that was not asked. Dividing by sin 30° instead of multiplying gives 4.8 ÷ 0.5 = 9.6 and then 9.6 − 2.5 = 7.1 m. Treating sine as proportional to the angle, so that sin 30° is a third of sin 90°, gives 4.8 ÷ 3 = 1.6 and then 2.5 − 1.6 = 0.9 m.
- (a) 4,000 nanometres — Method: the number of nanometres is the diameter divided by the length of one nanometre, and dividing powers of ten means subtracting the indices. Working: −6 − (−9) = 3, so 10⁻⁶ ÷ 10⁻⁹ = 10³, and the diameter is 4 × 10³ nanometres. Answer: 4,000 nanometres. The distractors: 400 nanometres comes from taking the difference between the indices as 2 instead of 3; 4 nanometres comes from changing the name of the unit without converting, leaving the coefficient untouched; 0.004 nanometres comes from dividing by 10³ instead of multiplying by it, as though a nanometre were the larger of the two units.
- (a) x/5 — Read the decimal as a fraction first: 0.2 is 2 tenths, so the coefficient is 2/10. Dividing the numerator and the denominator by 2 cancels this to 1/5, and a coefficient of 1/5 in front of a letter is written x/5. Reading the digit 2 as 'a half' gives x/2; reading 0.2 as 1/20 gives x/20; dividing only the denominator by 2 leaves 2/5, which is the coefficient 0.4 and twice as large as it should be.
- (c) 2:5 — Divide both numbers by their highest common factor, 4: 8 ÷ 4 = 2 and 20 ÷ 4 = 5, giving the ratio 2:5. Choosing 5:2 comes from writing the ratio the wrong way round, as cupcakes to muffins. Choosing 2:3 comes from using the difference between the two amounts (20 − 8 = 12) as the second part of the ratio instead of the number of cupcakes, then simplifying 8:12 by dividing by 4. Choosing 2:7 comes from comparing the muffins with the total number of items on the tray (8 out of 28) instead of comparing them with the cupcakes.
- (a) 125 — Method: a power tells you how many times to multiply the base by itself. Working: 5³ = 5 × 5 × 5 = 125. Answer: 125. (15 comes from multiplying the base by the power, 5 × 3, instead of using repeated multiplication. 53 comes from reading the power as if it were a two-digit number rather than an operation. 25 comes from using one fewer 5, effectively working out 5² instead of 5³.)
- (b) 32p — £3.20 is 320p, and 1 kg is 1000 g, which is 10 lots of 100 g. Divide the price in pence by 10: 320 ÷ 10 = 32p per 100 g. Dividing 320 by 100 instead of 10 gives 3.2p, using the wrong number of hundred-grams in a kilogram. Multiplying 320 by 10 instead of dividing gives 3200p. Forgetting to convert pounds to pence and dividing 3.20 by 10 gives 0.32, which is still in pounds rather than pence. Rice costs 32p per 100 g.
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.