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
- (a) 7.9 m — Method: the iteration converges on the width of the plot, so run the formula three times from the starting value and then add 4 m, because the length is 4 m greater than the width. Working: x₁ = √(30 − 4 × 3) = √18 = 4.24264…; x₂ = √(30 − 4 × 4.24264…) = √13.02943… = 3.60963…; x₃ = √(30 − 4 × 3.60963…) = √15.56147… = 3.94480…. The estimate for the length is 3.94480… + 4 = 7.94480…, which is 7.9 m correct to 1 decimal place. Answer: 7.9 m. The iteration is still oscillating at x₃, so this is the estimate that three uses of the formula give, not a settled value. The distractors: 3.9 m is x₃ itself, the width, given by a candidate who runs the iteration correctly and then stops before the step the question actually asks for; 7.6 m uses x₂ in place of x₃, one use of the formula short, and then adds the 4 m correctly; 15.8 m multiplies the width by 4 instead of adding 4 m to it, reading greater than as a multiplier.
- (d) x = −4, y = −19 — x² + 8x − 3 = (x + 4)² − 4² − 3 = (x + 4)² − 19. Substituting x = −4: (−4)² = 16, 8 × (−4) = −32, so 16 − 32 − 3 = −19, confirming the minimum value −19 at x = −4: turning point (−4, −19). Using 8 instead of half of it inside the bracket gives (x + 8)² − 67, turning point (−8, −67) — wrong, because only half the coefficient of x belongs inside the bracket. Reading the bracket's sign directly as the turning point's x-coordinate gives (4, −19) — wrong, because (x + 4)² is zero at x = −4, not x = 4. Computing 16 + 3 = 19 instead of −3 − 16 = −19 flips the sign of the constant, giving (−4, 19) — wrong, since the completed square's constant must be evaluated as −3 minus 16, not 16 plus 3. Check by substitution whenever the sign of a constant feels uncertain.
- (c) 17.7 cm — Method: the iteration converges on x, the depth of the box, which is also the side of each square cut away; a square is removed from both ends of the 20 cm side, so the longer side of the base is 20 − 2x. Run the formula three times, then carry out that subtraction. Working: x₁ = (16 × 1² − 1³ + 50) ÷ 60 = 65 ÷ 60 = 1.08333…; x₂ = 67.50636… ÷ 60 = 1.12510…; x₃ = 68.82959… ÷ 60 = 1.14715…. The longer side of the base is 20 − 2 × 1.14715… = 17.70568…, which is 17.7 cm correct to 1 decimal place. Answer: 17.7 cm. The distractors: 1.1 cm is x₃ itself rounded, the depth of the box, given by a candidate who runs the iteration correctly and then stops before the step the question actually asks for; 18.9 cm is 20 − 1.14715…, taking away one square instead of two and forgetting that a corner is cut from each end of that side; 9.7 cm is 12 − 2 × 1.14715…, the shorter side of the base, which measures the wrong edge of the sheet.
- (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.
- (a) 40 — From 9am to 12 noon is 3 hours, so the population doubles three times: 5 × 2³ = 40. A candidate who counts the elapsed time as 4 hours (an off-by-one counting error) would reach 5 × 2⁴ = 80. A candidate who counts it as only 2 hours would reach 5 × 2² = 20. A candidate who misreads 'doubles' as 'increases by 2' each hour would compute 5 + 3 × 2 = 11.
- (c) 2.61 — The limit L satisfies L = 12 ÷ (L + 2), so L(L + 2) = 12, giving L² + 2L − 12 = 0 and L = (−2 + √52) ÷ 2 = 2.6056, which is 2.61 to 2 decimal places (the early iterates 4, 2, 3, 2.4, 2.73, ... oscillate around this value before settling). Choosing 3.00 reads off x₃, one of the early oscillating values, before the sequence has settled close to the limit. Choosing 4.00 reads off x₁, the very first iterate, not the value the sequence approaches. Choosing 6.00 comes from writing the limit equation as L = 12 ÷ 2, leaving L itself out of the denominator.
- (b) 1.50 — Substituting (0, 8) gives A = 8, since r⁰ = 1. Substituting (2, 18) gives 8 × r² = 18, so r² = 18 ÷ 8 = 2.25. Taking the square root of 2.25 gives r = 1.50 (2 d.p.). Stopping after finding r² and giving 2.25 as the final answer, without taking the square root, is wrong because r² is not the same as r. Dividing r² by the exponent 2 instead of taking its square root — treating the power as something you divide by rather than root — gives 2.25 ÷ 2 = 1.13 (2 d.p.), which is wrong. Inverting the ratio, working out 8 ÷ 18 instead of 18 ÷ 8, gives 0.44 (2 d.p.), which is wrong because the LATER value must be divided by the EARLIER one to find the growth multiplier, not the other way round.
- (a) Subtracting 4x gives 3 = 10, which is never true. — Method: try to solve the equation as normal and see what happens. Working: subtract 4x from both sides: 4x + 3 − 4x = 4x + 10 − 4x, giving 3 = 10. This statement is false for every value of x, so the equation has no solution. Answer: subtracting 4x gives 3 = 10, which is never true. "x would have to be negative" invents a constraint on x that the equation never states. "It's true for every x" confuses this equation with an identity, where both sides would simplify to the same expression. "x = 7" misreads the false statement 3 = 10 as something to solve for x, rather than recognising it means no solution exists.
- (c) 5 — Method: call the number of years ago t, take t off both ages, and form an equation from the comparison at that time. Working: t years ago the father was 40 − t and Ethan was 10 − t, so 40 − t = 7(10 − t); expanding gives 40 − t = 70 − 7t, adding 7t to both sides gives 40 + 6t = 70, subtracting 40 gives 6t = 30, and dividing by 6 gives t = 5. Checking: five years ago the father was 35 and Ethan was 5, and 35 = 7 × 5. Answer: 5. The distractors: 35 comes from finding the right moment but giving the father's age at that time instead of the number of years; 30 comes from using Ethan's present age on the right-hand side, 40 − t = 7 × 10, which gives t = −30 and is then written as 30; 24 comes from reaching 6t = 30 correctly and subtracting 6 instead of dividing by 6.
- (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.
- (c) 12 cm — For a square, area = side². So side² = 144, giving side = ±12. Since a length must be positive, the side length is 12 cm. A candidate who gives both square roots without rejecting the negative one, which cannot be a length, answers 12 cm or −12 cm. A candidate who halves 144 instead of taking its square root gets 72 cm. A candidate who divides 144 by 4, confusing the area formula with a perimeter calculation, gets 36 cm.
- (b) 158 minutes — Rearranging C = 15 + 0.2m for m: subtract 15 from both sides to get C − 15 = 0.2m, then divide by 0.2: m = (C − 15)/0.2. Substituting C = 46.60: m = (46.60 − 15)/0.2 = 31.60/0.2 = 158. Answering 233 minutes comes from dividing the whole £46.60 by 0.2 without first taking off the £15 fixed charge. Answering 308 minutes comes from adding the £15 instead of subtracting it: (46.60 + 15)/0.2. Answering 218 minutes divides first and subtracts 15 afterwards, in the wrong order: 46.60/0.2 − 15 = 233 − 15 = 218. Ali made 158 minutes of calls.
- (a) xₙ₊₁ = ∛(5xₙ + 3) — Starting from x³ − 5x − 3 = 0, add 5x and 3 to both sides to get x³ = 5x + 3, then take the cube root of both sides: x = ∛(5x + 3), giving the iterative formula xₙ₊₁ = ∛(5xₙ + 3). A sign error when moving the constant term across, treating x³ − 5x − 3 = 0 as x³ = 5x − 3, gives xₙ₊₁ = ∛(5xₙ − 3). Swapping the coefficient of x with the constant term gives xₙ₊₁ = ∛(3xₙ + 5), which does not come from x³ = 5x + 3 at all. Treating cubing as meaning multiply by 3 rather than raise to the power 3, and so undoing it by dividing by 3 instead of taking a cube root, gives xₙ₊₁ = (5xₙ + 3) ÷ 3.
- (b) 8 kg — The cost above the flat £5 charge is 17 − 5 = £12. At £2 per kg, this covers 12 ÷ 2 = 6 kg above the first 2 kg, so the total weight is 2 + 6 = 8 kg. Dividing the full £17 by £2 per kg without first taking off the £5 flat charge gives 17 ÷ 2 = 8.5 kg. Taking off the £5 flat charge and dividing by £2 per kg, but forgetting to add back the 2 kg that the flat charge covers, gives 12 ÷ 2 = 6 kg. Taking off £2 instead of £5 as the flat charge, (17 − 2) ÷ 2 = 7.5 kg, swaps which number is the fixed fee.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.