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
- (b) (2x + 14)/((x − 1)(x + 3)) — To subtract these fractions, write them over the common denominator (x − 1)(x + 3): the numerator becomes 4(x + 3) − 2(x − 1). Expanding gives 4x + 12 − 2x + 2, which simplifies to 2x + 14, so the answer is (2x + 14)/((x − 1)(x + 3)). Writing (2x + 11)/((x − 1)(x + 3)) comes from not distributing the minus sign fully across the second bracket, treating −2(x − 1) as −2x − 1 instead of −2x + 2. Writing 2/((x − 1)(x + 3)) comes from subtracting the two original numerators directly, 4 − 2 = 2, the same mistake as subtracting fractions without a common denominator. Writing (2x − 10)/((x − 1)(x + 3)) comes from swapping which numerator multiplies which bracket, forming 4(x − 1) − 2(x + 3) instead of 4(x + 3) − 2(x − 1).
- (b) 3/2 — Rearrange 2x + 3y = 6 into y = mx + c: 3y = −2x + 6, so y = −(2/3)x + 2. The gradient of this line is −2/3. The perpendicular gradient is the negative reciprocal: 3/2. Distractor routes: −1/2 comes from reading the gradient straight off the x-coefficient, 2, without dividing by the y-coefficient, 3, first, then taking its negative reciprocal. −3/2 correctly finds the gradient −2/3 but only takes its reciprocal without also changing the sign, giving −3/2 instead of 3/2. 2/3 comes from negating the gradient −2/3 to 2/3, but forgetting to also take the reciprocal.
- (d) Reflect in the y-axis, +2 in x; roots 3, −2 — f(2 − x) is zero exactly when 2 − x equals one of f's roots: 2 − x = −1 or 2 − x = 4. Solving each correctly (x = 2 − (−1) = 3, and x = 2 − 4 = −2) gives the new roots x = 3 and x = −2. This is the same as reflecting y = f(x) in the y-axis to get f(−x), then translating 2 units in the positive x-direction to get f(−(x − 2)) = f(2 − x). Solving 2 − x = k as x = k − 2 instead of x = 2 − k is a sign slip when rearranging, and gives x = −3 and x = 2. Translating +2 in x with no reflection at all uses f(x − 2), whose roots are the original roots plus 2: x = 1 and x = 6 — this misses the reflection completely. Assuming 'no overall change' wrongly treats a reflection-and-translation pair as always cancelling out, when here the roots genuinely move, from x = −1 and x = 4 to x = 3 and x = −2.
- (d) x = (y + 3)/4 — Two operations have been applied to x: it has been multiplied by 4 and then 3 has been subtracted. Undo them in the opposite order. Adding 3 to both sides gives y + 3 = 4x. Dividing both sides by 4 then gives (y + 3)/4 = x, so x = (y + 3)/4. The bracket matters: writing y/4 + 3 divides only the y by 4 and leaves the 3 untouched. Writing (y − 3)/4 subtracts the 3 instead of adding it, and writing 4(y + 3) multiplies by 4 rather than dividing.
- (a) 4(x + 3) = 20 and 4x + 3 = 11 when x = 2, so the two expressions are not equivalent, because the bracket means the 3 must be added before multiplying by 4. — Substituting x = 2: 4(x + 3) = 4 × 5 = 20, and 4x + 3 = 8 + 3 = 11. The two values are different, and expanding 4(x + 3) algebraically gives 4x + 12, which can never equal 4x + 3 (that would require 12 = 3) — so the two expressions are never equivalent, for any value of x. The option claiming they become equal for a larger x is wrong: 4x + 12 = 4x + 3 has no solution at all. The option claiming they are equivalent because they share the terms 4x and 3 ignores that the bracket changes the constant term. The option that calculates 4(x + 3) as 11 ignores the bracket completely, applying the 4 only to the x term.
- (b) y decreases towards zero but never reaches it — Method: as x gets larger, dividing 20 by a bigger number gives a smaller result, so y decreases; because 20/x can never be exactly zero for any positive x, the curve gets closer to zero without ever reaching it, so y decreases towards zero but never reaches it. Distractor origins: 'y increases towards a limit but never reaches it' has the relationship backwards, treating y as increasing when it is actually decreasing; 'y decreases at a steady rate and reaches zero' wrongly assumes the graph behaves like a straight line that eventually hits zero; 'y stays the same however large x becomes' wrongly assumes there is no change in y at all.
- (c) Correct: 3y = 4 − x gives f⁻¹(x) = (4 − x)/3 — Swap x and y: x = 4 − 3y. Add 3y to both sides and subtract x from both sides: 3y = 4 − x. Divide by 3: y = (4 − x)/3, which is exactly what Ben wrote — his rearrangement is correct. Check with a value: f(1) = 4 − 3 = 1, and Ben's formula gives (4 − 1)/3 = 1, which matches. 'Correct, but only because f is its own inverse' gives the right verdict for a false reason — f(f(x)) = 4 − 3(4 − 3x) = 9x − 8, which is not x, so f is not self-inverse; Ben's rearrangement is correct for the ordinary algebraic reason above, not because of any special property of f. 'Wrong: sign kept, giving (−4 − x)/3' comes from not carrying the swap through consistently — testing x = 1 gives (−4 − 1)/3 = −5/3, which does not equal 1, so it is wrong. 'Wrong: correct inverse is (x − 4)/3' comes from writing 3y = x − 4 instead of 3y = 4 − x, a sign slip when isolating y — testing x = 1 gives (1 − 4)/3 = −1, which again does not equal 1.
- (a) (4, −8), a minimum point — The transformation x → x + 1 inside f translates the graph 1 unit to the LEFT, so the x-coordinate becomes 5 − 1 = 4. The minus sign in front of f reflects the graph in the x-axis, so the y-coordinate becomes −8, and a reflection in the x-axis turns every maximum into a minimum, so (4, −8) is a minimum point. Writing '(4, −8), a maximum point' gets the coordinates right but forgets that a reflection in the x-axis swaps maximum and minimum points. Writing '(6, −8), a minimum point' comes from translating 1 unit to the RIGHT instead of the left — f(x + 1) always moves the graph in the negative x-direction. Writing '(4, 8), a minimum point' gets the x-coordinate and the type right, but forgets to actually negate the y-coordinate, even though it does correctly reclassify the point as a minimum.
- (b) It is not even an ordinary equation with a solution: expanding the left-hand side gives 3x − 12, and 3x − 12 = 3x − 4 would require −12 = −4, which is never true. — Expanding the left-hand side, 3(x − 4) = 3x − 12. Setting this equal to the right-hand side, 3x − 12 = 3x − 4, gives −12 = −4 once the 3x terms are removed from both sides — a statement that is never true, so no value of x satisfies the equation at all, and it is certainly not an identity. The option about substituting a specific value misunderstands algebraic expansion, which holds for every x, not one chosen value. The option matching the first term wrongly assumes that is enough to prove equivalence. The option about multiplying the 4 by 3 on both sides is nonsensical, since there is only one bracket to expand, on the left-hand side.
- (a) 3y² — 'y squared, multiplied by 3' means the square is applied to y only, and the result is then multiplied by 3, written as 3y². Writing y³ mistakes the multiplication by 3 for an extra factor of y, adding to the power instead of using a coefficient. Writing (3y)² squares the whole of 3y, including the 3, which gives 9y² rather than 3y² — the square should apply to y alone. Writing 3 + y² adds the 3 instead of multiplying by it. The expression for 'y squared, multiplied by 3' is 3y².
- (b) 6x − 3 = 4x + 9 — Method: multiply every term inside the bracket by the number outside it; the right-hand side stays as it is given. Working: 3 × 2x = 6x and 3 × (−1) = −3, so 3(2x − 1) = 6x − 3. Answer: 6x − 3 = 4x + 9. 6x − 1 = 4x + 9 comes from multiplying only the 2x by 3 and leaving the −1 unchanged. 5x − 3 = 4x + 9 comes from adding the 3 to the 2 instead of multiplying, treating 3 × 2x as (3 + 2)x = 5x. 6x − 4 = 4x + 9 comes from working out 3 × (−1) as −1 − 3 = −4 instead of 3 × (−1) = −3.
- (a) 1.36 — Method: put the starting value into the right-hand side to get x₁, feed that value back in to get x₂, and round only once the second value has been found. Working: x₁ = 5 ÷ (1 + 2) = 5 ÷ 3 = 1.66666…; x₂ = 5 ÷ (1.66666… + 2) = 5 ÷ 3.66666… = 1.36363…. The digit in the third decimal place is 3, so x₂ = 1.36 correct to 2 decimal places. Answer: 1.36. The distractors: 1.67 is x₁, the value after a single use of the formula, given by a candidate who counts the starting value itself as x₁; 1.49 is x₃ = 1.48648…, one use of the formula too many; 1.37 comes from writing x₁ down as 1.66, truncating the display instead of keeping it in full, and then working out 5 ÷ 3.66 = 1.36612…, which rounds up to 1.37.
- (d) Line 3 — Method: check each line of Chloe's working against the correct algebraic step. Working: Line 1 to Line 2 is correct, subtracting 2x from both sides gives 3x − 4 = 8. But Line 2 to Line 3 should add 4 to both sides, giving 3x = 12, not 3x = 4 — the constant −4 has been dropped rather than removed correctly. Line 4 follows correctly from Chloe's own, incorrect, Line 3. Answer: Line 3. Line 1 is simply the original equation, copied out correctly. Line 2 correctly subtracts 2x from both sides of Line 1. Line 4 divides Chloe's own Line 3 by 3 correctly — the arithmetic there is fine, the mistake happened one line earlier.
- (d) 3m³ — Method: multiply the powers of m by adding their indices, then bring the number coefficient to the front. Working: m² × m has indices 2 and 1; add them to get 3, giving m³, then × 3 gives 3m³. Answer: 3m³. 3m² comes from multiplying the indices instead of adding them: 2 × 1 = 2, giving m², then × 3 = 3m². m³ comes from correctly combining the m's but dropping the coefficient 3. m⁶ comes from multiplying the index by the coefficient instead of writing the coefficient in front: taking the 2 in m² and the 3 to give m raised to the power 2 × 3, which is m⁶, with the lone m left out.
- (d) 12 — Method: call the younger brother's age x, write the elder brother's age in terms of x, and form an equation from the total. Working: the elder brother is x + 6, so x + (x + 6) = 30; simplifying gives 2x + 6 = 30, subtracting 6 from both sides gives 2x = 24, and dividing by 2 gives x = 12. Checking: 12 and 18 add up to 30 and differ by 6. Answer: 12. The distractors: 18 comes from solving correctly and then giving the elder brother's age, which is not the age asked for; 15 comes from halving 30 and ignoring the 6-year difference altogether; 24 comes from taking 6 off the total, 30 − 6 = 24, and giving that as an age.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.