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
- (b) 4 m — Blue fabric is 3 parts and this equals 1.5 m, so one part is 1.5 ÷ 3 = 0.5 m. Yellow fabric is 5 parts, so it is 5 × 0.5 = 2.5 m. The total length is 1.5 + 2.5 = 4 m. 2.5 m is the length of yellow fabric only, without adding the blue fabric back in. 1.5 m is just the given length of blue fabric, with the yellow fabric never worked out. 2.4 m comes from swapping the ratio, treating blue as 5 parts and yellow as 3 parts, giving one part as 1.5 ÷ 5 = 0.3 m and yellow as 3 × 0.3 = 0.9 m, then adding 1.5 + 0.9 = 2.4.
- (c) 21.6 — m² = (−2.4)² = 5.76, since a negative number squared is positive, so 5m² = 28.8. Then 3m = 3 × (−2.4) = −7.2. Total: 28.8 + (−7.2) = 21.6. −36 comes from taking m² as negative, 5 × (−5.76) − 7.2 = −36, forgetting that squaring removes the negative sign. 36 comes from ignoring the negative sign on m altogether and using m = 2.4 throughout. 29.4 comes from treating 3m as 3 + m instead of 3 × m, giving 28.8 + (3 + (−2.4)).
- (d) £24 — Add the parts of the ratio: 2 + 3 + 7 = 12. Find the value of one part: £96 ÷ 12 = £8. Cara's share is 3 parts: 3 × £8 = £24. (£16 is Ben's share, 2 × £8, not Cara's. £56 is Dev's share, 7 × £8, not Cara's. £28.80 comes from wrongly adding the ratio parts as 10 instead of 12, giving one part = £9.60.)
- (d) positive — Moving from A to B, the x-coordinate increases from 1 to 4 and the y-coordinate also increases from 1 to 7, so the line rises as it goes from left to right, which means the gradient is positive. "negative" would need y to decrease as x increases, which is not the case here. "zero" would need the y-coordinate to stay the same, but it changes from 1 to 7. "cannot be determined" is wrong because the coordinates of both points are known, so the direction of the line can always be found.
- (b) She is wrong; 12 rolls is too few to judge — Method: compare the result with what is expected, then ask whether the experiment is long enough for a difference to mean anything. Working: if the dice were fair the expected number of sixes in 12 rolls is 12 × 1 ÷ 6 = 2, so 4 sixes is 2 above what was expected. But over only 12 rolls a result like this turns up often by chance: the relative frequency here is 4/12, which is 1/3, and over so few trials a relative frequency can sit well away from 1/6 with no bias at all. Answer: Erin is wrong, because 12 rolls is far too few to decide; she should roll the dice many more times and see whether the relative frequency settles near 1/6. The distractors: saying she is right because 4 beats the expected 2 uses the correct expected value but treats any difference as proof, which so short an experiment cannot give; saying a fair dice gives each score twice in 12 rolls treats an expected value as a guaranteed one; saying that 4 sixes in 12 rolls cancels down to 1 in 6 mis-cancels the fraction, because 4/12 is 1/3, which is twice 1/6, so that comment reaches the right verdict from arithmetic that is wrong.
- (a) 1.24 — Method: for data given as a frequency table, the mean is Σfx ÷ Σf — multiply each value by its frequency, add the results, then divide by the total frequency. Working: 0 × 6 = 0. 1 × 10 = 10. 2 × 6 = 12. 3 × 3 = 9. So Σfx = 0 + 10 + 12 + 9 = 31. The total frequency is Σf = 6 + 10 + 6 + 3 = 25. Mean = 31 ÷ 25 = 1.24 siblings. Averaging the frequency column itself, (6 + 10 + 6 + 3) ÷ 4 = 6.25, mixes up the frequencies with the values they belong to. Writing down 1, the number of siblings with the highest frequency, gives the mode, not the mean. Writing down 31 stops after finding Σfx and forgets to divide by the total frequency, 25. Always divide Σfx by Σf — never stop at the top of the fraction.
- (a) 1/3 — To subtract these fractions, first write 3/4 with a denominator of 12: 3/4 = 9/12. Then 9/12 − 5/12 = 4/12, which simplifies to 1/3. Subtracting the numerators and the denominators separately, (3 − 5)/(4 − 12), gives −2/−8, which simplifies to 1/4. Changing 3/4 to twelfths by only changing the denominator, without scaling the numerator to match, gives 3/12 − 5/12 = −2/12, which simplifies to −1/6. Adding the fractions instead of subtracting them, 9/12 + 5/12, gives 14/12, which simplifies to 7/6.
- (b) £2.00 — Subtracting the second equation from the first eliminates the pastries: (3c + 2p) − (2c + 2p) = 9.60 − 7.60, so c = 2.00. A candidate who divides the first total by the number of coffees alone, ignoring the pastries, would get 9.60 ÷ 3 = £3.20. A candidate who finds the price of a pastry instead of a coffee — using c = 2.00 in 2c + 2p = 7.60 to get p = 1.80 — would answer £1.80. A candidate who reaches the correct difference of £2.00 but then mistakenly divides again or misplaces the decimal point would get £0.20.
- (c) 48 mm — Method: extension = k × force, where k = extension ÷ force. Working: k = 12 ÷ 5 = 2.4 mm per N. At 20 N: extension = 2.4 × 20 = 48 mm. Wrong options: 32 mm comes from adding the extension and force numbers instead of scaling (12 + 20); 3 mm comes from treating the relationship as inverse proportion (12 × 5 ÷ 20); 36 mm comes from using an incorrect scale factor of 3 between the forces instead of the correct factor of 4 (20 ÷ 5).
- (d) They are always equal to each other — Method: label the four angles a, b, c, d in order around the crossing point, then use the fact that neighbouring angles lie on a straight line. Working: a and b lie on a straight line, so a + b = 180°; b and c also lie on a straight line, so b + c = 180°. Both a and c are therefore 180° minus b, which forces a = c. Answer: a pair of vertically opposite angles is always equal to each other. The distractors: the claim that each is 90° holds only when the two lines happen to be perpendicular, so it is not always true; the claim that they add to 180° confuses the opposite pair with the neighbouring pair that lies along a straight line, and again holds only in the perpendicular case; the claim that they add to 360° uses the total of all four angles at the point rather than of the opposite pair.
- (c) 325 — Method: first find the relative frequency of NOT landing on red from the 200 spins, then scale that up to 500 spins. Working: non-red results = 50 + 80 = 130, out of 200 spins, so P(not red) = 130 ÷ 200 = 0.65. Expected non-red results in 500 spins = 500 × 0.65 = 325. Answer: 325. Watch out: writing down 175 finds the expected number of RED results instead, 70 ÷ 200 × 500 = 175, answering the opposite of what was asked. Writing down 250 assumes landing red or not landing red must be a fair 50-50 split, but the spinner is biased and the actual results do not split evenly. And writing down 130 stops after finding how many of the 200 spins were non-red and forgets to scale that figure up to the 500 spins asked for.
- (d) 1 × 10⁷ seconds — Method: the time for a journey is the distance divided by the speed, so round each number to 1 significant figure and then divide; dividing numbers in standard form means dividing the coefficients and subtracting the indices. Working: 3.1 × 10¹⁵ rounds to 3 × 10¹⁵ and 2.998 × 10⁸ rounds to 3 × 10⁸; 3 ÷ 3 = 1 for the coefficients, and 15 − 8 = 7 for the indices. Answer: about 1 × 10⁷ seconds. The distractors: 3 × 10⁷ seconds comes from subtracting the indices correctly but leaving the coefficient as 3 instead of dividing 3 by 3; 1 × 10⁻⁷ seconds comes from dividing the speed by the distance instead of the distance by the speed; 9 × 10²³ seconds comes from multiplying the two quantities instead of dividing them, since 3 × 3 = 9 and 15 + 8 = 23.
- (c) y = 4x − 5 — Parallel lines have the same gradient, so the new line has gradient 4; since it passes through (0, −5), its y-intercept is −5, giving y = 4x − 5. A candidate who drops the negative sign on the y-intercept would write y = 4x + 5. A candidate who changes the sign of the gradient, instead of keeping it the same for a parallel line, would write y = −4x − 5. A candidate who confuses m and c, using the y-intercept of the first line (3) as the gradient of the second, would write y = 3x − 5.
- (b) £52 — Method: the difference between the two ratio numbers tells you how many parts the £39 difference represents. Working: the difference in parts is 7 − 4 = 3, and this represents £39, so one part is £39 ÷ 3 = £13. Josh's savings are 4 × £13 = £52. So Josh has £52. Distractor £91 is Mia's savings, not Josh's. Distractor £39 comes from using the given £39 difference as the final answer, without scaling it to Josh's number of parts. Distractor £13 is the value of one part, found correctly but never multiplied by 4.
- (b) A right-angled triangle — The right angle at Y makes this a right-angled triangle, so that description is correct. Since XY is twice YZ, those two sides cannot be equal. The third side XZ is opposite the right angle, so it is the hypotenuse and is longer than either XY or YZ, so it cannot equal either of them. No two sides are equal, which rules out 'an isosceles triangle' and 'a right-angled isosceles triangle', both of which wrongly assume two equal sides. 'An equilateral triangle' would need all three sides equal, which contradicts XY being twice YZ, so it is wrong too.
- (c) 3⁻³ — Method: when dividing powers of the same base, subtract the index of the number you are dividing by from the index of the number being divided, keeping them in the order the question writes them. Working: 2 − 5 = −3, so 3² ÷ 3⁵ = 3⁻³. It is worth checking this against the numbers: 3² = 9 and 3⁵ = 243, and 9 ÷ 243 = 1/27, which is 3⁻³. 3³ comes from subtracting the other way round, 5 − 2 = 3, which reverses the sign of the index and gives 27 instead of 1/27. 3⁷ comes from working out 2 + 5 = 7, which is the rule for multiplying powers, not dividing them. 3¹⁰ comes from multiplying the indices, 2 × 5 = 10, instead of subtracting them. Answer: 3⁻³.
- (a) 130 — Method: substitute the total bill into the formula, then subtract the fixed charge and divide by the cost per text message. Working: 24.50 = 18 + 0.05t, so 0.05t = 24.50 − 18 = 6.50, t = 6.50 ÷ 0.05 = 130. Answer: 130 extra text messages. 490 comes from dividing the whole bill by 0.05 without first subtracting the £18 fixed charge: 24.50 ÷ 0.05 = 490. 13 comes from dividing the £6.50 by 0.5 instead of 0.05, moving the decimal point one place too far: 6.50 ÷ 0.5 = 13. 65 comes from dividing the £6.50 by 0.1 instead of 0.05.
- (a) No — the cost per metre differs: £2.50/m vs £2.20/m — Method: divide cost by length for each pair and compare the unit rates. Working: £7.50 ÷ 3 = £2.50 per m; £11.00 ÷ 5 = £2.20 per m. The rates are different, so this is NOT direct proportion. Wrong options: 'Yes — both amounts increase' wrongly assumes any increasing relationship is proportional; 'No — because 5 m costs more in total' judges by total cost rather than the rate per metre, which is not valid reasoning on its own; 'Yes — the cost per metre is £2.50 in both cases' miscalculates the second rate (11.00 ÷ 5 is £2.20, not £2.50).
- (b) 25 — Method: check the calculator answer by following the order of operations — each power is worked out before the addition. Working: 4² = 4 × 4 = 16 and 3² = 3 × 3 = 9, and 16 + 9 = 25. Answer: 25. The distractors: 49 is the value Freya wrote down and comes from adding first and then squaring, working out (4 + 3)² instead of 4² + 3²; 14 comes from doubling each number instead of squaring it, adding 8 and 6; 12 comes from multiplying 4 by 3 instead of squaring each number and adding the results.
- (a) £150 — Value after year 1: £800 × 0.75 = £600. Value after year 2: £600 × 0.75 = £450. The loss during the second year alone is £600 − £450 = £150. £450 comes from giving the value remaining after 2 years, not the amount lost during the second year. £200 comes from working out the loss during the first year instead of the second: £800 − £600 = £200. £350 comes from working out the total loss over both years instead of just the second year's loss: £800 − £450 = £350.
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.