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) Yes — the t² coefficient is negative, giving an n-shape. — The coefficient of t² in h = −5t² + 20t is −5, which is negative, so the graph is n-shaped with a maximum point — this matches the physical story of the rocket rising then falling, but the shape itself is decided by the negative coefficient of t², not by the story alone. Saying the shape comes from the story rather than the coefficient gets the reasoning backwards — the algebra determines the shape, and the story happens to agree with it. Saying it is U-shaped because height starts by increasing confuses the early part of the curve with its overall shape; a U-shaped curve would mean the rocket's height eventually increases again forever, which does not happen here. Saying it is n-shaped only because the rocket lands treats a consequence of the shape as if it were the cause.
- (c) 3.153 — x₁ = √(4 × 1 + 1) = √5 = 2.236067977. x₂ = √(4 × 2.236067977 + 1) = √9.944271908 = 3.153453965, which rounds to 3.153. Reporting x₁ instead of x₂ gives 2.236067977, which rounds to 2.236. A sign error inside the root, using xₙ₊₁ = √(4xₙ − 1) instead of √(4xₙ + 1), gives x₁ = √3 = 1.732050808 and x₂ = √(4 × 1.732050808 − 1) = √5.928203232 = 2.434790182, which rounds to 2.435. Applying the formula in the wrong order, working out √(4xₙ) + 1 at every step instead of √(4xₙ + 1), gives x₁ = √4 + 1 = 3 and x₂ = √(4 × 3) + 1 = 4.464101615, which rounds to 4.464.
- (b) 4 — Method: form the equation 30 + 25h = 130, where h is the number of hours, then solve for h. Working: subtract the call-out fee from the total bill: 25h = 130 − 30 = 100. Divide by the hourly rate: h = 100 ÷ 25 = 4. Answer: 4 hours. 5.2 comes from dividing the whole bill by the hourly rate without subtracting the fixed fee first, 130 ÷ 25. 3.5 comes from swapping the fee and the rate, subtracting the rate from the bill and dividing by the fee, (130 − 25) ÷ 30. 6.4 comes from adding the call-out fee to the bill instead of subtracting it, before dividing by the rate, (130 + 30) ÷ 25.
- (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.
- (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.
- (d) 1 hour 32 minutes — T = 40 × 1.8 + 20 = 72 + 20 = 92 minutes. Since 92 = 60 + 32, the cooking time is 1 hour 32 minutes. A candidate who rounds the mass to 2 kg before substituting gets 40 × 2 + 20 = 100 minutes = 1 hour 40 minutes. A candidate who forgets to add the 20 minutes gets 40 × 1.8 = 72 minutes = 1 hour 12 minutes. A candidate who multiplies the mass by (40 + 20) = 60 instead of substituting into the formula gets 1.8 × 60 = 108 minutes = 1 hour 48 minutes.
- (d) 2 — The gradient between two points on a line is the change in y divided by the change in x. Using (5, 2) and (0, −8): (2 − (−8)) ÷ (5 − 0) = 10 ÷ 5 = 2. Inverting the fraction, dividing the change in x by the change in y instead, gives 5 ÷ 10 = 0.5. Reversing the order of the x-values in the denominator, giving (2 − (−8)) ÷ (0 − 5) = 10 ÷ (−5), gives −2. Misreading the y-intercept as 8 instead of −8, giving (2 − 8) ÷ 5 = −6 ÷ 5, gives −1.2.
- (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.
- (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.
- (b) 2 < x < 6 — Factorise: x² − 8x + 12 = (x − 2)(x − 6), giving roots at x = 2 and x = 6. Since the coefficient of x² is positive, the graph is a U-shape that is negative, below the axis, between its roots. So P < 0 for 2 < x < 6. Distractor routes: x < 2 or x > 6 takes the region outside the roots, which is where P is positive, a profit, the opposite of a loss. 2 ≤ x ≤ 6 includes the endpoints, where P = 0 exactly, break-even rather than a loss, since the inequality is strict. −6 < x < −2 comes from factorising as (x + 2)(x + 6), reversing the sign of both roots.
- (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.
- (c) £8,000 — The multiplier for one year is 1 − 0.18 = 0.82, so 0.82 × 0.82 = 0.6724. Original value = 5,379.20 ÷ 0.6724 = £8,000. Treating the total drop as simple depreciation (18% × 2 = 36% lost in total, so dividing by 0.64 instead of 0.6724) gives 5,379.20 ÷ 0.64 = £8,405 (nearest pound) — wrong, because the depreciation compounds year by year rather than adding up. Dividing by 0.82 only once, forgetting the second year entirely, gives 5,379.20 ÷ 0.82 = £6,560 — wrong, because two years of depreciation have passed, not one. Multiplying by 0.6724 instead of dividing by it — repeating the depreciation forward instead of reversing it — gives 5,379.20 × 0.6724 = £3,617 (nearest pound) — wrong, because to find the ORIGINAL value you must undo the depreciation, not apply it again.
- (c) x + 3 — Expand the bracket: 0.5(4x + 6) = 2x + 3. Then subtract the x: 2x + 3 − x = x + 3. The option 2x + 3 comes from expanding the bracket correctly but then forgetting to subtract the x at all. The option x + 6 comes from forgetting to multiply the 6 inside the bracket by 0.5 (treating it as 2x + 6), then subtracting x. The option 3x + 3 comes from adding the x instead of subtracting it: 2x + 3 + x = 3x + 3.
- (b) 118 m — Width = 840 ÷ 35 = 24 m. Perimeter = 2 × (length + width) = 2 × (35 + 24) = 2 × 59 = 118 m. The option 59 m gives the sum of the length and width but forgets to double it for the perimeter. The option 70 m doubles only the length (2 × 35 = 70) and leaves out the width entirely. The option 48 m doubles only the width (2 × 24 = 48) and leaves out the length entirely.
- (d) An equation, true for one value of x — 2x + 5 = 17 is only true when x = 6, so it is an equation. A candidate who ignores the equals sign and focuses only on the x terms and numbers present picks the expression option. A candidate who sees an equals sign and assumes it must relate two different quantities, as a formula does, picks that option, missing that there is only one quantity, x, involved here. A candidate who wrongly checks whether both sides look similar in structure rather than testing specific values picks the identity option, missing that the two sides are not equal for every value of x.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.