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) g is one-to-one: f(3) = f(−3), removed by x ≥ 0 — A function has an inverse only if it is one-to-one: every output must come from exactly one input. f(3) = 9 and f(−3) = 9, so two different inputs give the same output, and there is no way to send 9 back to a single input — f is not one-to-one over all real x. Restricting the domain to x ≥ 0 removes one of the two inputs behind every such pair, so g is one-to-one and does have an inverse. 'g's outputs are positive; f's could be negative' is wrong because f(x) = x² also only gives outputs of 0 or more — the outputs of f and g are identical sets; it is the INPUTS that differ, not the outputs. 'Restricting any domain always creates an inverse' is wrong because a restriction only helps if it actually removes the repeated outputs: restricting f(x) = x² to x ≥ −3 still leaves f(1) = f(−1) = 1, so that restricted function is still not one-to-one and still has no inverse. 'Squares can never be reversed, under any conditions' is wrong because √9 = 3 does reverse 3² = 9 once you know the input was non-negative — a square root just cannot tell you WHICH of two inputs you started from unless the domain has already ruled one of them out.
- (b) 3 — Method: rearrange the equation into the form y = mx + c first, then read off the gradient. Working: dividing 4y = 12x + 20 by 4 gives y = 3x + 5, so the gradient is 3. The value 12 comes from reading the coefficient of x before dividing the equation by 4. The value 20 comes from using the constant term of the unsimplified equation instead of the gradient. The value 5 comes from finding the y-intercept, 20 / 4 = 5, and giving that instead of the gradient.
- (d) n and n + 1 are consecutive integers, so one of them must be even; this makes n(n + 1) even, so 4n(n + 1) is 4 × an even number, which is a multiple of 8. — The proof needs a reason why n(n + 1) is even, not just an assertion. n and n + 1 are consecutive integers, so exactly one of them is even; multiplying by that even number keeps n(n + 1) even, so 4n(n + 1) = 4 × (an even number), and 4 × an even number always has a further factor of 2 hidden inside it, making the whole product a multiple of 8. The option 'is a multiple of 4, and because n and n + 1 are consecutive integers, it must be a multiple of 8' asserts the multiple-of-8 conclusion directly from 'multiple of 4' and 'consecutive integers' without ever showing that n(n + 1) itself is even — the missing step is exactly what earns the mark. The option '4n is always a multiple of 4 ... which means it is a multiple of 8' mistakes 4n being a multiple of 4 for the whole product 4n(n + 1) being a multiple of 8; that extra factor of 2 only comes from n(n + 1) being even, not from 4n alone. The option that expands to 4n² + 4n and calls it 'clearly a multiple of 8' never checks for a factor of 2 beyond the 4 already there — the word 'clearly' is standing in for a missing argument.
- (c) 32 — Using the rule 3n + 4: the 3rd term is 3 × 3 + 4 = 13, and the 5th term is 3 × 5 + 4 = 19, so their sum is 13 + 19 = 32. Forgetting to add the 4 for the 3rd term, 3 × 3 = 9, and adding the correct 5th term, gives 9 + 19 = 28. Rounding the 19 up to 20 to make the addition easier and then forgetting to take the extra 1 back off, 13 + 20 = 33, gives 33. Using the rule 4n + 3 instead of 3n + 4 gives 4 × 3 + 3 = 15 and 4 × 5 + 3 = 23, summing to 38.
- (d) 6.0 — Subtract 1.8 from both sides: 6.3x ≤ 38.2. Divide both sides by 6.3: x ≤ 6.0634… . The question asks for the greatest value to 1 decimal place that still satisfies the inequality. Testing 6.1: 6.3 × 6.1 + 1.8 = 40.23, which is more than 40, so 6.1 fails. Testing 6.0: 6.3 × 6.0 + 1.8 = 39.6, which is no more than 40, so 6.0 works and is the greatest such value. A candidate who simply rounds 6.0634… to 1 decimal place answers 6.1, without checking that it satisfies the inequality. A candidate who adds 1.8 instead of subtracting works out 41.8 ÷ 6.3 and answers 6.6. A candidate who forgets the 1.8 altogether divides 40 by 6.3 and answers 6.3.
- (d) 40 m — Each trapezium has width 2. Its area is width × the average of its two heights. Strip 1: average of 0 and 5 is 2.5, so area = 2 × 2.5 = 5. Strip 2: average of 5 and 9 is 7, so area = 2 × 7 = 14. Strip 3: average of 9 and 12 is 10.5, so area = 2 × 10.5 = 21. Total distance = 5 + 14 + 21 = 40 m. Leaving out the division by 2 in the averaging step doubles every strip, giving 80 m instead of 40 m. Using only the LEFT height of each strip as a rectangle, 0 × 2 + 5 × 2 + 9 × 2 = 28, or only the RIGHT height, 5 × 2 + 9 × 2 + 12 × 2 = 52, both ignore that the graph curves between the two ends of each strip — always average the two heights of a trapezium, never use just one of them.
- (c) 6 — Method: rate = amount of fuel used ÷ time taken. Working: fuel used = 50 − 38 = 12 litres, time taken = 2 hours, so rate = 12 ÷ 2 = 6 litres per hour. Answer: the rate is 6 litres per hour. 44 comes from finding the average of the two fuel amounts, (50 + 38) ÷ 2, instead of the fuel used. 12 comes from working out the fuel used but forgetting to divide by the time taken. 19 comes from dividing the remaining fuel, 38, by the time taken instead of the fuel used.
- (a) 2 m/s² — Method: acceleration = change in speed ÷ time = (17 − 5) ÷ 6 = 12 ÷ 6 = 2 m/s². Distractor origins: 12 m/s² stops after finding the change in speed and forgets to divide by the time; 22 m/s² adds the two speeds instead of subtracting them, and also forgets to divide by time (5 + 17 = 22); 72 m/s² multiplies the change in speed by the time instead of dividing (12 × 6 = 72).
- (b) Student B's — narrower strips fit the curve more closely. — The trapezium rule replaces the curve with straight-line segments; the narrower each strip, the more closely its straight edge follows the curve, so Student B's estimate with 8 narrower strips is more likely to be closer to the true area. Reasoning from the number of arithmetic steps rather than from how well the straight lines fit the curve gives the wrong claim that Student A makes fewer rounding errors. Believing the trapezium rule is exact, rather than an estimate that improves with narrower strips, gives the wrong claim that the two are always the same. Believing wider strips smooth out the curve better, rather than following it less closely, gives the wrong claim in favour of Student A's wider strips.
- (d) The cost increases by about £10 per extra item — Gradient = change in cost ÷ change in items = (800 − 400) ÷ (70 − 30) = 400 ÷ 40 = 10. The units of the gradient are £ per item, so the cost is increasing by about £10 for every extra item produced, near x = 50. Subtracting in the wrong order, (400 − 800) ÷ (70 − 30) = −10, gives the right size but the wrong sign — check which point comes first each time. Leaving out the division by 40 gives £400 per item; dividing the wrong way round, 40 ÷ 400 = 0.1, gives £0.10 per item.
- (a) 18 — The common ratio is 2√3 ÷ 2 = √3. Checking: 6 ÷ 2√3 = √3 and 6√3 ÷ 6 = √3, so the ratio is consistent throughout. The next term is 6√3 × √3 = 6 × 3 = 18, since √3 × √3 = 3. Looking only at the coefficients 2, 2, 6, 6 and continuing them by doubling the last one gives 6 × 2 = 12, which is wrong because the step from each term to the next is a multiplication by √3, not a pattern in the coefficients alone. Doubling the previous term instead of multiplying by the surd ratio √3 gives 6√3 × 2 = 12√3, which is wrong because the common ratio is √3, not 2. Using 3 instead of √3 as the common ratio — squaring the true ratio by mistake — gives 6√3 × 3 = 18√3, which is wrong because 3 is the SQUARE of the common ratio, not the ratio itself.
- (b) −23 — Expand two of the three brackets first: (x + 5)(x − 2) = x² + 3x − 10. Then multiply this by the remaining bracket: (2x − 1)(x² + 3x − 10) = 2x³ + 6x² − 20x − x² − 3x + 10, which simplifies to 2x³ + 5x² − 23x + 10, so the coefficient of x is −23. Writing −13 comes from a sign slip in the first expansion, combining 5x − 2x as −5x − 2x = −7x instead of +3x, which carries through to a wrong final coefficient. Writing −20 comes from forgetting to distribute the −1 across every term of x² + 3x − 10, dropping the −1 × 3x = −3x contribution. Writing 10 comes from reading off the constant term of the expansion instead of the coefficient of x.
- (d) 2x/(x − 2) — Factorise x² − 4 as (x − 2)(x + 2) first — it's a difference of two squares. The (x + 2) in the numerator then cancels with the (x + 2) in the factorised denominator, and 6x² ÷ 3x simplifies to 2x, leaving 2x/(x − 2). Writing 2/(x − 2) comes from over-cancelling 6x² ÷ 3x as 2 instead of 2x, dropping the x that should remain. Writing 2x/(x + 2) comes from factorising x² − 4 as (x + 2)² instead of (x − 2)(x + 2), a difference of two squares always has one plus and one minus bracket. Writing 2x²/(x − 2) comes from simplifying 6x² ÷ 3x as 2x² instead of 2x, dividing the coefficients but not reducing the power of x.
- (b) x ≤ −2 — Method: take the number term off both sides, then divide by the coefficient of x; the sign turns round only when you divide BY a negative number, and here you divide by 3. Working: subtracting 6 from both sides of 3x + 6 ≤ 0 gives 3x ≤ −6; dividing both sides by 3, which is positive, gives x ≤ −2. Answer: x ≤ −2. The distractors: x ≥ −2 comes from turning the sign round because the right-hand side has become negative, which is not the rule; it is the sign of the divisor that matters; x ≤ 2 comes from moving the 6 across without changing its sign, giving 3x ≤ 6; x ≤ −18 comes from multiplying both sides by 3 instead of dividing by it.
- (d) Overestimate — the curve bends upward (convex). — The first differences of the speeds are 3, 5, 7 and 9, so the second differences are 2, 2 and 2 — constant and positive, which means the speed-time graph curves upwards (is convex). On a convex curve, each straight chord used by the trapezium rule lies above the curve, so the trapezium rule overestimates the true distance. 'Underestimate — the curve bends upward' states the same correct geometry but gets the conclusion backwards — a chord above the curve means too much area is counted, not too little. 'Overestimate — the speed values are increasing' uses the wrong evidence: increasing speed alone doesn't tell you whether the curve bends up or down, only the second differences do. 'Underestimate — second differences are constant' confuses a constant second difference with a steady rate of change in speed, which isn't what the second difference of a speed-time table measures.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.