⏱️ Ten-minute starters — Foundation

Answer key

1. (c) 125 — Method: a number cubed means multiplying the number by itself three times. Working: 5 × 5 × 5 = 125. 15 comes from working out 5 × 3 = 15, multiplying by the index instead of cubing. 8 comes from working out 5 + 3 = 8 instead of cubing. 53 comes from writing the base and the index next to each other instead of carrying out the calculation. Answer: 125.
2. (c) 500 cm² — The area of a triangle is half of base × height. First, base × height = 40 × 25 = 1,000. Half of 1,000 is 500 cm². 1,000 cm² forgets to halve and just gives base × height. 65 cm² adds the base and height together instead of multiplying them. 2,000 cm² doubles base × height instead of halving it.
3. (b) 3 — Method: the scale factor is a length of the second triangle divided by the corresponding length of the first, and corresponding means shortest paired with shortest. Working: the shortest side of the first triangle is 3 cm and the shortest side of the second is 9 cm, so the scale factor is 9 ÷ 3 = 3. Answer: 3. The distractors: 1/3 comes from dividing 3 by 9, which is the scale factor from the second triangle back to the first; 6 comes from subtracting, 9 − 3, treating the scale factor as a difference rather than a multiplier; 1.8 comes from dividing 9 by 5, pairing the second triangle's shortest side with the first triangle's longest side.
4. (d) 4.7 km — Multiply the map length by the scale factor: 9.4 × 50 000 = 470 000 cm. Convert to kilometres: 470 000 cm = 4700 m = 4.7 km. Converting only to metres and calling the answer 4700 kilometres mistakes metres for kilometres. Misreading the scale as 1 : 5000 instead of 1 : 50 000, 9.4 × 5000 = 47 000 cm = 0.47 km, is ten times too small. Misplacing the decimal point in 9.4 and effectively using 94, 94 × 50 000 = 4 700 000 cm = 47 km, is ten times too big.
5. (b) 13/2 — Put the number of pages in the novel over the number of pages in the comic: 312/48. Divide both numbers by their highest common factor, 24: 312÷24 = 13, 48÷24 = 2, giving 13/2. (2/13 comes from writing the page counts the wrong way round. 11/2 comes from finding the difference in the page counts, 312 − 48 = 264, and writing it as a fraction of the comic's page count, 264/48. 13/15 comes from comparing the novel's page count to the total number of pages in both books, 312/360.)
6. (b) 4/9 — Method: double the butter part of the ratio, keeping flour the same, find the new total, then write butter's part over the new total. Working: the new ratio is flour : butter = 5 : 4, since butter doubles from 2 to 4. New total = 5 + 4 = 9. Fraction of butter = 4/9. Answer: 4/9. 2/9 comes from forgetting to double the butter part and using the original value 2 over the new total of 9. 4/7 comes from doubling the butter part correctly to 4 but keeping the old total of 7 instead of working out the new total. 2/5 comes from using the original ratio 5:2 directly as butter over flour without doubling anything.
7. (a) Yes — the cost per metre is £1.50 each time — Direct proportion holds if the cost per metre is the same every time. Check each pair: 3.00 ÷ 2 = 1.50, 6.00 ÷ 4 = 1.50, and 10.50 ÷ 7 = 1.50. All three give the same rate, £1.50 per metre, so the data does show direct proportion. Saying only that the cost increases as the length increases is not enough on its own — many non-proportional relationships also increase, so this reason does not prove proportion. Misreading 10.50 ÷ 7 as 1.05 by misplacing the decimal point gives a false mismatch that is not actually there. Requiring every length to be a double of another confuses a special case (doubling) with the general test, which is that the rate itself stays constant. The data does show direct proportion, at £1.50 per metre.
8. (d) $y = x^2 - 2x - 3$ — Method: read the two x-intercepts (roots) from the graph, write the quadratic as the product of the corresponding factors, then expand. Working: the curve crosses the x-axis at x = −1 and x = 3, so the equation factorises as (x + 1)(x − 3), which expands to x² − 2x − 3. Answer: y = x² − 2x − 3. Distractor refutation: y = x² − x − 6 comes from misreading the left-hand crossing point as x = −2 instead of x = −1, giving factors (x + 2)(x − 3). y = x² − x − 2 comes from misreading the right-hand crossing point as x = 2 instead of x = 3, giving factors (x + 1)(x − 2). y = x² + 2x − 3 comes from writing the factors as (x − 1)(x + 3), swapping which root gets the plus sign and which gets the minus sign, giving the wrong sign on the x term.
9. (c) 600 centilitres — Method: changing a larger unit into a smaller one means multiplying by the conversion factor given in the question. Working: 6 × 100 = 600. Answer: 600 centilitres. The distractors: 60 centilitres comes from multiplying by 10, as if a litre held 10 centilitres; 6000 centilitres comes from multiplying by 1000, which is the number of millilitres in a litre, not centilitres; 106 centilitres comes from adding 100 and 6 instead of multiplying.
10. (b) 3/10 — Work out the empty space: 500 − 350 = 150 litres. Form the fraction 150/500; both numbers share a factor of 50, so 150 ÷ 50 = 3 and 500 ÷ 50 = 10, giving 3/10. 7/10 comes from writing the fraction of the tank that is full (350/500), instead of the empty space. 1/2 comes from miscalculating 500 − 350 as 250 instead of 150. 3/7 comes from comparing the empty space with the water held (150/350), instead of with the tank's total capacity.
11. (a) 1500 ml — Method: to change litres into millilitres, multiply by 1000. Working: 1.5 × 1000 = 1500 ml. So the bottle holds 1500 ml. Distractor 150 ml comes from multiplying by 100 instead of 1000. Distractor 15000 ml comes from multiplying by 10000, an extra zero. Distractor 1.5 ml comes from not converting the units at all.
12. (b) £100 — Over 250 games, the expected total winnings are 250 × (1/5) × £12 = £600, since a player wins on 1 of the 5 equally likely sections. The total cost of playing is 250 × £2 = £500. The players' expected profit is the winnings minus the cost: £600 − £500 = £100. Writing £500 is wrong because that is only the total cost of playing, without any winnings included. Writing £600 is wrong because that is only the total expected winnings, without subtracting what was paid to play. Writing £2,500 is wrong because it assumes a win on every single game (250 × £12 = £3,000) instead of using the 1-in-5 probability, then subtracts the cost: £3,000 − £500 = £2,500. The players' expected profit over the 250 games is £100.