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) 0.0065 — Leading zeros are never significant, so counting from the first non-zero digit, the first two significant figures of 0.006482 are 6 and 4. Look at the next digit along, 8, to decide whether the second figure rounds up: since 8 is 5 or more, the 4 rounds up to 5, giving 0.0065. Rounding to 2 decimal places instead of 2 significant figures gives 0.01, which answers a different question. Wrongly counting one of the leading zeros as a significant figure and stopping one figure short gives 0.006. Keeping an extra digit, as in 0.00648, gives 3 significant figures rather than 2.
- (d) £16.70 — The mileage charge is 2.20 × 6 = £13.20. Adding the fixed fee: £13.20 + £3.50 = £16.70. A candidate who forgets the fixed fee gives just the mileage charge, £13.20. A candidate who adds the fixed fee to the per-mile rate before multiplying by the number of miles, (3.50 + 2.20) × 6, gets £34.20. A candidate who rounds £2.20 down to £2 gets 2 × 6 + 3.50 = £15.50.
- (a) 6 — Method: for inverse proportion the product xy is the same for every pair, so find that product and use it to work back to the missing value. Working: xy = 2 × 15 = 30, so when x = 5 the equation 5y = 30 gives y = 30 ÷ 5 = 6. Answer: 6. The distractors: 37.5 comes from treating the pair as direct proportion and scaling y up with x, 15 × 5 ÷ 2, although in inverse proportion y falls as x rises; 30 is the constant product itself, given as a value of y rather than used to find one; 12 comes from additive thinking — x rises by 3, so 3 is taken off y — which would make the two quantities differ by a constant instead of multiplying to one.
- (d) 20 cm — The scale factor from P to Q is 15 ÷ 6 = 2.5. Apply the same scale factor to the other side: 8 × 2.5 = 20 cm. A pupil who divides instead of multiplying by the scale factor gets 8 ÷ 2.5 = 3.2 cm. A pupil who adds the difference between the two known sides, 15 − 6 = 9, to 8 instead of scaling gets 8 + 9 = 17 cm. A pupil who rounds the scale factor 2.5 down to 2 gets 8 × 2 = 16 cm. The correct length is 20 cm.
- (a) 0.45, different from 0.4 for all the households — Method: work out the probability inside the restricted group of garden owners, then work out the probability across the whole survey, and compare the two. Working: 54 of the 120 households with a garden own a dog, so the conditional probability is 54 divided by 120, which is 0.45. Across the whole survey 80 of the 200 households own a dog, which is 0.4. Since 0.45 is not 0.4, having a garden changes the chance of owning a dog and the two events are not independent. Answer: 0.45, different from 0.4 for all the households. The distractors: 0.27 is 54/200, dividing the households with both by the whole survey instead of by the 120 with a garden; 0.675 is 54/80, the probability that a household has a garden given that it owns a dog, which is the condition and the event the wrong way round; 0.4 is 80/200, the probability of owning a dog with the garden information never used, which is why that route also reports no difference.
- (c) No, 90 cm is far outside the heights on the graph — Method: a line of best fit describes the trend only across the stretch of data it was drawn through; predicting beyond that stretch is extrapolation, and nothing in the data supports it. Working: the heights used to draw this line run from 150 cm to 180 cm, all of them Year 10 pupils, while 90 cm is 60 cm below the shortest of them and belongs to a two-year-old child, whose build follows no trend the graph has measured. Substituting anyway gives 0.9 × 90 − 85 = −4, a mass of −4 kg, which cannot exist. Answer: no, because 90 cm is far outside the heights on the graph. The distractors: saying a line of best fit cannot be used to predict at all throws away its main purpose, since a prediction made between the plotted values is perfectly sound; saying the line passes through all 20 points misdescribes a line of best fit, which is drawn to follow the trend of the points and will normally pass through few of them; saying the equation works for any value put into it treats an equation fitted to Year 10 heights as a law of nature, and the mass of −4 kg shows what that assumption produces.
- (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.
- (d) x = 5y + 4 — To make x the subject of y = (x − 4)/5, first multiply both sides by 5 to clear the fraction: 5y = x − 4, then add 4 to both sides: x = 5y + 4. Writing x = 5y − 4 multiplies correctly but keeps the minus sign on the 4 instead of changing it to a plus when moving it across. Writing x = y/5 + 4 divides by 5 instead of multiplying, the wrong inverse of the fraction. Writing x = 5(y + 4) adds 4 before multiplying by 5, reversing the correct order of the two steps. The correct rearrangement is x = 5y + 4.
- (d) 13/10 — First find the selling price: £150 + £45 = £195. Put the selling price over the cost price: 195/150. Divide both numbers by their highest common factor, 15: 195÷15 = 13, 150÷15 = 10, giving 13/10. (10/13 comes from writing the prices the wrong way round. 3/10 is just the profit written as a fraction of the cost price, 45/150, not the selling price. 13/23 comes from comparing the selling price to the combined total of the cost price and the selling price, 195/345.)
- (c) 1/4 — A full turn at the centre of a circle is 360°, so a sector's fraction of the circle is its angle divided by 360°: 90 ÷ 360 = 1/4. 1/2 would be the fraction for a sector with an angle of 180°, not 90°. 3/4 is the fraction of the rest of the circle, the major sector left over from the 270° that is not part of this sector. 1/8 would be the fraction for a sector with an angle of 45°, half of 90°.
- (b) 2/11 — Method: restrict the 36 equally likely outcomes to those where at least one die shows a 5, then find what fraction of THOSE give a total of 8. Working: outcomes with at least one 5: (5, 1), (5, 2), (5, 3), (5, 4), (5, 5), (5, 6), (1, 5), (2, 5), (3, 5), (4, 5), (6, 5) — 11 outcomes. Among these, the total is 8 for (5, 3) and (3, 5) — 2 outcomes. P(total 8 | at least one 5) = 2/11. Answer: 2/11. Watch out: 5/36 is P(total 8) over the full 36 outcomes — it ignores that you already know one die shows a 5. Treating the condition as 'the first die shows a 5' instead of 'at least one die shows a 5' restricts you to only 6 outcomes and misses the (3, 5) case, giving 1/6. And counting only (5, 3) but not its reverse (3, 5) inside the correct 11-outcome list gives 1/11 instead of 2/11.
- (a) 23 — Division undoes multiplication, so the missing number is 391 ÷ 17 = 23. Writing down 17 repeats the number already given instead of solving for the missing one. Subtracting instead of dividing gives 391 − 17 = 374. Multiplying instead of dividing gives 391 × 17 = 6647.
- (a) (2n + 1) + (2n + 3) = 4n + 4 = 4(n + 1) — Two consecutive odd numbers can be written as 2n + 1 and 2n + 3, for a whole number n. Adding them: (2n + 1) + (2n + 3) = 4n + 4 = 4(n + 1), which is a multiple of 4 for every whole number n, proving the general result. Using 2n + 1 twice does not represent two different numbers, so it proves nothing about a sum of two numbers; writing n + (n + 2) drops the +1 that makes the numbers odd in the first place, and only shows a multiple of 2; and check every constant term is added correctly — 1 + 3 is 4, not 3.
- (b) 5 litres — Method: adding water changes the total volume but adds no salt, so work out the volume of salt, then the total volume that makes that salt 20% of the mixture, then the extra water. Working: 30% of 10 litres is 0.3 × 10 = 3 litres of salt. For the same 3 litres to be 20% of the new mixture, the new total volume is 3 ÷ 0.2 = 15 litres. The water added is the extra volume, 15 − 10 = 5 litres. Answer: 5 litres. The distractors: 3 litres is the volume of salt in the solution, which is the first step and not what the question asks for; 15 litres is the total volume of the new mixture, which counts the 10 litres already in the container as water that was poured in; 2 litres comes from taking 20% of the original 10 litres, applying the new percentage to the old volume instead of to the new one.
- (a) 105° — The interior angles of a pentagon add up to (5 − 2) × 180° = 540°. Subtracting the three known angles, 540 − 100 − 110 − 120 = 210°, and this 210° is shared equally between the two angles marked x°, so each one is 210 ÷ 2 = 105°. 210° stops one step early, giving the total of the two unknown angles instead of one of them. 108° is the interior angle of a regular pentagon, which does not apply here since this pentagon's angles are not all equal. 55° comes from halving one of the given angles, 110°, instead of halving the remaining total.
- (d) Reflect in the y-axis, +2 in x; roots 3, −2 — f(2 − x) is zero exactly when 2 − x equals one of f's roots: 2 − x = −1 or 2 − x = 4. Solving each correctly (x = 2 − (−1) = 3, and x = 2 − 4 = −2) gives the new roots x = 3 and x = −2. This is the same as reflecting y = f(x) in the y-axis to get f(−x), then translating 2 units in the positive x-direction to get f(−(x − 2)) = f(2 − x). Solving 2 − x = k as x = k − 2 instead of x = 2 − k is a sign slip when rearranging, and gives x = −3 and x = 2. Translating +2 in x with no reflection at all uses f(x − 2), whose roots are the original roots plus 2: x = 1 and x = 6 — this misses the reflection completely. Assuming 'no overall change' wrongly treats a reflection-and-translation pair as always cancelling out, when here the roots genuinely move, from x = −1 and x = 4 to x = 3 and x = −2.
- (a) 8/5 — Scaling down from 8 people to 5 people uses the multiplier 5/8. To reverse this and scale back up from 5 people to 8 people, use the reciprocal of that multiplier: flip 5/8 to get 8/5. 5/8 comes from using the forward (scaling down) multiplier again, instead of reversing it. 3/5 comes from writing the difference in people (8 − 5 = 3) over 5, instead of using the reciprocal of 5/8. 25/64 comes from multiplying the forward multiplier by itself (5/8 × 5/8), instead of finding its reciprocal.
- (a) Translation by the vector (0, 6) — Method: reflecting twice in two parallel horizontal lines is always equivalent to a single translation, at right angles to the lines, of twice the distance between them. Working: the two lines are 4 − 1 = 3 units apart, so the translation is 2 × 3 = 6 units in the positive y-direction. Answer: translation by the vector (0, 6). Using just the gap itself, without doubling it, gives (0, 3); translating in the negative y-direction, from the second line back towards the first, gives (0, −6); and describing the combination as a single reflection in the line halfway between them, y = 2.5, confuses this combination with the effect of a single reflection — two reflections in parallel lines are always equivalent to a translation, never to another reflection. Always double the gap between the lines, and translate in the direction from the first line towards the second.
- (a) 4(x + 3) = 20 and 4x + 3 = 11 when x = 2, so the two expressions are not equivalent, because the bracket means the 3 must be added before multiplying by 4. — Substituting x = 2: 4(x + 3) = 4 × 5 = 20, and 4x + 3 = 8 + 3 = 11. The two values are different, and expanding 4(x + 3) algebraically gives 4x + 12, which can never equal 4x + 3 (that would require 12 = 3) — so the two expressions are never equivalent, for any value of x. The option claiming they become equal for a larger x is wrong: 4x + 12 = 4x + 3 has no solution at all. The option claiming they are equivalent because they share the terms 4x and 3 ignores that the bracket changes the constant term. The option that calculates 4(x + 3) as 11 ignores the bracket completely, applying the 4 only to the x term.
- (a) 9 km — Ravi's house and the library have the same y-coordinate, so the distance between them is the difference between their x-coordinates: 6 − (−3) = 9 km. 3 km comes from dropping the negative sign on Ravi's x-coordinate and working out 6 − 3 instead. 0 km comes from using the y-coordinates, which are equal, instead of the x-coordinates. −9 km comes from working out −3 − 6 = −9 and not converting it to a positive distance.
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.