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) £37 — One box costs £4 + £3 = £7. Five boxes cost 5 × £7 = £35. Adding the single £2 delivery fee gives £35 + £2 = £37. A candidate who added the £2 delivery fee to each box instead of once for the whole order worked out 5 × (£7 + £2) = 5 × £9 = £45. A candidate who forgot the £3 markup and used the shop's buying price worked out 5 × £4 + £2 = £22. A candidate who added the £3 markup only once, after multiplying the buying price by 5, worked out 5 × £4 + £3 + £2 = £25.
- (c) 6 — Method: substitute the value, work out the top of the fraction first, then the division, and add the 3 last. Working: the top gives 10 − 4 = 6, dividing by 2 gives 6 ÷ 2 = 3, and adding 3 gives 3 + 3 = 6. Answer: 6. The distractors: 11 comes from dividing only the 4 by 2 instead of the whole of the top, giving 10 − 2 + 3; 4.5 comes from dividing the + 3 by 2 as well, giving (10 − 4 + 3) ÷ 2; 0 comes from subtracting the wrong way round on the top, giving (4 − 10) ÷ 2 = −3 and then −3 + 3.
- (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.
- (a) 65° — Method: a line that divides an angle into two equal parts gives each part half of the original angle, so halve 130°. Working: 130 ÷ 2 = 65. Answer: 65°. The distractors: 130° is the whole of angle ABC, written down without halving it; 50° comes from working out 180 − 130, using the angles on a straight line instead of dividing the angle in two; 32.5° comes from dividing by 4 instead of by 2, as though the line split the angle into four equal parts.
- (b) 100 — The sample shows a proportion of 8/60 = 2/15 faulty. Apply that proportion to the new batch of 750: 750 × 2/15 = 100. Flipping the ratio, calculating 8/750 × 60 instead of 8/60 × 750, gives 0.64, which rounds to about 1. Assuming the same number of faulty items applies to the new batch, without scaling for its larger size, just repeats the sample's count of 8. Rounding the proportion 8/60 = 0.1333... down to 0.1 before multiplying gives 750 × 0.1 = 75.
- (c) Yes — with an estimate of 320, above the 250 limit. — Method: scale the sample proportion up to the whole batch to get an estimate, then compare that estimate with the 250 limit to reach a decision. Working: in the sample, 4 out of 50 boards are faulty, a proportion of 4 ÷ 50 = 0.08. Applying that proportion to the batch of 4,000 gives an estimate of 0.08 × 4000 = 320 faulty boards. Since 320 is more than 250, the factory should scrap the batch. Inverting the proportion, 50 ÷ 4 = 12.5, and treating that as a percentage of the batch, 12.5% × 4000 = 500, still gives 'yes' but from the wrong fraction, so it overstates the estimate. Comparing the raw number of faulty boards found in the sample, 4, directly with the 250 limit skips the scaling up to the batch altogether, and 4 is nowhere near 250, so that route wrongly says 'no'. Dividing the batch by the sample size, 4000 ÷ 50 = 80, finds how many samples of 50 fit into the batch but stops before multiplying by the 4 faulty boards found, so it also wrongly says 'no'. Always find the proportion in the sample first, scale it up to the whole batch, and only then compare the estimate with the limit given.
- (c) 5.7 kg — Method: to round to 1 decimal place, keep one digit after the decimal point and let the digit in the second decimal place decide whether that digit stays as it is or goes up. Working: 5.672 has 6 in the first decimal place and 7 in the second decimal place; 7 is 5 or more, so the 6 goes up to 7 and the digits beyond the first decimal place are dropped. Answer: 5.7 kg. The distractors: 5.6 kg comes from chopping the digits after the first decimal place off instead of rounding them, which is truncation rather than rounding; 6.0 kg comes from rounding to the nearest whole kilogram instead of to 1 decimal place; 5.0 kg comes from chopping everything after the decimal point off, so the mass is both truncated and given to the wrong degree of accuracy.
- (c) x + 18 — Expand −3(2x − 6) by multiplying both terms by −3: −3 × 2x = −6x and −3 × (−6) = 18, giving 7x − 6x + 18 = x + 18. Writing x − 18 comes from not flipping the sign of the −6 inside the bracket, so −3 × (−6) is treated as −18 instead of +18. Writing x + 6 comes from forgetting to multiply the −6 by 3, only carrying its sign. Writing 13x − 18 comes from treating the whole bracket as being added rather than subtracted, so 3(2x − 6) = 6x − 18 is added to 7x.
- (c) 16% — Method: scale each concentration to its own mass to find the salt it contains, add the two masses of salt, then write the ratio of salt to mixture per 100 g. Working: 10:100 = x:300 gives 30 g of salt, and 25:100 = y:200 gives 50 g of salt; the mixture holds 30 + 50 = 80 g of salt in 300 + 200 = 500 g of solution; 80:500 = 16:100. Answer: 16%. The distractors: 17.5% is the mean of 10% and 25%, which ignores that there is more of the weaker solution than of the stronger one; 19% comes from swapping the two concentrations over, working out (300 × 25% + 200 × 10%) ÷ 500; 26.7% comes from dividing the 80 g of salt by the 300 g of the first solution rather than by the 500 g of mixture.
- (d) SSS, using shared side QS — PQ equals RQ and PS equals RS are two given pairs of equal sides, and QS is common to both triangles, so QS equals itself and gives a third pair of equal sides. Three pairs of equal sides is exactly the SSS condition, so 'SSS, using shared side QS' is correct. 'SAS, using the angle at Q' is wrong because no angle is given anywhere in this question; angle PQS and angle RQS are not stated to be equal, and assuming they are would be assuming the very thing being proved. 'Only two pairs of sides — not enough' is wrong because it forgets that the shared side QS is itself a third pair of equal sides. 'Cannot prove — no angle given' is wrong because SSS is one of the four basic congruence conditions and specifically requires no angle at all.
- (c) 0.6 — Method: no two of these ways of travelling can happen on the same day, so they are mutually exclusive and the probability that one of them happens is the sum of their probabilities; they need not add to 1, because travelling by car is a fourth way. Working: 0.2 + 0.3 = 0.5, and 0.5 + 0.1 = 0.6, the decimal points lined up at each step. Answer: 0.6, which also shows that the probability of being taken by car is 0.4, since all four ways together must make 1. The distractors: 0.4 comes from carrying on past the question and giving the probability of the remaining way, by car; 0.5 comes from adding only the bus and the bike and leaving the smallest of the three probabilities out of the total; 0.006 comes from multiplying the three probabilities together instead of adding them.
- (a) 3.8 × 10⁻³ — 0.0038 is less than 1, so the power of 10 is negative. Moving the decimal point 3 places gives A = 3.8, so 0.0038 = 3.8 × 10⁻³. A candidate who wrote 3.8 × 10³ used a positive power, which is only correct for numbers of 10 or more. A candidate who wrote 38 × 10⁻⁴ used a value of A outside the required range. A candidate who wrote 3.8 × 10⁻⁴ counted one place too many when moving the decimal point.
- (a) −7 — The coefficient of xy is the number multiplying that exact term, including its sign: in 4x²y − 7xy + 2, the term in xy is −7xy, so the coefficient is −7. Answering 7 correctly picks out the number but drops the minus sign that belongs to it. Answering 4 picks the coefficient of the x²y term instead of the xy term — x²y and xy are different terms because their powers of x differ. Answering −5 combines −7 with the constant term +2, as though the coefficient of xy included the number with no letter attached to it. The coefficient of xy is −7.
- (a) 4:3:1 — Convert every part to the same unit: 2 m = 200 cm, so the ratio is 200 : 150 : 50. Dividing all three parts by 50 gives 4 : 3 : 1. Writing 2 : 150 : 50 has not converted 2 m into centimetres, so the units do not match. Writing 3 : 4 : 1 has the first two parts the wrong way round. Writing 4 : 3 : 2 comes from an arithmetic slip on the last part: 50 ÷ 50 = 1, not 2.
- (a) 6 cm — Method: a rectangle is made of two lengths and two widths, so the perimeter is 2 × (length + width). Half the perimeter is therefore one length plus one width, and the width is what is left of that half once the length is taken away. Working: 30 ÷ 2 = 15 cm is one length added to one width, and 15 − 9 = 6. Answer: 6 cm. The distractors: 21 cm comes from taking the length off the whole perimeter, 30 − 9, so three sides are still counted in the figure that is written down; 12 cm comes from removing both lengths correctly, 30 − 2 × 9 = 12, and then recording that remainder as the width instead of halving it, because it is in fact the two widths together; 7.5 cm comes from dividing the perimeter by four, 30 ÷ 4, which is the calculation for the side of a square and throws away the length that was given.
- (a) Fewer than 48,500 people attended — Method: a figure given to the nearest thousand lies within half of 1,000, that is 500, of the figure printed, so the attendance is at least 47,500 and below 48,500. Working: 48,000 − 500 = 47,500 and 48,000 + 500 = 48,500, and an attendance of 48,500 would have been reported as 49,000, so every possible attendance is below 48,500. Answer: Fewer than 48,500 people attended. The distractors: more than 48,500 turns the upper limit of the range into a minimum; fewer than 47,500 uses the lower limit as though it were the upper one; more than 48,000 assumes the printed figure was rounded down, when it could just as well have been rounded up from a smaller attendance.
- (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.
- (b) 20 — The gradient is the change in p divided by the change in t: (90 − 30) ÷ (5 − 2) = 60 ÷ 3 = 20. Choosing 0.05 comes from dividing the change in t by the change in p, the wrong way round (3 ÷ 60). Choosing −20 comes from subtracting the coordinates in the wrong order for one part of the calculation, for example (30 − 90) ÷ (5 − 2), giving a negative value. Choosing 18 comes from dividing the second p-coordinate by the second t-coordinate directly (90 ÷ 5) instead of using the change between the two points.
- (c) 62.35 ≤ r < 62.45 — Method: with a value rounded to 1 decimal place, the error interval reaches half of 0.1 either side. Working: half of 0.1 is 0.05, so the interval runs from 62.4 − 0.05 to 62.4 + 0.05. Answer: 62.35 ≤ r < 62.45. (62 ≤ r < 63 comes from rounding to the nearest whole number instead of 1 decimal place. 62.35 ≤ r ≤ 62.45 comes from including the upper bound with ≤ instead of excluding it with <. 62.3 ≤ r < 62.5 comes from using 0.1 either side instead of half of it.)
- (d) 3/5 — Put the school journey time over the gym journey time: 12/20. Divide both numbers by their highest common factor, 4: 12÷4 = 3, 20÷4 = 5, giving 3/5. (5/3 comes from writing the times the wrong way round. 2/5 comes from finding the difference in the times, 20 − 12 = 8 minutes, and writing it as a fraction of the gym time, 8/20. 3/8 comes from comparing the school time to the total time for both journeys, 12/32.)
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.