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) Wrong — the product is −4/25, not −1. — The student's rearrangement is correct: 5y = −2x + 15 gives y = −(2/5)x + 3, gradient −2/5. But the test for perpendicularity is that the product of the two gradients equals exactly −1, not merely that it is negative. Here 2/5 × (−2/5) = −4/25, which is not −1, so the lines are NOT perpendicular. Distractor routes: "a negative product always means perpendicular" states a rule that does not exist — many pairs of lines have a negative gradient product without being perpendicular, as this pair shows. "The rearrangement is incorrect" wrongly blames a correct step; 5y = −2x + 15 does rearrange to y = −(2/5)x + 3. "2/5 and −2/5 are negatives of each other" notices a true but irrelevant fact — being negatives of each other is not the perpendicularity condition; an exact product of −1 is.
- (a) A translation by vector (0, 3) — y = x² + 3 adds a constant outside the squaring, so it is a vertical translation of y = x² — every point moves the same distance parallel to the y-axis, with no change in x. The vector is (0, 3), matching the +3. A vector of (3, 0) confuses this with a horizontal shift; (0, −3) has the right axis but the wrong sign, since the graph moves up, not down; a stretch changes the shape of the curve, which adding a constant term never does.
- (a) 3x = 12 — Adding the two equations: the y-terms, +y and −y, have opposite signs, so they cancel; the x-terms combine to 2x + x = 3x; and the right-hand sides add to 11 + 1 = 12. This gives 3x = 12. A candidate who forgets that the y-terms cancel, and instead adds them as if they had the same sign, would write 3x + 2y = 12. A candidate who subtracts the right-hand sides instead of adding them would get 3x = 10. A candidate who correctly reaches 3x = 12 but then treats 12 itself as the value of x, skipping the final division, would write x = 12.
- (c) y = 3x + 1 — Method: a line of known gradient m has equation y = mx + c, and c is found by substituting the coordinates of a point known to lie on it. Working: the gradient is 3, so the line is y = 3x + c; substituting x = 1 and y = 4 gives 4 = 3 × 1 + c, so c = 4 − 3 = 1. Answer: y = 3x + 1. The distractors: y = 3x − 1 comes from working out the constant as mx − y, 3 − 4 = −1, instead of y − mx; y = x + 3 comes from swapping the two numbers over, putting the gradient 3 in the constant position and the x-coordinate 1 in front of x; y = 3x + 4 comes from using the y-coordinate 4 as the constant without substituting.
- (b) x = (y − 3)/5 — To make x the subject of y = 5x + 3, first subtract 3 from both sides to get y − 3 = 5x, then divide both sides by 5: x = (y − 3)/5. Writing x = (y + 3)/5 keeps the division correct but does not change the sign of the 3 when moving it across. Writing x = y/5 − 3 divides only the y term by 5 and leaves the 3 as a separate subtraction, instead of subtracting first and dividing the whole expression. Writing x = 5(y − 3) applies the correct order of subtracting 3 first, but then multiplies by 5 instead of dividing — the inverse of 5x is division, not multiplication. The correct rearrangement is x = (y − 3)/5.
- (a) 3x/2 — Factorise top and bottom first: 6x³ − 15x² = 3x²(2x − 5), and 4x² − 10x = 2x(2x − 5). The bracket (2x − 5) is common to both, so it cancels, leaving 3x²/(2x); dividing the power of x, 3x² ÷ x = 3x, gives 3x/2. Writing 3x²/2 cancels the (2x − 5) correctly and removes the denominator's x, but never reduces the power of x left in the numerator — 3x² ÷ x should give 3x, not stay as 3x². Writing 3/2 cancels the (2x − 5) correctly but then drops the x from the numerator altogether, treating 3x² over x as if it cancelled completely to 3 instead of reducing to 3x. Writing −3x/2 comes from factorising the denominator with the wrong sign, as 2x(5 − 2x) instead of 2x(2x − 5); cancelling (5 − 2x) against the numerator's (2x − 5) then needs an extra minus sign, which flips the answer to −3x/2.
- (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.
- (d) 4.521 — x₁ = √(3 × 4 + 7) = √19 = 4.358898944. x₂ = √(3 × 4.358898944 + 7) = √20.076696833 = 4.480702716. x₃ = √(3 × 4.480702716 + 7) = √20.442108148 = 4.521294964, which rounds to 4.521. Mislabelling the starting value x₀ as x₁, so that the working stops one iteration too early, reports the true x₂ = 4.480702716, which rounds to 4.481. Working out one iteration too many reports the true x₄ = √(3 × 4.521294964 + 7) = 4.534741987, which rounds to 4.535. Applying the formula in the wrong order, calculating √(3xₙ) + 7 at every step instead of √(3xₙ + 7), gives, from x₀ = 4: √12 + 7 = 10.464101615, then √(3 × 10.464101615) + 7 = 12.602883619, then √(3 × 12.602883619) + 7 = 13.148873950, which rounds to 13.149.
- (d) (3, 0) — Method: every point on the x-axis has y-coordinate 0, so substituting y = 0 into the equation and solving gives the x-coordinate of the crossing point. Working: 0 = 2x − 6 gives 2x = 6, so x = 6 ÷ 2 = 3 and the graph crosses the x-axis at (3, 0). Answer: (3, 0). The distractors: (0, −6) is where the graph crosses the y-axis, found by substituting x = 0 rather than y = 0; (−3, 0) comes from moving the 6 across the equals sign without changing its sign, giving 2x = −6; (6, 0) comes from reading the constant straight off as the crossing point and never dividing by the gradient 2.
- (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.
- (c) 55 — Continuing the pattern: 8+13=21 (5th term), 13+21=34 (6th term), 21+34=55 (7th term). A candidate who miscounts the position and stops one term early would give 34, the 6th term. A candidate who doubles the most recent term instead of adding the two before it would compute 34×2=68. A candidate who adds a non-adjacent pair — the 4th and 6th terms, skipping the 5th — would compute 13+34=47.
- (b) 158 minutes — Rearranging C = 15 + 0.2m for m: subtract 15 from both sides to get C − 15 = 0.2m, then divide by 0.2: m = (C − 15)/0.2. Substituting C = 46.60: m = (46.60 − 15)/0.2 = 31.60/0.2 = 158. Answering 233 minutes comes from dividing the whole £46.60 by 0.2 without first taking off the £15 fixed charge. Answering 308 minutes comes from adding the £15 instead of subtracting it: (46.60 + 15)/0.2. Answering 218 minutes divides first and subtracts 15 afterwards, in the wrong order: 46.60/0.2 − 15 = 233 − 15 = 218. Ali made 158 minutes of calls.
- (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.
- (b) (−5, −2) — A rotation of 180° about the origin reverses the sign of both coordinates, so Q = (−5, −2). A candidate who reverses the sign of only the y-coordinate, as if reflecting in the x-axis, gets (5, −2). A candidate who reverses the sign of only the x-coordinate, as if reflecting in the y-axis, gets (−5, 2). A candidate who swaps the coordinates instead of reversing their signs gets (2, 5).
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.