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
- (c) −8 — (−2)³ = (−2) × (−2) × (−2) = −8, since multiplying three negative numbers gives a negative result. A candidate who forgets the sign of a negative number when cubing it might treat (−2)³ as if it were 2³ = 8. A candidate who multiplies −2 by 3 instead of cubing it might get −2 × 3 = −6. A candidate who combines both mistakes — multiplying by 3 and dropping the sign — might get 2 × 3 = 6.
- (b) 3w − 5 ≥ 16 — "Three times w, minus 5" translates to 3w − 5, and "is at least 16" means it must be 16 or more, giving 3w − 5 ≥ 16. A candidate who reads "at least" as a strict inequality writes 3w − 5 > 16. A candidate who misreads the wording and applies the subtraction before the multiplication writes 3(w − 5) ≥ 16. A candidate who reverses the direction of the inequality writes 3w − 5 ≤ 16.
- (d) x = −2, x = 6; y-intercept (0, 12) — Reflecting y = f(x) in the x-axis, to get y = −f(x), negates every y-value but leaves every x-value fixed. The x-intercepts happen where y = 0, and −0 = 0, so they are unaffected: y = −f(x) still crosses the x-axis at x = −2 and x = 6. The y-intercept is the value at x = 0: f(0) = −12, so −f(0) = 12, giving the point (0, 12) — the sign flips because the y-intercept is a nonzero y-value, unlike the roots. Writing 'x = 2, x = −6; y-intercept (0, −12)' comes from confusing −f(x) with f(−x) — reflecting in the y-axis instead of the x-axis, which negates the x-values of the intercepts (turning −2 into 2 and 6 into −6) but leaves f(0) unchanged, since f(−0) = f(0) = −12. Writing 'x = −2, x = 6; y-intercept (0, −12)' comes from forgetting that −f(x) is a reflection at all, and assumes both intercepts stay exactly as they were. Writing 'x = 2, x = −6; y-intercept (0, 12)' correctly negates the y-intercept but wrongly negates the x-intercepts too, as if a reflection in the x-axis also flipped the sign of every x-value.
- (c) n = 4 — Testing n = 4: 4² = 16, and 16 + 4 + 1 = 21, and 21 = 3 × 7 is not a prime number, so this value disproves the claim. Testing n = 1: 1² = 1, and 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, which is prime, so it does not disprove the claim. Testing n = 2: 2² = 4, and 4 + 2 + 1 = 7, which is prime. Testing n = 3: 3² = 9, and 9 + 3 + 1 = 13, which is also prime — a counterexample has to give a result that isn't prime, and only n = 4 does that.
- (c) x + 18 — Expand −3(2x − 6) by multiplying both terms by −3: −3 × 2x = −6x and −3 × (−6) = 18, giving 7x − 6x + 18 = x + 18. Writing x − 18 comes from not flipping the sign of the −6 inside the bracket, so −3 × (−6) is treated as −18 instead of +18. Writing x + 6 comes from forgetting to multiply the −6 by 3, only carrying its sign. Writing 13x − 18 comes from treating the whole bracket as being added rather than subtracted, so 3(2x − 6) = 6x − 18 is added to 7x.
- (b) No, because their gradients are 2 and −2 — Method: two lines are parallel exactly when their gradients are equal as signed numbers, so m is read from each equation written in the form y = mx + c and the two are compared. Working: y = 2x + 1 has gradient 2 and y = −2x + 3 has gradient −2; those are not equal, so the lines are not parallel, and indeed one slopes upwards while the other slopes downwards. Answer: No, because their gradients are 2 and −2. The distractors: saying yes because both gradients have size 2 comes from comparing the sizes of the gradients and ignoring their signs; saying yes because the gradients add to 0 comes from using a sum of zero as the test for parallel lines instead of equality of gradients; saying no because the y-intercepts are 1 and 3 reaches the right verdict by the wrong route, since the intercepts decide where the lines sit rather than whether they are parallel.
- (b) y = 2x and y = −(1/2)x + 1 — Method: two lines are perpendicular when the product of their gradients is −1, so the gradient of each line is read from the number multiplying x and the two are multiplied together. Working: for y = 2x and y = −(1/2)x + 1 the gradients are 2 and −1/2, and 2 × (−1/2) = −1, so that pair is perpendicular. Answer: y = 2x and y = −(1/2)x + 1. The distractors: the pair y = 2x and y = 2x + 1 has equal gradients, whose product is 4, so those two lines are parallel and never meet, and they are chosen by a candidate applying the parallel condition; the pair y = 2x and y = −2x + 1 comes from changing the sign of the gradient without turning it upside down, and its product is −4; the pair y = 2x and y = (1/2)x + 1 comes from turning the gradient upside down without changing its sign, and its product is 1.
- (b) $y = x^3 - 4x$ — Method: count how many times the curve crosses the x-axis and check whether it is a cubic (an S-shape with up to three crossing points) rather than a lower power, and note which way it runs overall from bottom-left to top-right or the reverse. Working: the curve crosses the x-axis at three points, x = −2, 0 and 2, and runs from bottom-left to top-right, which matches y = x³ − 4x = x(x − 2)(x + 2). Answer: y = x³ − 4x. Distractor refutation: y = −x³ + 4x comes from a sign error on every term, which would flip the curve so it ran from top-left to bottom-right instead. y = x³ + 4x comes from a sign error on the x term only, which removes two of the three crossing points, since x(x² + 4) has only x = 0 as a real root. y = x² − 4x comes from dropping the cubic term altogether, giving a parabola with only two crossing points instead of an S-shaped curve with three.
- (d) It crosses the x-axis at x = 3 and x = −3. — y = x² − 9 factorises as (x − 3)(x + 3), since 9 = 3², so the curve crosses the x-axis at x = 3 and x = −3. Saying it crosses once at x = 9 mistakes the constant term for a root directly, without taking its square root. Saying it crosses at x = 9 and x = −9 makes the same mistake but adds a sign either way. Saying it does not cross the x-axis confuses the y-intercept, which is negative at (0, −9), with the number of times the curve meets the x-axis — a negative y-intercept combined with an upward-opening curve guarantees it crosses the x-axis twice.
- (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.
- (a) −1/3 — The gradient of L is 3, the coefficient of x in y = mx + c form. The gradient of a line perpendicular to a line of gradient m is the negative reciprocal, −1/m. So the perpendicular gradient is −1/3. Distractor routes: 3 gives the gradient of L itself, forgetting to change it at all — that is the gradient of a PARALLEL line. 1/3 takes the reciprocal of 3 but keeps the same sign, missing the negative sign a perpendicular gradient requires. −3 negates the gradient of L but does not take its reciprocal, giving the gradient of a line with the opposite slope rather than a perpendicular one.
- (d) 6 — Method: write an expression for each person's savings after w weeks, and set them equal. Working: 40 + 6w = 10 + 11w. Subtract 6w from both sides: 40 = 10 + 5w. Subtract 10: 30 = 5w, so w = 6. Answer: 6 weeks. 0 comes from setting only the weekly amounts equal, 6w = 11w, and ignoring the different starting amounts entirely. 10 comes from adding the two starting amounts and dividing by the difference in weekly amounts, (40 + 10) ÷ (11 − 6), instead of forming and solving the correct equation. 1.76 comes from adding the two weekly amounts instead of subtracting them when rearranging, (40 − 10) ÷ (11 + 6).
- (a) Positive x-direction, 90°; image is y = sin x. — Writing cos(x − 90°) as cos(x − a) with a = 90 shows this is a horizontal translation, y = f(x − a), which moves the graph 90° in the positive x-direction; the identity cos(x − 90°) = sin x confirms the image is y = sin x. Choosing the negative x-direction reverses the sign inside the bracket — subtracting inside the bracket always translates in the positive x-direction, not the negative one, so that statement is wrong on direction. Getting the direction right but conflating the subtraction inside the bracket with an extra reflection of the output flips the sign of the resulting graph, wrongly giving y = −sin x. Treating the subtraction as if it changed the output directly, rather than the input, wrongly calls this a vertical translation even while still correctly recalling that the image simplifies to y = sin x.
- (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.
- (d) £16.70 — The mileage charge is 2.20 × 6 = £13.20. Adding the fixed fee: £13.20 + £3.50 = £16.70. A candidate who forgets the fixed fee gives just the mileage charge, £13.20. A candidate who adds the fixed fee to the per-mile rate before multiplying by the number of miles, (3.50 + 2.20) × 6, gets £34.20. A candidate who rounds £2.20 down to £2 gets 2 × 6 + 3.50 = £15.50.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.