Printable · GCSE Foundation · ages 14-16
Ratio, proportion and rates of change worksheet — GCSE Foundation
Fifteen questions across the ratio, proportion and rates of change statements at Foundation tier. Choose the non-calculator filter to rehearse Paper 1, which counts for a third of the marks.
Answer key: Ratio, proportion and rates of change worksheet — GCSE Foundation
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 3 : 2 — Method: 'A is k times B' means that if B is taken as 1 part then A is k parts, and a ratio in its simplest form is written with whole numbers that have no common factor. Working: taking B as 1, A is 1.5, so A : B = 1.5 : 1; multiplying both parts by 2 clears the decimal and gives 3 : 2, and 3 and 2 share no factor. Answer: 3 : 2. The distractors: 2 : 3 comes from writing B before A, reversing the order the question asks for; 1.5 : 1 is the right relationship but is not in its simplest form, because a ratio in its simplest form uses whole numbers; 3 : 5 comes from comparing A with the combined length rather than with B, since A : (A + B) = 1.5 : 2.5 = 3 : 5.
- (c) 2/7 — Method: each number in a ratio counts parts, so the whole is all the parts added together, and the fraction wanted is the cement parts over that total. Working: the mix has 5 + 2 = 7 parts altogether, and 2 of those parts are cement, so the cement is 2/7 of the mix. Answer: 2/7. The distractors: 2/5 comes from writing the cement parts over the sand parts, comparing one part with the other part instead of with the whole; 5/7 comes from writing the sand parts over the total, which answers about the wrong material; 7/2 comes from writing the total over the cement parts, turning the fraction upside down.
- (c) 6.00 m — Method: the ratio of height to shadow length is the same for both objects. Working: road sign height ÷ shadow = 3 ÷ 5 = 0.6. Lamppost height = 0.6 × 10 = 6.00 m. Wrong options: 16.67 m comes from inverting the ratio, using shadow ÷ height instead of height ÷ shadow (10 × 5 ÷ 3); 8.00 m comes from adding the difference between the two shadow lengths to the road sign's height instead of scaling (3 + (10 − 5)); 1.50 m comes from multiplying by the ratio of the two shadow lengths the wrong way round (3 × 5 ÷ 10).
- (b) 4 : 25 — For similar shapes, the ratio of areas is the ratio of lengths squared: 2² : 5² = 4 : 25. 2 : 5 comes from using the perimeter ratio itself as the area ratio, without squaring it at all. 8 : 125 comes from cubing each part instead of squaring (2³ : 5³) — cubing is the rule for volume, not area. 4 : 5 comes from squaring only the first part of the ratio (2² = 4), and leaving the second part unsquared.
- (d) 8/5 — Two masses can only be compared once they are in the same unit. Since 1 kg is 1000 g, the recipe needs 1200 g. The recipe's mass is being written as a fraction of Dan's mass, so 1200 goes on the top and 750 on the bottom, giving 1200/750. The highest common factor of the two is 150: 1200 ÷ 150 = 8 and 750 ÷ 150 = 5. The fraction is 8/5, which is greater than 1 because the recipe needs more flour than Dan has.
- (a) 4:3:1 — Convert every part to the same unit: 2 m = 200 cm, so the ratio is 200 : 150 : 50. Dividing all three parts by 50 gives 4 : 3 : 1. Writing 2 : 150 : 50 has not converted 2 m into centimetres, so the units do not match. Writing 3 : 4 : 1 has the first two parts the wrong way round. Writing 4 : 3 : 2 comes from an arithmetic slip on the last part: 50 ÷ 50 = 1, not 2.
- (a) 24 N/m² — Pressure = force ÷ area. 68.4 ÷ 2.85 = 24 N/m². 194.94 N/m² comes from multiplying the force by the area instead of dividing (68.4 × 2.85). 65.55 N/m² comes from subtracting the area from the force (68.4 − 2.85) instead of dividing. 0.04 N/m² comes from dividing the area by the force instead of the force by the area (2.85 ÷ 68.4).
- (d) 4:5 — Write the ratio pounds : dollars as 1 : 1.25. Multiply both parts by 4 to clear the decimal: 1 × 4 = 4 and 1.25 × 4 = 5, giving 4 : 5. (5:4 comes from writing the ratio the wrong way round, dollars to pounds. 1:1 comes from rounding 1.25 dollars down to the nearest whole dollar. 1:5 comes from multiplying only the dollars by 4 to clear the decimal and leaving the pounds as 1 — both parts of a ratio must be multiplied by the same number.)
- (a) 150 g — Method: scale the recipe to find the total sugar needed, then subtract the sugar Sam already has. Working: 200 ÷ 8 × 20 = 500, so 500 g is needed in total; 500 − 350 = 150, so 150 g still to buy. Stopping after finding the total, 500, without subtracting what he has gives 500 g. Scaling the wrong way round, 200 × 8 ÷ 20 = 80, wrongly suggests he already has enough, giving 0 g. Adding the amount he has instead of subtracting it, 500 + 350 = 850, gives 850 g.
- (c) A straight line through the origin, rising from left to right — Two quantities are in direct proportion when one is a constant multiple of the other, so their graph is a straight line through the origin: when one quantity is 0 the other is 0 as well, and doubling one doubles the other. A straight line crossing the vertical axis at 5 has a fixed amount added on, so when the horizontal quantity is 0 the vertical quantity is 5, not 0 — a straight line on its own is not enough for direct proportion. A curve that falls steeply and then levels off without touching either axis shows inverse proportion: one quantity grows as the other shrinks, and their product stays the same. A horizontal line at a height of 3 shows a quantity that does not change at all as the other one grows, so it is not proportional to it.
- (d) 30 cm — Convert 300 m to centimetres: 300 m = 30 000 cm. The scale 1 : 1000 means the map length is the real length divided by 1000: 30 000 ÷ 1000 = 30, giving 30 cm. Dividing the unconverted 300 (metres, not centimetres) by 1000 gives 0.3 cm, far too small to be a real map measurement. Dividing by 10 000 instead of 1 000 gives 3 cm, ten times too small. Multiplying instead of dividing, 300 × 1000 = 300 000, gives 300 000 cm — using the scale the wrong way round, as if the map were bigger than real life.
- (b) 2, the cost in pounds of each extra gigabyte — Method: the gradient is the change in cost divided by the change in data, so it is the cost of each extra gigabyte; the value where the line meets the vertical axis is the charge before any data is used, which is a different quantity. Working: from (0, 10) to (8, 26) the cost rises by 26 − 10 = 16 pounds while the data rises by 8 − 0 = 8 gigabytes, so the gradient is 16 ÷ 8 = 2, meaning each extra gigabyte costs £2. Answer: 2, the cost in pounds of each extra gigabyte. The distractors: '10, the cost in pounds of each extra gigabyte' reads the intercept as the gradient, but 10 is what the tariff costs when no data at all has been used; '3.25, the cost in pounds of each extra gigabyte' comes from 26 ÷ 8, treating the line as though it passed through the origin when it starts at 10; '2, the fixed monthly charge in pounds' has the gradient right but describes the intercept, and the fixed charge on this tariff is £10.
- (a) 4 — The length scale factor, cubed, gives the volume scale factor: L³ = 64, so L = the cube root of 64 = 4, since 4 × 4 × 4 = 64. 64 comes from using the volume scale factor itself as the length scale factor, without taking a root at all. 8 comes from taking the square root of 64 instead of the cube root — that would be the correct root for an area scale factor, not a volume one. 32 comes from halving the volume scale factor (64 ÷ 2), instead of cube-rooting it.
- (d) 4.50 m² — 1 m² = 100 cm × 100 cm = 10,000 cm², so to convert cm² to m² you divide by 10,000: 45,000 ÷ 10,000 = 4.50 m². Dividing by 100 instead of 10,000, treating area like a length conversion, gives 45,000 ÷ 100 = 450.00 m², a common mistake since 1 m = 100 cm. Multiplying by 100 instead of dividing gives 45,000 × 100 = 4500000.00 m², using the conversion factor the wrong way round entirely. Dividing by 100,000 instead of 10,000 gives 0.45 m², an extra factor of 10 too far.
- (d) £6705 — After the first year: £6400 × 1.08 = £6912. After the second year: £6912 × 0.97 = £6704.64, which rounds to £6705 (nearest pound). £6720 comes from treating the +8% and −3% changes as a single net +5% change applied to the original amount instead of applying each change in turn: £6400 × 1.05 = £6720. £6912 comes from applying only the first year's growth and stopping there, without applying the second year's fall. £7104 comes from adding the two percentages together as +11% and applying that to the original amount instead of applying each change to the correct starting amount in turn: £6400 × 1.11 = £7104.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.