Printable · GCSE Foundation · ages 14-16
Number worksheet — GCSE Foundation
Fifteen questions across the number statements at Foundation tier. Choose the non-calculator filter to rehearse Paper 1, which counts for a third of the marks.
Non-calculator
Answer key: Number worksheet — GCSE Foundation
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (d) 60 — Method: round each number to 1 significant figure and multiply; the estimate then shows whether the calculator answer is sensible. Working: 3.1 rounds to 3 and 19.6 rounds to 20, so the estimate is 3 × 20 = 60. Answer: 60. Hannah's 6.076 is about ten times too small, which is what happens when 19.6 is keyed in as 1.96. The distractors: 62 comes from rounding 19.6 only and leaving 3.1 as it stands, giving 3.1 × 20 = 62; 6 comes from trusting the calculator display rather than checking it against an estimate; 600 comes from rounding 19.6 to 200 instead of to 20, a place-value slip, giving 3 × 200 = 600.
- (b) 25 g — Method: substitute the number of years into the model, raise the fraction to that power first, then multiply by the starting mass. Working: with n = 3 the model gives M = 200 × (1/2)³. Since (1/2)³ = 1/8, the mass is 200 ÷ 8 = 25. Answer: 25 g. The distractors: 12.5 g comes from halving four times instead of three, counting the first weighing as a year; 300 g comes from multiplying by 1/2 × 3 = 1.5 instead of raising 1/2 to the power 3; 0.125 g comes from working out (1/2)³ = 0.125 and stopping there, without multiplying by the starting mass.
- (a) 5 — Method: the number of glasses is the amount in the jug divided by the amount one glass holds. Write the mixed number as an improper fraction, then divide by multiplying by the reciprocal. Working: 3 1/3 = (3 × 3 + 1)/3 = 10/3, and 10/3 ÷ 2/3 = 10/3 × 3/2 = 30/6 = 5. Answer: 5. The distractors: 2 comes from writing 3 1/3 as 4/3, adding the whole number to the numerator instead of multiplying it by the denominator first, and then dividing 4/3 by 2/3; 20/9 comes from multiplying by 2/3 instead of dividing by it; 5/3 comes from dividing by 2 rather than by 2/3, as though each glass held 2 litres.
- (b) 5² — Method: multiplying two powers of the same base adds their indices, and a negative index is added as a negative number. Working: −2 + 4 = 2, so 5⁻² × 5⁴ = 5². Answer: 5². The distractors: 5⁶ comes from adding the sizes of the indices, 2 + 4, and ignoring the minus sign; 5⁻⁸ comes from multiplying the indices, −2 × 4, instead of adding them; 5⁻⁶ comes from subtracting the indices, −2 − 4, as though the powers were being divided.
- (c) −5 — Method: the bracket is worked out first, then the multiplication and the division, which stand as separate parts, and the subtraction that joins them is carried out last; subtracting a negative is the same as adding. Working: (−3) + 5 = 2, so the product is 2 × (−4) = −8; the division gives (−6) ÷ 2 = −3; joining them gives −8 − (−3) = −8 + 3 = −5. Answer: −5. The distractors: −11 comes from taking away 3 instead of taking away −3, giving −8 − 3 = −11; −1 comes from working from left to right once the bracket is done, giving −8 − (−6) = −2 and then −2 ÷ 2 = −1; 11 comes from treating the first product as positive because it was worked out from a bracket, giving 8 − (−3) = 11.
- (c) 5 — 0.2 = 1/5, and turning the fraction upside down gives the reciprocal 5/1 = 5. Writing −0.2 mistakes the reciprocal for the negative of the number. Working out 1 − 0.2 = 0.8 mistakes the reciprocal for subtracting the number from 1. Writing 0.5 is the reciprocal of 2, not of 0.2 — a place-value slip that drops the decimal, since 1 ÷ 0.2 = 5 while 1 ÷ 2 = 0.5.
- (a) They cannot both be describing the same path — Jon's measurement means the true length, l, satisfies 11.5 m ≤ l < 12.5 m. Mia's measurement means the true length satisfies 12.55 m ≤ l < 12.65 m. These two ranges do not overlap, so the two measurements cannot both be describing the same path. 'They must both be describing the same path' ignores that the two ranges do not overlap at all. 'Jon's measurement must be wrong' wrongly assumes Jon is the one at fault, when the mismatch does not show which measurement, if either, is wrong. 'Mia's measurement must be wrong' makes the same unjustified assumption in the other direction.
- (a) The tape can only give the length to the nearest centimetre — Method: a measurement should never be written to a finer degree of accuracy than the instrument used can read. Working: the tape is marked in centimetres, so the smallest division Leah can read is 1 cm, which is 0.01 m and two decimal places in metres; writing 7.3157 m claims the length to the nearest tenth of a millimetre, four decimal places, which the markings cannot support. A record of 7.32 m, to the nearest centimetre, is what this tape justifies. Answer: The tape can only give the length to the nearest centimetre. The distractors: the nearest millimetre contradicts the markings described in the question, which are centimetres, and would still claim more accuracy than the tape offers; the rule that a length in metres must be written to 2 decimal places borrows the habit of writing money to the penny, when the accuracy of a length depends on the instrument; rounding to the nearest metre would throw away accuracy the tape genuinely provides.
- (b) −0.7 < −0.25 — Method: compare the two negative decimals by their distance from zero on a number line. Working: −0.7 is 0.7 away from zero and −0.25 is 0.25 away from zero, so −0.7 is further from zero in the negative direction, making it the smaller number. Answer: −0.7 < −0.25 is true. "−0.7 > −0.25" comes from comparing 0.7 and 0.25 as if both numbers were positive, ignoring the negative signs. "−0.7 = −0.25" comes from assuming the two numbers are equal because they are both negative decimals. "−0.7 ≥ −0.25" combines the false statement "−0.7 > −0.25" with the false statement "−0.7 = −0.25".
- (c) 87 litres — Work out how much water is drained: 8 × 6 = 48 litres. Subtract this from the starting amount: 120 − 48 = 72 litres. Then add the 15 litres from the hose: 72 + 15 = 87 litres. Subtracting the 15 litres instead of adding it, as though the hose also removed water, gives 120 − 48 − 15 = 57 litres. Stopping after the drain step, without adding the hose water back in, leaves the working at 72 litres. Adding the rate and the time instead of multiplying them, 8 + 6 = 14 litres drained, and then working from there gives 120 − 14 + 15 = 121 litres. So 87 litres of water is left in the tank.
- (c) 6/8 — Method: two fractions can only be compared directly when they share a denominator, so rewrite 3/4 in eighths and then compare the numerators. Working: 5/8 is already in eighths, and 3/4 = (3 × 2)/(4 × 2) = 6/8. Comparing the numerators, 6 > 5, so Oliver eats the larger share. Answer: 6/8. The distractors: 5/8 comes from skipping the conversion altogether and assuming that a bar cut into eighths must give the bigger share because it has more pieces; once both shares are written over the same denominator, 5 eighths is one eighth less than 6 eighths. 1/8 comes from working out how much more Oliver eats, 6/8 − 5/8, instead of writing down the greater of the two shares. 7/8 comes from adding 4 to the numerator and 4 to the denominator of 3/4 instead of multiplying both by 2.
- (a) 10 °C — Method: work out the coldest and warmest of the four temperatures, then subtract to find the difference. Working: the coldest temperature is Sam's, −9 °C, and the warmest is Alex's, 1 °C. The difference is 1 − (−9) = 1 + 9 = 10. Answer: 10 °C. 8 °C comes from working out 1 − 9 = −8 and reporting 8, dropping the negative sign on −9 instead of turning the subtraction into an addition. 3 °C comes from comparing the wrong pair, Sam's −9 °C and Ben's −6 °C, instead of the coldest and the warmest: −6 − (−9) = 3. 7 °C comes from comparing Ben's −6 °C with Alex's 1 °C, mistakenly treating Ben's reading as the coldest instead of Sam's.
- (c) 2 — First write 1 1/2 as an improper fraction, 3/2. To divide by 3/4, multiply by its reciprocal, 4/3: 3/2 × 4/3 = 12/6 = 2. Dropping the whole number and dividing only the fractional part, 1/2 ÷ 3/4 = 1/2 × 4/3, gives 2/3. Multiplying by 3/4 directly instead of using its reciprocal, 3/2 × 3/4, gives 9/8. Using the reciprocal of the first fraction instead of the second, 2/3 × 3/4, gives 1/2.
- (d) −5, −1, 0, 3 — Method: order the numbers by their position on a number line, smallest (furthest left) first. Working: both −5 and −1 lie to the left of 0, and 3 lies to the right of 0. Of the two negatives, −5 is 5 units from zero and −1 is 1 unit from zero, so −5 is further left. Answer: −5, −1, 0, 3. The distractors: 3, 0, −1, −5 is the correct order written the wrong way round, starting with the largest; −1, −5, 0, 3 comes from ordering the two negatives by the size of their digits, so that −1 is treated as the smaller; 0, −1, −5, 3 comes from believing that zero is the smallest number there is and then listing the negatives by their digits.
- (d) 10 — Method: list the pairs systematically, taking each sweet in turn and pairing it only with the sweets that come after it, so that no pair is written down twice. Working: numbering the sweets 1 to 5, the first sweet pairs with 4 others, the second pairs with 3 sweets that come after it, the third with 2 and the fourth with 1, so the total is 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 10. Answer: 10. The distractors: 20 comes from working out 5 × 4 and never halving, which counts each pair twice, once in each order; 25 comes from working out 5 × 5, which allows the same sweet to be chosen twice; 9 comes from adding the 5 choices and the 4 remaining choices instead of combining them as a selection of two.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.