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) 37.0 — C = 5(98.6 − 32) ÷ 9 = 5 × 66.6 ÷ 9 = 333 ÷ 9 = 37.0. A candidate who forgets to subtract 32 first gets 5 × 98.6 ÷ 9 = 54.8 (1 d.p.). A candidate who forgets the 5 ÷ 9 factor entirely and just works out F − 32 gets 66.6. A candidate who multiplies by 9 ÷ 5 instead of 5 ÷ 9 gets 66.6 × 9 ÷ 5 = 119.9 (1 d.p.).
- (b) £105 — The hourly charge is 25 × 3 = £75. Adding the call-out fee: £75 + £30 = £105. A candidate who forgets the call-out fee gives just the hourly charge, £75. A candidate who adds the call-out fee to the hourly rate before multiplying by the hours, (30 + 25) × 3, gets £165. A candidate who multiplies the call-out fee by the number of hours instead of the hourly rate, 30 × 3, gets £90.
- (a) 842.0 — The radius to (20, 21) has gradient 21/20, so the tangent's gradient is −20/21. The tangent line is y − 21 = −20/21(x − 20), i.e. y = −20/21x + 841/21. Setting y = 0 gives the x-intercept x = 841/20 = 42.05; setting x = 0 gives the y-intercept y = 841/21 ≈ 40.048. The area of triangle OPQ is 1/2 × 42.05 × 40.048 ≈ 842.0. 1684.0 comes from multiplying the two intercepts without the 1/2 that a triangle's area needs — twice the correct area. 580.7 comes from using the circle's radius, 29, as a side of the triangle instead of the x-intercept, 42.05: 1/2 × 29 × 40.048 ≈ 580.7. 2.0 comes from a sign error in the tangent's gradient — using 20/21 instead of −20/21 — which gives a different line, with intercepts x ≈ −2.05 and y ≈ 1.952, and area 1/2 × 2.05 × 1.952 ≈ 2.0.
- (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) 27 — Method: let the smaller number be n, so the larger number is n + 9. Form the equation n + (n + 9) = 45. Working: simplify: 2n + 9 = 45, so 2n = 36, giving n = 18. The larger number is 18 + 9 = 27. Answer: 27. 18 is the smaller number, found correctly, but given as the answer to the question asking for the larger number. 22.5 comes from ignoring the "9 more" part and simply halving the total, 45 ÷ 2. 36 comes from a sign error when isolating the constant, treating the equation as 2n = 45 + 9 instead of 2n = 45 − 9.
- (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.
- (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.
- (d) 8 — Method: write both present ages in terms of one letter, take four years off each of them, and form an equation from the comparison four years ago. Working: let Amelia be y, so her mother is 3y; four years ago they were y − 4 and 3y − 4, giving 3y − 4 = 5(y − 4); expanding gives 3y − 4 = 5y − 20; adding 20 and subtracting 3y from both sides gives 16 = 2y, and dividing by 2 gives y = 8. Checking: Amelia is 8 and her mother 24; four years ago they were 4 and 20, and 20 = 5 × 4. Answer: 8. The distractors: 4 comes from solving correctly but giving Amelia's age four years ago instead of her age now; 16 comes from stopping at 2y = 16 and giving 16 as her age; 2 comes from collecting the y terms by adding the 5y instead of subtracting it, giving 3y + 5y = 20 − 4 and so 8y = 16.
- (a) It gets closer to zero but never actually reaches it. — y = 60 × (0.5)ˣ is always positive, however large x is, because a positive number raised to any power stays positive. As x increases, (0.5)ˣ gets smaller and smaller but never equals zero, so y approaches zero without ever reaching it. Believing the curve reaches zero when x = 60, because 60 is the starting value, mixes up the y-intercept with a stopping point — an exponential decay curve like this one never actually reaches the x-axis, so this is wrong. Believing the curve goes negative for large x is wrong because multiplying a positive number by (0.5) any number of times can never produce a negative result. Believing the curve levels off at y = 0.5, confusing the base of the exponential with its eventual level, is wrong: the base only controls how fast the curve falls, not where it settles — this curve settles at y = 0, not y = 0.5. Whenever you sketch an exponential decay curve, draw it approaching the x-axis but never touching it.
- (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).
- (c) 16 km/h — Method: total distance = 12 + 8 = 20 km. Total time = 30 + 30 + 15 = 75 minutes = 1.25 hours. Average speed = total distance ÷ total time = 20 ÷ 1.25 = 16 km/h. Distractor origins: 20 km/h gives the total distance without ever dividing by the total time; 24 km/h uses only the speed of the first stage (12 km in 30 minutes), ignoring the second stage and the rest; 28 km/h averages the two separate stage speeds, 24 km/h and 32 km/h, instead of using total distance over total time.
- (a) 0 — the line does not intersect the circle — Substitute y = 2x + 7 into x² + y² = 4: x² + (2x + 7)² = 4, which expands to x² + 4x² + 28x + 49 = 4, giving 5x² + 28x + 45 = 0. The discriminant is b² − 4ac = 28² − 4 × 5 × 45. Since 28² = 784 and 4 × 5 × 45 = 900, the discriminant is 784 − 900 = −116. Since the discriminant is negative, the quadratic has no real solutions, so the line does not meet the circle at all: 0 intersection points. Distractor routes: "1 — the line is a tangent" confuses a negative discriminant with a zero one; a discriminant of exactly zero gives one point, a tangent, but −116 is not zero. "2 — the line crosses the circle at two points" assumes a positive discriminant without actually working it out. "It cannot be found without solving the quadratic" is the whole point the discriminant exists to avoid — its sign alone, without finding x, tells you the number of real solutions.
- (d) 3.425 — x₁ = ∛(6 × 3 + 20) = ∛38 = 3.3620 (unrounded, 3.36198...). x₂ = ∛(6 × 3.3620 + 20) = ∛40.172 = 3.425 (3 d.p.). Choosing 3.362 stops at x₁ instead of continuing to x₂. Choosing 2.722 leaves out the '+ 20' inside the root, working out ∛(6 × 3.3620) = ∛20.172 = 2.722. Choosing 0.556 subtracts 20 instead of adding it, working out ∛(6 × 3.3620 − 20) = ∛0.172 = 0.556.
- (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.
- (a) 2.55 — x₁ = 20 ÷ (2 + 5) = 20 ÷ 7 = 2.857142857. x₂ = 20 ÷ (2.857142857 + 5) = 20 ÷ 7.857142857 = 2.545454545, which rounds to 2.55. Reporting x₁ instead of x₂ gives 2.857142857, which rounds to 2.86. Dropping the +5 in the denominator, using xₙ₊₁ = 20 ÷ xₙ, gives x₁ = 20 ÷ 2 = 10 and x₂ = 20 ÷ 10 = 2, which is 2.00. A sign error in the denominator, using xₙ₊₁ = 20 ÷ (xₙ − 5), gives x₁ = 20 ÷ (2 − 5) = −6.666666667 and x₂ = 20 ÷ (−6.666666667 − 5) = −1.714285714, which rounds to −1.71.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.