⏱️ Ten-minute starters — Foundation

Answer key

1. (b) Kite — Method: name a quadrilateral by matching what is given — which sides are equal, whether those equal sides lie next to each other or opposite each other, and whether any sides are parallel — against the definitions of the special quadrilaterals. Working: the two 6 cm sides meet at B and the two 9 cm sides meet at D, so each pair of equal sides is a pair of neighbours rather than a pair of opposites, and the stem rules out any parallel sides. The quadrilateral with two pairs of equal adjacent sides and no parallel sides is a kite. Answer: kite. The distractors: a rhombus is chosen by candidates who see two pairs of equal sides and read that as all four sides being equal, which the two different lengths of 6 cm and 9 cm rule out; a parallelogram is chosen by candidates who remember that a parallelogram has two pairs of equal sides but not that in a parallelogram the equal sides are the opposite ones, and who pass over the statement that nothing is parallel; an isosceles trapezium is chosen by candidates who notice that the shape is symmetrical about the line BD and treat symmetry on its own as the mark of a trapezium, when a trapezium needs a pair of parallel sides.
2. (a) £50 — Substituting x = 200 into y = 0.15x + 20 gives y = 0.15 × 200 + 20 = 30 + 20 = £50. A candidate who forgets to add the standing charge would get only 0.15 × 200 = £30. A candidate who misplaces the decimal point in the rate, using 1.5 instead of 0.15, would get 1.5 × 200 + 20 = £320. A candidate who swaps the roles of the rate and the number of units would work out 0.15 × 20 + 200 = £203.
3. (d) 27/80 — Method: write the total as a fraction of a litre, then divide by the number of glasses. Working: 1.35 = 27/20, so each glass holds 27/20 ÷ 4 = 27/80 of a litre. Answer: 27/80. 27/20 comes from converting the total correctly to a fraction but forgetting to divide by the number of glasses. 27/5 comes from multiplying the total by 4 instead of dividing. 17/50 comes from rounding 1.35 ÷ 4 to 0.34 before converting to a fraction.
4. (c) 100 — Method: apply the position-to-term rule straight to the position asked for, since it does not depend on the term before it. Working: the rule squares the position number and the position is 10, so the term is 10², which means 10 × 10. Answer: 100. The distractors: 81 comes from squaring 9 instead of 10, one position short; 20 comes from multiplying the position by 2 instead of squaring it; 1000 comes from cubing the position, 10 × 10 × 10, instead of squaring it.
5. (b) $\binom{-0.4}{-7}$ — The overall movement is the sum of the two vectors: (−1.2 + 0.8, −4.5 + (−2.5)) = (−0.4, −7). '$\binom{-2}{-2}$' comes from subtracting the second vector from the first instead of adding them. '$\binom{-0.4}{7}$' gets the top number right but drops the negative sign on the bottom number. '$\binom{2}{-7}$' comes from treating −1.2 + 0.8 as if the signs did not matter, giving +2 instead of −0.4.
6. (a) £102 — Method: find the value of one part of the ratio, then work out each group's share before comparing them. Working: the ratio 5:2 has 5 + 2 = 7 parts, so one part is £238 ÷ 7 = £34. Adults donate 5 × £34 = £170 and children donate 2 × £34 = £68, so adults donate £170 − £68 = £102 more than children. So the difference is £102. Distractor £68 is only the children's donation, without finding the difference. Distractor £170 is only the adults' donation, without finding the difference. Distractor £136 comes from doubling the children's donation instead of subtracting it from the adults' donation.
7. (d) No, because 3/8 + 5/12 + 1/6 = 23/24 — Using a common denominator of 24: 3/8 = 9/24, 5/12 = 10/24 and 1/6 = 4/24. Adding these numerators gives 9 + 10 + 4 = 23, so the three probabilities sum to 23/24, which is less than 1 — Zara is not correct. Adding the original numerators (3 + 5 + 1 = 9) over a denominator of 12 instead of converting each fraction properly gives 9/12 = 3/4, still less than 1 but the wrong fraction. Converting 1/6 to 5/24 instead of 4/24 (using the wrong scaling) makes the total 9/24 + 10/24 + 5/24 = 24/24 = 1, wrongly suggesting the probabilities are valid. Judging validity from the fact that each individual fraction lies between 0 and 1 ignores that an exhaustive set must sum to exactly 1, not merely contain valid individual values.
8. (d) 0.3 — Converting the fractions to decimals, 1/4 = 0.25 and 2/5 = 0.4, so any decimal between 0.25 and 0.4 is a valid answer, and 0.3 fits. Confusing 1/4 with 1/5 and converting it as 0.2 instead of 0.25 gives a value below the true lower bound. Confusing 2/5 with 1/2 and converting it as 0.5 instead of 0.4 gives a value above the true upper bound. Converting the fractions correctly but choosing a decimal above the true upper bound of 0.4 instead of between the two values gives 0.45.
9. (a) 80 — Method: list the outcomes that count as a success, write the probability from them, then multiply by the number of rolls. Working: the scores of 3 or more are 3, 4, 5 and 6, which is 4 of the 6 equally likely scores, so the probability is 4/6, which cancels to 2/3. Over 120 rolls the expected number is 120 × 2 ÷ 3 = 80. Answer: about 80 of the rolls would be expected to give 3 or more. The distractors: 60 comes from reading a score of 3 or more as a score above 3 and counting only 4, 5 and 6, giving 120 × 3 ÷ 6 = 60; 40 is the expected number of rolls that are not 3 or more, 120 × 2 ÷ 6 = 40; 20 is 120 ÷ 6 and is the expected count for one single score.
10. (a) 24 — The display is 4 tins wide, 3 tins high and 2 tins deep, and every position in that block is filled, so the total number of tins is the product of all three measurements: 4 × 3 × 2 = 24. "12" comes from multiplying only the width and height shown in the front elevation (4 × 3), forgetting the depth entirely. "9" comes from adding the three measurements (4 + 3 + 2) instead of multiplying them. "6" comes from multiplying only the height and depth (3 × 2), forgetting the width shown by the front elevation.
11. (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.
12. (d) 4.50 m² — 1 m² = 100 cm × 100 cm = 10,000 cm², so to convert cm² to m² you divide by 10,000: 45,000 ÷ 10,000 = 4.50 m². Dividing by 100 instead of 10,000, treating area like a length conversion, gives 45,000 ÷ 100 = 450.00 m², a common mistake since 1 m = 100 cm. Multiplying by 100 instead of dividing gives 45,000 × 100 = 4500000.00 m², using the conversion factor the wrong way round entirely. Dividing by 100,000 instead of 10,000 gives 0.45 m², an extra factor of 10 too far.