⏱️ Ten-minute starters — Foundation

Answer key

1. (c) 0.36 — Method: convert the fraction to an equivalent fraction with denominator 100, then read off the decimal. Working: 9/25 = 36/100 (multiplying numerator and denominator by 4) = 0.36. Answer: 0.36. 2.8 comes from flipping the fraction and dividing the denominator by the numerator instead: 25 ÷ 9 = 2.77…, rounded to 2.8. 0.925 comes from writing the digits of the numerator and denominator directly after the decimal point without scaling the fraction. 0.9 comes from writing the numerator straight after the decimal point, as if the denominator were 10 rather than 25.
2. (a) 0.16 — The probability that Kofi fails a single attempt is 1 − 0.6 = 0.4. Since the attempts are independent, the probability he fails both is 0.4 × 0.4 = 0.16. Choosing 0.36 comes from squaring the probability of PASSING instead, 0.6 × 0.6 = 0.36, which is the probability of passing both attempts, not failing both. Choosing 0.4 comes from giving the probability of failing just one attempt, forgetting to combine two attempts. Choosing 0.24 comes from multiplying the fail probability by the pass probability, 0.4 × 0.6 = 0.24, mixing up passing and failing between the two attempts.
3. (c) A line has no endpoints; a segment has two — A line extends without end in both directions, whereas a line segment is the part of a line between two specific fixed endpoints, so 'a line has no endpoints; a segment has two' is correct. 'A line has two endpoints; a segment has none' reverses these two definitions, so it is wrong. 'A line segment is always curved' is wrong because a line segment is straight, not curved, and does not extend infinitely. 'A line segment is a closed shape' is wrong because a line segment is a straight length between two points, not a polygon.
4. (a) a circle of radius 4 cm, centred at O — Every point exactly 4 cm from a fixed point O sweeps out a full circle of radius 4 cm centred at O — that is the definition of this locus. "a straight line 4 cm long, starting at O" only covers points in one direction, not every direction. "a square with sides of 4 cm, centred at O" would only touch the true locus at a few points on its perimeter, since most of a square's edge is not 4 cm from its centre. "two points, each 4 cm from O" comes from picturing only the points directly left and right of O, forgetting every other direction round it.
5. (b) 75 — The exchange rate is constant: k = 46 ÷ 40 = 1.15 euros per pound. For £65, the number of euros is 1.15 × 65 = 74.75, which rounds to 75 euros. Getting 74 comes from rounding 74.75 down instead of to the nearest whole number. Getting 57 comes from using the reciprocal rate (40 ÷ 46) instead of 46 ÷ 40. Getting 71 comes from adding the difference between 65 and 40 (25) onto 46 instead of using the proportional rate.
6. (d) 120 g — Mass = density × volume, so 0.8 × 150 = 120 g. Working out 150 ÷ 0.8 = 187.5 divides by the density instead of multiplying, the wrong way round for finding a mass. Working out 150 × 8 = 1200 misplaces the decimal point in the density, treating 0.8 g/cm³ as 8 g/cm³. Working out 150 − 0.8 = 149.2 simply subtracts the density from the volume, which does not give a mass. The piece of wood has a mass of 120 g.
7. (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.
8. (d) 25,000 — Method: to round to the nearest 1,000, look at the hundreds digit; 5 or more sends the thousands digit up, less than 5 leaves it where it is, and every digit below the thousands becomes zero. Working: 24,681 has 4 in the thousands place and 6 in the hundreds place. As 6 is 5 or more, the 4 thousands go up to 5 thousands and the hundreds, tens and units are replaced by zeros. Answer: 25,000. The distractors: 24,000 comes from cutting the last three digits off instead of rounding, which leaves the thousands digit untouched; 24,700 is 24,681 rounded to the nearest 100, a finer degree of accuracy than the question asks for; 20,000 is 24,681 rounded to the nearest 10,000, a coarser degree of accuracy.
9. (b) 10.5 — Method: multiply the drawing length by the scale factor to get the real length. Working: 7 cm × 1.5 = 10.5 m. A student who answers 8.5 has added the scale factor to the drawing length instead of multiplying (7 + 1.5). A student who answers 14 has rounded the scale factor up to 2 before multiplying. A student who answers 3.5 has divided the drawing length by 2 instead of multiplying it by 1.5. Answer: 10.5 m.
10. (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.
11. (d) 66 — 6 and (4x + 3) are correct factors of 24x + 18. — Substituting x=2 into 24x+18: 24×2+18=48+18=66. Checking the factorisation: 6×4x=24x and 6×3=18, so 6(4x+3)=24x+18, matching the original expression — 6 and (4x+3) are correctly identified as factors. A candidate who substitutes x=2 into (4x+3) but forgets to multiply by the factor 6 afterwards would compute just 4×2+3=11. A candidate who adds 24 and 18 together before multiplying by x, instead of multiplying 24 by x first, would compute (24+18)×2=84. A candidate who distributes the 6 over only the first term inside the brackets, forgetting the second, would check the factorisation as 6×4x=24x but leave the 3 unmultiplied, getting 24x+3 instead of 24x+18 — and would wrongly conclude that 6 and (4x+3) are not correct factors.
12. (d) 1/12 — Method: list the full possibility space of sandwich-and-drink pairs, then divide the one matching pair by the size of the whole space. Working: there are 3 × 4 = 12 equally likely sandwich-and-drink pairs, and exactly one of them is egg and water. Answer: 1/12. Watch out: writing down 1/7 comes from adding the two counts, 3 + 4 = 7, instead of multiplying them to build the possibility space. Writing down 1/3 uses only the chance of choosing egg out of 3 sandwiches and ignores the drink altogether. And writing down 1/4 uses only the chance of choosing water out of 4 drinks and ignores the sandwich altogether.