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.
Answer key: Algebra worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (d) 23 — Method: let the smallest integer be n, so the three consecutive integers are n, n + 1 and n + 2. Form the equation n + (n + 1) + (n + 2) = 72. Working: simplify the left side: 3n + 3 = 72, so 3n = 69, giving n = 23. Answer: 23. 24 comes from dividing 72 by 3 directly, 72 ÷ 3 = 24, which finds the middle integer rather than realising the three numbers differ. 25 comes from correctly finding n = 23 but reading off the largest integer, n + 2, instead of the smallest as asked. 21 comes from dividing first and subtracting after, (72 ÷ 3) − 3, instead of subtracting 3 before dividing by 3.
- (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).
- (d) An inequality, because ≤ compares the two sides — The symbol ≤ means 'is less than or equal to', so the statement compares the sizes of the two sides instead of saying they are equal: that makes it an inequality. Solving it gives n ≤ 5, a whole range of values rather than the single value an equation would give. An identity has to be true for every value of the letter, and this fails at n = 6, so it is not one. A formula works one quantity out from another, and there is only one letter here.
- (c) Only x = 5 satisfies 3x + 5 = 20, not every value of x. — 3x + 5 = 20 is only true when x = 5, since 3 × 5 + 5 = 20; for any other value of x the two sides are not equal, so it is an equation, not an identity. Saying it cannot be simplified confuses simplifying with the equation/identity distinction, which is about how many values of x make it true. Saying it has an = sign is not a valid test, since identities are also written with an = or ≡ sign. A number on the right-hand side does not decide it either — what matters is whether both sides match for every value of x, not the form of the right-hand side.
- (a) It is 2(w + (w + 3)) = 4w + 6, not 2w + 3. — The perimeter of a rectangle is twice the width plus twice the length: 2 × w + 2 × (w + 3) = 2w + 2w + 6 = 4w + 6, so the gardener's 2w + 3 is wrong. Writing w + (w + 3) = 2w + 3 forgets to double the sides at all, only adding one width and one length once. Writing 4(w + 3) = 4w + 12 wrongly treats all four sides as equal to the length, as if the garden were a square. Writing 3w + 6 comes from doubling the length correctly but adding the width only once instead of doubling it too.
- (b) £14 — Method: read the fixed charge (the cost at 0 miles) and the rate (the cost per extra mile) from the graph, then use them to work out the cost for a distance beyond the part that is plotted. Working: the graph shows a fixed charge of £2 at 0 miles, and the cost rises by £2 for every extra mile, so for 6 miles the cost is £2 + (£2 × 6) = £2 + £12 = £14. Answer: £14. Distractor refutation: £12 comes from multiplying the rate by the distance and leaving out the £2 fixed charge. £8 comes from misreading the rate as £1 per mile instead of £2 per mile. £24 comes from adding the fixed charge to the rate first and then multiplying the total by the distance, instead of multiplying the rate by the distance and then adding the fixed charge.
- (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.
- (d) 6n + 3 — Method: find the price per passenger, then find the booking fee that fits a booking for 1 passenger. Working: the cost rises by £6 for each extra passenger (15 − 9 = 6, 21 − 15 = 6, 27 − 21 = 6), so the cost has the form 6n + c. Substituting n = 1: 6(1) + c = 9, so c = 3. Answer: the cost in pounds is 6n + 3. 6n ignores the booking fee altogether. 6n + 9 uses the cost of one passenger, £9, as the fee without first subtracting the £6 per-passenger price. 9n + 6 swaps the two numbers, using the first cost as the price per passenger and the difference as the fee.
- (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.
- (b) n² + 4n — First differences of 5, 12, 21, 32, 45 are 7, 9, 11, 13. Second differences are 2, 2, 2, so a = 2 ÷ 2 = 1. Subtracting n² (1, 4, 9, 16, 25) from the totals (5, 12, 21, 32, 45) leaves 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, the linear expression 4n. So the number of oranges is n² + 4n. Using the second difference itself as the coefficient of n², without halving it, gives 2n² + 4n. Finding a = 1 correctly but dropping the linear remainder 4n entirely leaves n². Treating the first first difference (7) as a constant common difference and building a linear formula 5 + 7(n − 1) = 7n − 2 fits only the first two totals, and gives 19 for n = 3 instead of 21.
- (d) 2n² − n − 2 — First differences: 5, 9, 13, 17. Second differences: 4, 4, 4, so a = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Subtracting 2n² (2, 8, 18, 32, 50) from the terms (−1, 4, 13, 26, 43) leaves −3, −4, −5, −6, −7, which is the linear expression −n − 2. So the nth term is 2n² − n − 2. Using the second difference itself as a, without halving it, gives 4n² − n − 2. Finding a = 2 correctly but dropping the linear remainder −n − 2 entirely leaves 2n². Treating the first first difference (5) as a common difference and building a + (n − 1)d = −1 + 5(n − 1) gives 5n − 6, which only matches the first two terms.
- (c) (2, 5) — Reflecting in the x-axis keeps the x-coordinate the same and changes the sign of the y-coordinate: Q = (2, 5). (−2, −5) comes from reflecting in the y-axis instead, which changes the sign of the x-coordinate. (−2, 5) comes from reflecting in both axes. (2, −5) comes from not applying the reflection at all.
- (d) x₂ closer: f(x₂) = 0.0225, nearer to 0 — f(2.6) = 2.6² − 7 = 6.76 − 7 = −0.24, and f(2.65) = 2.65² − 7 = 7.0225 − 7 = 0.0225. The closer a value of x is to the root, the closer f(x) is to zero — regardless of sign. Since |0.0225| = 0.0225 is much smaller than |−0.24| = 0.24, x₂ = 2.65 is closer to the root. 'x₁ closer: −0.24 is the smaller value' comes from comparing the SIGNED values of f(x) rather than their distances from zero — −0.24 is indeed less than 0.0225 as a number, but that does not mean x₁ is closer to the root. 'x₁ closer: f(x₁) negative ⇒ nearer root' invents a rule that a negative f(x) means x is closer to the root; the sign of f(x) only tells you which side of the root x is on, not how close it is. 'x₂ is the exact root, since f(x₂) ≈ 0' misreads f(x₂) = 0.0225 as zero; the true root is √7 ≈ 2.6458, so f(2.65) is close to zero but not equal to it, and x₂ is an approximation, not the exact root.
- (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) x = −3, y = −7 — x² + 6x + 2 = (x + 3)² − 3² + 2 = (x + 3)² − 7. Substituting x = −3: (−3)² = 9, 6 × (−3) = −18, so 9 − 18 + 2 = −7, confirming the minimum value −7 at x = −3: turning point (−3, −7). Using 6 instead of half of 6 inside the bracket gives (x + 6)² − 34, turning point (−6, −34) — 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 (3, −7) — wrong, because (x + 3)² is zero at x = −3, not x = 3. Computing 9 − 2 = 7 instead of 2 − 9 = −7 flips the sign of the constant, giving (−3, 7) — wrong, since the completed square's constant must be evaluated as 2 minus 9, not 9 minus 2. Always check a turning point by substituting its x-value back into the original equation.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.