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) 2/3 — Method: multiply the numerators together and the denominators together, then divide both parts of the result by their highest common factor. Working: 3 × 14 = 42 and 7 × 9 = 63, giving 42/63; the highest common factor of 42 and 63 is 21, and 42 ÷ 21 = 2 with 63 ÷ 21 = 3. Answer: 2/3. The distractors: 17/16 comes from adding the numerators and adding the denominators, giving (3 + 14)/(7 + 9); 27/98 comes from turning the second fraction upside down and multiplying, which divides instead of multiplying and gives 3/7 × 9/14; 2/21 comes from cancelling the 7 into the 14 in the numerator but leaving the 7 in the denominator, giving 6/63.
- (a) 1 — Method: the value of y when x = 0 is where the line meets the y-axis, which is the constant c in y = mx + c, so the gradient is worked out from the two given points first and the constant follows by substituting one of them. Working: m = (16 − 7) ÷ (5 − 2) = 9 ÷ 3 = 3, so the line is y = 3x + c; substituting x = 2 and y = 7 gives 7 = 3 × 2 + c, so c = 7 − 6 = 1, and the value of y when x = 0 is that constant. Answer: 1. The distractors: 3 comes from stopping at the gradient and offering it as the intercept; 4 comes from stepping back from x = 2 to x = 0 by one unit of x instead of two, 7 − 3 = 4; −1 comes from working the constant out as mx − y, 3 × 2 − 7 = −1, instead of y − mx.
- (c) Height rising at 2 m/s at t = 1.5 s — A tangent's gradient on a height-time graph is the instantaneous rate of change of height, in metres per second, so gradient 2 means the ball's height is increasing at 2 m/s at t = 1.5 s. Saying the height 'is 2 m' confuses the gradient, a rate, with the y-value on the graph, which is the ball's height itself. Saying the ball 'travelled 2 m from t = 1 to t = 2' treats the instantaneous gradient at one instant as if it were the total distance risen over a whole one-second interval, which is a different quantity found from two height readings, not from one tangent. Saying the speed 'is 2 m/s²' uses the wrong units — m/s² measures acceleration, the rate of change of speed, not speed itself. Always check that the units quoted match what a height-time graph's gradient can actually give you: metres per second.
- (c) 1 : 300 — First convert both lengths to the same unit: 15 m = 1500 cm. The scale compares 5 cm on the drawing to 1500 cm in real life, so dividing both parts by 5 gives a scale of 1 : 300. A candidate who compares 5 to 15 without converting units gets 1 : 3. A candidate who converts 15 m to 150 cm, using the wrong conversion factor, gets 1 : 30. A candidate who converts 15 m to 15000 cm, again using the wrong conversion factor, gets 1 : 3000. The scale of the drawing is 1 : 300.
- (c) 28 — Reading only is 22 − 6 = 16, and gaming only is 18 − 6 = 12, so exactly one of the two is 16 + 12 = 28. Adding 22 and 18 without removing the 6 who like both, 22 + 18 = 40, counts those 6 students twice. Giving 6 mistakes the number who like both for the number who like exactly one. Finding 22 + 18 − 6 = 34 gives the number who like at least one of reading or gaming, but stops there instead of also removing the 6 who like both to leave only those who like exactly one.
- (c) 20 ≤ h < 40 — Method: with 80 values the lower quartile is the 80 ÷ 4 = 20th value in order, so build a running total until it first reaches 20. Working: the running totals are 14, then 14 + 22 = 36, then 52, then 80; the 20th plant is past 14 but not past 36, so it lies in the second class. Answer: the lower quartile lies in the class 20 ≤ h < 40. The distractors: 0 ≤ h < 20 comes from believing that the bottom quarter of the data must all sit in the first class, when that class holds only 14 of the 80 plants; 40 ≤ h < 50 comes from using the position 80 ÷ 2 = 40 and so locating the median rather than the lower quartile; 50 ≤ h < 80 comes from counting 20 plants down from the tallest instead of up from the shortest, which locates the upper quartile at the 60th plant.
- (a) 91 is not prime, because 91 = 7 × 13. — Check 91 for prime factors up to its square root, which is just under 10: 91 ÷ 7 = 13, and both 7 and 13 are prime, so 91 = 7 × 13 and 91 is not a prime number. Checking only 2, 3 and 5 misses that 7 also needs to be tried — 91 is odd, its digits do not sum to a multiple of 3 (9 + 1 = 10), and it does not end in 0 or 5, so those three checks alone wrongly suggest it is prime. Assuming any odd number ending in 1 must be prime ignores that 91 = 7 × 13 is a counterexample. Misapplying the digit-sum test for 3 by miscounting 9 + 1 as a multiple of 3 wrongly concludes 91 is divisible by 3, when the correct digit sum, 10, is not a multiple of 3. So 91 is not prime, because 91 = 7 × 13.
- (d) Below y = x + 1, below x + y = 5, above y = 0 — For y ≤ x + 1, R lies on or below the line y = x + 1. For x + y ≤ 5 (that is, y ≤ 5 − x), R lies on or below that line too. For y ≥ 0, R lies on or above the x-axis. Combining all three: R is below y = x + 1, below x + y = 5, and above y = 0. Distractor routes: "Above y = x + 1" flips the first inequality, describing the wrong side of that line. "Above x + y = 5" flips the second inequality, describing the wrong side of that line. "Below y = 0" flips the third inequality, describing the wrong side of the x-axis.
- (b) 20 — The gradient is the change in p divided by the change in t: (90 − 30) ÷ (5 − 2) = 60 ÷ 3 = 20. Choosing 0.05 comes from dividing the change in t by the change in p, the wrong way round (3 ÷ 60). Choosing −20 comes from subtracting the coordinates in the wrong order for one part of the calculation, for example (30 − 90) ÷ (5 − 2), giving a negative value. Choosing 18 comes from dividing the second p-coordinate by the second t-coordinate directly (90 ÷ 5) instead of using the change between the two points.
- (a) 75° — The three angles in the triangle formed by the two supports and the ground add up to 180°. Two of the angles are 34° and 71°, so the third angle is 180 − 34 − 71 = 75, which is 75°. 105° comes from adding the two given angles together instead of subtracting them from 180° (34 + 71 = 105). 146° comes from computing 180 − 34 = 146 and forgetting to also subtract 71°. 37° comes from subtracting the two given angles from each other instead of using the triangle's angle sum (71 − 34 = 37).
- (c) 26 — The number who play football or basketball is 27 + 21 − 9 = 39, subtracting the 9 who play both so they are not counted twice. The number who play neither is then 65 − 39 = 26. Giving 39 stops after finding the number who play football or basketball, without taking the complement within the 65 members. Subtracting all three given numbers from 65, 65 − 27 − 21 − 9 = 8, treats the 9 who play both as a separate group rather than a correction for double-counting. Adding 27 and 21 without removing the double-counted 9, then subtracting that total from 65, gives 65 − (27 + 21) = 17.
- (b) Chloe's estimate — √70 = 8.3666... to 4 decimal places. Comparing each estimate against this: Ben's 8.3 is 0.0666 away; Chloe's 8.4 is only 0.0334 away; Dan's 8.9 is 0.5334 away; Ella's 8.5 is 0.1334 away. Chloe's estimate is closest, because her method tests an actual calculation, 8.5² = 72.25, sees that it overshoots 70, and corrects slightly downward from it, rather than only comparing which perfect square is nearer. Ben's sharing-out is not a bad idea in itself — 70 sits 6 of the way along the 17 from 64 to 81, so 'about a third of the way' from 8 to 9 points at roughly 8.35 — but he then rounds that position down to 8.3, and it is that rounding, not the sharing-out, that leaves him twice as far from √70 as Chloe. Dan's claim that 81 is closer to 70 than 64 is is backwards: 70 − 64 = 6, while 81 − 70 = 11, so 64 is in fact the nearer square, which makes his estimate of 8.9 the furthest from the truth of all four. Ella's plain midpoint of 8 and 9 tests nothing at all: √70 does not sit halfway between 8 and 9, and her 8.5 lands further from √70 than Chloe's checked estimate does.
- (a) (2, 7) — Midpoint = ((x1+x2)/2, (y1+y2)/2) = ((−3+7)/2, (5+9)/2) = (4/2, 14/2) = (2, 7). (4, 14) comes from adding the coordinates correctly but forgetting to divide by 2. (2, 9) comes from correctly averaging the x-coordinates but simply copying the y-coordinate of the second point instead of averaging the y-coordinates. (5, 2) comes from subtracting the coordinates instead of adding them before halving: ((7−(−3))/2, (9−5)/2) = (5, 2).
- (d) 2:5 — The ratio of the y-values equals the ratio of the coefficients of x, since x cancels: 2x : 5x = 2 : 5.
- (c) No — 50° is angle P, not between PQ and QR. — Method: 1/2ab sin C only gives the area when C is the angle between the two named sides. Working: PQ and QR meet at vertex Q, so the angle between them is angle PQR, not angle QPR (which is the angle at vertex P, between sides PQ and PR). Since angle QPR is not included between PQ and QR, the student's calculation 1/2 × 8 × 11 × sin 50° does not give the area of the triangle — the verdict is No. Claiming that any angle works with any two sides ignores that the formula is only true for the INCLUDED angle. Claiming the formula needs all three sides is a different, incorrect statement about the formula itself — Area = 1/2ab sin C is valid with exactly two sides and their included angle, when that angle is actually known.
- (d) 3m³ — Method: multiply the powers of m by adding their indices, then bring the number coefficient to the front. Working: m² × m has indices 2 and 1; add them to get 3, giving m³, then × 3 gives 3m³. Answer: 3m³. 3m² comes from multiplying the indices instead of adding them: 2 × 1 = 2, giving m², then × 3 = 3m². m³ comes from correctly combining the m's but dropping the coefficient 3. m⁶ comes from multiplying the index by the coefficient instead of writing the coefficient in front: taking the 2 in m² and the 3 to give m raised to the power 2 × 3, which is m⁶, with the lone m left out.
- (d) A falling curve that never touches either axis — Method: inverse proportion means the product of the two quantities is constant, so P = k ÷ Q; as Q grows P shrinks, and P can never reach zero because k divided by a number is never zero. Working: taking k = 12 as an example, the pairs (1, 12), (2, 6), (3, 4), (6, 2) and (12, 1) drop steeply at first and then flatten out, so the graph is a curve that approaches both axes without meeting either of them. Answer: a falling curve that never touches either axis. The distractors: 'a straight line through the origin' is the graph of direct proportion, P = kQ, which is the opposite relationship; 'a straight line with a negative gradient' is the commonest error, reading 'P falls as Q rises' as a straight line, but on such a line P would drop by the same amount for every increase in Q and would cross the horizontal axis into negative values; 'a straight line crossing the vertical axis above zero' is a relationship of the form P = mQ + c, in which P and Q are not proportional at all.
- (c) They must also be equal — Once two triangles are proved congruent by any condition, including ASA, they are identical in every respect: every pair of corresponding sides and every pair of corresponding angles must be equal, not just the ones originally used to prove the congruence. So the two remaining pairs of corresponding sides must also be equal, making 'they must also be equal' correct. 'They might be equal or not' and 'not enough information to say' both wrongly suggest that congruence only guarantees the specific facts used to prove it, when congruence actually guarantees the triangles are identical overall. 'They must be different' is backwards: the triangles being identical is the entire point of proving congruence, not a reason for a side to differ.
- (b) 5 — Set n² + 4n = 45, so n² + 4n − 45 = 0. This factorises as (n + 9)(n − 5) = 0, giving n = −9 or n = 5. Since a term number must be positive, n = 5. Taking the magnitude of the rejected negative solution, 9, instead of discarding it, gives 9. Dividing 45 by the coefficient of n and ignoring the n² term entirely, 45 ÷ 4 = 11.25, rounded to the nearest whole number, gives 11. Dropping the linear term 4n and solving n² = 45 instead, the nearest whole number to √45 = 6.708 is 7.
- (c) (2, 5) — Reflecting in the x-axis keeps the x-coordinate the same and changes the sign of the y-coordinate: Q = (2, 5). (−2, −5) comes from reflecting in the y-axis instead, which changes the sign of the x-coordinate. (−2, 5) comes from reflecting in both axes. (2, −5) comes from not applying the reflection at all.
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.