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

VersionsA only A + B A + B + Csame questions, different order

AnswersQuestions only With answer key Key only

New sheet

Answer key: GCSE Foundation sample Paper 2 (calculator)

Maths · GCSE Foundation · Paper 2 · Calculator · 20 questions

MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk

(c) 0.36 — Method: convert the fraction to an equivalent fraction with denominator 100, then read off the decimal. Working: 9/25 = 36/100 (multiplying numerator and denominator by 4) = 0.36. Answer: 0.36. 2.8 comes from flipping the fraction and dividing the denominator by the numerator instead: 25 ÷ 9 = 2.77…, rounded to 2.8. 0.925 comes from writing the digits of the numerator and denominator directly after the decimal point without scaling the fraction. 0.9 comes from writing the numerator straight after the decimal point, as if the denominator were 10 rather than 25.
(a) t = 0 or t = 4 — The ball is at ground level exactly when h = 0. From the table, h = 0 at t = 0 and at t = 4, so those are the two times. Distractor origins: t = 1 or t = 3 picks the times with equal (but non-zero) height instead of ground level; t = 2 picks the time of maximum height instead of ground level; t = 0 finds only the starting time and misses the second one.
(c) 2/7 — Method: each number in a ratio counts parts, so the whole is all the parts added together, and the fraction wanted is the cement parts over that total. Working: the mix has 5 + 2 = 7 parts altogether, and 2 of those parts are cement, so the cement is 2/7 of the mix. Answer: 2/7. The distractors: 2/5 comes from writing the cement parts over the sand parts, comparing one part with the other part instead of with the whole; 5/7 comes from writing the sand parts over the total, which answers about the wrong material; 7/2 comes from writing the total over the cement parts, turning the fraction upside down.
(a) 100° — In a kite, the pair of angles between the unequal sides are equal to each other. Angle X and angle Z are both between one side from the WX/WZ pair and one side from the XY/ZY pair, so angle Z = angle X = 100°.
(c) 23 — Multiples of 4 from 1 to 30 are 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 and 28 — 7 numbers, so n(A) = 7. The universal set has 30 elements, so n(A′) = 30 − 7 = 23. Reporting n(A) itself, 7, without subtracting it from the universal set forgets what the complement means. Estimating the count of multiples of 4 as 30 ÷ 4 = 7.5, rounded to 8, instead of listing them exactly, gives 30 − 8 = 22. Miscounting the universal set as having 31 elements instead of 30, an off-by-one slip, gives 31 − 7 = 24.
(c) No — 8 from one class is too small to represent the school. — Method: judge reliability by asking whether the sample is both large enough, and spread across the population, relative to what it is meant to represent. Working: 8 pupils is a tiny fraction of the school's 1,000 pupils, and all 8 come from a single class rather than a range of year groups, so the sample is both too small and too narrow to represent the whole school reliably. She is not right. Saying any sample size gives an equally reliable estimate ignores that reliability generally improves with a larger, more representative sample. Saying the method is unreliable because it was not done online is not a reason connected to sample size or representativeness at all. Saying 8 is reliable because it is more than half her class compares the sample to the wrong population — the school has 1,000 pupils, not one class. Always judge a sample's size against the population it is meant to represent, not against a smaller group within it.
(c) £4.05 — The total cost is 7 × 85p = £5.95. Josh's change is £10.00 − £5.95 = £4.05. Taking off the pounds and then only the 5p digit, £10.00 − £5.00 = £5.00 followed by £5.00 − £0.05, ignoring the 90p altogether, gives £4.95. Rounding the cost up to £6.00 and never accounting for the extra 5p at all gives £4.00. Multiplying 7 × 85 incorrectly as 605 (a slip in 7 × 5) gives a total cost of £6.05, and correctly subtracting that from £10.00 gives £3.95.
(a) £14.50 — Method: the first 200 minutes are already covered by the £12, so only 250 − 200 = 50 minutes are charged extra. Extra charge = 50 × £0.05 = £2.50. Total cost = £12 + £2.50 = £14.50. Distractor origins: £24.50 charges 5p for all 250 minutes instead of only the 50 minutes over 200 (250 × £0.05 = £12.50, plus £12 = £24.50); £12.50 makes that same slip of charging all 250 minutes but then forgets to add the £12 monthly fee; £13.50 works out 250 − 200 wrongly as 30 extra minutes instead of 50 (30 × £0.05 = £1.50, plus £12 = £13.50).
(d) 20 — Method: equivalent ratios are linked by a single multiplier, so find it from the part you know and apply it to the other part. Working: 15 ÷ 3 = 5, so the multiplier is 5, and 4 × 5 = 20. Answer: 20. The distractors: 16 comes from adding the difference between the ratio parts, 4 − 3 = 1, to 15, treating the ratio as a difference; 60 comes from multiplying 15 by 4 without first dividing by 3; 11.25 comes from using the ratio the wrong way round, working out 15 × 3 ÷ 4.
(d) 7.7 m — The horizontal distance is adjacent to the 50° angle and the zip wire is the hypotenuse, so horizontal distance = 12 × cos 50° = 12 × 0.6428... = 7.71...≈ 7.7 m. "9.2 m" uses the sine ratio instead of cosine, 12 × sin 50° = 9.19...≈ 9.2 m, which actually finds the vertical drop of the zip wire, not the horizontal distance. "15.7 m" comes from dividing by the sine ratio instead of multiplying by the cosine ratio, 12 ÷ sin 50° = 15.66...≈ 15.7 m, both the wrong operation and the wrong ratio. "12.0 m" simply uses the length of the zip wire itself as the horizontal distance, ignoring the angle of 50° altogether.
(a) £124.80 — On the cake branch, 150 − 100 = 50 cakes were bought by children. Adding the 54 biscuits bought by children gives 50 + 54 = 104 items sold to children in total, and at £1.20 each that raises 104 × £1.20 = £124.80. Writing £60.00 is wrong because 50 × £1.20 = £60.00 only counts the cake sales to children and leaves out the 54 biscuits. Writing £163.20 is wrong because it uses the ADULT sales instead of children's: 100 cake adults plus 90 − 54 = 36 biscuit adults gives 136 × £1.20 = £163.20. Writing £136.80 is wrong because it finds the cake children's number by subtracting the wrong branch (150 − 90 = 60 instead of 150 − 100 = 50), giving 60 + 54 = 114 items and 114 × £1.20 = £136.80. The total raised from sales to children is £124.80.
(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.
(b) x = 5 — Area = length × width, so x(x + 3) = 40, which rearranges to x² + 3x − 40 = 0. This factorises as (x + 8)(x − 5) = 0: the two numbers in the brackets must multiply to −40 and add to +3, and the pair 8 and −5 does both. This gives x = −8 or x = 5. Since x is a length, it cannot be negative, so x = 5. A candidate who gives both solutions without rejecting the negative one, which cannot be a length, answers x = 5 or x = −8. A candidate who picks the wrong factor pair of 40, such as 10 and −4 instead of 8 and −5, gets (x + 10)(x − 4) = 0 and answers x = 4. A candidate who rejects the wrong root, keeping the negative solution instead of the positive one, answers x = −8.
(d) 26.6 — Find the constant multiplier — the mass of each metre of pipe: 12.6 ÷ 4.5 = 2.8, so the mass is always 2.8 times the length. For a length of 9.5 m, the mass is 9.5 × 2.8 = 26.6 kg. 17.6 comes from assuming an additive relationship instead of a multiplicative one — adding the increase in length (9.5 − 4.5 = 5) onto 12.6. 3.4 comes from using the multiplier the wrong way round (4.5 ÷ 12.6, rounded to 1 d.p.), then multiplying by 9.5. 12.6 comes from simply repeating the given mass, without applying the multiplier to the new length.
(c) 17.71 m — The perimeter is the two long sides (5 m + 5 m = 10 m) plus the one remaining short side (3 m) plus the curved semicircular edge. The 3 m side is the diameter of the semicircle, so its radius is 3 ÷ 2 = 1.5 m and the curved length is half the circumference: (1/2) × 2 × 3.14 × 1.5 = 4.71 m. Total: 10 + 3 + 4.71 = 17.71 m.
(d) 360 km — Method: first find the kilometres per litre by dividing distance by fuel used, then multiply this rate by the new tank size. Working: 180 ÷ 6 = 30 km per litre; 30 × 12 = 360 km. Answer: 360 km. 30 km comes from finding the correct fuel consumption but stopping there, without scaling it up to the full tank. 2160 km comes from multiplying the original distance (180) by the tank size (12) directly, skipping the unit rate. 90 km comes from pairing the numbers the wrong way round: dividing the distance by the new tank size, 180 ÷ 12 = 15, and then multiplying by the original 6 litres, 15 × 6 = 90.
(b) 14 — Substitute n=4 into 3n+2: 3×4+2=14. A candidate who adds 3 and n instead of multiplying would compute 3+4+2=9. A candidate who substitutes the wrong term number, n=3, would reach 3×3+2=11. A candidate who forgets to add the constant term would compute just 3×4=12.
(a) £40.32 — Find the cost per square metre from the rate given: £14.40 ÷ 20 = £0.72 per m². Then multiply by the area to be covered: £0.72 × 56 = £40.32. Working out 14.40 × 20 ÷ 56 ≈ £5.14 uses the ratio the wrong way round, scaling down as if 56 m² needed less paint than 20 m². Stopping at £0.72 only gives the cost per square metre, not the cost for the whole wall. Working out 14.40 + (56 − 20) = £50.40 adds the extra square metres straight onto the cost in pounds, treating square metres and pounds as the same kind of quantity. Covering 56 m² costs £40.32.
(b) 63 — 10% of 180 = 18, so 5% = 9. 35% = (3 × 18) + 9 = 54 + 9 = 63. A candidate who uses 25% instead of 35% gets 45. A candidate who doubles 35% to get 70% by mistake gets 126. A candidate who subtracts 35 from 180 instead of finding a percentage gets 145.
(c) 1 : 16 — Work out each area before comparing. Square P has area 3 × 3 = 9 cm². Square Q has area 12 × 12 = 144 cm². The ratio of the areas is 9 : 144, and both parts divide by 9: 9 ÷ 9 = 1 and 144 ÷ 9 = 16, giving 1 : 16. Notice that the sides are in the ratio 1 : 4, and the areas are in the ratio of the squares of those parts, which is what always happens when a length is scaled. Stopping at 1 : 4 would compare the sides and never the areas, and cubing the parts to reach 1 : 64 is the rule for volumes rather than for areas. The order matters too: the question names square P first, so its area must be the first part of the ratio.

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.