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
- (a) £600 — Method: round the number of cakes and the price of each cake to 1 significant figure, then multiply the rounded values. Working: 187 rounds to 200, and £2.95 rounds to £3 (the digit after the first, 9, rounds the 2 up to 3), so the estimate is 200 × £3 = £600. £400 comes from rounding £2.95 down to £2 instead of up to £3, giving 200 × £2 = £400. £561 comes from rounding only the price and using the exact number of cakes, 187 × £3 = £561. £570 comes from rounding 187 to the nearest 10 as 190 instead of to 1 significant figure as 200, giving 190 × £3 = £570. Answer: £600.
- (a) 3x = 12 — Adding the two equations: the y-terms, +y and −y, have opposite signs, so they cancel; the x-terms combine to 2x + x = 3x; and the right-hand sides add to 11 + 1 = 12. This gives 3x = 12. A candidate who forgets that the y-terms cancel, and instead adds them as if they had the same sign, would write 3x + 2y = 12. A candidate who subtracts the right-hand sides instead of adding them would get 3x = 10. A candidate who correctly reaches 3x = 12 but then treats 12 itself as the value of x, skipping the final division, would write x = 12.
- (b) £16 — Since cost is proportional to the square root of diameter, C = k√d. Using d = 9, C = 12: √9 = 3, so 12 = k × 3, giving k = 12 ÷ 3 = 4. The equation is C = 4√d. When d = 16: √16 = 4, so C = 4 × 4 = 16. Halving the new diameter instead of taking its square root gives 16 ÷ 2 = 8, and then C = 4 × 8 = 32 — halving a number is not the same as taking its square root, as √16 = 4, not 8. Multiplying k by the diameter itself instead of by its square root gives C = 4 × 16 = 64, skipping the square root altogether. Reporting √16 on its own, without multiplying by k, gives only 4, not the cost. The cost of manufacturing a lens of diameter 16 mm is £16.
- (c) VW — Method: within one circle a chord's distance from the centre is fixed by its length, because a chord passing nearer the centre cuts further across the circle; so the chord that lies closest to the centre is simply the longest one listed. Working: the four lengths are 6 cm, 10 cm, 14 cm and 15 cm. Placing them in order, the greatest is 15 cm, and that length belongs to VW, so VW lies closest to the centre. Answer: VW. The distractors: PQ comes from reversing the rule and taking the shortest chord to be the one tucked nearest the centre; TU comes from knowing that the very longest chord is a diameter, deciding that such a chord passes through the centre rather than lying close to it, ruling the 15 cm chord out on that ground and taking the next longest; RS comes from reading 'closest to the centre' as 'nearest the middle of the list of lengths' and picking a middling value.
- (d) 1/20 — Method: add the counts on the faulty end branches, divide by the total number of items in the experiment, then cancel. Working: the faulty items number 15 + 5 = 20, and 400 items were checked, so the probability is 20/400. Dividing the top and the bottom by 20 gives 1/20. Answer: the probability is 1/20. The distractors: 3/50 is 15/250 and comes from dividing machine A's faults by machine A's output, which is that machine's own fault rate rather than the probability for the whole batch; 1/30 is 5/150 and does the same on machine B's branch; 19/20 is 380/400 and gives the probability that the item picked is not faulty.
- (b) 4 — The difference, Bristol minus Leeds, on each day is: Monday 4 − 3 = 1, Tuesday 4 − 5 = −1, Wednesday 6 − 2 = 4, Thursday 2 − 4 = −2. The greatest amount by which Bristol exceeded Leeds is 4 hours, on Wednesday. Choosing 1 takes Monday's smaller positive difference instead of the greatest one. Choosing 2 takes the size of Thursday's difference, but that is the amount by which Leeds exceeded Bristol, the opposite direction to the one asked for. Choosing 6 takes Bristol's raw figure on Wednesday without subtracting Leeds's 2 hours first.
- (c) 90 — Multiply the number of choices for each course: 5 × 6 × 3 = 90. 14 comes from adding the three numbers instead of multiplying them. 30 comes from multiplying only the starters and mains, 5 × 6, and forgetting the dessert. 18 comes from multiplying only the mains and desserts, 6 × 3, and forgetting the starter.
- (b) 20 — 3x² − 4x = 3(−2)² − 4(−2) = 3(4) − (−8) = 12 + 8 = 20. A candidate who makes a sign error on −4x, treating −4 × −2 as −8 instead of +8, gets 12 − 8 = 4. A candidate who squares −2 but keeps the result negative, using 3 × (−4) = −12 for the first term, but correctly works out −4x = −4 × (−2) = 8, gets −12 + 8 = −4. A candidate who squares the whole term 3x, working out (3 × −2)² − 4 × (−2), gets (−6)² + 8 = 36 + 8 = 44.
- (d) £144 — Method: find the length (perimeter) scale factor by taking the square root of the area ratio, then apply it to the cost. Working: 12 : 27 simplifies to 4 : 9, and the square root of each part gives the length ratio 2 : 3, so the scale factor from the smaller to the larger pond is 3 ÷ 2 = 1.5. Cost = £96 × 1.5 = £144. Answer: £144. £216 comes from using the area ratio itself as the cost ratio, £96 × (27 ÷ 12) = £216, without taking the square root. £64 comes from using the length ratio the wrong way round, £96 × (2 ÷ 3) = £64. £111 comes from simply adding the difference in area, 27 − 12 = 15, onto the original cost, £96 + £15 = £111, instead of scaling proportionally.
- (c) 32 cm — Method: a perimeter is lengths added together, so it scales by the length scale factor itself, which is 4 ÷ 3 going from the smaller triangle to the larger one — not by its square. Working: 24 ÷ 3 = 8, and 8 × 4 = 32. Answer: 32 cm. The distractors: 18 cm comes from multiplying by 3 ÷ 4, scaling from the larger triangle down to the smaller one; 25 cm comes from adding the difference between the parts of the ratio, 4 − 3 = 1, to the perimeter; 8 cm comes from dividing by 3 and stopping there, before multiplying by 4.
- (b) 38% — Method: the two swimming percentages are quoted inside different age groups, so weight each one by the size of its group and add the two results. Working: the under 18s are 45% of the members and 60% of them swim, giving 0.45 × 60 = 27% of all the members. The members aged 18 or over are 55% of the members and 20% of them swim, giving 0.55 × 20 = 11% of all the members. Adding these gives 38%. Answer: 38% of the members swim each week. The distractors: 80% comes from adding 60% and 20% straight off, treating two rates quoted inside different groups as though they could be added; 40% is the mean of 60% and 20%, which would be right only if the two age groups were the same size, and they are not; 42% comes from pairing each swimming rate with the wrong age group, working out 0.45 × 20 added to 0.55 × 60.
- (d) £4.80 — Method: find the error interval, then check which value falls outside it. Working: half of 20p is 10p, so the actual cost, c, satisfies £4.50 ≤ c < £4.70. £4.80 is above £4.70, so it could not be the actual cost. Answer: £4.80. (£4.50 is a genuine possible cost — it sits at the included lower boundary. £4.65 is a genuine possible cost, below the £4.70 upper boundary. £4.55 is a genuine possible cost, well inside the interval.)
- (a) They always charge the same, since 3(2n + 4) = 6n + 12. — Expand Advert A's formula by multiplying both terms inside the bracket by 3: 3 × 2n = 6n, and 3 × 4 = 12, giving 3(2n + 4) = 6n + 12, which is identical to Advert B's formula — so the two adverts always charge the same amount, whatever n is. Getting 6n + 4 comes from multiplying the 2n by 3 but leaving the 4 unmultiplied. Getting 2n + 7 comes from adding 3 to the bracket instead of multiplying by it. Saying it depends on n avoids expanding the bracket at all — once expanded, both formulas are identical for every value of n, so the cost can be compared directly.
- (c) 3 — Method: find the height scale factor, cube it to find the volume (and coverage) scale factor, use it to find one large sack's coverage, then divide the total lawn area by this and round up to a whole number of sacks. Working: height scale factor = 40 ÷ 20 = 2, so coverage scale factor = 2³ = 8, and each large sack covers 30 × 8 = 240 m². 500 ÷ 240 = 2.08…, which rounds UP to 3 whole sacks. Answer: 3. 2 comes from correctly finding that each large sack covers 240 m², but then rounding 500 ÷ 240 down instead of up, which would leave part of the lawn untreated. 5 comes from squaring the height scale factor (2² = 4) instead of cubing it, giving a coverage of only 30 × 4 = 120 m² per sack. 17 comes from forgetting to scale the coverage at all and dividing 500 by the smaller sack's coverage of 30 m².
- (a) 3 : 5 — Method: for similar figures the ratio of the areas is the square of the ratio of the lengths, so the length ratio is found by taking the square root of each part of the area ratio. Working: the areas are in the ratio 36 : 100, and taking square roots gives √36 : √100 = 6 : 10, which cancels to 3 : 5. Answer: 3 : 5. The distractors: 9 : 25 is 36 : 100 in its simplest form, so it is still the ratio of the areas and the square roots were never taken; 5 : 3 takes the roots correctly but writes the parts the wrong way round, giving DEF to ABC when ABC to DEF was asked for; 25 : 9 makes both mistakes at once, leaving the area ratio and reversing it.
- (b) (−5, −2) — A rotation of 180° about the origin reverses the sign of both coordinates, so Q = (−5, −2). A candidate who reverses the sign of only the y-coordinate, as if reflecting in the x-axis, gets (5, −2). A candidate who reverses the sign of only the x-coordinate, as if reflecting in the y-axis, gets (−5, 2). A candidate who swaps the coordinates instead of reversing their signs gets (2, 5).
- (b) 16 — Method: substitute x into each equation separately, then subtract the smaller value from the larger. Working: y = 3 × 4 = 12 and z = 7 × 4 = 28, so the difference is 28 − 12 = 16. Answer: 16. The distractors: 4 comes from subtracting the constants, 7 − 3, which is the difference between the two gradients rather than the difference between the values at x = 4; 40 comes from adding the two values, 12 + 28, instead of subtracting them; 28 is the value of z on its own, given instead of being compared with the value of y.
- (b) Wrong: 1 litre = 1000 ml, so 3.2 l = 3200 ml. — 1 litre = 1000 ml, so 3.2 litres = 3.2 × 1000 = 3200 ml — Sam is wrong because he multiplied by 100 instead of 1000. Saying Sam is correct accepts the wrong multiplier. Saying Sam is wrong only because 3.2 should be rounded first misses the real error, which is the multiplier, not the starting number. Saying '1 litre is 100 ml' misstates the basic fact and blames the wrong part of Sam's working.
- (c) Correct: 3y = 4 − x gives f⁻¹(x) = (4 − x)/3 — Swap x and y: x = 4 − 3y. Add 3y to both sides and subtract x from both sides: 3y = 4 − x. Divide by 3: y = (4 − x)/3, which is exactly what Ben wrote — his rearrangement is correct. Check with a value: f(1) = 4 − 3 = 1, and Ben's formula gives (4 − 1)/3 = 1, which matches. 'Correct, but only because f is its own inverse' gives the right verdict for a false reason — f(f(x)) = 4 − 3(4 − 3x) = 9x − 8, which is not x, so f is not self-inverse; Ben's rearrangement is correct for the ordinary algebraic reason above, not because of any special property of f. 'Wrong: sign kept, giving (−4 − x)/3' comes from not carrying the swap through consistently — testing x = 1 gives (−4 − 1)/3 = −5/3, which does not equal 1, so it is wrong. 'Wrong: correct inverse is (x − 4)/3' comes from writing 3y = x − 4 instead of 3y = 4 − x, a sign slip when isolating y — testing x = 1 gives (1 − 4)/3 = −1, which again does not equal 1.
- (d) g is one-to-one: f(3) = f(−3), removed by x ≥ 0 — A function has an inverse only if it is one-to-one: every output must come from exactly one input. f(3) = 9 and f(−3) = 9, so two different inputs give the same output, and there is no way to send 9 back to a single input — f is not one-to-one over all real x. Restricting the domain to x ≥ 0 removes one of the two inputs behind every such pair, so g is one-to-one and does have an inverse. 'g's outputs are positive; f's could be negative' is wrong because f(x) = x² also only gives outputs of 0 or more — the outputs of f and g are identical sets; it is the INPUTS that differ, not the outputs. 'Restricting any domain always creates an inverse' is wrong because a restriction only helps if it actually removes the repeated outputs: restricting f(x) = x² to x ≥ −3 still leaves f(1) = f(−1) = 1, so that restricted function is still not one-to-one and still has no inverse. 'Squares can never be reversed, under any conditions' is wrong because √9 = 3 does reverse 3² = 9 once you know the input was non-negative — a square root just cannot tell you WHICH of two inputs you started from unless the domain has already ruled one of them out.
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.