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
- (c) 64 m — The distance travelled is the area under the speed-time graph. From t = 0 to t = 4, the shape is a triangle with base 4 and height 8, area 1/2 × 4 × 8 = 16. From t = 4 to t = 10, the shape is a rectangle with base 6 and height 8, area 6 × 8 = 48. Total distance: 16 + 48 = 64 m. Treating the whole 10 seconds as a single trapezium with parallel sides 0 and 8 and width 10, instead of splitting it into the triangle and rectangle, gives 40 m. Ignoring the acceleration phase completely and assuming the car travels at a constant 8 m/s for all 10 seconds gives 8 × 10 = 80 m. Misreading the second interval as running from t = 4 to t = 8 instead of t = 4 to t = 10 gives a rectangle area of 4 × 8 = 32, plus the correct triangle of 16, totalling 48 m.
- (d) y = −2x + 10 — Method: a tangent is perpendicular to the radius drawn to the point where it touches, so work out the gradient of that radius, take its negative reciprocal for the tangent, then substitute into y − y₁ = m(x − x₁). Working: the radius joins (0, 0) to (4, 2), so its gradient is 2 ÷ 4 = 1/2; turning 1/2 upside down gives 2 and changing the sign gives −2. Substituting into y − 2 = −2(x − 4) gives y − 2 = −2x + 8, so y = −2x + 10. Answer: y = −2x + 10. The distractors: y = −0.5x + 4 changes the sign of the radius gradient but never turns it upside down, using −1/2 where −2 belongs; y = 2x − 6 turns the gradient upside down but leaves it positive, using 2 where −2 belongs; y = −2x − 10 has the correct gradient but substitutes the point with both signs reversed, writing y + 2 = −2(x + 4) instead of y − 2 = −2(x − 4).
- (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.
- (c) 32 — The terms are 60, 53, 46, 39, 32 — each found by subtracting 7 from the term before, so the 5th term is 32. Subtracting 7 five times from the first term instead of four times, 60 − 7 × 5 = 25, treats the first term as if it came before the sequence starts. Adding 7 four times instead of subtracting, 60 + 7 × 4 = 88, uses the wrong operation. Stopping one term early gives the 4th term, 39.
- (c) 1 — At x = 0, f(0) = 4. Applying the transformations in order — reflect in the x-axis first, then translate up by 5 — gives −f(0) + 5 = −4 + 5 = 1. Applying the translation but forgetting the reflection gives f(0) + 5 = 9. Applying the reflection to the whole expression, including the +5, gives −f(0) − 5 = −9. Applying the reflection but forgetting the translation gives −f(0) = −4.
- (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) Statement (ii) — Statement (ii) opens with 'Since n(n + 1) is even', treating the very fact the proof is meant to establish as if it were already known — that is circular reasoning, assuming the conclusion to help derive itself. Statement (i) only names the two consecutive integers as n and n + 1; it makes no claim about whether their product is even, so it introduces nothing circular. Statement (iii) states the conclusion, and would be a valid final step if statement (ii) had reached 'one of n and n + 1 is even' by a genuine argument, such as considering the cases where n is even or odd separately. Saying the proof assumes nothing circular is wrong, because statement (ii)'s opening clause is exactly that assumption.
- (a) 45 — The ratio between the two given points, one power of x apart, gives b: 405 ÷ 135 = 3, so b = 3. Substituting back, at x = 1, y = A × b, so 135 = A × 3, giving A = 45. Giving the common ratio b itself instead of A confuses which unknown was asked for and produces 3 — wrong, because the question asks for A, not b. Giving 135 instead treats the first given point as the y-intercept and reads A off it directly — wrong, because that point is at x = 1, not x = 0, so 135 is A × b, not A. Assuming A equals b⁰ = 1 by itself, rather than substituting a known point to solve for A, gives 1 — wrong, because b⁰ is always 1 regardless of A; A must be found using an actual (x, y) pair from the graph.
- (a) {x : x < −3} ∪ {x : x ≥ 1} — "Less than −3" stays strict, since the wording never says "or equal to": x < −3. "Greater than or equal to 1" is inclusive: x ≥ 1. These are two separate, non-overlapping ranges joined with "or", so in set notation they are combined with the union symbol: {x : x < −3} ∪ {x : x ≥ 1}. Distractor routes: {x : x ≤ −3} ∪ {x : x > 1} swaps the strict and inclusive signs, marking −3 as included and 1 as excluded, the opposite of the wording. {x : −3 < x ≤ 1} treats "or" as "and", joining the two conditions into one continuous interval between the values instead of a union of two separate ranges. {x : x > −3} ∪ {x : x ≤ 1} reverses both inequality directions; the two reversed ranges then overlap and between them cover every number on the number line, so that set is the whole of the real line rather than the two separate ranges the description asks for.
- (a) P = 100I / (RT) — Method: undo the operations done to P in reverse order — multiply by 100, then divide by R and by T. Working: I = PRT/100, so 100I = PRT, so P = 100I / (RT). Answer: P = 100I / (RT). P = IRT/100 comes from leaving R and T in the numerator instead of moving them to the denominator. P = 100RT/I comes from swapping P and I when rearranging. P = 100I/R comes from dividing by R only and forgetting to also divide by T.
- (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.
- (d) Formula A gives £39 and Formula B gives £39, and since 3(2n + 5) expands to 6n + 15 for every value of n, the stallholder is correct. — Formula A: 3(2 × 4 + 5) = 3 × 13 = £39. Formula B: 6 × 4 + 15 = 24 + 15 = £39. Expanding Formula A algebraically gives 3(2n + 5) = 6n + 15, which is identical to Formula B for every value of n, not just n = 4, so the stallholder is correct — this is an identity, not a coincidence. The option giving £29 for Formula A comes from multiplying only the 2n by 3 and forgetting to also multiply the 5, then adding the unmultiplied 5: 3 × 2 × 4 = 24, + 5 = 29. The two options that reach the correct numbers but reject the stallholder's claim both use faulty reasoning — matching values at one value of n, or counting terms, does not decide whether two expressions are identical for every n; expanding the bracket does.
- (d) x = 4 and x = −4 — Substituting y = 3 gives x² + 9 = 25, which simplifies to x² = 16, so x = 4 or x = −4. Choosing 'x = 3 and x = −3' uses the given value y = 3 as if it were the x-coordinate. Choosing 'x = 4' alone finds the positive square root of 16 but forgets the negative root. Choosing 'x = 5 and x = −5' skips subtracting 3² = 9 from 25 and takes the square root of 25 directly.
- (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.
- (a) 23 — The number of logs increases by 4 for each layer down, starting from 3 in the top layer, so the nth layer has 3+(n−1)×4 logs. For the 6th layer: 3+5×4=3+20=23. A candidate who adds the difference of 4 six times instead of five, treating the top layer as needing an addition too, would compute 3+6×4=27. A candidate who uses 4n instead of 4n−1, omitting the adjustment for the first layer, would compute 4×6=24. A candidate who subtracts the common difference, 4, instead of 1 when adjusting the multiplier would compute 4×6−4=20.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.