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
- (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.
- (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.
- (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) 5 cm³ — When P = 32, V = 480 ÷ 32 = 15 cm³. When P = 24, V = 480 ÷ 24 = 20 cm³. The increase in volume is 20 − 15 = 5 cm³. Giving only the second volume, 20 cm³, forgets to subtract the first volume. Giving only the first volume, 15 cm³, answers the wrong part of the question. Subtracting the two pressures instead of the two volumes, 32 − 24 = 8, mixes up which quantity the question asks for.
- (a) 4 — Rectangle 1: P = 2(9 + 4) = 2 × 13 = 26 cm. Rectangle 2: P = 2(6 + 5) = 2 × 11 = 22 cm. Difference = 26 − 22 = 4 cm. 2 comes from finding the difference between (l + w) for each rectangle, 13 − 11 = 2, but forgetting to double it. 26 comes from giving rectangle 1's whole perimeter instead of the difference between the two. 6 comes from doubling only the change in length, 2 × (9 − 6), and ignoring that the width also changed.
- (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.
- (b) 8 — The perimeter is 2(x + (x + 3)) = 4x + 6, so 4x + 6 = 38, which gives 4x = 32 and x = 8. A candidate who forgets the '+3' and treats the rectangle as a square, solving 2(2x) = 38, gets x = 9.5. A candidate who forgets to double the sum of the sides, solving 2x + 3 = 38, gets x = 17.5. A candidate who uses 3x instead of x + 3 for the length, solving 2(x + 3x) = 38, gets x = 4.75.
- (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.
- (c) 496 — d = 0.4v² + 6. First v² = 35 × 35 = 1225. Then 0.4 × 1225 = 490. Add 6: 490 + 6 = 496 m. 490 comes from forgetting to add the 6 at the end. 202 comes from squaring 0.4v together instead of squaring only v, (0.4 × 35)² + 6 = 14² + 6 = 202. 20 comes from using v instead of v², 0.4 × 35 + 6.
- (d) 2.7 — The height after 3 years of 10% compound growth is 2 × 1.1³ = 2.662 m, which rounds to 2.7 m. A candidate who adds 10% of the original height (0.2 m) in each of the 3 years, instead of compounding on the new height each time, would reach 2 + 3×0.2 = 2.6 m. A candidate who compounds for only 2 years would reach 2 × 1.1² = 2.42 m, rounding to 2.4 m. A candidate who compounds for 4 years instead of 3 would reach 2 × 1.1⁴ = 2.928 m, rounding to 2.9 m.
- (b) 6x + 6 — Perimeter = 2[(2x + 5) + (x − 2)] = 2(3x + 3) = 6x + 6. A candidate who adds the length and width but forgets to double for the perimeter gets 3x + 3. A candidate who makes a sign error and adds 2 instead of subtracting it before doubling gets 2[(2x + 5) + (x + 2)] = 6x + 14. A candidate who multiplies the length and width instead of adding them, confusing the perimeter formula with the area formula, and then doubles that product, gets 2(2x + 5)(x − 2) = 4x² + 2x − 20.
- (b) 5.00 — Continuing the iteration: x₁ = √(2 × 1 + 15) = √17 = 4.1231, x₂ = √(2 × 4.1231 + 15) = √23.2462 = 4.8214, x₃ = √(2 × 4.8214 + 15) = √24.6428 = 4.9642, x₄ = √(2 × 4.9642 + 15) = √24.9284 = 4.9928, and the values keep climbing towards 5.00 as n increases (the limit L satisfies L² = 2L + 15, so L² − 2L − 15 = 0, giving L = 5). Choosing 4.99 stops after x₄, one iteration before the value has settled fully to 5.00. Choosing 17.00 uses the value under the very first square root (2 × 1 + 15 = 17) as if that number itself were the limit. Choosing 1.00 assumes the sequence never moves from the starting value x₀.
- (c) The sequence diverges, moving away from x = 3 — Starting from x₀ = 2.9: x₁ = 2.9² − 6 = 2.41, x₂ = 2.41² − 6 = −0.19, x₃ = (−0.19)² − 6 = −5.96, x₄ = (−5.96)² − 6 = 29.56 — the values swing away from 3 and grow rapidly, so the sequence diverges rather than settling anywhere. Choosing 'settles towards x = 3' assumes that starting close to a root is enough for a rearrangement to converge to it, which is not always true — this rearrangement changes values too steeply near x = 3 to stay there. Choosing 'settles towards x = −2' assumes a diverging sequence must eventually land on the other root; instead it runs away to increasingly large values. Choosing 'stays constant at 2.9' ignores that applying the formula changes the value at every step.
- (b) f(1) = −3 and f(2) = 3 — f(1) = 1³ − 1 − 3 = 1 − 1 − 3 = −3. f(2) = 2³ − 2 − 3 = 8 − 2 − 3 = 3. Since f(1) is negative and f(2) is positive, there is a change of sign, so a solution lies between x = 1 and x = 2. Dropping the −x term entirely gives f(1) = 1 − 3 = −2 and f(2) = 8 − 3 = 5. Using x² instead of x³ throughout gives f(1) = 1 − 1 − 3 = −3, which happens to coincide with the correct value at x = 1, but f(2) = 4 − 2 − 3 = −1, which does not show a change of sign at all. Working out −f(x) instead of f(x), a sign-flip error, gives f(1) = 3 and f(2) = −3, the correct sizes but with both signs reversed.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.