Printable · GCSE Foundation · ages 14-16

Proportion as equality of ratios worksheet — GCSE Foundation

Fifteen questions on "proportion as equality of ratios" — DfE statement R7. Print it, or print three versions so neighbours cannot copy by letter; the key gives the letter for each version.

Non-calculator

VersionsA only A + B A + B + Csame questions, different order

AnswersQuestions only With answer key Key only

CalculatorMixed Non-calculator (Paper 1)Calculator (Papers 2 and 3)

New sheet

Answer key: Proportion as equality of ratios worksheet — GCSE Foundation

Maths · GCSE Foundation · R7 · Proportion as equality of ratios · Non-calculator · 15 questions

MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk

(c) 8 m — Method: in the same sunlight every object has its height and its shadow in the same ratio, so write 2:3 = h:12, find the multiplier that takes 3 to 12 and apply it to the height. Working: 12 ÷ 3 = 4, so the tree's shadow is 4 times the post's shadow; the height must be scaled by the same 4, giving 4 × 2 = 8 m. Answer: 8 m. The distractors: 18 m comes from setting up the proportion upside down, 12 ÷ 2 × 3, which scales by shadow over height instead of height over shadow; 24 m comes from multiplying the 12 m shadow by the post's height of 2 m and never dividing by the post's shadow of 3 m; 4 m is the scale factor 12 ÷ 3, given as a length instead of being used to scale the 2 m post.
(d) Yes, because 4 × 9 = 6 × 6 — Method: two ratios are equal when their cross-products are equal, so multiply the first part of each ratio by the second part of the other. Working: 4 × 9 = 36 and 6 × 6 = 36; the two products match, so the ratios are equal, and simplifying both to 2:3 shows the same thing. Answer: yes, because 4 × 9 = 6 × 6. The distractors: the reason that the number 6 appears in both ratios reaches the right verdict from a surface match, since a figure shared by two ratios says nothing about equivalence — 4:6 and 6:5 share a 6 and are not equal; the reason built on 9 − 6 and 6 − 4 compares the differences inside each ratio, 3 against 2, which is additive thinking and ends at a verdict of no; the reason built on 4 × 6 and 6 × 9 multiplies the two parts of each ratio together instead of across the pair, giving 24 against 54 and again a verdict of no.
(b) 12 cm — Method: height:width = 3:2 means both lengths are built from parts of the same size, so write 3:2 = 18:x, find one part and multiply by the number of parts in the width. Working: the height is 3 parts and measures 18 cm, so one part is 18 ÷ 3 = 6 cm; the width is 2 parts, so 2 × 6 = 12 cm. Answer: 12 cm. The distractors: 27 cm comes from using the ratio the wrong way round, 18 ÷ 2 × 3, which makes the width longer than the height even though 2 is the smaller part; 6 cm is the value of one part, given as the width instead of being doubled; 17 cm comes from treating the ratio as a difference — 3 − 2 = 1, so 1 cm is taken off the height — but a ratio scales the lengths, it does not subtract from them.
(d) 450 g — Find the amount of rice per person: 300 ÷ 4 = 75 g. Multiply by the new number of people: 75 × 6 = 450 g. Giving 200 g swaps which number the rice is divided and multiplied by (300 ÷ 6 × 4 = 200), scaling the wrong way. Giving 180 g uses 4 + 6 = 10 as the base instead of the original 4 people (300 × 6 ÷ 10 = 180). Giving 400 g assumes each of the 2 extra people needs 300 ÷ 6 = 50 g on top of the original 300 g (300 + 2 × 50 = 400), rather than scaling the whole amount in proportion.
(c) 30 — Method: use y = kx and find k from the given pair of values, then substitute x = 12. Working: k = 20 ÷ 8 = 2.5, so y = 2.5 × 12 = 30. Answer: 30. 24 comes from treating the relationship as additive, adding the increase in x (12 − 8 = 4) straight onto y (20 + 4 = 24), instead of multiplying by k. 14.5 comes from finding k correctly (2.5) but then adding it to x instead of multiplying (12 + 2.5 = 14.5). 4.8 comes from finding k upside down, 8 ÷ 20 = 0.4, and multiplying by x: 12 × 0.4 = 4.8.
(a) 20% — Method: a percentage concentration compares the sugar with the whole solution, so add the two masses to get the mass of solution and then scale the ratio of sugar to solution to a denominator of 100. Working: the solution has a mass of 200 + 50 = 250 g; sugar:solution = 50:250, and scaling to per 100 gives 50 ÷ 250 × 100 = 20, so the ratio is 20:100. Answer: 20%. The distractors: 25% comes from comparing the sugar with the 200 g of water, 50:200, rather than with the whole solution; 80% is the percentage of the solution that is water, 200:250, which answers for the wrong part of the mixture; 0.2% comes from working out 50 ÷ 250 = 0.2 and writing that decimal down as a percentage without multiplying by 100.
(a) 375 g — Find the amount of flour needed per muffin: 150 ÷ 6 = 25 g. Multiply by the new number of muffins: 25 × 15 = 375 g. (60 g comes from using the scale factor the wrong way round, 6/15 × 150. 150 g comes from not scaling the recipe at all. 300 g comes from rounding the scale factor, 15 ÷ 6, down to 2 before multiplying.)
(d) 24 — Method: split 60 into 3 + 7 = 10 equal parts, find the value of one part, then use the difference in ratio parts. Working: 60 ÷ 10 = 6, so the numbers are 3 × 6 = 18 and 7 × 6 = 42, and their difference is 42 − 18 = 24. Answer: 24. 4 comes from finding the difference between the ratio numbers, 7 − 3, but forgetting to multiply by the value of one part. 60 comes from adding the two numbers back together instead of subtracting, which just repeats the given sum. 80 comes from dividing 60 by the first ratio number, 3, instead of by the total number of parts, 10, giving a part value of 20 and a difference of 7 × 20 − 3 × 20 = 80.
(d) 20 litres — The ratio of concentrate to water is 2 : 5, so water = concentrate × 5 ÷ 2. 8 × 5 ÷ 2 = 20, so Priya needs 20 litres of water. Giving 40 litres multiplies by 5 but forgets to divide by 2 (8 × 5 = 40). Giving 3.2 litres uses the ratio inverted, multiplying by 2 ÷ 5 instead of 5 ÷ 2 (8 × 2 ÷ 5 = 3.2). Giving 11 litres uses additive reasoning instead of multiplicative: it adds the difference between the ratio parts, 5 − 2 = 3, onto the amount of concentrate (8 + 3 = 11), but ratios scale by multiplying, not by adding a fixed amount.
(a) 0.6 litres — The ratio 1 : 9 means the solution has 1 + 9 = 10 equal parts in total. Each part is 6 ÷ 10 = 0.6 litres, and disinfectant is 1 part, so Priti needs 0.6 litres of disinfectant. Giving 0.667 litres divides by 9, the number of parts of water, instead of the total number of parts, 10 (6 ÷ 9 ≈ 0.667). Giving 6 litres is the total amount of solution, not just the disinfectant's share of it. Giving 5.4 litres works out the water's share (6 × 9 ÷ 10 = 5.4), not the disinfectant's.
(d) 132 — Method: find the value of one part of the ratio, use it to find Leo's pages, then add both amounts together. Working: 84 ÷ 7 = 12 (value of one part). Leo's pages = 12 × 4 = 48. Total = 84 + 48 = 132. Wrong options: 48 gives only Leo's pages and forgets to add Mia's; 147 comes from reversing the ratio parts (84 ÷ 4 × 7 = 147) and stopping there; 231 comes from reversing the ratio parts and then adding Mia's pages (84 + 147).
(c) 16% — Method: scale each concentration to its own mass to find the salt it contains, add the two masses of salt, then write the ratio of salt to mixture per 100 g. Working: 10:100 = x:300 gives 30 g of salt, and 25:100 = y:200 gives 50 g of salt; the mixture holds 30 + 50 = 80 g of salt in 300 + 200 = 500 g of solution; 80:500 = 16:100. Answer: 16%. The distractors: 17.5% is the mean of 10% and 25%, which ignores that there is more of the weaker solution than of the stronger one; 19% comes from swapping the two concentrations over, working out (300 × 25% + 200 × 10%) ÷ 500; 26.7% comes from dividing the 80 g of salt by the 300 g of the first solution rather than by the 500 g of mixture.
(d) £24 — Add the parts of the ratio: 2 + 3 + 7 = 12. Find the value of one part: £96 ÷ 12 = £8. Cara's share is 3 parts: 3 × £8 = £24. (£16 is Ben's share, 2 × £8, not Cara's. £56 is Dev's share, 7 × £8, not Cara's. £28.80 comes from wrongly adding the ratio parts as 10 instead of 12, giving one part = £9.60.)
(c) 5 hours — Method: measure the job in decorator-hours, which is in the same ratio as the number of rooms, then share the decorator-hours between the decorators available. Working: 5 decorators × 6 hours = 30 decorator-hours for 3 rooms, so one room takes 30 ÷ 3 = 10 decorator-hours; 5 rooms take 5 × 10 = 50 decorator-hours; shared between 10 decorators that is 50 ÷ 10 = 5 hours. Answer: 5 hours. The distractors: 3 hours comes from halving the 6 hours because the number of decorators doubles, while forgetting that there are also more rooms to paint; 10 hours comes from scaling the 6 hours up for the rooms only, 6 × 5 ÷ 3, and leaving the workforce at 5 decorators; 6 hours comes from assuming that doubling the decorators and increasing the rooms cancel each other out, which they do not, because the rooms rise by a factor of 5/3 and the workforce by a factor of 2.
(b) 9 — Method: divide the known quantity by its ratio number to find the value of one part, then multiply by the other ratio number. Working: 21 ÷ 7 = 3 (value of one part). Red beads = 3 × 3 = 9. Wrong options: 49 comes from dividing by the wrong ratio number (21 ÷ 3 × 7); 24 comes from adding the ratio number for red (3) to 21 instead of scaling; 14 comes from subtracting the ratio number for blue (7) from 21 instead of scaling.

Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.