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.
Non-calculator
Answer key: Algebra worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (d) 50/3 — Method: call the smaller number x, write the larger number in terms of x and use the total. Working: the larger number is 2x, so x + 2x = 50, that is 3x = 50 and x = 50/3. Answer: 50/3, since 50/3 added to 100/3 makes 50 and 100/3 is twice 50/3. The distractors: 100/3 is the larger of the two numbers rather than the smaller one asked for; 25 comes from halving 50 and treating the two numbers as equal; 24 comes from reading 'twice the smaller number' as 'two more than the smaller number' and solving x + (x + 2) = 50.
- (b) 4 — Adding the two equations: the y-terms, −2y and +2y, cancel, and the x-terms combine to 5x + 3x = 8x; the right-hand sides add to 16 + 16 = 32. This gives 8x = 32, so x = 4. A candidate who adds only one of the right-hand sides, instead of both, would get 8x = 16, so x = 2. A candidate who divides 32 by 4 instead of 8 would get x = 8. A candidate who subtracts the equations instead of adding them, getting 2x − 4y = 0, and then wrongly assumes y = 0, would get x = 0.
- (c) (3, 9) — Reflecting in the horizontal line y = 2 keeps the x-coordinate the same and maps y to 2 × 2 − y = 4 − (−5) = 9, so S = (3, 9). A candidate who uses k − y instead of 2k − y gets 2 − (−5) = 7, giving (3, 7). A candidate who reflects in the x-axis instead of the line y = 2, simply changing the sign of y, gets (3, 5). A candidate who also changes the sign of the x-coordinate, as if reflecting in both axes, gets (−3, 9).
- (c) y = 3x + 2 — Method: divide the change in the outputs by the change in the inputs to find the multiplier, then put one pair of values into the rule to find the number added on. Working: the output rises by 11 − 5 = 6 while the input rises by 3 − 1 = 2, so the multiplier is 6 ÷ 2 = 3; with an input of 1, 3 × 1 = 3 and the output is 5, so 2 is added. Answer: y = 3x + 2, checked against the second pair by 3 × 3 + 2 = 11. The distractors: y = 3x − 2 comes from finding the multiplier 3 and then subtracting the 2 instead of adding it; y = 2x + 3 comes from swapping the multiplier and the number added on; y = x + 4 comes from assuming the input is multiplied by 1 and using 5 − 1 = 4 as the number added on.
- (a) Subtracting 4x gives 3 = 10, which is never true. — Method: try to solve the equation as normal and see what happens. Working: subtract 4x from both sides: 4x + 3 − 4x = 4x + 10 − 4x, giving 3 = 10. This statement is false for every value of x, so the equation has no solution. Answer: subtracting 4x gives 3 = 10, which is never true. "x would have to be negative" invents a constraint on x that the equation never states. "It's true for every x" confuses this equation with an identity, where both sides would simplify to the same expression. "x = 7" misreads the false statement 3 = 10 as something to solve for x, rather than recognising it means no solution exists.
- (a) Yes — the gradients multiply to −2 × 1/2 = −1. — Rearrange Q into the form y = mx + c: 2y = x + 6 gives y = (1/2)x + 3, so Q has gradient 1/2. P has gradient −2. Two lines are perpendicular exactly when the product of their gradients is −1: −2 × 1/2 = −1. Since this holds, P and Q are perpendicular. Distractor routes: "the product is −1, but perpendicular needs 1" works out the product correctly but misremembers the condition — the perpendicular test is a product of exactly −1, and parallel lines are spotted by their gradients being equal, not by a product of 1. "Q's gradient is 2, and −2 × 2 = −4" comes from reading the 2 in front of y in 2y = x + 6 as the gradient, instead of dividing the whole equation by 2 first to reach y = (1/2)x + 3, where the gradient is 1/2. "Both equations have a negative x-term" is not a valid test at all — P's equation does have a negative x-term, but Q's, once rearranged, does not, and matching signs say nothing about the actual gradients.
- (a) 3 and 7 — Method: one equation is linear and the other is not, so rearrange the linear equation and substitute it into the other to leave a single quadratic in one letter. Working: x + y = 10 gives y = 10 − x, so xy = 21 becomes x(10 − x) = 21, which rearranges to x² − 10x + 21 = 0; factorising gives (x − 3)(x − 7) = 0, so the two values are 3 and 7, and 3 + 7 = 10 with 3 × 7 = 21. Answer: 3 and 7. The distractors: 1 and 21 comes from using only the product and taking the first factor pair of 21; −3 and −7 comes from factorising as (x + 3)(x + 7), which reverses the sign of both values; 5 and 5 comes from using only the sum and splitting 10 into two equal parts.
- (b) 10 km — Method: find the constant speed from the graph (distance ÷ time for any point on the line), then multiply that speed by 20 minutes. Working: the line passes through (4 minutes, 2 km), so the speed is 2 ÷ 4 = 0.5 km per minute; in 20 minutes the cyclist travels 0.5 × 20 = 10 km. Answer: 10 km. Distractor refutation: 3 km comes from reading off the distance shown at the end of the plotted section (6 minutes) and stopping there, instead of extending the line to 20 minutes. 20 km comes from misreading the speed as 1 km per minute instead of 0.5 km per minute, doubling the true rate. 40 km comes from dividing 20 by the speed instead of multiplying by it, a reciprocal mix-up.
- (a) It has a solution between x = 2.6 and x = 2.7 — f(2.6) is negative and f(2.7) is positive, so the graph of f crosses the x-axis between x = 2.6 and x = 2.7, meaning the equation has a solution there. Choosing 'x = 2.6 is a solution' reads an end of the interval as the root itself, but f(2.6) = −1.424, which is not zero — the change of sign locates a root between the two values, it does not land on either of them. Choosing 'between x = −2.6 and x = −2.7' confuses the negative f-VALUE at 2.6 with a negative x-value. Choosing 'no root in this interval' misapplies the rule, which needs a CHANGE of sign — and a change of sign is exactly what these two values show.
- (c) 90° — The graph of y = tan x has a vertical asymptote at x = 90°, the smallest positive value for which it is undefined. tan 0° = 0, a defined value, not an undefined one — confusing where the graph equals zero with where it is undefined gives 0°. x = 270° is also a value where y = tan x is undefined, but it is not the smallest positive one, since 90° comes first. tan 45° = 1, a defined value — confusing the asymptote with the angle at which tan x = 1 gives 45°.
- (d) 12√2 — The nth term of a geometric sequence is a × rⁿ⁻¹. Here a = 3, r = √2, n = 6, so the 6th term is 3 × (√2)⁵. Since (√2)² = 2, (√2)⁴ = (2)² = 4, so (√2)⁵ = (√2)⁴ × √2 = 4√2. The 6th term is 3 × 4√2 = 12√2. 15√2 comes from treating (√2)⁵ as 5√2 — multiplying the index by the surd instead of raising √2 to that power — then multiplying by 3 gives 3 × 5√2 = 15√2, which is wrong because powers of a surd do not scale linearly with the index. 24√2 comes from miscalculating (√2)⁴ as 8 instead of 4 (a squaring slip, since (√2)² = 2 but (√2)⁴ should be 2² = 4, not 2 × 4), giving 3 × 8√2 = 24√2. 4√2 comes from forgetting to multiply by the first term a = 3, leaving just (√2)⁵ = 4√2.
- (c) The cost, in pounds, for each extra gigabyte of data used — In C = 15 + 2g, the number multiplying g is the gradient, which gives the extra cost for each extra unit of g — here, £2 for each extra gigabyte. 'The fixed monthly fee, in pounds' describes the constant term 15, not the coefficient of g. 'The total number of gigabytes included in the plan' misreads the coefficient as a quantity of data rather than a cost per gigabyte. 'The cost … for each extra 2 gigabytes' doubles the unit the coefficient actually applies to — it is the cost for each single extra gigabyte.
- (d) 8 — Since the mean of the four numbers is 12.5, their total is 4 × 12.5 = 50. The three known numbers add up to 8 + 15 + 19 = 42, so n = 50 − 42 = 8. A candidate who multiplies the mean by 3 instead of 4 gets a total of 37.5, giving n = 37.5 − 42 = −4.5. A candidate who forgets to subtract the three known numbers and gives the total itself as n states n = 50. A candidate who subtracts the mean from the total of the three known numbers instead of the other way round gets n = 42 − 12.5 = 29.5.
- (c) It has two different real solutions — Method: the discriminant is the quantity under the square root sign in the quadratic formula, so its sign decides how many real values the formula produces. Working: when the discriminant is positive its square root is a real number that is not zero, and the formula adds that root and subtracts it in turn, so the two results are different; a positive discriminant that is not a perfect square still gives two solutions, but they are not whole numbers. Answer: it has two different real solutions. The distractors: one repeated real solution is what a discriminant of zero gives, because adding and subtracting zero changes nothing; no real solutions is what a negative discriminant gives, because a negative number has no real square root; two whole-number solutions happens only when the discriminant is a perfect square and the division works out exactly, which a positive discriminant does not guarantee.
- (d) 5 — Each term is found by multiplying the previous term by the common ratio, 0.5: 80, 40, 20, 10, and the next term is 10 × 0.5 = 5. A candidate who instead subtracts the same amount each time (repeating the last difference of 10) would reach 10 − 10 = 0. A candidate who divides by 4 instead of by 2 would reach 10 ÷ 4 = 2.5. A candidate who multiplies by 2 instead of dividing (reversing the direction of the sequence) would reach 10 × 2 = 20.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.