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) 2.154 — Continuing xₙ₊₁ = ∛(3xₙ + 4) from x₁ = 2.154 gives x₂ = 2.187, x₃ = 2.195, settling towards the root near 2.196 — this is the formula that converges. Continuing xₙ₊₁ = (xₙ³ − 4) ÷ 3 from x₁ = 1.333 gives x₂ = −0.543 and then x₃ = −1.387, moving further from the root each time. Continuing xₙ₊₁ = 4 ÷ (xₙ² − 3) from x₁ = 4 gives x₂ = 0.308 and then x₃ = −1.377, swinging wildly rather than settling. Continuing xₙ₊₁ = xₙ³ − 2xₙ − 4 from x₁ = 0 gives x₂ = −4 and then x₃ = −60, running away from the root entirely.
- (d) 45 — v = s ÷ t = 180 ÷ 4 = 45 km/h. 720 comes from multiplying s and t instead of dividing, 180 × 4. 184 comes from adding s and t instead of dividing, 180 + 4. 176 comes from subtracting t from s instead of dividing, 180 − 4.
- (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.
- (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.
- (d) 6.0 — Subtract 1.8 from both sides: 6.3x ≤ 38.2. Divide both sides by 6.3: x ≤ 6.0634… . The question asks for the greatest value to 1 decimal place that still satisfies the inequality. Testing 6.1: 6.3 × 6.1 + 1.8 = 40.23, which is more than 40, so 6.1 fails. Testing 6.0: 6.3 × 6.0 + 1.8 = 39.6, which is no more than 40, so 6.0 works and is the greatest such value. A candidate who simply rounds 6.0634… to 1 decimal place answers 6.1, without checking that it satisfies the inequality. A candidate who adds 1.8 instead of subtracting works out 41.8 ÷ 6.3 and answers 6.6. A candidate who forgets the 1.8 altogether divides 40 by 6.3 and answers 6.3.
- (c) £2.80 — 3n + 1.50 = 9.90, so 3n = 8.40 and n = 2.80, so each notebook costs £2.80. A candidate who forgets to subtract the cost of the pen and divides the total by 3 gets n = 9.90 ÷ 3 = £3.30. A candidate who adds the cost of the pen instead of subtracting it gets 3n = 11.40 and n = £3.80. A candidate who treats the pen as a fourth notebook and divides the total by 4 gets n = 9.90 ÷ 4 = £2.48 (2 d.p.).
- (b) 58.8 km/h — Total distance = 100 + 47 = 147 km. Total time = 1.5 + 0.25 + 0.75 = 2.5 hours. Average speed = 147 ÷ 2.5 = 58.8 km/h. Leaving out the 0.25 hours of waiting from the total time gives 147 ÷ 2.25 = 65.3 km/h (1 d.p.) — wrong, because the train is stationary but time is still passing on the whole journey. Using only the first leg gives 100 ÷ 1.5 = 66.7 km/h (1 d.p.) — wrong, because it ignores the second leg of the journey entirely. Working out each leg's own speed (100 ÷ 1.5 = 66.7 km/h and 47 ÷ 0.75 = 62.7 km/h) and then averaging those two speeds gives 64.7 km/h (1 d.p.) — wrong, because the average of two speeds over DIFFERENT times is not the same as total distance divided by total time.
- (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.
- (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.
- (a) 6x + 12 — A regular hexagon has 6 equal sides, so the perimeter is 6(x + 2) = 6x + 12. A candidate who multiplies only the x-term by 6 and forgets to multiply the 2 gets 6x + 2. A candidate who multiplies only the number term by 6 and forgets to multiply the x gets x + 12. A candidate who adds 6 and 2 to make a single coefficient of x instead of expanding the brackets gets 8x.
- (d) 400 m — The distance travelled equals the area under the speed-time graph. The first 10 seconds form a triangle with base 10 and height 20, giving an area of 0.5 × 10 × 20 = 100 m. The next 15 seconds form a rectangle with base 15 and height 20, giving an area of 15 × 20 = 300 m. The total distance is 100 + 300 = 400 m. The option 500 m treats the whole 25 seconds as travelled at the constant 20 m/s, ignoring that the speed was building up during the first 10 seconds: 25 × 20 = 500. The option 300 m only counts the constant-speed section and forgets the triangle section entirely. The option 200 m comes from working out the triangle's area without halving it (10 × 20 = 200) and forgetting the rectangle altogether.
- (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.
- (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.
- (a) 23 — The number of logs increases by 4 for each layer down, starting from 3 in the top layer, so the nth layer has 3+(n−1)×4 logs. For the 6th layer: 3+5×4=3+20=23. A candidate who adds the difference of 4 six times instead of five, treating the top layer as needing an addition too, would compute 3+6×4=27. A candidate who uses 4n instead of 4n−1, omitting the adjustment for the first layer, would compute 4×6=24. A candidate who subtracts the common difference, 4, instead of 1 when adjusting the multiplier would compute 4×6−4=20.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.