⏱️ Ten-minute starters — Foundation

Answer key

1. (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.
2. (a) x = 6, y = 27 — Method: for direct proportion, y = kx, so k = y ÷ x. Working: k = 9 ÷ 2 = 4.5. At x = 6: y = 4.5 × 6 = 27. Wrong options: x = 6, y = 13 comes from adding the change in x (4) onto y instead of scaling by k; x = 6, y = 3 comes from treating the relationship as inverse proportion (k = 2 × 9 = 18, then y = 18 ÷ 6 = 3); x = 6, y = 24 comes from rounding the constant of proportionality down to 4 instead of using 4.5.
3. (a) 1/10 — There are 4 × 5 = 20 equally likely outcomes in total. The pairs whose product is 12 are Spinner A showing 3 with Spinner B showing 4, and Spinner A showing 4 with Spinner B showing 3, which is 2 outcomes, giving a probability of 2/20 = 1/10. Choosing 1/20 comes from finding only one of the two pairs, (3, 4), and missing (4, 3) as a separate outcome. Choosing 1/8 comes from using 16 as the total number of outcomes, 4 × 4, forgetting that Spinner B has 5 sections rather than 4. Choosing 1/5 comes from listing the factor pairs of 12 as 2 × 6 and 3 × 4 and counting each one in both orders, (2, 6), (6, 2), (3, 4) and (4, 3), giving 4 outcomes out of 20 without checking that neither spinner has a 6 on it.
4. (a) 1260° — The sum of the interior angles of a polygon with n sides is (n − 2) × 180°. For a nonagon, n = 9, so the sum is (9 − 2) × 180° = 7 × 180° = 1260°. 1620° uses 9 × 180° without subtracting 2 from n first. 140° is the size of a single interior angle of a regular nonagon (1260° ÷ 9), not the sum of all nine. 1440° uses (n − 1) × 180° = 8 × 180° instead of (n − 2) × 180°.
5. (c) 100√3 cm — The height is opposite the 60° angle, so height = 2 × sin 60° = 2 × √3/2 = √3 m. Converting to centimetres: √3 m = 100√3 cm. '√3 cm' forgets to convert the answer from metres to centimetres. '200√3 cm' comes from mis-recalling sin 60° as √3 instead of √3/2, dropping the denominator of the exact value: 2 × √3 = 2√3 m = 200√3 cm. '50√3 cm' comes from halving the ladder's length before multiplying by sin 60°, instead of using the full 2 m.
6. (a) 8 — A cylinder has two flat circular faces (the top and the base) and one curved surface, so only its 2 flat faces are wrapped. A cuboid has 6 faces and all of them are flat, so all 6 are wrapped. Adding these: 2 + 6 = 8, so 8 is correct. 9 comes from wrongly counting the cylinder's curved surface as a flat face. 6 comes from counting only the cuboid and forgetting the cylinder's two flat circular faces. 3 comes from counting only the cylinder and including its curved surface in that total.
7. (c) 2.6 × 10⁵ — In standard form, A must satisfy 1 ≤ A < 10. Moving the decimal point in 260,000 to just after the 2 gives A = 2.6, and the decimal point moved 5 places, so 260,000 = 2.6 × 10⁵. A candidate who wrote 26 × 10⁴ used a value of A outside the required range, even though it has the same overall value. A candidate who wrote 2.6 × 10⁶ counted one place too many when moving the decimal point. A candidate who wrote 0.26 × 10⁶ used a value of A below 1, again outside the required range.
8. (d) 50% — Method: write the number of red cards over the total number of cards, then turn that fraction into a percentage by dividing and multiplying by 100. Working: the probability is 26/52; 26 ÷ 52 = 0.5 and 0.5 × 100 = 50. Answer: 50%, the exact middle of the 0 to 1 probability scale, which matches the fact that half the pack is red. The distractors: 26% comes from writing the number of red cards straight down as the percentage without dividing by the total; 25% comes from taking one of the four suits as the red ones and giving a quarter; 2% comes from dividing the wrong way round, 52 ÷ 26 = 2, and writing that as a percentage.
9. (a) £600 — Method: round the number of cakes and the price of each cake to 1 significant figure, then multiply the rounded values. Working: 187 rounds to 200, and £2.95 rounds to £3 (the digit after the first, 9, rounds the 2 up to 3), so the estimate is 200 × £3 = £600. £400 comes from rounding £2.95 down to £2 instead of up to £3, giving 200 × £2 = £400. £561 comes from rounding only the price and using the exact number of cakes, 187 × £3 = £561. £570 comes from rounding 187 to the nearest 10 as 190 instead of to 1 significant figure as 200, giving 190 × £3 = £570. Answer: £600.
10. (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.
11. (b) No — the angle given is not the included angle — Method: check whether the given angle sits between the two given sides, since SAS requires the included angle. Working: sides AB and BC meet at vertex B, so the angle between them is angle B — but the angle given is angle A, which is not between the two given sides, and the same mismatch happens in triangle DEF. Options: 'two sides and one angle match' restates SAS's ingredients without checking their positions, which is exactly Meera's mistake; 'SSS needs three equal sides' is a true fact about a different condition, but it is not the reason Meera is wrong here; 'SAS allows any equal angle' states a rule that is not how SAS works, since the angle must be the included one. Answer: no, the angle given is not the included angle.
12. (d) 140 — Method: round each number to the nearest 10, then add the rounded values. Working: 89 rounds to 90 (nearest 10) and 52 rounds to 50 (nearest 10). 90 + 50 = 140. Answer: 140. 141 is the exact value of 89 + 52, found without rounding first, so it is not an estimate. 130 comes from rounding 89 down to 80 instead of up to the nearest 10, 90. 150 comes from rounding 52 up to 60 instead of down to the nearest 10, 50.