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
- (d) It has a solution between x = 2.2 and x = 2.3 — Since f(2.2) is negative and f(2.3) is positive, the graph of f crosses the x-axis somewhere between x = 2.2 and x = 2.3, so the equation has a solution in that interval. Choosing 'between x = −2.2 and x = −2.3' confuses the negative f-VALUE at 2.2 with a negative x-value. Choosing 'no solution' misreads a change of sign as meaning the opposite of what it shows. Choosing 'exactly two solutions' assumes a single change of sign must give two roots, which is not what the rule guarantees.
- (c) Fastest at t = 2 min — steepest gradient. — The rate of cooling is given by the size (magnitude) of the gradient, ignoring its sign — the steeper the tangent, the faster the temperature is changing. Of −8, −3 and −0.5, the gradient −8 has the greatest magnitude, so the tea is cooling fastest at t = 2 minutes. 'Fastest at t = 20 min — largest gradient' confuses the signed value with the size of the rate: −0.5 is the largest NUMBER of the three, but it's the smallest in magnitude, meaning the tea is barely cooling at all by then. 'Cools at the same rate throughout' ignores that the three gradients are different sizes, not just all negative. 'Fastest at t = 10 min — the middle reading' isn't a mathematical reason at all — the gradients themselves have to be compared, not their position in the list.
- (a) It has a solution between x = 2.6 and x = 2.7 — f(2.6) is negative and f(2.7) is positive, so the graph of f crosses the x-axis between x = 2.6 and x = 2.7, meaning the equation has a solution there. Choosing 'x = 2.6 is a solution' reads an end of the interval as the root itself, but f(2.6) = −1.424, which is not zero — the change of sign locates a root between the two values, it does not land on either of them. Choosing 'between x = −2.6 and x = −2.7' confuses the negative f-VALUE at 2.6 with a negative x-value. Choosing 'no root in this interval' misapplies the rule, which needs a CHANGE of sign — and a change of sign is exactly what these two values show.
- (b) s = d / t — Method: undo the multiplication by t by dividing both sides by t. Working: d = st, so dividing both sides by t gives s = d / t. The value s = dt comes from multiplying by t instead of dividing. The value s = t / d comes from inverting the fraction, dividing t by d instead of d by t. The value s = d − t comes from subtracting t instead of dividing by it.
- (a) t = 0 or t = 4 — The ball is at ground level exactly when h = 0. From the table, h = 0 at t = 0 and at t = 4, so those are the two times. Distractor origins: t = 1 or t = 3 picks the times with equal (but non-zero) height instead of ground level; t = 2 picks the time of maximum height instead of ground level; t = 0 finds only the starting time and misses the second one.
- (a) 1.36 — Method: put the starting value into the right-hand side to get x₁, feed that value back in to get x₂, and round only once the second value has been found. Working: x₁ = 5 ÷ (1 + 2) = 5 ÷ 3 = 1.66666…; x₂ = 5 ÷ (1.66666… + 2) = 5 ÷ 3.66666… = 1.36363…. The digit in the third decimal place is 3, so x₂ = 1.36 correct to 2 decimal places. Answer: 1.36. The distractors: 1.67 is x₁, the value after a single use of the formula, given by a candidate who counts the starting value itself as x₁; 1.49 is x₃ = 1.48648…, one use of the formula too many; 1.37 comes from writing x₁ down as 1.66, truncating the display instead of keeping it in full, and then working out 5 ÷ 3.66 = 1.36612…, which rounds up to 1.37.
- (a) Overestimates — trapezium edges lie above the curve. — For a concave-up curve, each chord connecting two points on the curve lies ABOVE the curve between those points, because the curve bends away from the chord underneath it. The trapezium rule uses these chords as the top edges of each trapezium, so the trapeziums cover a larger region than the true area under the curve — the estimate is an overestimate. Saying it underestimates because the edges lie below the curve gets the direction backwards: for a concave-up curve the edges lie above, not below. Saying it overestimates 'because more strips always increase it' gives the right verdict for the wrong reason — using MORE, narrower strips makes a trapezium estimate more accurate and brings it closer to the true area, it does not simply increase the total. Saying the estimate is exact ignores that straight edges cannot follow a curved line perfectly; there is always a gap between the chord and the curve on a bend, which is exactly what makes the rule an estimate rather than an exact calculation.
- (b) 10 km — Method: find the constant speed from the graph (distance ÷ time for any point on the line), then multiply that speed by 20 minutes. Working: the line passes through (4 minutes, 2 km), so the speed is 2 ÷ 4 = 0.5 km per minute; in 20 minutes the cyclist travels 0.5 × 20 = 10 km. Answer: 10 km. Distractor refutation: 3 km comes from reading off the distance shown at the end of the plotted section (6 minutes) and stopping there, instead of extending the line to 20 minutes. 20 km comes from misreading the speed as 1 km per minute instead of 0.5 km per minute, doubling the true rate. 40 km comes from dividing 20 by the speed instead of multiplying by it, a reciprocal mix-up.
- (b) 3 — At the limit, L = √(2L + 3). Squaring both sides: L² = 2L + 3, so L² − 2L − 3 = 0, which factorises as (L − 3)(L + 1) = 0, giving L = 3 or L = −1. Since the sequence of iterates stays positive throughout, the limit is L = 3. Taking the other, negative root without rejecting it gives −1. Treating the equation L = 2L + 3 as already linear, forgetting to square both sides first, gives −L = 3, so L = −3. A sign error when factorising, writing (L + 3)(L − 1) = 0 instead of (L − 3)(L + 1) = 0, gives L = 1.
- (b) y decreases towards zero but never reaches it — Method: as x gets larger, dividing 20 by a bigger number gives a smaller result, so y decreases; because 20/x can never be exactly zero for any positive x, the curve gets closer to zero without ever reaching it, so y decreases towards zero but never reaches it. Distractor origins: 'y increases towards a limit but never reaches it' has the relationship backwards, treating y as increasing when it is actually decreasing; 'y decreases at a steady rate and reaches zero' wrongly assumes the graph behaves like a straight line that eventually hits zero; 'y stays the same however large x becomes' wrongly assumes there is no change in y at all.
- (d) 44 m — The trapezium rule between t = 2 and t = 5 uses only the speeds at t = 2, 3, 4 and 5 — 12, 15, 16 and 14 — with three strips of width 1: adding the first and last readings and twice the sum of the middle readings gives 12 + 14 + 2 × (15 + 16) = 88, and half of that is 44 m. Writing 68.5 m comes from applying the trapezium rule to the whole table, from t = 0 to t = 6, instead of restricting it to the interval t = 2 to t = 5 that the question asks for. Writing 28.5 m comes from forgetting to double the two middle readings, 15 and 16, in the trapezium rule formula. Writing 39 m comes from averaging only the first and last speeds in the interval, 12 and 14, and multiplying by the 3-second interval, ignoring the readings at t = 3 and t = 4 in between.
- (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.
- (d) t = 5 — The maximum height occurs halfway between the two times when the ball is at ground level: the midpoint of t = 1 and t = 9 is (1 + 9) ÷ 2 = 5, so the ball reaches its maximum height at t = 5 seconds. Getting t = 4 comes from halving the DIFFERENCE between the times, 9 − 1 = 8, then 8 ÷ 2 = 4, instead of finding their midpoint. Getting t = 8 uses that difference, 9 − 1 = 8, as if the gap between the two times were itself the time of the maximum. Getting t = 10 adds the two times, 1 + 9 = 10, but forgets to divide by 2.
- (c) No — that moment has already passed — Method: call the number of years from now x, add x to both ages, form the equation from the comparison and then interpret the value of x that comes out. Working: in x years Harry will be 14 + x and Mia will be 8 + x, so 14 + x = 2(8 + x); expanding gives 14 + x = 16 + 2x, and subtracting x and 16 from both sides gives x = −2. A negative value of x places the moment two years in the past, when Harry was 12 and Mia was 6 and 12 = 2 × 6, so it is not something still to come. Answer: no — that moment has already passed. The distractors: the claim that it has never happened and never will comes from reaching x = −2 and reading a negative number of years as no solution at all, when x = −2 does not say that no such moment exists but says where it is — two years before now; the claim that it happens when Harry is 16 comes from doubling Mia's present age, 2 × 8 = 16, and reading that as the age Harry has to reach; the claim that it happens when Harry is 20 comes from expanding 2(8 + x) as 8 + 2x, doubling only the x, which gives x = 6.
- (b) £2.00 — Subtracting the second equation from the first eliminates the pastries: (3c + 2p) − (2c + 2p) = 9.60 − 7.60, so c = 2.00. A candidate who divides the first total by the number of coffees alone, ignoring the pastries, would get 9.60 ÷ 3 = £3.20. A candidate who finds the price of a pastry instead of a coffee — using c = 2.00 in 2c + 2p = 7.60 to get p = 1.80 — would answer £1.80. A candidate who reaches the correct difference of £2.00 but then mistakenly divides again or misplaces the decimal point would get £0.20.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.