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
- (a) 36 kg — The mix is 3 + 5 = 8 equal shares, so the cement is 3/8 of the mass. One share is 96 ÷ 8 = 12 kg, and the cement is 3 shares: 3 × 12 = 36 kg. Working out 3/5 of 96 gives 57.6 kg, which uses the sand as the denominator instead of the whole mix; 60 kg is the mass of the sand; 12 kg is one share only.
- (a) x = (y + 9) / 2 — Method: undo the subtraction of 9 first, then undo the multiplication by 2. Working: y = 2x − 9, so adding 9 to both sides gives y + 9 = 2x, then dividing both sides by 2 gives x = (y + 9) / 2. The value x = (y − 9) / 2 comes from a sign error, keeping the −9 instead of moving it to +9. The value x = 2(y + 9) comes from multiplying by 2 instead of dividing. The value x = y / 2 + 9 comes from dividing by 2 before adding 9, the wrong order of operations, instead of dividing the whole bracket.
- (a) 36 — Pressure = force ÷ area, so 126 ÷ 3.5 = 36 N/m². (0.03 comes from dividing the area by the force instead of the force by the area, the wrong way round. 129.5 comes from adding 126 and 3.5 instead of dividing. 441 comes from multiplying 126 by 3.5 instead of dividing.)
- (c) Swapped the x and y components — The student's vector has the same two numbers, 5 and −2, but in swapped positions, so the error is swapping the x and y components rather than an error with signs or size. 'Reversed both signs' is wrong because the numbers 5 and −2 have not changed sign, only position. 'Reversed only the y sign' is wrong for the same reason — no sign has actually changed. 'Doubled the x component' is wrong because neither number has changed in size.
- (a) 20 — Dice A is fair, so its expected number of sixes is 150 × 1/6 = 25. Dice B has P(6) = 0.3, so its expected number of sixes is 150 × 0.3 = 45. The difference is 45 − 25 = 20. Adding the two expected values instead of subtracting them gives 25 + 45 = 70. Reporting Dice B's expected sixes on their own, without comparing to Dice A, gives 45. Using the fair probability 1/6 for Dice B as well as Dice A ignores the bias altogether, giving 150 × 1/6 = 25 for both dice and a difference of 0.
- (a) 26 — Method: a line of best fit lets one quantity be predicted from the other, so the score is substituted into the equation of the line and the resulting inequality is solved for the number of hours. Working: a score of at least 80 means 2.5x + 15 ≥ 80; taking 15 from both sides gives 2.5x ≥ 65, and dividing both sides by 2.5 gives x ≥ 26, so the least whole number of hours is 26. Checking, 2.5 × 26 + 15 = 80, which does reach the target. Answer: 26 hours — and this is only an estimate, because a line of best fit predicts a trend rather than an individual result, and a prediction made outside the range of hours the pupils actually revised for would be an extrapolation and less reliable still. The distractors: 27 comes from reaching 26 and then rounding up again, although 26 hours already gives a score of exactly 80; 32 comes from 80 ÷ 2.5, which ignores the 15 in the equation of the line; 38 comes from (80 + 15) ÷ 2.5, that is from adding the 15 instead of subtracting it when rearranging.
- (a) £177.60 — Total raised = 240 × £1.85 = £444.00. The hospital receives 40% of this: £444.00 × 0.4 = £177.60. A candidate who works out the remaining 60% instead of the 40% given away gets £266.40. A candidate who forgets to find the percentage and gives the full total gets £444.00. A candidate who halves 40% by mistake and uses 20% gets £88.80.
- (b) (−4, 3) — Method: in a rectangle whose sides are parallel to the axes only two different x-coordinates and two different y-coordinates appear, and each of them is shared by a pair of vertices, so the missing vertex takes the x-coordinate and the y-coordinate that so far appear only once. Working: the x-coordinates given are −4, 2 and 2, so 2 is already used twice and −4 is used once; the y-coordinates given are −1, −1 and 3, so −1 is already used twice and 3 is used once; the fourth vertex therefore has x = −4 and y = 3. Answer: (−4, 3). The distractors: (3, −4) comes from picking the two unpaired coordinates correctly and then writing them in the wrong order; (−4, −5) comes from matching the 4-unit vertical side but measuring it downwards from (−4, −1) instead of upwards; (8, 3) comes from carrying on round the shape with the horizontal step used earlier, adding 6 to the x-coordinate of (2, 3) instead of closing the rectangle.
- (c) £3,200 — Method: find the value of one part of the ratio from the first investor's amount, then work out the second investor's share before adding both together. Working: £1,200 is 3 parts, so one part is £1,200 ÷ 3 = £400. The second investor's share is 5 × £400 = £2,000, and the total is £1,200 + £2,000 = £3,200. So the total invested is £3,200. Distractor £2,000 is only the second investor's share, without adding the first investor's £1,200. Distractor £2,400 comes from doubling the first investor's amount instead of using the ratio. Distractor £6,000 comes from multiplying £1,200 by 5 directly instead of first finding the value of one part.
- (a) 17 cm — Convert the real distance to centimetres first: 3.4 km = 340 000 cm. Then divide by the scale factor, 20 000, since the map is 20 000 times smaller than real life: 340 000 ÷ 20 000 = 17, so the map distance is 17 cm. Choosing 1700 cm divides by 200 instead of 20 000, losing two zeros from the scale factor (340 000 ÷ 200 = 1700). Choosing 170 cm divides by 2 000 instead of 20 000, losing one zero from the scale factor (340 000 ÷ 2 000 = 170). Choosing 0.17 cm divides by 2 000 000 instead of 20 000, adding two extra zeros to the scale factor (340 000 ÷ 2 000 000 = 0.17).
- (b) 80 — To find the number of attempts needed, divide the target number of successes by the probability of success: 60 ÷ 0.75 = 80. Writing 45 is wrong because 60 × 0.75 = 45 multiplies instead of dividing — that is the number of successes expected from 60 attempts, not the number of attempts needed for 60 successes. Writing 240 is wrong because 60 ÷ 0.25 = 240 uses 0.25, the probability of MISSING, instead of 0.75, the probability of scoring. Writing 90 is wrong because it comes from misremembering 0.75 as 2/3 and dividing by that instead: 60 ÷ (2/3) = 90. She needs to attempt 80 free throws.
- (c) £7.25 — Find the total cost of the books first: 3 × 4.25 = 12.75, so the books cost £12.75 in total. Subtract this from the £20 note: 20.00 − 12.75 = 7.25, so the change is £7.25. Stopping after finding the cost and not subtracting it from £20 gives £12.75, which is the amount spent, not the change. Borrowing correctly in the pence column but forgetting to reduce the pounds column by 1 gives £8.25 instead of £7.25. Multiplying 3 × 4.25 as 12.25 instead of 12.75, a multiplication slip, makes the change come out £0.50 too high, at £7.75. So Jack receives £7.25 change.
- (d) −3 — Method: rewrite the equation in the form y = mx + c, then read off the gradient. Working: y = 4 − 3x can be written as y = −3x + 4, so comparing with y = mx + c gives m = −3. Answer: the gradient is −3. The value 3 comes from ignoring the negative sign on the x term. The value 4 comes from reading off the y-intercept instead of the gradient. The value −4 comes from a sign error, applying the negative sign to the intercept instead of the gradient.
- (d) 8 — The product of price and number of tickets is constant: k = 4 × 12 = 48. At £6 per ticket, the number of tickets is 48 ÷ 6 = 8. Getting 18 comes from treating price and tickets as directly proportional and working out 12 × 6 ÷ 4 instead of dividing k by the new price. Getting 12 assumes the number of tickets does not change when the price changes. Getting 6 comes from writing down the new price instead of working out the number of tickets.
- (a) 3/4 — 1 litre = 1000 ml, so 750 ml is 750/1000 of a litre. Dividing both the numerator and denominator by 250 simplifies this to 3/4. Writing the fraction upside down, as the litre out of the 750 ml, gives 4/3. Finding the fraction of the litre that is NOT filled, 250/1000, gives 1/4. Dividing the numerator by 250 but the denominator by only 100, an inconsistent simplification, gives 3/10.
- (b) 1 — Any non-zero number raised to the power 0 equals 1, so 7⁰ = 1. Writing 0 confuses this rule with multiplying by zero. Writing 7 mistakes the power of 0 for leaving the base unchanged, as if nothing happened. Writing 1/7 confuses the zero index with a negative one — it is 7⁻¹ that equals 1/7, while 7⁰ equals 1.
- (a) 3x = 12 — Adding the two equations: the y-terms, +y and −y, have opposite signs, so they cancel; the x-terms combine to 2x + x = 3x; and the right-hand sides add to 11 + 1 = 12. This gives 3x = 12. A candidate who forgets that the y-terms cancel, and instead adds them as if they had the same sign, would write 3x + 2y = 12. A candidate who subtracts the right-hand sides instead of adding them would get 3x = 10. A candidate who correctly reaches 3x = 12 but then treats 12 itself as the value of x, skipping the final division, would write x = 12.
- (c) 3 — Method: find the height scale factor, cube it to find the volume (and coverage) scale factor, use it to find one large sack's coverage, then divide the total lawn area by this and round up to a whole number of sacks. Working: height scale factor = 40 ÷ 20 = 2, so coverage scale factor = 2³ = 8, and each large sack covers 30 × 8 = 240 m². 500 ÷ 240 = 2.08…, which rounds UP to 3 whole sacks. Answer: 3. 2 comes from correctly finding that each large sack covers 240 m², but then rounding 500 ÷ 240 down instead of up, which would leave part of the lawn untreated. 5 comes from squaring the height scale factor (2² = 4) instead of cubing it, giving a coverage of only 30 × 4 = 120 m² per sack. 17 comes from forgetting to scale the coverage at all and dividing 500 by the smaller sack's coverage of 30 m².
- (c) −5 ≤ −5 — The symbol ≤ means 'less than or equal to', and −5 is equal to −5, so this statement is true. −3 ≥ −1 is false: a candidate who ignores the negative signs and compares 3 with 1 would wrongly think −3 is the bigger number, but on the number line −3 is smaller than −1. 0.4 < 2/5 is false because 2/5 converts to exactly 0.4, so the two values are equal, not one strictly less than the other — a candidate who assumes a fraction is automatically bigger than a similar-looking decimal without converting it would miss this. 7/10 ≤ 0.6 is false because 7/10 converts to 0.7, which is bigger than 0.6; a candidate who misplaces the decimal point and converts 7/10 as 0.07 would wrongly believe this statement is true.
- (d) 2:5 — The ratio of the y-values equals the ratio of the coefficients of x, since x cancels: 2x : 5x = 2 : 5.
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.