Sample paper · GCSE Higher · grades 4–9
GCSE Higher sample Paper 1 (non-calculator)
The real Paper 1 is 1.5 hour 30 minutes and 80 marks, non-calculator, and all three papers carry equal weight. This sample is 20 original questions in the same content proportions as the Higher qualification — number 15%, algebra 30%, ratio, proportion and rates of change 20%, geometry and measures 20%, probability 7.5%, statistics 7.5% — with no calculator-only items. AO1 / AO2 / AO3 at this tier: 40% / 30% / 30%.
Non-calculatorGCSE Higher
Answer key: GCSE Higher sample Paper 1 (non-calculator)
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 9π cm² — The area of a circle is π × r². With a radius of 3 cm this is π × 3² = 9π cm², and this is exact because π has not been replaced by any approximation. Writing 28.3 cm² replaces π with a rounded decimal value, 3.14, and then rounds the result again, so it is only an approximation. Writing 28.26 cm² uses π ≈ 3.14 without a final rounding step, but this is still only an approximation of 9π, not the exact value. Writing 27 cm² comes from replacing π with the rough approximation 3, which is even further from the true value.
- (d) 28 — The height decreases by 8 cm at each bounce after the first, so the nth bounce reaches 60−(n−1)×8 cm. For the 5th bounce: 60−4×8=60−32=28. A candidate who subtracts 8 one time too many, five times instead of four, would compute 60−5×8=20. A candidate who adds the decrease instead of subtracting it, a sign error, would compute 60+4×8=92. A candidate who works out only the total decrease and forgets to include the starting height of 60 cm would compute just 5×8=40.
- (a) 42 — Find the value of one part: 18 ÷ 3 = 6. Find the number of dogs: 4 × 6 = 24. Add the cats and the dogs to find the total: 18 + 24 = 42. (24 is the number of dogs only, not the total number of animals. 126 comes from multiplying the number of cats by the total number of parts, 18 × 7, instead of finding one part first. 25 comes from adding the ratio numbers 3 and 4 directly to the number of cats.)
- (c) 15 cm — Method: going from the smaller tile to the larger one, every length is multiplied by the scale factor 5 ÷ 3. Working: 9 ÷ 3 = 3, and 3 × 5 = 15. Answer: 15 cm. The distractors: 11 cm comes from adding the difference between the parts of the ratio, 5 − 3 = 2, to the 9 cm side, treating a ratio as a gap rather than a multiplier; 45 cm comes from multiplying by 5 and forgetting to divide by 3; 27 cm comes from multiplying by 3, which is the part of the ratio belonging to the smaller tile.
- (b) 4 — With 150 rolls and probability 1/6 for each number, the expected count is 150 ÷ 6 = 25. Comparing each actual count with 25: 1 is 22 (3 below), 2 is 27 (2 above), 3 is 24 (1 below), 4 is 34 (9 above), 5 is 21 (4 below) and 6 is 22 (3 below). Number 4 is furthest above its expected count, so it is the most over-represented. Number 2 is also above its expected count, but by only 2, far less than 4's 9. Number 3's count of 24 is below the expected 25, so it is under-represented, not over. Number 6's count of 22 is also below the expected 25, so it too is under-represented.
- (a) 150 bulbs — Method: assume the proportion faulty in a random sample is the proportion faulty in the whole day's output, and scale the sample up to the population. Working: the sample of 80 has to be scaled up to 4,000 bulbs, and 4,000 ÷ 80 = 50, so the day's output is 50 sample-sized batches. Each batch is expected to contain the same 3 faulty bulbs, so the estimate is 3 × 50 = 150. Answer: 150 bulbs, and it is an estimate, because another sample of 80 would probably contain a different number of faulty bulbs. The distractors: 50 bulbs is the scale factor 4,000 ÷ 80 written down as though it were the answer, so it reports how many batches there are rather than how many faulty bulbs; 120 bulbs comes from reading 3 out of 80 as 3%, then taking 0.03 × 4,000 = 120, but 3 out of 80 is 3.75%; 240 bulbs comes from 3 × 80 = 240, multiplying the faulty bulbs by the size of the sample instead of by the scale factor, which uses the 80 twice and the 4,000 not at all.
- (a) 42.5 ≤ t < 47.5 — Rounding to the nearest 5 minutes means the actual time can be up to half of 5 minutes, 2.5 minutes, below or above 45 before it would round to a different multiple of 5. The lower bound is 45 − 2.5 = 42.5 and the upper bound is 45 + 2.5 = 47.5. A time of exactly 47.5 minutes would round up to 50, not 45, so 47.5 is excluded while 42.5 does still round to 45. Writing 42.5 ≤ t ≤ 47.5 wrongly includes 47.5. Writing 40 ≤ t < 50 uses a whole rounding unit, 5, either side instead of half of it. Writing 44.5 ≤ t < 45.5 treats the rounding unit as 1 minute instead of 5 minutes.
- (d) 10 — The right angle is at (1, 1). The vertical side has length 5 − 1 = 4 and the horizontal side has length 6 − 1 = 5, so the area is (4 × 5) ÷ 2 = 20 ÷ 2 = 10. A candidate who forgets to halve the product of the two sides gets 4 × 5 = 20. A candidate who forgets to subtract the shared vertex's coordinate and uses the raw coordinates 6 and 5 as the side lengths gets (6 × 5) ÷ 2 = 30 ÷ 2 = 15. A candidate who uses only one side length as the area gets 5.
- (a) It's an average over 20 days, which may miss the day-5 rate. — Method: a chord's gradient is the AVERAGE rate of change across the whole interval it spans; it only closely approximates the INSTANTANEOUS rate of change at a point inside that interval when the rate of change is roughly constant across the interval, which usually means the interval needs to be short. Working: here the chord spans 20 days while the point of interest, t = 5, is only a quarter of the way along it, so if the reservoir's level rose or fell at different rates over that time, the chord's gradient will not be close to the true gradient of the curve at t = 5 — this is the correct reason. Claiming the chord's gradient needs the water level at every day in between is wrong: a chord's gradient needs only the two endpoint values, at t = 0 and t = 20. Claiming a chord can only estimate the rate at its own endpoints is wrong: a chord between two points can be used to estimate the instantaneous rate of change at any point inside the interval, including one that is not an endpoint — that is exactly the technique being used here, and it is the SIZE of the interval that makes the estimate poor, not the fact that t = 5 is an interior point. Claiming the units do not match is wrong: the chord's gradient and the instantaneous rate of change are both measured in metres per day, so the units are the same. A chord is only a good estimate of an instantaneous rate when the interval it spans is short enough that the rate does not change much within it — always check how long the interval is compared with how far it is to the point you actually want.
- (c) RHS applies: the right angle, hypotenuse and one matching side are all equal — Both triangles are right-angled, and the hypotenuses (AC and DF) are equal, and one further pair of matching sides (AB and DE) are equal. This matches the Right angle-Hypotenuse-Side condition, which needs only these three facts, not a third side.
- (b) 200 — Method: list the equally likely outcomes for the two coins before writing any probability, then multiply by the number of throws. Working: the equally likely outcomes are head then head, head then tail, tail then head, and tail then tail, so there are 4 of them. Two of those 4 give one head and one tail, so the probability is 2/4, which is 1/2. Over 400 throws the expected number is 400 × 1 ÷ 2 = 200. Answer: about 200 of the throws would be expected to give one head and one tail. The distractors: 133 comes from treating two heads, two tails and one of each as three equally likely results and working out 400 ÷ 3 = 133.3, then rounding; 100 comes from counting only head then tail as a success, giving 400 × 1 ÷ 4 = 100; 300 is the expected number of throws that do not give two heads, 400 × 3 ÷ 4 = 300.
- (c) 7/30 — Let x = 0.2333... . Because only the 3 recurs, use two multiples of x that line up the recurring part exactly: 10x = 2.333... and 100x = 23.333... . Subtracting removes the recurring tail completely: 100x − 10x = 23.333... − 2.333... = 21, so 90x = 21, giving x = 21/90 = 7/30. Treating the decimal as if it terminated after two places, writing 0.23 as 23/100, ignores that the 3 carries on forever. Misreading which digits recur — treating 0.2333... as if the block '23' repeated, giving 0.232323... — leads to x = 23/99, which is a different, larger recurring decimal from the one given. A numerator slip in the subtraction, computing 22 instead of 21, gives x = 22/90 = 11/45.
- (d) y = (1/4)x + 3 — The given line has gradient −4, so the perpendicular gradient is the negative reciprocal, 1/4. Since (0, 3) is the y-intercept, the perpendicular line is y = (1/4)x + 3. Distractor routes: y = −4x + 3 uses the original line's own gradient instead of the perpendicular gradient, only changing the intercept for the new point. y = (−1/4)x + 3 takes the reciprocal of −4 but forgets to change its sign, so it is not the true negative reciprocal. y = 4x + 3 negates the gradient −4 but does not take its reciprocal, giving 4 instead of 1/4.
- (d) 3/5 — Convert both times to minutes: 2 hours 15 minutes = 135 minutes; 3 hours 45 minutes = 225 minutes. Put the train time over the bus time: 135/225. Divide both numbers by their highest common factor, 45: 135÷45 = 3, 225÷45 = 5, giving 3/5. (5/3 comes from writing the times the wrong way round. 2/5 comes from finding the difference, 225 − 135 = 90 minutes, and writing it as a fraction of the bus time, 90/225. 3/8 comes from comparing the train time to the total time for both journeys, 135/360.)
- (d) 4.44 m — The real van's length is 18.5 × 24 = 444 cm, which converts to 4.44 m. '0.77 m' comes from dividing by 24 instead of multiplying, using the ratio the wrong way round (18.5 ÷ 24 = 0.77 cm), and then writing that figure down as metres. '44.4 m' comes from converting 444 cm to metres with the decimal point in the wrong place. '444 m' comes from working out 444 cm correctly but forgetting to convert it into metres at all.
- (d) n² + 3 — First differences: 3, 5, 7, 9. Second differences: 2, 2, 2, so the sequence is quadratic and the coefficient of n² is half the second difference: a = 2 ÷ 2 = 1. Subtracting n² (1, 4, 9, 16, 25) from the terms (4, 7, 12, 19, 28) leaves 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, a constant, so the nth term is n² + 3. Using the second difference itself as a, without halving it, gives 2n² + 3. Finding a = 1 correctly but then dropping the constant remainder gives n². Treating the first first difference (3) as a common difference and building a linear formula a + (n − 1)d = 4 + 3(n − 1) gives 3n + 1, which fits only the first term.
- (c) 27 : 64 — For similar solids, the ratio of volumes is the ratio of lengths cubed: 3³ : 4³ = 27 : 64. 3 : 4 comes from using the height ratio itself as the volume ratio, without cubing it at all. 9 : 16 comes from squaring each part instead of cubing (3² : 4²) — squaring is the rule for area, not volume. 27 : 4 comes from cubing only the first part of the ratio (3³ = 27), and leaving the second part uncubed.
- (b) 115° — Angle APE and angle BPQ are vertically opposite, so angle BPQ = 65°, equal to angle APE. Angle BPQ and angle PQD are co-interior (allied) angles between the parallel lines, and co-interior angles always add up to 180°, so angle PQD = 180 − 65 = 115°. "65°" comes from treating co-interior angles as equal to each other, the way alternate angles are, instead of adding to 180°. "295°" comes from applying the angles-round-a-point fact (360° − 65°) directly to the original 65°, skipping the correct co-interior step. "25°" comes from misremembering co-interior angles as adding to 90° instead of 180° (90 − 65 = 25).
- (b) 3n + 1 — Method: find how many more tiles each pattern uses, then find the constant by adjusting pattern 1's total. Working: each pattern uses 3 more tiles than the last, so the coefficient of n is 3. The constant is pattern 1's total minus the common difference: 4 − 3 = 1. Answer: the nth term is 3n + 1. 3n + 4 comes from using pattern 1's total, 4, as the constant without subtracting the common difference. 3n − 2 comes from a slip in working out the constant, subtracting the common difference twice (4 − 3 − 3 = −2) instead of once. n + 3 comes from swapping the common difference and the constant.
- (c) Line D — Method: the steeper of two lines is the one whose gradient is greater, and the gradient of a line through two points is the change in y divided by the change in x. Working: line C rises 2 for a run of 4, so its gradient is 2 ÷ 4 = 1/2; the other line rises 2 for a run of 2, so its gradient is 2 ÷ 2 = 1; since 1 is greater than 1/2, it is line D that is the steeper. Answer: Line D. The distractors: Line C is chosen by comparing the x-coordinates and calling the line that reaches further along the x-axis the steeper one; They are equally steep comes from comparing only the y-coordinates, which are both 2, without dividing by the two different runs; There is not enough information comes from believing that a gradient can only be measured off a drawn graph, when two points on a line are enough to work it out.
How the 20 questions are shared out
- Number — 3 questions (15% of the qualification)
- Algebra — 6 questions (30% of the qualification)
- Ratio, proportion and rates of change — 4 questions (20% of the qualification)
- Geometry and measures — 4 questions (20% 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.