Sample paper · GCSE Foundation · grades 1–5
GCSE Foundation sample Paper 2 (calculator)
The real Paper 2 is 1.5 hour 30 minutes and 80 marks, 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 a calculator allowed. AO1 / AO2 / AO3 at this tier: 50% / 25% / 25%.
CalculatorGCSE Foundation
Answer key: GCSE Foundation sample Paper 2 (calculator)
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 8,000,000,000 — Method: a power of ten is 1 followed by that many zeros, so 8 × 10⁹ is 8 multiplied by 1 followed by nine zeros. Working: 10⁹ = 1,000,000,000, and 8 × 1,000,000,000 puts an 8 in front of those nine zeros. Answer: 8,000,000,000. The distractors: 800,000,000 comes from writing nine digits altogether instead of nine zeros after the 8; 720 comes from reading 10⁹ as 10 × 9 = 90 and then working out 8 × 90; 0.000000008 comes from treating the index as negative and carrying the decimal point nine places to the left.
- (b) (−5, −2) — A rotation of 180° about the origin reverses the sign of both coordinates, so Q = (−5, −2). A candidate who reverses the sign of only the y-coordinate, as if reflecting in the x-axis, gets (5, −2). A candidate who reverses the sign of only the x-coordinate, as if reflecting in the y-axis, gets (−5, 2). A candidate who swaps the coordinates instead of reversing their signs gets (2, 5).
- (b) Provider Y — £21.00 against Provider X's £23.00 — Provider X's gradient is (35 − 15) ÷ 100 = 0.2, so cost = 15 + 0.2 × 40 = 15 + 8 = £23.00. Provider Y's gradient is (45 − 5) ÷ 100 = 0.4, so cost = 5 + 0.4 × 40 = 5 + 16 = £21.00. £21.00 is less than £23.00, so Provider Y is cheaper: 'Provider Y — £21.00 against Provider X's £23.00'. Getting both costs right but naming Provider X as cheaper compares the two numbers the wrong way round — £23.00 is more than £21.00, not less. Comparing only the fixed fees, £15.00 and £5.00, ignores the cost of the 40 gigabytes actually used. Reading off the costs at 100 gigabytes, £35.00 and £45.00, directly from the graph answers a different usage from the 40 gigabytes the question asks about.
- (a) Parallel, since both gradients are 2 — Gradient of line 1 = (5 − 1) ÷ (2 − 0) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Gradient of line 2 = (6 − 2) ÷ (5 − 3) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. The two gradients are equal, so the lines are parallel. "Not parallel, since the gradients are 2 and 4" uses 4 for line 2, which comes from dividing the change in y, 4, by 1 rather than by the change in x, 5 − 3 = 2. "Not parallel, since the two lines cross the y-axis at different points" confuses parallel lines with the same line repeated — parallel lines are distinct lines, and where a line crosses the y-axis has no effect on its gradient. "Parallel, since both lines pass through positive coordinates" reaches the right conclusion for the wrong reason: lines are parallel because their gradients are equal, not because the coordinates given happen to be positive.
- (c) 4/5 — Add the counts of everyone who owns a cat, a dog, or both: 12 + 15 + 5 = 32 out of 40 people, which simplifies to 4/5. Leaving out the 5 people who own both, and adding only the two only-groups, gives 27/40. Using the 8 people who own neither, instead of everyone who owns at least one pet, gives 8/40 = 1/5. Counting the 5 people who own both twice, once alongside each only-group as well as on their own, gives 12 + 15 + 5 + 5 = 37 out of 40, or 37/40.
- (c) 40 minutes — Method: for grouped data, estimate the mean using the midpoint of each class — multiply each midpoint by its frequency, add the results, then divide by the total frequency. Working: the midpoints are 10, 30, 50 and 70 minutes. 10 × 5 = 50. 30 × 10 = 300. 50 × 10 = 500. 70 × 5 = 350. Σfx = 50 + 300 + 500 + 350 = 1200. Σf = 5 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 30. Estimated mean = 1200 ÷ 30 = 40 minutes. Using the upper boundary of each class instead of the midpoint — 20 × 5 = 100, 40 × 10 = 400, 60 × 10 = 600, 80 × 5 = 400 — gives a total of 1500 and an estimate of 1500 ÷ 30 = 50 minutes, too high because a boundary is not the middle of the class. Averaging the frequencies themselves, 5, 10, 10 and 5, ignores the times altogether and gives 7.5. Stopping after Σfx = 1200 without dividing by the total frequency gives a number far too large to be a time in minutes. Always find the midpoint of each class before multiplying by the frequency, and always divide by Σf at the end.
- (b) 10 — First find 1/4 of 80, which is 20, then find 1/2 of that: 20 ÷ 2 = 10. Adding the two fractions together instead of applying them one after the other, 1/2 + 1/4 = 3/4, and finding 3/4 of 80 gives 60. Finding 1/4 of 80 = 20 correctly but stopping before applying the second fraction leaves 20 as the final answer. Finding 1/2 of 80 = 40 first but forgetting to then find 1/4 of that leaves 40 as the final answer.
- (b) (−5, −2) — Both points have the same y-coordinate, so the midpoint lies on the same horizontal line: y = −2. The x-coordinate is the average of −9 and −1: (−9 + (−1)) ÷ 2 = −10 ÷ 2 = −5, giving (−5, −2). (−10, −2) comes from adding the x-coordinates but forgetting to divide by 2. (−4, −2) comes from a sign error on the second x-coordinate, treating −1 as +1: (−9 + 1) ÷ 2 = −4. (5, −2) comes from dropping the negative sign on the x-coordinate.
- (c) They are in direct proportion, because y ÷ x = 2.5 for both pairs. — Testing direct proportion means checking that y ÷ x is the same for every pair: 15 ÷ 6 = 2.5 and 25 ÷ 10 = 2.5, so the quantities are in direct proportion. Saying they are not in proportion because x + y differs uses addition, which is not the correct test for proportion. Saying they are not in proportion because y − x differs also uses the wrong test — subtraction, not division. Saying they are in proportion because x × y is 90 and 250 uses multiplication, which is the test for inverse proportion, and the two products are not even equal to each other, so this option also contradicts itself.
- (a) opposite angles of a parallelogram are equal — P and R are opposite vertices of the parallelogram, and opposite angles of a parallelogram are always equal, which is why angle R equals angle P, 65°. Co-interior angles adding up to 180° is the correct fact for angle Q or angle S, the angles adjacent to P along a side, not for the opposite angle R. Alternate angles are equal is a fact about a transversal crossing two parallel lines, which explains other angle relationships in the parallelogram, not the one between opposite angles P and R directly. Angles on a straight line adding up to 180° applies to two angles that sit together on one straight line, which P and R do not.
- (a) 5/36 — Method: list every result of the two dice as an ordered pair, first score then second score, count the pairs that give the total asked for and divide by how many pairs the list holds. Working: each dice can show 6 scores, so there are 6 × 6 = 36 equally likely ordered pairs. The pairs whose scores add to 6 are (1, 5), (2, 4), (3, 3), (4, 2) and (5, 1), which is 5 pairs out of the 36. Answer: the probability is 5/36. The distractors: 4/36 comes from listing (1, 5), (5, 1), (2, 4) and (4, 2) and leaving (3, 3) out, because a double does not look like a pair that can be turned round; 5/12 comes from finding the 5 pairs but taking the number of possible results to be 6 + 6 = 12, adding the two dice instead of multiplying them; 1/11 comes from treating the eleven possible totals 2, 3, 4 and so on up to 12 as equally likely, so that a total of 6 is one result out of eleven.
- (b) 88.8 — Multiply as whole numbers first, ignoring the decimal point: 37 × 24. Split it as 37 × 20 = 740 and 37 × 4 = 148, so 37 × 24 = 740 + 148 = 888. 3.7 has 1 decimal place and 24 has none, so the answer needs 1 decimal place: 88.8. Counting the 2 digits in "3.7" as though that were the number of decimal places gives 8.88 instead of 1 decimal place. Leaving the decimal point out altogether gives 888. Misreading 37 × 4 as 138 rather than 148 gives a running total of 878, placed with 1 decimal place as 87.8. So 3.7 × 24 = 88.8.
- (d) 5 — Method: rearrange the formula to make m the subject, then substitute F = 15.50. Working: F = 3 + 2.5m, so subtracting 3 from both sides gives F − 3 = 2.5m, then dividing by 2.5 gives m = (F − 3) / 2.5. Substituting F = 15.50: m = (15.50 − 3) / 2.5 = 12.50 / 2.5 = 5. The value 6.2 comes from dividing 15.50 by 2.5 without subtracting the fixed £3 first. The value 3.2 comes from dividing first and subtracting afterwards, in the wrong order: (15.50 / 2.5) − 3 = 3.2. The value 7.4 comes from adding £3 instead of subtracting it before dividing: (15.50 + 3) / 2.5 = 7.4.
- (d) £30.00 — The gradient is (130 − 70) ÷ (5 − 2) = 60 ÷ 3 = £20 per hour. Using the point (2, 70): the cost for 2 hours at £20 per hour is 20 × 2 = £40, so the call-out fee is 70 − 40 = £30. Taking the C-value of the first point as the fee without subtracting the hourly cost gives £70.00 — but that point already includes 2 hours of the hourly rate. Using the gradient itself as the fee, £20.00, confuses the rate per hour with the fixed charge. Subtracting 20 × 3 = 60 instead of 20 × 2 = 40 (using the wrong h-value) gives 70 − 60 = £10.00.
- (b) Neither, because both coordinates differ — A line segment is horizontal only when both points share the same y-coordinate, and vertical only when both points share the same x-coordinate. Here A has x-coordinate −4 and B has x-coordinate 2, which differ, and A has y-coordinate 3 and B has y-coordinate 6, which also differ, so the segment is neither horizontal nor vertical. Every point has a y-coordinate and an x-coordinate, so simply having one is not a reason for the line to be horizontal or vertical — both of those wrong reasons ignore that the coordinates must match, not just exist. The x-coordinates do increase from A to B, but an increasing x-coordinate on its own describes a slope, not a horizontal line.
- (c) An under-estimate, by 8 — Method: work out the exact product, then compare it with the estimate; an estimate that is smaller than the exact value is an under-estimate, and the difference between them is the size of the error. Working: 48 × 21 = 48 × 20 + 48 = 960 + 48 = 1,008, and 1,008 − 1,000 = 8, so the estimate falls short. Answer: an under-estimate, by 8. The distractors: an over-estimate by 8 has the size of the error right but the direction wrong, and comes from assuming that rounding 48 up to 50 must push the estimate above the exact value, without allowing for 21 being rounded down; an over-estimate by 19 comes from working out 48 × 21 as 48 × 20 + 21 = 981, adding a 21 where another 48 belongs; the claim that the estimate is exactly right comes from arguing that one number was rounded up and the other down, so the two changes must cancel.
- (d) h = 2A / (a + b) — Method: undo the multiplication by 1/2 by multiplying both sides by 2, then undo the multiplication by (a + b) by dividing both sides by it. Working: A = (a + b)h / 2, so multiplying both sides by 2 gives 2A = (a + b)h, then dividing both sides by (a + b) gives h = 2A / (a + b). The value h = A / (a + b) comes from forgetting to multiply by 2 to clear the 1/2 first. The value h = 2A / a + b comes from dividing only by a and leaving b outside the fraction, instead of dividing by the whole bracket (a + b). The value h = (a + b) / (2A) comes from inverting the fraction.
- (c) £310 — Gradient = (210 − 130) ÷ (7 − 3) = 80 ÷ 4 = 20, so the monthly rate is £20. Using C = 20m + c with the point (3, 130): 130 = 60 + c, so c = 70. After 12 months: C = 20 × 12 + 70 = 240 + 70 = £310.
- (a) 7.2 × 10⁻⁴ — 0.00072 = 7.2 × 10⁻⁴, moving the decimal point 4 places to the right to reach 7.2, so the exponent is negative. Writing 7.2 × 10⁴ uses a positive exponent, which would give a number far larger than 1, not a small decimal. Writing 7.2 × 10⁻⁵ moves the point one place too many. Writing 0.72 × 10⁻³ leaves the coefficient below 1, which standard form does not allow.
- (d) 4.50 m² — 1 m² = 100 cm × 100 cm = 10,000 cm², so to convert cm² to m² you divide by 10,000: 45,000 ÷ 10,000 = 4.50 m². Dividing by 100 instead of 10,000, treating area like a length conversion, gives 45,000 ÷ 100 = 450.00 m², a common mistake since 1 m = 100 cm. Multiplying by 100 instead of dividing gives 45,000 × 100 = 4500000.00 m², using the conversion factor the wrong way round entirely. Dividing by 100,000 instead of 10,000 gives 0.45 m², an extra factor of 10 too far.
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.