Printable · GCSE Higher · ages 14-16
Algebra worksheet — GCSE Higher
Fifteen questions across the algebra statements at Higher tier. Choose the non-calculator filter to rehearse Paper 1, which counts for a third of the marks.
Calculator
Answer key: Algebra worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (b) 6 — 3n + 4.5 = 22.5, so 3n = 18 and n = 6. A candidate who divides 22.5 by 3 first and ignores the 4.5 gets n = 7.5. A candidate who makes a sign error and forms the equation 3n − 4.5 = 22.5 gets 3n = 27 and n = 9. A candidate who divides by 3 before subtracting the 4.5, working out 22.5 ÷ 3 + 4.5, gets n = 12.
- (a) 2.55 — x₁ = 20 ÷ (2 + 5) = 20 ÷ 7 = 2.857142857. x₂ = 20 ÷ (2.857142857 + 5) = 20 ÷ 7.857142857 = 2.545454545, which rounds to 2.55. Reporting x₁ instead of x₂ gives 2.857142857, which rounds to 2.86. Dropping the +5 in the denominator, using xₙ₊₁ = 20 ÷ xₙ, gives x₁ = 20 ÷ 2 = 10 and x₂ = 20 ÷ 10 = 2, which is 2.00. A sign error in the denominator, using xₙ₊₁ = 20 ÷ (xₙ − 5), gives x₁ = 20 ÷ (2 − 5) = −6.666666667 and x₂ = 20 ÷ (−6.666666667 − 5) = −1.714285714, which rounds to −1.71.
- (a) 48 litres — Split the area into three sections. The rectangle (t = 0 to 2) has area 2 × 12 = 24. The first trapezium (t = 2 to 5, parallel sides 12 and 3, width 3) has area 1/2 × (12 + 3) × 3 = 22.5. The second trapezium (t = 5 to 6, parallel sides 3 and 0, width 1) has area 1/2 × (3 + 0) × 1 = 1.5. Total volume: 24 + 22.5 + 1.5 = 48 litres. Forgetting the rectangle and adding only the two trapeziums gives 22.5 + 1.5 = 24 litres. Using a single trapezium across the whole 6 minutes, with parallel sides 12 and 0, ignoring that the first 2 minutes are constant, gives 1/2 × (12 + 0) × 6 = 36 litres. Correctly finding the rectangle and the first trapezium but forgetting to halve the second trapezium, using (3 + 0) × 1 = 3 instead of 1.5, gives 24 + 22.5 + 3 = 49.5 litres.
- (d) 8 — Working backwards by halving (undoing the doubling), one 4-hour step at a time: 9,600 (20 h) → 4,800 (16 h) → 2,400 (12 h) → 1,200 (8 h) → 600 (4 h) → 300 (0 h). Reading these in time order — 300, 600, 1,200, 2,400, 4,800, 9,600 at 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 hours — the population is still at or below 1,000 at 4 hours (600) and first goes above 1,000 at 8 hours (1,200). So the recorded population first exceeds 1,000 at 8 hours. Answering 20 just reads off the time stated in the question, without working out when the threshold was actually first crossed — wrong, because 9,600 is only the value AT 20 hours, not necessarily the first time the population passed 1,000. Answering 0 comes from recovering the starting population by dividing 9,600 by 5 (the number of 4-hour gaps up to 20 hours) instead of by 2⁵ = 32 (the correct number of halvings), giving a wrongly-inflated starting value of 9,600 ÷ 5 = 1,920 — already above 1,000 at 0 hours — wrong, because doubling means the value must be halved five times, dividing by 2 five times (2⁵ = 32), not divided once by the number of gaps. Answering 12 comes from halving back only twice, from 9,600 to 4,800 (16 h) to 2,400 (12 h), and stopping there because 2,400 is already above 1,000, without checking that 1,200 at 8 hours is also above 1,000 and occurs earlier — wrong, because the FIRST recorded time above 1,000 is the earliest such time, not the first one reached while working backwards from 20 hours.
- (b) 5.00 — Continuing the iteration: x₁ = √(2 × 1 + 15) = √17 = 4.1231, x₂ = √(2 × 4.1231 + 15) = √23.2462 = 4.8214, x₃ = √(2 × 4.8214 + 15) = √24.6428 = 4.9642, x₄ = √(2 × 4.9642 + 15) = √24.9284 = 4.9928, and the values keep climbing towards 5.00 as n increases (the limit L satisfies L² = 2L + 15, so L² − 2L − 15 = 0, giving L = 5). Choosing 4.99 stops after x₄, one iteration before the value has settled fully to 5.00. Choosing 17.00 uses the value under the very first square root (2 × 1 + 15 = 17) as if that number itself were the limit. Choosing 1.00 assumes the sequence never moves from the starting value x₀.
- (c) 6,400 — 9 hours contains 9 ÷ 3 = 3 whole periods of doubling, so the population is 800 × 2³. Since 2³ = 8, the population after 9 hours is 800 × 8 = 6,400. Adding 100% growth three times instead of compounding it — treating the growth as simple, not repeated doubling — gives 800 × 4 = 3,200, which is wrong because each period doubles the CURRENT population, not the original one. Using 9 as the power instead of dividing by the 3-hour period first gives 800 × 2⁹ = 409,600, which is wrong because the exponent counts periods, not hours. Giving the growth factor 2³ = 8 on its own, without multiplying by the starting population 800, leaves the answer as 8, which is wrong because the question asks for the population, not the multiplier. Always check that your final number of periods matches the total time divided by the period length.
- (d) Overestimate — the curve bends upward (convex). — The first differences of the speeds are 3, 5, 7 and 9, so the second differences are 2, 2 and 2 — constant and positive, which means the speed-time graph curves upwards (is convex). On a convex curve, each straight chord used by the trapezium rule lies above the curve, so the trapezium rule overestimates the true distance. 'Underestimate — the curve bends upward' states the same correct geometry but gets the conclusion backwards — a chord above the curve means too much area is counted, not too little. 'Overestimate — the speed values are increasing' uses the wrong evidence: increasing speed alone doesn't tell you whether the curve bends up or down, only the second differences do. 'Underestimate — second differences are constant' confuses a constant second difference with a steady rate of change in speed, which isn't what the second difference of a speed-time table measures.
- (b) 12.7 m/s — Find the total distance from the area under the graph, then divide by the total time. Break the graph into its four straight sections: a triangle from (0, 0) to (5, 20), where 5 × 20 = 100 gives an area of 50 m when halved; a rectangle from (5, 20) to (12, 20), area 7 × 20 = 140 m; a trapezium from (12, 20) to (16, 4), where (20 + 4) × 4 = 96 gives an area of 48 m when halved; and a rectangle from (16, 4) to (20, 4), area 4 × 4 = 16 m — a total distance of 50 + 140 + 48 + 16 = 254 m. Dividing by the 20 seconds gives an average speed of 254 ÷ 20 = 12.7 m/s. Writing 15.1 m/s comes from forgetting to halve the trapezium area for the third section, using 96 instead of 48: a total of 302 m, and 302 ÷ 20 = 15.1 m/s. Writing 11.9 m/s comes from leaving out the final section, from (16, 4) to (20, 4), entirely: a total of 238 m, and 238 ÷ 20 = 11.9 m/s. Writing 12.1 m/s comes from dividing the correct total distance by 21 instead of 20 — a fencepost slip, counting the whole seconds from t = 0 to t = 20 inclusive as 21 seconds of travel rather than reading the journey as a duration of 20 seconds: 254 ÷ 21 = 12.1 m/s (1 d.p.).
- (c) 14.1 — Method: in x² + y² = r² the right-hand side is the square of the radius, so take its square root to find the radius, then double the radius because the diameter is twice the radius. Working: r² = 50, so r = √50 = 7.07106…, and the diameter is 2 × 7.07106… = 14.14213…, which is 14.1 correct to 1 decimal place. Answer: 14.1. The distractors: 7.1 is the radius, worked out correctly but never doubled, so it answers a question about the radius rather than the diameter; 100.0 comes from doubling the 50 on the right-hand side, treating r² as though it were already the radius; 25.0 comes from halving the 50, treating r² as though it were already the diameter.
- (a) 4 — Rectangle 1: P = 2(9 + 4) = 2 × 13 = 26 cm. Rectangle 2: P = 2(6 + 5) = 2 × 11 = 22 cm. Difference = 26 − 22 = 4 cm. 2 comes from finding the difference between (l + w) for each rectangle, 13 − 11 = 2, but forgetting to double it. 26 comes from giving rectangle 1's whole perimeter instead of the difference between the two. 6 comes from doubling only the change in length, 2 × (9 − 6), and ignoring that the width also changed.
- (b) 5 cm³ — When P = 32, V = 480 ÷ 32 = 15 cm³. When P = 24, V = 480 ÷ 24 = 20 cm³. The increase in volume is 20 − 15 = 5 cm³. Giving only the second volume, 20 cm³, forgets to subtract the first volume. Giving only the first volume, 15 cm³, answers the wrong part of the question. Subtracting the two pressures instead of the two volumes, 32 − 24 = 8, mixes up which quantity the question asks for.
- (b) 235 litres — The flow rate at t = 10 is the gradient of the tangent: change in volume ÷ change in time = (190 − 130) ÷ (12 − 8) = 60 ÷ 4 = 15 litres per minute. Treating this rate as roughly constant for a short interval, the volume 5 minutes after t = 10 is estimated as 160 + 5 × 15 = 235 litres. Using the tangent's own point spacing — 2 minutes, from t = 10 to t = 12 — instead of the 5 minutes actually asked for gives 160 + 2 × 15 = 190, which is just the volume already given at one of the tangent's own points, not an answer to the question asked. Multiplying the gradient by the time WITHOUT adding the starting volume, 5 × 15 = 75, forgets that a rate estimates a CHANGE, which must be added to the starting volume, not given as the answer on its own. Subtracting instead of adding, 160 − 5 × 15 = 85, extrapolates backward in time rather than forward.
- (d) If the graph has two real roots, they are equal and opposite in value, so they sum to zero. — A turning point on the y-axis means the graph's axis of symmetry is the line x = 0, so any two roots must be symmetrical about x = 0 — equal in size but opposite in sign, summing to zero. The graph could still have no real roots, but that is not guaranteed just from the turning point's position, so the option claiming it must have none is too strong. The roots do not have to both be positive — if real, one is positive and one negative (or both are zero). The graph does not have to touch the x-axis at exactly one point either; it could cross at two symmetrical points, touch at one point, or miss the x-axis entirely.
- (d) x₂ closer: f(x₂) = 0.0225, nearer to 0 — f(2.6) = 2.6² − 7 = 6.76 − 7 = −0.24, and f(2.65) = 2.65² − 7 = 7.0225 − 7 = 0.0225. The closer a value of x is to the root, the closer f(x) is to zero — regardless of sign. Since |0.0225| = 0.0225 is much smaller than |−0.24| = 0.24, x₂ = 2.65 is closer to the root. 'x₁ closer: −0.24 is the smaller value' comes from comparing the SIGNED values of f(x) rather than their distances from zero — −0.24 is indeed less than 0.0225 as a number, but that does not mean x₁ is closer to the root. 'x₁ closer: f(x₁) negative ⇒ nearer root' invents a rule that a negative f(x) means x is closer to the root; the sign of f(x) only tells you which side of the root x is on, not how close it is. 'x₂ is the exact root, since f(x₂) ≈ 0' misreads f(x₂) = 0.0225 as zero; the true root is √7 ≈ 2.6458, so f(2.65) is close to zero but not equal to it, and x₂ is an approximation, not the exact root.
- (c) (3, 9) — Reflecting in the horizontal line y = 2 keeps the x-coordinate the same and maps y to 2 × 2 − y = 4 − (−5) = 9, so S = (3, 9). A candidate who uses k − y instead of 2k − y gets 2 − (−5) = 7, giving (3, 7). A candidate who reflects in the x-axis instead of the line y = 2, simply changing the sign of y, gets (3, 5). A candidate who also changes the sign of the x-coordinate, as if reflecting in both axes, gets (−3, 9).
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.