Sample paper · GCSE Higher · grades 4–9
GCSE Higher 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 Higher qualification — number 15%, algebra 30%, ratio, proportion and rates of change 20%, geometry and measures 20%, probability 7.5%, statistics 7.5% — with a calculator allowed. AO1 / AO2 / AO3 at this tier: 40% / 30% / 30%.
CalculatorGCSE Higher
Answer key: GCSE Higher sample Paper 2 (calculator)
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 20p — Turn each price into the same rate before comparing. The small bag is 400 g = 0.4 kg, so it costs £1.12 ÷ 0.4 = £2.80 per kg. The large bag costs £3.90 ÷ 1.5 = £2.60 per kg. The saving is £2.80 − £2.60 = £0.20, which is 20p per kg. 2p compares the prices per 100 g rather than per kilogram, £2.78 subtracts one bag price from the other without turning either into a rate, and £2.60 is the large bag's price per kilogram rather than the saving.
- (c) y = 3x + 5 — Method: find the gradient from the two points, then substitute one point into y = mx + c to find c. Working: gradient = (14 − 2) ÷ (3 − (−1)) = 12 ÷ 4 = 3. Using the point (3, 14): 14 = 3(3) + c, so 14 = 9 + c, giving c = 5. Answer: y = 3x + 5. y = 6x − 4 comes from mishandling the negative x-coordinate, treating 3 − (−1) as 3 − 1 = 2, so the gradient becomes 12 ÷ 2 = 6, and then c = 14 − 18 = −4. y = 3x + 23 comes from a sign error isolating c, adding 9 to 14 instead of subtracting it: c = 14 + 9 = 23. y = x/3 + 13 comes from dividing the change in x by the change in y instead of the other way round, giving a gradient of 4 ÷ 12 = 1/3, and then c = 14 − 1 = 13.
- (d) 5:3:2 — German = 100% − 50% − 30% = 20%. The ratio 50 : 30 : 20 simplifies by dividing every part by 10 to give 5 : 3 : 2.
- (a) Yes - SSS, the three side lengths all match — Bracket P's sides (12 cm, 16 cm, 20 cm) can each be matched to one of Bracket Q's sides (16 cm, 20 cm, 12 cm) — the same three lengths, just listed differently — so the brackets are congruent by SSS. SAS is wrong here because no angle is stated for either bracket, only three sides. The order the sides are listed in does not matter for SSS — only whether the SET of three lengths matches, and it does, so 'listed in a different order' is not a reason to say no. Nothing extra is needed: SSS proves congruence from side lengths alone, without any angles, so it can be determined.
- (c) The green bag (7/24) — Method: fractions can only be ordered once they share a denominator, so rewrite all four over the lowest common denominator and compare the numerators. Working: the lowest common denominator of 12, 8, 24 and 3 is 24, and scaling gives 5/12 = 10/24, 3/8 = 9/24, 7/24 stays as it is, and 1/3 = 8/24; the numerators are then 10, 9, 7 and 8. Answer: the smallest numerator is 7, so the green bag, with 7/24, is the least likely and sits furthest to the left on the 0 to 1 scale. The distractors: the red bag (5/12) comes from finding the largest of the four probabilities instead of the smallest; the blue bag (3/8) comes from scaling 3/8 by changing only the denominator to 24, which turns it into 3/24 and makes it look the smallest; the yellow bag (1/3) comes from comparing numerators alone and assuming the fraction with the numerator 1 must be the smallest.
- (c) Club members probably eat differently from most people — Method: a sample is biased when the group it is drawn from differs from the population in the very thing the survey is measuring, so compare the subgroup with the population on that quantity. Working: the survey measures eating habits, and people who join a sports club take more exercise than average and are known to eat differently from the town as a whole, so their replies pull the results away from the true picture for the town however many of them are asked. Answer: club members probably eat differently from most people. The distractors: the reply about the number of members treats bias as a question of size, but a large biased sample is still biased; the reply that the members were picked at random is false, since the council picked a club rather than picking residents, and it confuses bias with non-response; the reply that everyone asked lives in the town notes something true of the members but draws the false conclusion that the sample therefore covers the town, when a sample must reflect a population and not merely be taken from inside it.
- (b) 25 g — Method: substitute the number of years into the model, raise the fraction to that power first, then multiply by the starting mass. Working: with n = 3 the model gives M = 200 × (1/2)³. Since (1/2)³ = 1/8, the mass is 200 ÷ 8 = 25. Answer: 25 g. The distractors: 12.5 g comes from halving four times instead of three, counting the first weighing as a year; 300 g comes from multiplying by 1/2 × 3 = 1.5 instead of raising 1/2 to the power 3; 0.125 g comes from working out (1/2)³ = 0.125 and stopping there, without multiplying by the starting mass.
- (a) 18 cm² — Method: substitute the width into the formula, applying the index to the letter before multiplying by the 2 in front of it. Working: x² = 3 × 3 = 9, and then A = 2 × 9 = 18, so the area is 18 cm². Answer: 18 cm². The distractors: 36 cm² comes from multiplying 2 by 3 first and squaring afterwards, giving (2 × 3)²; 12 cm² comes from doubling instead of squaring, so that x² is replaced by 2x and the calculation becomes 2 × 2 × 3; 6 cm² comes from working out 2 × 3 and never applying the index at all.
- (a) 1000m — Method: kilograms are a smaller unit than tonnes, so change tonnes into kilograms by multiplying by 1000. Working: m tonnes = m × 1000 kg = 1000m kg. So the expression is 1000m. Distractor m/1000 comes from dividing by 1000 instead of multiplying, which would make the number of kilograms smaller than the number of tonnes, the wrong way round. Distractor 1000 + m comes from adding the conversion factor instead of multiplying by it. Distractor m − 1000 comes from subtracting the conversion factor instead of multiplying by it.
- (a) Parallel, since both gradients are 2 — Gradient of line 1 = (5 − 1) ÷ (2 − 0) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Gradient of line 2 = (6 − 2) ÷ (5 − 3) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. The two gradients are equal, so the lines are parallel. "Not parallel, since the gradients are 2 and 4" uses 4 for line 2, which comes from dividing the change in y, 4, by 1 rather than by the change in x, 5 − 3 = 2. "Not parallel, since the two lines cross the y-axis at different points" confuses parallel lines with the same line repeated — parallel lines are distinct lines, and where a line crosses the y-axis has no effect on its gradient. "Parallel, since both lines pass through positive coordinates" reaches the right conclusion for the wrong reason: lines are parallel because their gradients are equal, not because the coordinates given happen to be positive.
- (b) 12/19 — Method: turn the percentages into expected frequencies out of 1000, total the faulty pens, then divide supplier Y's faulty pens by that total, because the pen picked is known to be faulty. Working: supplier X provided 700 pens and 2% of them are faulty, which is 14 pens. Supplier Y provided 300 pens and 8% of them are faulty, which is 24 pens. Altogether 38 pens are faulty, so the probability is 24/38, and dividing the numerator and the denominator by 2 gives 12/19. Answer: the probability is 12/19. The distractors: 3/10 is supplier Y's share of the stock, the answer before the faulty information is used at all; 3/125 is 24/1000, the probability that a pen is from supplier Y and faulty, which stops at the joint probability and never divides by the probability of a fault; 4/5 is 8 divided by 2 + 8, comparing the two fault rates as though the suppliers provided equal numbers of pens, so the 70 to 30 split is thrown away.
- (d) 2³ × 5² — Method: divide repeatedly by the smallest prime number, then write any repeated prime using a power. Working: 200 ÷ 2 = 100, 100 ÷ 2 = 50, 50 ÷ 2 = 25, 25 ÷ 5 = 5, and 5 is prime, so 200 = 2 × 2 × 2 × 5 × 5, written as 2³ × 5². 2² × 5³ swaps the two powers, giving 4 × 125 = 500, not 200. 2³ × 5 leaves out one of the two 5s, giving 8 × 5 = 40, not 200. 2 × 5³ leaves out two of the three 2s, giving 2 × 125 = 250, not 200. Answer: 2³ × 5².
- (d) 12 — Method: call the younger brother's age x, write the elder brother's age in terms of x, and form an equation from the total. Working: the elder brother is x + 6, so x + (x + 6) = 30; simplifying gives 2x + 6 = 30, subtracting 6 from both sides gives 2x = 24, and dividing by 2 gives x = 12. Checking: 12 and 18 add up to 30 and differ by 6. Answer: 12. The distractors: 18 comes from solving correctly and then giving the elder brother's age, which is not the age asked for; 15 comes from halving 30 and ignoring the 6-year difference altogether; 24 comes from taking 6 off the total, 30 − 6 = 24, and giving that as an age.
- (a) Inverse proportion — A curve that decreases and never touches either axis is the standard shape for inverse proportion, y = k/x. Direct proportion graphs are straight lines through the origin, which this is not, so it must be inverse proportion rather than neither.
- (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) Underestimate: the chord lies below the curve — For a curve that is concave down (bending downward), the straight line joining any two points on the curve lies BELOW the curve. The trapezium's top edge is this straight line, so the trapezium's area is smaller than the true area under the curve — the trapezium rule UNDERESTIMATES the distance in this case. This is because a curve whose gradient keeps decreasing bends away from any chord joining two of its points, dropping the chord below every point of the curve in between. The reverse, a chord lying above the curve, is the rule for a concave-up curve, not this one — check which way the curve bends before deciding. The trapezium rule does not always overestimate or underestimate, and it is not exact except when the graph really is a straight line.
- (d) 1.5 — Method: the length scale factor is the square root of the area scale factor, not the area scale factor itself. Working: the area scale factor is 45 ÷ 20 = 2.25, and the square root of 2.25 is 1.5. Answer: 1.5. Nadia's answer, 2.25, is the AREA scale factor — she never took the square root to get back to the length scale factor. 4.5 comes from doubling the area scale factor instead of taking its square root. 0.67 comes from taking the square root in the wrong direction, finding the scale factor from the larger rug to the smaller rug instead of the other way round.
- (d) 4.6 cm — Method: BC is opposite the 30° angle and AC is next to it, so the ratio that links the two is tan θ = opposite ÷ adjacent. Working: tan 30° = BC ÷ 8, so BC = 8 × tan 30° = 4.6188…, which is 4.6 to 1 decimal place. Answer: 4.6 cm. The distractors: 13.9 cm comes from dividing by tan 30° instead of multiplying by it; 4.0 cm comes from using sin 30°, which treats the 8 cm side as the hypotenuse when it is the side next to the 30° angle; 6.9 cm comes from using cos 30° in place of tan 30°, which gives the wrong pair of sides.
- (d) P lies outside the circle — The squared distance from the origin to P is 8² + 9² = 64 + 81 = 145, which is greater than 100, so P lies outside the circle. Choosing 'P lies inside the circle' comes from adding the coordinates directly (8 + 9 = 17) instead of squaring and adding them, and comparing 17 with 100. Choosing 'P lies on the circle' comes from squaring 9 incorrectly as 36 (as if it were 6²) instead of 81, giving 64 + 36 = 100, equal to the right-hand side. Choosing 'Cannot be determined' wrongly assumes the equation of the line itself is needed, when the radius and the distance from the origin to P are already enough.
- (a) 12 — Method: write both ages as they were six years ago, call Leo's present age x, and form an equation from the comparison at that time. Working: six years ago Harry was 24 − 6 = 18 and Leo was x − 6, so 18 = 3(x − 6); expanding gives 18 = 3x − 18, adding 18 to both sides gives 36 = 3x, and dividing by 3 gives x = 12. Checking: six years ago Harry was 18 and Leo was 6, and 18 = 3 × 6. Answer: 12. The distractors: 6 comes from solving 18 = 3(x − 6) as far as Leo's age six years ago, 18 ÷ 3 = 6, and giving that as his age now; 8 comes from dividing Harry's present age by 3, 24 ÷ 3 = 8, using the multiple at the wrong moment in time; 36 comes from stopping at 3x = 36 and giving 36 as Leo's age.
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.