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
- (d) 720 — Method: the three medals are awarded one after the other, and each award removes one athlete from the pool available for the next, so the product rule multiplies the number of choices at each stage. Working: 10 athletes could take gold; once gold is settled 9 could take silver; once silver is settled 8 could take bronze; so the number of ways is 10 × 9 × 8 = 720. Answer: 720. The distractors: 1000 comes from working out 10 × 10 × 10, which allows the same athlete to take more than one medal; 120 comes from dividing the product by 6, which would be right only if the three medals were identical, whereas gold, silver and bronze are different; 30 comes from multiplying the 10 athletes by the 3 medals instead of multiplying the choices at each stage.
- (d) 3x² + 4x − 7 — Method: the minus sign in front of the second bracket changes the sign of every term inside it; then collect like terms. Working: removing the brackets gives 5x² + 3x − 2 − 2x² + x − 5; the squared terms give 5x² − 2x² = 3x², the x terms give 3x + x = 4x, and the number terms give −2 − 5 = −7. Answer: 3x² + 4x − 7. The distractors: 7x² + 2x + 3 comes from adding the two brackets instead of subtracting, giving 5x² + 2x², 3x − x and −2 + 5; 3x² + 2x + 3 comes from applying the minus sign to 2x² only, leaving −x and +5 unchanged so that 3x − x = 2x and −2 + 5 = 3; 3x² + 4x + 3 comes from changing the signs of the terms with letters but leaving +5 as it stood, so the number terms give −2 + 5 = 3.
- (d) 20 litres — The ratio of concentrate to water is 2 : 5, so water = concentrate × 5 ÷ 2. 8 × 5 ÷ 2 = 20, so Priya needs 20 litres of water. Giving 40 litres multiplies by 5 but forgets to divide by 2 (8 × 5 = 40). Giving 3.2 litres uses the ratio inverted, multiplying by 2 ÷ 5 instead of 5 ÷ 2 (8 × 2 ÷ 5 = 3.2). Giving 11 litres uses additive reasoning instead of multiplicative: it adds the difference between the ratio parts, 5 − 2 = 3, onto the amount of concentrate (8 + 3 = 11), but ratios scale by multiplying, not by adding a fixed amount.
- (b) Yes — OA = OC (radii), so the base angles are equal. — Method: check the definition of a radius and the isosceles triangle property the step relies on. Working: every radius of a circle has the same length, so OA = OC regardless of where A and C sit on the circle — this alone makes triangle OAC isosceles, and the base angles opposite the two equal sides, angle OAC and angle OCA, must be equal. The verdict is Yes, for exactly that reason. Claiming OA and OC are only equal if they are drawn to 'the very same point' misunderstands what a radius is — A and C can be any two points on the circle and OA still equals OC. Claiming the triangle is isosceles because angle AOC is 90° reverses the logic: nothing in the step has fixed angle AOC at 90°, and even if it had, that alone would not explain why OA = OC. Claiming the triangle would need to be equilateral confuses isosceles (two equal sides) with equilateral (three equal sides) — only two sides, OA and OC, are being compared here.
- (b) 5/12 — There are 36 equally likely ordered pairs. Listing the pairs where the red score is smaller than the blue score gives 15 outcomes, so the probability is 15/36 = 5/12. Choosing 1/2 comes from assuming the 36 outcomes split evenly between 'red smaller' and 'red bigger', which ignores the 6 outcomes where the two dice show the same score. Choosing 7/12 comes from including the outcomes where the two scores are equal, 15 + 6 = 21, giving 21/36 = 7/12, instead of using 'less than' strictly. Choosing 5/36 comes from counting only the outcomes where the two scores differ by exactly 1, such as (1, 2) and (2, 3), which is 5 outcomes, and missing the pairs that differ by more than 1.
- (a) (30, 60) — Method: a cumulative frequency point is plotted at the upper boundary of its class, paired with the running total of all the frequencies up to and including that class. Working: the running totals are 7, then 7 + 19 = 26, then 26 + 34 = 60, then 60 + 40 = 100; the class 20 ≤ t < 30 has upper boundary 30, and the running total there is 60. Answer: the point for that class is plotted at 30 seconds against a cumulative frequency of 60. The distractors: (25, 60) comes from plotting at the class midpoint, which is what a frequency polygon uses and not what a cumulative frequency diagram uses; (30, 34) comes from plotting the class frequency, 34, rather than the running total; (20, 60) comes from plotting at the lower boundary of the class, which would claim that 60 calls took less than 20 seconds when only 26 did.
- (b) 14.5 ≤ l < 15.5 — A measurement given to the nearest metre could have been rounded from anywhere up to half a metre below or above it: 15 − 0.5 = 14.5 and 15 + 0.5 = 15.5. Every value from 14.5 up to (but not reaching) 15.5 rounds to 15, so the error interval is 14.5 ≤ l < 15.5, with the lower bound included and the upper bound excluded. Making both ends strict, 14.5 < l < 15.5, wrongly excludes 14.5 itself, even though 14.5 does round to 15. Making both ends inclusive, 14.5 ≤ l ≤ 15.5, wrongly includes 15.5, which actually rounds up to 16, not 15. Using a whole metre either side instead of half a metre, giving 14 ≤ l < 16, comes from forgetting that the error is only half the rounding unit.
- (a) −1 — Reflecting y = sin x in the x-axis gives y = −sin x, so g(x) = −sin x. Since sin 90° = 1, g(90) = −1. Reading sin 90° = 1 and forgetting to apply the reflection gives 1. Misreading the angle as 0° instead of 90° gives sin 0° = 0, so 0. Confusing sin 90° with sin 30° = 0.5, then reflecting it, gives −0.5.
- (a) 100 — The difference between the parts of the ratio is 7 − 3 = 4 parts, and this is worth 40 beads. Divide to find one part: 40 ÷ 4 = 10. The total number of parts is 7 + 3 = 10, so the total number of beads is 10 × 10 = 100. (40 is just the given difference between gold and silver, not the total. 70 is the number of gold beads only, using 7 parts. 30 is the number of silver beads only, using 3 parts.)
- (b) 46.8 cm² — Method: for a parallelogram, not a triangle, the two sides and the angle between them give Area = ab sin C — there is no 1/2. Working: Area = 6 × 9 × sin 60° = 46.8 cm² (1 d.p.). Answer: 46.8 cm². Using the triangle formula, (1/2)ab sin C, on a parallelogram by mistake gives half the true area, 23.4 cm²; using cos 60° instead of sin 60° gives 27.0 cm²; and adding the two sides before multiplying by sin 60° gives 13.0 cm². A parallelogram is exactly two of the triangles this formula was built for, so never carry the 1/2 across from the triangle version.
- (d) 3/36 — Method: list the results as ordered pairs, decide which totals satisfy the condition, count the pairs that give those totals and divide by the number of pairs there are. Working: there are 6 × 6 = 36 equally likely ordered pairs. Greater than 10 means a total of 11 or a total of 12. A total of 11 comes from (5, 6) and (6, 5); a total of 12 comes from (6, 6) alone, because both dice must show a 6. That is 2 + 1 = 3 pairs out of the 36. Answer: the probability is 3/36. The distractors: 2/36 comes from counting the two ways of making 11 and forgetting that 12 is greater than 10 as well; 4/36 comes from writing (6, 6) down twice, applying the rule that a pair can be turned round to a double that can only happen one way; 33/36 comes from reading the condition the wrong way round and giving the probability that the total is 10 or less.
- (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) 5n − 1 — The common difference is 5 (9−4=5), so the expression starts 5n. To match the first term when n=1, 5×1+c=4, so c=−1: the nth term is 5n−1. A candidate who uses the first term itself as the constant, instead of first term minus the common difference, would write 5n+4 (giving 9, 14, 19, 24 — one term too high throughout). A candidate who omits the constant term altogether would write just 5n (giving 5, 10, 15, 20, not matching the sequence). A candidate who adds the common difference to n instead of multiplying would write n+5 (giving 6, 7, 8, 9, far too small).
- (a) 1 : 2 000 000 — Method: a scale is a ratio between two lengths written in the same unit, reduced so that the map distance is 1. Working: 120 km = 120 × 1000 × 100 = 12 000 000 cm, so the ratio is 6 : 12 000 000, and dividing both parts by 6 gives 1 : 2 000 000. Answer: 1 : 2 000 000. The distractors: 1 : 12 000 000 comes from writing the real length in centimetres without dividing by the 6 cm on the map; 1 : 200 000 comes from taking 120 km as 1 200 000 cm, one conversion step short, before dividing by 6; 1 : 20 000 comes from converting 120 km to 120 000 m and treating those metres as centimetres.
- (b) (5, 1) — First scale a by 2: 2a = (2×3, 2×(−2)) = (6, −4). Then add b component by component: (6+(−1), −4+5) = (5, 1). (2, 3) is a + b without doubling a first. (4, 6) doubles both a and b instead of only a. (7, −9) subtracts b from 2a instead of adding it.
- (b) 19 — A line through (x₁, y₁) with gradient m has equation y − y₁ = m(x − x₁). Substituting (6, 1) and m = −3: y − 1 = −3(x − 6), so y = −3x + 18 + 1, which simplifies to y = −3x + 19; at x = 0 this gives 19. Making a sign error when distributing, writing −3(x − 6) as −3x − 18 instead of −3x + 18, gives the wrong line y = −3x − 17, so −17 at x = 0. Forgetting to add the y₁ = 1 at the end, using y = −3(x − 6) alone, gives 18 at x = 0. Substituting the y-coordinate into the gradient term instead of using x, working out 1 + (−3 × 1), gives −2.
- (b) 250 g — Method: adding water changes the total mass but not the mass of salt, so find the salt, hold it fixed, use the new ratio to find the new total mass and subtract the mass already in the beaker. Working: 12:100 = x:500 gives 12 ÷ 100 × 500 = 60 g of salt; that 60 g must be 8% of the new mixture, so 8:100 = 60:y gives y = 60 ÷ 8 × 100 = 750 g; the water added is 750 − 500 = 250 g. Answer: 250 g. The distractors: 750 g is the mass of the diluted solution, given without taking away the 500 g that was in the beaker to start with; 60 g is the mass of salt, the quantity that stays the same, given instead of the mass of water; 20 g comes from treating the fall from 12% to 8% as 4% of the original 500 g, which measures a change in concentration as though it were a mass of water.
- (c) 5√3 m — The cable, the pole and the ground form a right-angled triangle: the ground distance (5 m) is adjacent to the 60° angle, and the height of the pole is opposite it, so height = 5 × tan 60° = 5 × √3 = 5√3 m. 5√3/2 m comes from using sin 60° = √3/2 instead of tan 60°. 5/√3 m comes from using tan 30° = 1/√3, the reciprocal-angle value, instead of tan 60°. 10√3 m comes from doubling the correct height by mistake.
- (a) x = 2, x = 7; y-intercept cannot be found here — Translating y = f(x) to y = f(x − 3) shifts the graph 3 units to the right, so each root increases by 3: x = −1 becomes x = 2, and x = 4 becomes x = 7. The y-intercept is the value at x = 0, which for this new graph is f(0 − 3) = f(−3) — and f(−3) is not one of the values given, so the new y-intercept cannot be worked out from the information given. Writing 'y-intercept stays at (0, −8)' wrongly assumes a horizontal translation leaves the y-intercept unchanged — it generally does not, since it moves the whole graph sideways, including the point that used to sit on the y-axis. Writing roots at x = −4 and x = 1 comes from translating 3 units to the LEFT instead of to the right — f(x − 3) shifts the graph in the positive x-direction, not the negative direction.
- (b) x ≤ 5 — Method: divide out the bracket first, then undo the number term; the inequality sign turns round only if both sides are multiplied or divided by a negative number. Working: dividing both sides of 2(x − 1) ≤ 8 by 2 gives x − 1 ≤ 4, and 2 is positive so the ≤ is unchanged; adding 1 to both sides gives x ≤ 5. Answer: x ≤ 5. The distractors: x ≤ 3 comes from subtracting 1 from 4 instead of adding 1 to both sides; x ≤ 4 comes from stopping at 8 ÷ 2 = 4 and never undoing the −1 inside the bracket; x < 5 comes from reading ≤ as a strict inequality, which wrongly leaves the boundary value out of the solution set.
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.