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
- (c) 5 — Method: let a be the number of adult tickets, so the number of child tickets is 9 − a. Form the equation 10a + 6(9 − a) = 74. Working: expand the bracket: 10a + 54 − 6a = 74, so 4a = 20, giving a = 5. Answer: 5 adult tickets. 4 comes from correctly finding the number of child tickets but reporting it instead of the number of adult tickets asked for. 1.25 comes from a sign error expanding the bracket, writing 10a + 54 + 6a = 74 instead of subtracting, which gives 16a = 20. 7.4 comes from dividing the total takings by the adult ticket price only, ignoring the children entirely, 74 ÷ 10.
- (b) 3.38 — r₁ = √(300 ÷ (π × 8)) = √11.9366 = 3.4550. r₂ = √(300 ÷ (π × 8.4550)) = √11.2947 = 3.3608. r₃ = √(300 ÷ (π × 8.3608)) = √11.4232 = 3.3798, which rounds to 3.38. Choosing 3.36 stops at r₂, one iteration too early. Choosing 4.82 leaves out the '+ 5' inside the bracket, dividing by π × rₙ instead of π × (rₙ + 5). Choosing 3.45 comes from using π ≈ 3 instead of the calculator's π key throughout.
- (b) x = 5 — Area = length × width, so x(x + 3) = 40, which rearranges to x² + 3x − 40 = 0. This factorises as (x + 8)(x − 5) = 0: the two numbers in the brackets must multiply to −40 and add to +3, and the pair 8 and −5 does both. This gives x = −8 or x = 5. Since x is a length, it cannot be negative, so x = 5. A candidate who gives both solutions without rejecting the negative one, which cannot be a length, answers x = 5 or x = −8. A candidate who picks the wrong factor pair of 40, such as 10 and −4 instead of 8 and −5, gets (x + 10)(x − 4) = 0 and answers x = 4. A candidate who rejects the wrong root, keeping the negative solution instead of the positive one, answers x = −8.
- (a) £50 — Substituting x = 200 into y = 0.15x + 20 gives y = 0.15 × 200 + 20 = 30 + 20 = £50. A candidate who forgets to add the standing charge would get only 0.15 × 200 = £30. A candidate who misplaces the decimal point in the rate, using 1.5 instead of 0.15, would get 1.5 × 200 + 20 = £320. A candidate who swaps the roles of the rate and the number of units would work out 0.15 × 20 + 200 = £203.
- (a) 1.861 — x₁ = ∛(10 − 2²) = ∛6 = 1.817120593. x₂ = ∛(10 − 1.817120593²) = ∛6.698072751 = 1.885022855. x₃ = ∛(10 − 1.885022855²) = ∛6.446688837 = 1.861139399, which rounds to 1.861. Reporting x₂ instead of x₃ gives 1.885022855, which rounds to 1.885. Stopping after the first iteration and reporting x₁ instead of x₃ gives 1.817120593, which rounds to 1.817. A sign error inside the cube root, using xₙ₊₁ = ∛(10 + xₙ²) instead of ∛(10 − xₙ²), gives x₁ = ∛14 = 2.410142264, x₂ = ∛(10 + 2.410142264²) = 2.509763724, and x₃ = ∛(10 + 2.509763724²) = 2.535437381, which rounds to 2.535.
- (c) 19 — Method: set up the equation 15 + 9n = 186, then subtract the deposit and divide by the cost per student. Working: 9n = 186 − 15 = 171; n = 171 ÷ 9 = 19. Answer: 19 students. 20.67 comes from dividing the whole £186 by £9 without first subtracting the deposit: 186 ÷ 9 ≈ 20.67. 11.8 comes from swapping the two amounts round, subtracting £9 and dividing by £15: (186 − 9) ÷ 15 = 11.8. 22.33 comes from adding the deposit instead of subtracting it: (186 + 15) ÷ 9 ≈ 22.33.
- (a) Underestimate: the chord lies below the curve — For a curve that is concave down (bending downward), the straight line joining any two points on the curve lies BELOW the curve. The trapezium's top edge is this straight line, so the trapezium's area is smaller than the true area under the curve — the trapezium rule UNDERESTIMATES the distance in this case. This is because a curve whose gradient keeps decreasing bends away from any chord joining two of its points, dropping the chord below every point of the curve in between. The reverse, a chord lying above the curve, is the rule for a concave-up curve, not this one — check which way the curve bends before deciding. The trapezium rule does not always overestimate or underestimate, and it is not exact except when the graph really is a straight line.
- (a) Litres — The area under a graph is found by multiplying a y-value by an x-value, so its units are the y-axis units multiplied by the x-axis units: litres per minute × minutes = litres, since the 'per minute' cancels with the 'minutes'. Answering 'litres per minute' keeps the y-axis units unchanged, as if multiplying by time did nothing to the units at all. Answering 'litres per minute squared' treats the x-axis as also being measured 'per minute', squaring a unit that should instead cancel. Answering 'minutes' keeps only the x-axis units and drops the rate altogether.
- (d) x + y = 7 — The midpoint of AB is (−1 + 5)/2, (2 + 8)/2, which is (2, 5). The gradient of AB is (8 − 2)/(5 − (−1)) = 6/6 = 1. The perpendicular bisector has gradient −1 and passes through (2, 5): y − 5 = −(x − 2), which rearranges to x + y = 7. Distractor routes: x − y = −3 uses the gradient of AB itself, 1, rather than its negative reciprocal, giving a line PARALLEL to AB through the midpoint instead of perpendicular to it. x + y = 12 comes from adding the y-coordinates, 2 + 8 = 10, but forgetting to divide by 2, using the midpoint (2, 10) instead of (2, 5). x + y = 4 comes from using A's x-coordinate, −1, directly instead of averaging it with B's, giving the point (−1, 5) instead of the true midpoint (2, 5).
- (d) It diverges, growing rapidly without limit. — x₁ = 2³ − 2 = 8 − 2 = 6. x₂ = 6³ − 2 = 216 − 2 = 214. x₃ = 214³ − 2 = 9800344 − 2 = 9800342. The values 6, 214, 9800342, … grow far larger at every step, so the sequence diverges rather than settling anywhere. Checking whether the sequence converges to a fixed value near 2 fails, since the terms grow enormously instead of levelling off. Checking for a repeating pair of values also fails, since 6, 214 and 9800342 are all different, with no sign of a return to 6. x₀ = 2 is a fixed point only if 2³ − 2 = 2, but 2³ − 2 = 6, not 2, so the sequence does not stay constant.
- (b) 0.458 — x₁ = (0.4² + 3) ÷ 7 = 3.16 ÷ 7 = 0.4514 (unrounded, 0.451428...). x₂ = (x₁² + 3) ÷ 7 = (0.2038 + 3) ÷ 7 = 3.2038 ÷ 7 = 0.458 (3 d.p.). Choosing 0.632 divides only the 3 by 7 instead of dividing the whole sum x₁² + 3 by 7. Choosing 0.451 repeats the calculation for x₁ instead of moving on to x₂. Choosing 0.493 uses x₁ itself instead of x₁² inside the formula.
- (c) Week 16, £37,000 — y = f(x − 6) − 8000 combines a horizontal translation of 6 units RIGHT (subtracting 6 inside the brackets) with a vertical translation of £8000 DOWN (subtracting 8000 outside). Applying both to the maximum (10, 45000): 10 + 6 = 16, so the new maximum is in week 16. And 45000 − 8000 = 37000, so the maximum weekly profit is £37,000.
- (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.
- (a) 5.8 — The horizontal distance is 3 and the vertical distance is 5, so using Pythagoras' theorem the distance is √(3² + 5²) = √34 = 5.8 (1 d.p.). A candidate who adds the two differences instead of using Pythagoras gets 3 + 5 = 8.0. A candidate who works out 3² + 5² = 34 but forgets to take the square root gets 34.0. A candidate who subtracts the squares instead of adding them gets √(5² − 3²) = √16 = 4.0.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.