⏱️ Ten-minute starters — Foundation

Answer key

1. (c) Yes, correct, because 24 ÷ 8 × 3 = 9. — Method: divide the count you know by its ratio part to find the value of one part, then multiply by the part you want. Working: one part = 24 ÷ 8 = 3 counters, so green = 3 × 3 = 9 counters, and the student is correct. Dividing 24 by 3 instead of 8 gives 24 ÷ 3 × 8 = 64, the ratio parts the wrong way round. Stopping after 24 ÷ 8 = 3 gives 3, forgetting to multiply by the green ratio part. Adding 24 + 3 = 27 confuses adding a ratio part with scaling by it.
2. (d) 23.57 °C — Method: add all seven temperatures, divide by the number of readings and round only at the end. Working: 22 + 24 + 23 + 25 + 26 + 21 + 24 = 165, and 165 ÷ 7 = 23.5714…, which rounds to 23.57 to 2 decimal places. Answer: 23.57 °C. The distractors: 24 °C comes from writing down the mode, the only temperature recorded twice, instead of the mean; 27.5 °C comes from dividing the total by 6 instead of by the 7 days recorded; 5 °C comes from working out the range, 26 − 21, which is a measure of spread and not an average.
3. (b) 62 — Method: co-interior (allied) angles between parallel lines add up to 180°. Working: 180 − 118 = 62. Answer: 62°. A candidate who treats co-interior angles as equal, like corresponding angles, gives 118. A candidate who uses 360° instead of 180°, working out 360 − 118, gets 242. A candidate who subtracts as if the angles were complementary, working out 118 − 90, gets 28.
4. (c) x = −5 — Method: 4 is being subtracted from x, so add 4 to both sides; adding a positive number to a negative one moves to the right along the number line. Working: adding 4 to both sides gives x = −9 + 4, and −9 + 4 = −5. Answer: x = −5. The distractors: x = −13 comes from subtracting 4 from both sides instead of adding it, giving −9 − 4; x = 5 comes from working out −9 + 4 correctly and then writing the result without its minus sign; x = 13 comes from reading the right-hand side as 9 rather than −9 and adding 4 to it.
5. (b) 21 — Both legs of the journey are on the same bearing, 070°, so the ship travels in one straight line the whole way and the distances simply add: 12 + 9 = 21 km. A candidate who subtracts instead of adding gets 12 − 9 = 3 km. A candidate who multiplies the two distances gets 12 × 9 = 108. A candidate who assumes the ship changed direction and treats the two legs as the sides of a right-angled triangle works out √(12² + 9²) = √225 = 15 km — but the bearing does not change, so there is no triangle and no hypotenuse to find. Because the ship stays on one straight line, the total distance is 21 km.
6. (a) 330 ml — Correct to the nearest 20 ml means the true volume could be up to 10 ml (half of 20) either side of 340 ml. The smallest possible volume is 340 − 10 = 330 ml. A candidate who subtracted the full 20 ml instead of half of it worked out 340 − 20 = 320 ml. A candidate who added instead of subtracted, finding the largest possible volume instead of the smallest, worked out 340 + 10 = 350 ml. A candidate who halved the interval again by mistake, using 5 ml instead of 10 ml, worked out 340 − 5 = 335 ml.
7. (a) 1,400 and 1,240, so combine the samples for one estimate — Method: scale each sample up to the whole stock, then use the fact that a larger sample gives a more reliable estimate than a smaller one. Working: the first sample gives 35 ÷ 50 = 0.7 and 0.7 × 2,000 = 1,400 paperbacks; the second gives 31 ÷ 50 = 0.62 and 0.62 × 2,000 = 1,240 paperbacks. Two random samples of the same size are expected to differ a little, so neither estimate is wrong. Putting the two together gives 35 + 31 = 66 paperbacks in 100 books, and 66 ÷ 100 = 0.66 with 0.66 × 2,000 = 1,320, an estimate resting on twice as many books as either volunteer checked. Answer: 1,400 and 1,240, so combine the samples for one estimate. The distractors: keeping 1,400 because it is larger picks an estimate by its size, when both samples held 50 books and neither has a stronger claim; saying a volunteer must have miscounted assumes two random samples ought to agree exactly, which is precisely what random sampling does not promise; 1,750 and 1,550 come from 35 × 50 = 1,750 and 31 × 50 = 1,550, multiplying each count by the size of the sample instead of scaling by 2,000 ÷ 50.
8. (d) £100.48 — Area of the rug = (angle ÷ 360) × π × r² = (180 ÷ 360) × 3.14 × 16 = 0.5 × 50.24 = 25.12 m². Cost = 25.12 × £4 = £100.48. (£200.96 comes from finding the area of a full circle, 3.14 × 16 = 50.24 m², and forgetting the angle fraction before costing it; £25.12 comes from forgetting to square the radius, using 0.5 × 3.14 × 4 = 6.28 m², and then costing that; £50.24 comes from using the arc length formula, 0.5 × 2 × 3.14 × 4 = 12.56, in place of the area, and costing that.)
9. (c) ASA — Method: check which condition matches two angles and the side between them, since that is all the sailmaker has measured. Working: the 10 m side lies between the 50° and 75° angles in both panels, so this is two Angles and the included Side, ASA. Options: SAS would need two sides and the angle between them, but only one side has been measured here; SSS would need three sides, but only one is known; RHS needs a right angle and a hypotenuse, and neither panel has a stated right angle. Answer: ASA.
10. (b) 19.0 g/cm³ — Density = mass ÷ volume. 342.6 ÷ 18 = 19.0333…, which rounds to 19.0 g/cm³ (1 d.p.). 6166.8 g/cm³ comes from multiplying the mass by the volume instead of dividing (342.6 × 18). 324.6 g/cm³ comes from subtracting the volume from the mass (342.6 − 18) instead of dividing. 0.1 g/cm³ comes from dividing the volume by the mass instead of the mass by the volume (18 ÷ 342.6 = 0.0525…, rounded to 1 d.p.).
11. (b) £1,000, so £900 is not enough — Method: round each number to 1 significant figure, multiply to estimate the total cost, then compare the estimate with the money available. Working: 187 rounds to 200 and £4.85 rounds to £5, so the estimate is 200 × 5 = 1,000, and £1,000 is more than the £900 the school has. Answer: £1,000, so £900 is not enough. The distractors: £800 comes from cutting £4.85 down to £4 instead of rounding it up to £5, giving 200 × 4 = 800, and that estimate wrongly suggests the money stretches; £935 comes from rounding the price only and keeping 187 lunches, giving 187 × 5 = 935; £950 comes from rounding 187 to the nearest 10 rather than to 1 significant figure, giving 190 × 5 = 950.
12. (a) 4,000 nanometres — Method: the number of nanometres is the diameter divided by the length of one nanometre, and dividing powers of ten means subtracting the indices. Working: −6 − (−9) = 3, so 10⁻⁶ ÷ 10⁻⁹ = 10³, and the diameter is 4 × 10³ nanometres. Answer: 4,000 nanometres. The distractors: 400 nanometres comes from taking the difference between the indices as 2 instead of 3; 4 nanometres comes from changing the name of the unit without converting, leaving the coefficient untouched; 0.004 nanometres comes from dividing by 10³ instead of multiplying by it, as though a nanometre were the larger of the two units.