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
- (a) 0.0069 — Leading zeros are not significant, so the significant figures in 0.006852 start at 6: 6, 8, 5, 2. Rounding to 2 significant figures means keeping 6 and 8, and looking at the next digit, 5, to decide whether to round up. Since 5 rounds up, the second significant figure increases from 8 to 9: 0.006852 rounds to 0.0069. A candidate who rounded to 1 significant figure instead of 2 wrote 0.007. A candidate who rounded to 3 significant figures instead of 2 wrote 0.00685. A candidate who did not round up despite the next digit being 5 wrote 0.0068.
- (c) r = √(A/π) — A = πr² means r has been squared and then multiplied by π. To make r the subject, first divide both sides by π to get A/π = r², then take the square root of both sides: r = √(A/π). Writing r = A/π stops after dividing by π and forgets that r is still squared — it never undoes the square. Writing r = √A/π takes the square root before dividing by π, which square-roots only the A and not the whole of A/π. Writing r = (A/π)² squares A/π instead of taking its square root — the opposite of what is needed to undo r². The correct rearrangement is r = √(A/π).
- (d) 2:3:5 — The highest common factor of 12, 18 and 30 is 6. Divide every part by 6: 12 ÷ 6 = 2, 18 ÷ 6 = 3, 30 ÷ 6 = 5, giving 2 : 3 : 5. Dividing by 2 instead of 6 gives 6 : 9 : 15, which still shares a common factor of 3, so it is not fully simplified. Dividing by 3 instead of 6 gives 4 : 6 : 10, which still shares a common factor of 2, so it is not fully simplified either. Swapping the first two parts gives 3 : 2 : 5, the parts in the wrong order.
- (a) 32 m — The scale factor from the larger pond to the smaller pond is 4 ÷ 11, so the smaller perimeter is 88 × 4 ÷ 11 = 32 m. The distractor 242 m comes from using the ratio the wrong way round, 88 × 11 ÷ 4 = 242. The distractor 84 m comes from subtracting the smaller ratio number, 88 − 4 = 84, instead of scaling. The distractor 121 m comes from multiplying 11 × 11 = 121, ignoring the given perimeter altogether.
- (b) 500 — Method: when a dice is known to be fair, the theoretical probability is the best thing to work from, and the more trials there are the closer the results tend to it. Working: for a fair dice the probability of a six is 1/6, so the expected number of sixes in 3000 rolls is 3000 × 1 ÷ 6 = 500. The class experiment gave a relative frequency of 14/60, but 60 trials is far too few to overturn a known theoretical value, and the school's 3000 rolls will tend towards 1/6 in any case. Answer: about 500 sixes. The distractors: 700 comes from using the class relative frequency instead of the theory, 3000 × 14 ÷ 60 = 700; 600 comes from splitting the difference between the two, since 1/6 is about 0.167 and 14/60 is about 0.233, whose mean is 0.2, and 3000 × 0.2 = 600; 2500 uses 5/6 instead of 1/6 and counts the rolls expected not to be a six.
- (a) 1,400 and 1,240, so combine the samples for one estimate — Method: scale each sample up to the whole stock, then use the fact that a larger sample gives a more reliable estimate than a smaller one. Working: the first sample gives 35 ÷ 50 = 0.7 and 0.7 × 2,000 = 1,400 paperbacks; the second gives 31 ÷ 50 = 0.62 and 0.62 × 2,000 = 1,240 paperbacks. Two random samples of the same size are expected to differ a little, so neither estimate is wrong. Putting the two together gives 35 + 31 = 66 paperbacks in 100 books, and 66 ÷ 100 = 0.66 with 0.66 × 2,000 = 1,320, an estimate resting on twice as many books as either volunteer checked. Answer: 1,400 and 1,240, so combine the samples for one estimate. The distractors: keeping 1,400 because it is larger picks an estimate by its size, when both samples held 50 books and neither has a stronger claim; saying a volunteer must have miscounted assumes two random samples ought to agree exactly, which is precisely what random sampling does not promise; 1,750 and 1,550 come from 35 × 50 = 1,750 and 31 × 50 = 1,550, multiplying each count by the size of the sample instead of scaling by 2,000 ÷ 50.
- (c) 5 × 10⁻³ — Method: in standard form the coefficient must be at least 1 and less than 10, and for a number smaller than 1 the index is negative and counts the places the decimal point moves to the right. Working: the only significant digit is 5, so the coefficient is 5; moving the decimal point in 0.005 three places to the right gives 5, so the index is −3. Answer: 5 × 10⁻³. The distractors: 0.5 × 10⁻² is the same value written the wrong way, because 0.5 is smaller than 1 and so is not an allowed coefficient; 5 × 10⁻² comes from counting the two zeros after the decimal point instead of the three places the point moves; 5 × 10³ comes from taking the index as positive, which describes a number in the thousands rather than one smaller than 1.
- (c) x ≥ 3 — Method: collect the number terms first; the x term is negative, so the final step multiplies both sides by −1, and that is the one step that turns the inequality sign round. Working: subtracting 5 from both sides of 5 − x ≤ 2 gives −x ≤ −3; multiplying both sides by −1 turns −x into x and −3 into 3, and because the multiplier is negative the ≤ becomes ≥, so x ≥ 3. Answer: x ≥ 3. The distractors: x ≤ 3 comes from multiplying by −1 without turning the sign round, the commonest slip on this type; x ≤ −3 comes from reading −x ≤ −3 as though the minus sign could simply be rubbed off the left-hand side; x ≥ −3 comes from turning the sign round correctly but leaving the right-hand side at −3 instead of multiplying it by −1 as well.
- (b) 13/2 — Put the number of pages in the novel over the number of pages in the comic: 312/48. Divide both numbers by their highest common factor, 24: 312÷24 = 13, 48÷24 = 2, giving 13/2. (2/13 comes from writing the page counts the wrong way round. 11/2 comes from finding the difference in the page counts, 312 − 48 = 264, and writing it as a fraction of the comic's page count, 264/48. 13/15 comes from comparing the novel's page count to the total number of pages in both books, 312/360.)
- (b) 12 cm — Method: in similar shapes every length is multiplied by the same scale factor, and a ratio of 1 : 3 means that factor is 3 going from the smaller shape to the larger one. Working: 4 × 3 = 12. Answer: 12 cm. The distractors: 7 cm comes from adding 3 to the side instead of multiplying by it, which is what happens when a ratio is read as a difference; 36 cm comes from multiplying by 3² = 9, the factor that scales areas, and applying it to a length; 4 cm comes from treating the two shapes as congruent, so that corresponding sides stay equal — similar shapes have equal angles, but their sides are in proportion.
- (d) 1/8 — The multiples of 3 from 1 to 8 are 3 and 6, so the probability of that event is 2/8, which simplifies to 1/4. The probability of the coin landing on heads is 1/2. Since the spin and the toss are independent, multiply the two probabilities: 1/4 × 1/2 = 1/8. A candidate who answers 1/4 has considered only the spinner and forgotten to combine it with the coin toss. A candidate who answers 1/2 has considered only the coin and forgotten the spinner condition entirely. A candidate who answers 1/16 has counted only one number, 6, as a multiple of 3 instead of two, giving 1/8 × 1/2.
- (a) 8 × 10² — Method: to multiply numbers written in standard form, multiply the coefficients and add the indices. Working: 4 × 2 = 8 for the coefficients, and −3 + 5 = 2 for the indices; 8 already lies between 1 and 10, so no adjustment is needed. Answer: 8 × 10². The distractors: 6 × 10² comes from adding the coefficients, 4 + 2, instead of multiplying them; 8 × 10⁸ comes from ignoring the minus sign and adding 3 + 5; 8 × 10⁻¹⁵ comes from multiplying the indices, −3 × 5, instead of adding them.
- (d) 16 boys and 14 girls — Method: write the number of boys in terms of the number of girls, then use the total for the class. Working: if there are g girls then there are g + 2 boys, so g + (g + 2) = 30, that is 2g + 2 = 30, so 2g = 28 and g = 14; the number of boys is 14 + 2 = 16. Answer: 16 boys and 14 girls, which total 30 and differ by 2. The distractors: 14 boys and 16 girls comes from substituting for the wrong group, writing b + (b + 2) = 30 and then calling b the number of boys; 15 boys and 15 girls comes from halving 30 and never using the difference; 17 boys and 13 girls comes from adding the whole 2 to one half of the class and taking the whole 2 off the other half, which leaves a difference of 4.
- (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.
- (d) 16 — Method: use the scale to find the real length and width separately, then use the perimeter formula. Working: real length = 4 cm × 125 = 500 cm = 5 m; real width = 2.4 cm × 125 = 300 cm = 3 m; perimeter = 2 × (5 + 3) = 16 m. A student who answers 8 has added the real length and width but forgotten to double the total for the perimeter. A student who answers 1600 has correctly worked out the perimeter in centimetres but forgotten to convert it to metres. A student who answers 500 has only converted the length to real centimetres and stopped there, ignoring the width and the perimeter step. Answer: 16 m.
- (d) x = 0, y = −1 and x = 3, y = 5 — Set the two expressions for y equal: 2x − 1 = x² − x − 1. Rearranging, subtracting 2x and adding 1 to both sides: 0 = x² − x − 1 − 2x + 1 = x² − 3x, so x² − 3x = 0. Factorise: x(x − 3) = 0, giving x = 0 or x = 3. Using y = 2x − 1: x = 0 gives y = −1; x = 3 gives y = 5. Distractor routes: x = 0, y = −1 alone stops after the factor x = 0 and never checks the second factor, x − 3 = 0. x = 0, y = −1 and x = −3, y = −7 comes from mis-factorising x² − 3x as x(x + 3), a sign error that gives a second root of −3 instead of 3. x = −2, y = −5 and x = 1, y = 1 comes from adding 2x to both sides instead of subtracting it when rearranging, giving x² + x − 2 = 0 instead of x² − 3x = 0.
- (c) 4/5 — Find 20% of £45: 10% is £4.50, so 20% is £9. The sale price is £45 − £9 = £36. Form the fraction 36/45; both numbers share a factor of 9, so 36 ÷ 9 = 4 and 45 ÷ 9 = 5, giving 4/5. 1/5 comes from writing the discount itself as a fraction of the normal price (9/45), instead of the sale price. 6/5 comes from adding the 20% instead of subtracting it, giving a sale price of £54, then 54/45 = 6/5. 5/9 comes from treating 'reduced by 20%' as 'reduced by £20', giving a sale price of £25, then 25/45 = 5/9.
- (c) A rotation of 180° about the origin — An enlargement by scale factor −1 sends every point (x, y) to (−x, −y) — both coordinates change sign. A rotation of 180° about the origin does exactly the same thing to every point, so the two transformations have identical effect. A reflection in the x-axis only changes the sign of the y-coordinate, sending (x, y) to (x, −y), leaving the x-coordinate untouched. A reflection in the y-axis only changes the sign of the x-coordinate, sending (x, y) to (−x, y), leaving the y-coordinate untouched. Treating a negative scale factor as though it behaves like a positive one gives no transformation at all, but the minus sign is not decorative — it reverses both coordinates. Both signs flip together, which is exactly what a 180° rotation about the origin does.
- (a) 6x + 12 — A regular hexagon has 6 equal sides, so the perimeter is 6(x + 2) = 6x + 12. A candidate who multiplies only the x-term by 6 and forgets to multiply the 2 gets 6x + 2. A candidate who multiplies only the number term by 6 and forgets to multiply the x gets x + 12. A candidate who adds 6 and 2 to make a single coefficient of x instead of expanding the brackets gets 8x.
- (c) Wrong — the product is −4/25, not −1. — The student's rearrangement is correct: 5y = −2x + 15 gives y = −(2/5)x + 3, gradient −2/5. But the test for perpendicularity is that the product of the two gradients equals exactly −1, not merely that it is negative. Here 2/5 × (−2/5) = −4/25, which is not −1, so the lines are NOT perpendicular. Distractor routes: "a negative product always means perpendicular" states a rule that does not exist — many pairs of lines have a negative gradient product without being perpendicular, as this pair shows. "The rearrangement is incorrect" wrongly blames a correct step; 5y = −2x + 15 does rearrange to y = −(2/5)x + 3. "2/5 and −2/5 are negatives of each other" notices a true but irrelevant fact — being negatives of each other is not the perpendicularity condition; an exact product of −1 is.
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.