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.
Answer key: Number worksheet — GCSE Foundation
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 4 × 10⁴ — 8 ÷ 2 = 4, and 6 − 2 = 4, so each project receives 4 × 10⁴ pounds. Multiplying the exponents instead of subtracting them gives 6 × 2 = 12, so 4 × 10¹². Adding the exponents instead of subtracting them gives 6 + 2 = 8, so 4 × 10⁸. Subtracting the coefficients instead of dividing them gives 8 − 2 = 6, so 6 × 10⁴.
- (c) 62.35 ≤ r < 62.45 — Method: with a value rounded to 1 decimal place, the error interval reaches half of 0.1 either side. Working: half of 0.1 is 0.05, so the interval runs from 62.4 − 0.05 to 62.4 + 0.05. Answer: 62.35 ≤ r < 62.45. (62 ≤ r < 63 comes from rounding to the nearest whole number instead of 1 decimal place. 62.35 ≤ r ≤ 62.45 comes from including the upper bound with ≤ instead of excluding it with <. 62.3 ≤ r < 62.5 comes from using 0.1 either side instead of half of it.)
- (d) 15:20 — Method: add all three journey segments to the departure time, converting the total number of minutes into hours and minutes. Working: 55 + 20 + 40 = 115 minutes = 1 hour 55 minutes. 13:25 + 1 hour 55 minutes = 15:20. Answer: 15:20. (15:00 comes from leaving out the 20 minute break and adding only 55 + 40 = 95 minutes. 14:25 comes from leaving out the 55 minute first leg and adding only 20 + 40 = 60 minutes. 14:40 comes from leaving out the 40 minute second leg and adding only 55 + 20 = 75 minutes.)
- (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.
- (c) 7 — Method: a square root asks which positive number multiplied by itself gives the number under the root sign, so work up through the square numbers until one of them is 49. Working: 5 × 5 = 25, 6 × 6 = 36 and 7 × 7 = 49. Answer: 7. The distractors: 9 comes from recalling the wrong square fact and pairing 49 with 9, when 9 × 9 = 81; 24.5 comes from treating a square root as a halving and working out 49 ÷ 2; 2401 comes from squaring 49 instead of square-rooting it, applying the inverse operation the wrong way round.
- (d) 0.25 — Dividing by 1000 moves every digit three place-value columns, so 250 ÷ 1000 = 0.25. A candidate who divides by 100 instead of 1000 gets 2.5. A candidate who divides by 10,000 instead of 1000 gets 0.025. A candidate who divides by 10 instead of 1000 gets 25.
- (a) 12 — List the multiples of each number: multiples of 4 are 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24; multiples of 6 are 6, 12, 18, 24. The lowest number that appears in both lists is 12. Picking 24, a common multiple but not the lowest one, gives an answer that is too big. Picking 6, the larger of the two original numbers rather than a common multiple, ignores that the lowest common multiple must appear in both lists. Working out the highest common factor instead of the lowest common multiple gives 2. So the lowest common multiple of 4 and 6 is 12.
- (d) 10π cm — Method: for a circle, circumference = π × diameter. Working: circumference = π × 10 = 10π cm. Answer: 10π cm. 20π cm comes from using the formula 2 × π × radius but plugging in the diameter as if it were the radius: 2 × π × 10 = 20π. 25π cm comes from confusing circumference with area, using π × radius² with radius 5: π × 5² = 25π. 5π cm comes from halving the diameter and then multiplying by π, as if circumference were π × radius: π × 5 = 5π.
- (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.
- (b) 0.6 — Method: convert the fraction to an equivalent fraction with denominator 10, then read off the decimal. Working: 3/5 = 6/10 (multiplying numerator and denominator by 2) = 0.6. Answer: 0.6. 0.35 comes from combining the digits 3 and 5 directly after the decimal point instead of converting the fraction. 0.53 comes from writing the numerator and denominator digits in the wrong order. 1.67 comes from flipping the fraction to 5/3 before converting to a decimal.
- (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.
- (a) x⁶ — Method: work through the powers in order — multiplying powers of the same base means adding indices, and dividing powers of the same base means subtracting indices. Working: first, x⁵ × x³ = x⁸ (adding 5 and 3); then x⁸ ÷ x² = x⁶ (subtracting 2 from 8). x⁴ comes from swapping the two rules — subtracting for the multiplication, 5 − 3 = 2, and then adding for the division, 2 + 2 = 4. x¹⁰ comes from adding all three indices, 5 + 3 + 2 = 10, treating the division the same as a multiplication. 6x comes from correctly reaching a total index of 6 but then writing it as a coefficient of x instead of as its power. Answer: x⁶.
- (b) 2.1 m — The three pieces use 3 × 0.9 = 2.7 m of wood. Remaining wood = 4.8 − 2.7 = 2.1 m. A candidate who miscounts and only subtracts 2 pieces instead of 3 gets 4.8 − 1.8 = 3.0 m. A candidate who adds instead of subtracting gets 4.8 + 2.7 = 7.5 m. A candidate who gives the length used instead of the length remaining gets 2.7 m.
- (c) 2000 mm — Put both lengths into the same unit first. There are 1000 mm in a metre, so the ribbon is 2.4 × 1000 = 2400 mm, and there are 10 mm in a centimetre, so the piece cut off is 40 × 10 = 400 mm. The length left is 2400 − 400 = 2000 mm. 2360 mm subtracts 40 mm instead of 400 mm, 200 mm works in centimetres and then labels the result as millimetres, and 2800 mm adds the piece that was cut off instead of subtracting it.
- (a) 4.5 × 10⁴ — 45,000 = 4.5 × 10,000 = 4.5 × 10⁴, with the coefficient between 1 and 10 as standard form requires. Writing 45 × 10³ keeps the coefficient too large — 45 is not between 1 and 10. Writing 4.5 × 10³ undercounts the places moved, giving only 4,500. Writing 4.5 × 10⁵ overcounts the places moved, giving 450,000.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.