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
- (b) 4 m — Blue fabric is 3 parts and this equals 1.5 m, so one part is 1.5 ÷ 3 = 0.5 m. Yellow fabric is 5 parts, so it is 5 × 0.5 = 2.5 m. The total length is 1.5 + 2.5 = 4 m. 2.5 m is the length of yellow fabric only, without adding the blue fabric back in. 1.5 m is just the given length of blue fabric, with the yellow fabric never worked out. 2.4 m comes from swapping the ratio, treating blue as 5 parts and yellow as 3 parts, giving one part as 1.5 ÷ 5 = 0.3 m and yellow as 3 × 0.3 = 0.9 m, then adding 1.5 + 0.9 = 2.4.
- (b) 2 < x < 6 — Factorise: x² − 8x + 12 = (x − 2)(x − 6), giving roots at x = 2 and x = 6. Since the coefficient of x² is positive, the graph is a U-shape that is negative, below the axis, between its roots. So P < 0 for 2 < x < 6. Distractor routes: x < 2 or x > 6 takes the region outside the roots, which is where P is positive, a profit, the opposite of a loss. 2 ≤ x ≤ 6 includes the endpoints, where P = 0 exactly, break-even rather than a loss, since the inequality is strict. −6 < x < −2 comes from factorising as (x + 2)(x + 6), reversing the sign of both roots.
- (c) 5/7 — First find the number of children: 84 − 35 = 49. The question compares the adults with the children, not with everyone on the bus, so the denominator is 49 and the numerator is 35, giving 35/49. Both parts divide by 7: 35 ÷ 7 = 5 and 49 ÷ 7 = 7. In its simplest form the fraction is 5/7.
- (c) 10.4 cm — Method: rearrange Area = (1/2)ab sin C to make the unknown side the subject: b = 2 × Area ÷ (a × sin C). Working: b = 2 × 36 ÷ (9 × sin 50°) = 10.4 cm (1 d.p.). Answer: 10.4 cm. Forgetting to double the area before dividing gives b = 36 ÷ (9 × sin 50°) = 5.2 cm; using cos 50° instead of sin 50° gives b = 2 × 36 ÷ (9 × cos 50°) = 12.4 cm; and multiplying by sin 50° instead of dividing by it — inverting the rearrangement — gives b = 2 × 36 × sin 50° ÷ 9 = 6.1 cm. Always double the area before dividing, and check whether the unknown should be multiplied or divided by sin C once you've rearranged.
- (b) 4 — With 150 rolls and probability 1/6 for each number, the expected count is 150 ÷ 6 = 25. Comparing each actual count with 25: 1 is 22 (3 below), 2 is 27 (2 above), 3 is 24 (1 below), 4 is 34 (9 above), 5 is 21 (4 below) and 6 is 22 (3 below). Number 4 is furthest above its expected count, so it is the most over-represented. Number 2 is also above its expected count, but by only 2, far less than 4's 9. Number 3's count of 24 is below the expected 25, so it is under-represented, not over. Number 6's count of 22 is also below the expected 25, so it too is under-represented.
- (a) Minutes a candle has burned and length remaining — As a candle burns for longer, less of it remains, so these two variables move in opposite directions as one increases — that is negative correlation. A pupil's shoe size generally increases as they get older, so age and shoe size show positive correlation, not negative, since both rise together. A football team's shirt colour is not a numerical quantity linked to how many matches it wins, so shirt colour and number of wins show no correlation at all. The number of letters in a pupil's name has no real connection to their ability in maths, so that pair also shows no correlation.
- (b) 3²⁰ is larger — Method: two powers with different bases and different indices can be compared once they are rewritten with a common index, which is possible whenever the indices share a factor. Working: 30 and 20 have a highest common factor of 10, so 2³⁰ = (2³)¹⁰ = 8¹⁰ and 3²⁰ = (3²)¹⁰ = 9¹⁰. Both are now tenth powers, and since 9 is larger than 8, 9¹⁰ is larger than 8¹⁰. Answer: 3²⁰ is larger. The distractors: 2³⁰ is larger comes from comparing only the indices and choosing the power with the bigger index; They are equal comes from multiplying base by index, 2 × 30 and 3 × 20, and finding 60 each time; They cannot be compared without a calculator comes from assuming that powers this large can only be ranked by evaluating them in full.
- (c) y = x² — Method: test a candidate rule against every pair given, not just one — a rule that fits one pair and fails another is not the rule. Working: the outputs 1, 4, 9 rise by 3 and then by 5, so they are not going up in equal steps and the input is not simply multiplied by a fixed number; comparing each output with its own input gives 1 × 1 = 1, 2 × 2 = 4 and 3 × 3 = 9, and all three pairs fit. Answer: y = x². The distractors: y = 3x comes from fitting only the last pair, where 3 × 3 = 9, and reading that 3 as a multiplier; y = 3x − 2 comes from assuming a multiply-then-add rule and using the first step in the outputs, 4 − 1 = 3, as the multiplier — it fits the first two pairs and fails the third; y = 2x comes from fitting only the pair 2 and 4 and reading every output as double its input.
- (b) 1 : 1.875 — To write a ratio in the form 1 : n, divide both parts by the first part, 8: 8 ÷ 8 = 1 and 15 ÷ 8 = 1.875, giving 1 : 1.875. Giving 1 : 0.53 divides the wrong way round, computing 8 ÷ 15 instead of 15 ÷ 8. Giving 1.875 : 1 has the two parts of the answer swapped, which is the form n : 1, not 1 : n. Giving 8 : 1.875 divides only the second part by 8, so the first part is still 8, not 1.
- (b) SAS (two sides and the included angle) — PQ = ST and QR = TU are two pairs of matching sides, and the angle between them (angle Q and angle T) is 90° in both triangles — two sides and the angle between them are equal, so the triangles are congruent by SAS, using only the measurements given. RHS needs the hypotenuses to be known equal; here only the two legs are given, so you would first have to work out each hypotenuse by Pythagoras' theorem — extra working the question rules out. SSS has the same problem: the third side of each triangle is not given, only calculable. ASA needs two angles and the side between them, but here it is two sides and the angle between them that are given, not two angles.
- (a) unlikely — 3/8 = 3 ÷ 8 = 0.375, which is between 0 and 0.5, so the probability is best described as unlikely. Rounding 3/8 loosely to 'about a half' without converting it properly leads to evens, which is wrong since 0.375 is noticeably below 0.5. Reading 3/8 as the complement and using 1 − 3/8 = 5/8 = 0.625 instead gives likely, but the question asks about the probability of 3/8 itself, not its complement. Flipping the fraction to 8/3 ≈ 2.67, which is impossible for a probability, and rounding it towards the top of the scale gives certain.
- (d) −1.4, −6/5, 0, 5/4, 1.3 — Method: convert the fractions 5/4 and −6/5 to decimals so every number is written the same way, then compare all five decimals. Working: 5/4 = 1.25 and −6/5 = −1.2. Comparing −1.4, −1.2, 0, 1.25 and 1.3 in size gives the order −1.4, −1.2, 0, 1.25, 1.3. Answer: −1.4, −6/5, 0, 5/4, 1.3. −6/5, −1.4, 0, 5/4, 1.3 swaps the two negative numbers, treating −6/5 as more negative than −1.4 even though −1.2 is closer to zero than −1.4. 1.3, 5/4, 0, −6/5, −1.4 lists the numbers from largest to smallest instead of smallest to largest. −1.4, −6/5, 0, 1.3, 5/4 swaps 5/4 and 1.3, comparing the numerator 5 directly with 1.3 instead of converting 5/4 to the decimal 1.25 first.
- (d) n and n + 1 are consecutive integers, so one of them must be even; this makes n(n + 1) even, so 4n(n + 1) is 4 × an even number, which is a multiple of 8. — The proof needs a reason why n(n + 1) is even, not just an assertion. n and n + 1 are consecutive integers, so exactly one of them is even; multiplying by that even number keeps n(n + 1) even, so 4n(n + 1) = 4 × (an even number), and 4 × an even number always has a further factor of 2 hidden inside it, making the whole product a multiple of 8. The option 'is a multiple of 4, and because n and n + 1 are consecutive integers, it must be a multiple of 8' asserts the multiple-of-8 conclusion directly from 'multiple of 4' and 'consecutive integers' without ever showing that n(n + 1) itself is even — the missing step is exactly what earns the mark. The option '4n is always a multiple of 4 ... which means it is a multiple of 8' mistakes 4n being a multiple of 4 for the whole product 4n(n + 1) being a multiple of 8; that extra factor of 2 only comes from n(n + 1) being even, not from 4n alone. The option that expands to 4n² + 4n and calls it 'clearly a multiple of 8' never checks for a factor of 2 beyond the 4 already there — the word 'clearly' is standing in for a missing argument.
- (d) 7/5 — The number of unbroken crayons is 60 − 25 = 35. The comparison is with the broken crayons, so the broken crayons are the denominator: 35/25. Both parts divide by 5: 35 ÷ 5 = 7 and 25 ÷ 5 = 5. The fraction is 7/5, which is greater than 1 because there are more unbroken crayons than broken ones.
- (d) Opposite angles in a cyclic quadrilateral sum to 180° — ABCD is a cyclic quadrilateral, and angle ABC and angle ADC are a pair of opposite angles in it — they don't sit next to each other around the quadrilateral. The theorem that fixes the sum of a cyclic quadrilateral's opposite angles at 180° is exactly the one needed here. The other three theorems don't apply to this figure at all: the angle-in-a-semicircle theorem gives a 90° angle only when one side is a diameter, and no diameter is mentioned; the angle-at-the-centre theorem needs a centre point and an inscribed angle on the same arc, and no centre is given here; the tangent–radius theorem gives a 90° angle only where a tangent line touches the circle, and there is no tangent in this figure. Only the cyclic-quadrilateral theorem fits what is actually drawn.
- (d) 28 — The height decreases by 8 cm at each bounce after the first, so the nth bounce reaches 60−(n−1)×8 cm. For the 5th bounce: 60−4×8=60−32=28. A candidate who subtracts 8 one time too many, five times instead of four, would compute 60−5×8=20. A candidate who adds the decrease instead of subtracting it, a sign error, would compute 60+4×8=92. A candidate who works out only the total decrease and forgets to include the starting height of 60 cm would compute just 5×8=40.
- (d) 25% — Method: percentage decrease = decrease ÷ original amount × 100. Working: the reduction is £60 − £45 = £15, and 15 ÷ 60 = 0.25, so 0.25 × 100 = 25%. Answer: 25%. The distractors: 15% comes from quoting the £15 reduction as though pounds and per cent were the same thing; 33% comes from dividing the £15 by the new price £45 instead of by the original £60, which gives 33% to the nearest per cent; 75% is the new price written as a percentage of the old one, which is what is still paid rather than what has been taken off.
- (b) −2 — The gradient of the original line is (6 − 2) ÷ (3 − 1) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Reflecting in the x-axis sends every y-coordinate to its negative, which flips the sign of the gradient: the image line has gradient −2. Translating by (2, 0) is a horizontal shift, which does not change the line's steepness or direction at all, so the gradient stays at −2. Assuming the gradient is unaffected by the reflection gives 2, the original gradient carried straight through. Thinking a reflection in the x-axis turns a gradient into its positive reciprocal gives 1/2. Combining that same wrong idea with the sign flip from the reflection gives −1/2. Only the sign flips, from the reflection, and translating never changes a gradient at all, so the answer is −2.
- (d) An equation, true for one value of x — 2x + 5 = 17 is only true when x = 6, so it is an equation. A candidate who ignores the equals sign and focuses only on the x terms and numbers present picks the expression option. A candidate who sees an equals sign and assumes it must relate two different quantities, as a formula does, picks that option, missing that there is only one quantity, x, involved here. A candidate who wrongly checks whether both sides look similar in structure rather than testing specific values picks the identity option, missing that the two sides are not equal for every value of x.
- (d) Formula A gives £39 and Formula B gives £39, and since 3(2n + 5) expands to 6n + 15 for every value of n, the stallholder is correct. — Formula A: 3(2 × 4 + 5) = 3 × 13 = £39. Formula B: 6 × 4 + 15 = 24 + 15 = £39. Expanding Formula A algebraically gives 3(2n + 5) = 6n + 15, which is identical to Formula B for every value of n, not just n = 4, so the stallholder is correct — this is an identity, not a coincidence. The option giving £29 for Formula A comes from multiplying only the 2n by 3 and forgetting to also multiply the 5, then adding the unmultiplied 5: 3 × 2 × 4 = 24, + 5 = 29. The two options that reach the correct numbers but reject the stallholder's claim both use faulty reasoning — matching values at one value of n, or counting terms, does not decide whether two expressions are identical for every n; expanding the bracket does.
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.