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) −2 — Method: rearrange the equation into the form y = mx + c, then read off the gradient. Working: 3y = 12 − 6x, so dividing every term by 3 gives y = 4 − 2x, so the gradient is −2. Answer: the gradient is −2. 2 comes from dropping the negative sign after dividing by 3. 4 comes from using the y-intercept, 4, instead of the gradient. −6 comes from reading off the coefficient of x before dividing the whole equation by 3.
- (b) 5.00 — Continuing the iteration: x₁ = √(2 × 1 + 15) = √17 = 4.1231, x₂ = √(2 × 4.1231 + 15) = √23.2462 = 4.8214, x₃ = √(2 × 4.8214 + 15) = √24.6428 = 4.9642, x₄ = √(2 × 4.9642 + 15) = √24.9284 = 4.9928, and the values keep climbing towards 5.00 as n increases (the limit L satisfies L² = 2L + 15, so L² − 2L − 15 = 0, giving L = 5). Choosing 4.99 stops after x₄, one iteration before the value has settled fully to 5.00. Choosing 17.00 uses the value under the very first square root (2 × 1 + 15 = 17) as if that number itself were the limit. Choosing 1.00 assumes the sequence never moves from the starting value x₀.
- (d) x = 6 — Method: with an unknown on both sides, first collect the x terms on one side by subtracting the smaller x term from both sides, then deal with the numbers. Working: subtracting x from both sides gives x + 7 = 13, and subtracting 7 from both sides gives x = 6. Answer: x = 6. The distractors: x = 20 comes from adding 7 to 13 instead of subtracting it once the x terms have been collected; x = 2 comes from collecting the x terms by adding them, giving 3x + 7 = 13 and then 3x = 6; x = −6 comes from subtracting 2x from both sides to get 7 = −x + 13, reaching −6 = −x and then copying the sign straight across instead of dividing by −1.
- (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.
- (b) x = −4, y = −3 and x = 3, y = 4 — Substitute y = x + 1 into x² + y² = 25: x² + (x + 1)² = 25, which expands to x² + x² + 2x + 1 = 25, giving 2x² + 2x − 24 = 0, or x² + x − 12 = 0. Factorise: (x + 4)(x − 3) = 0, so x = −4 or x = 3. Using y = x + 1: when x = −4, y = −3; when x = 3, y = 4. Distractor routes: x = 4, y = 5 and x = −3, y = −2 comes from mis-factorising x² + x − 12 as (x − 4)(x + 3), reversing the sign of each root. x = −4, y = −3 alone stops after finding the first root of the quadratic and never goes back for the second pair. x = 12, y = 13 comes from misreading x² + y² = 25 as the linear equation x + y = 25 and solving that together with y = x + 1.
- (b) −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 — Factorise x² − 2x − 8 = (x − 4)(x + 2), giving roots x = 4 and x = −2. Since the coefficient of x² is positive and the inequality is ≤ 0, the solution is the closed interval between the roots, −2 ≤ x ≤ 4, with the roots included because the inequality is not strict. The integers in this interval are −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. Distractor routes: −1, 0, 1, 2, 3 drops both endpoints, treating ≤ as if it were the strict inequality <. −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 comes from mis-factorising as (x − 5)(x + 2), giving an upper root of 5 instead of 4. −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3 comes from mis-factorising as (x − 4)(x + 3), giving a lower root of −3 instead of −2.
- (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.
- (a) y = (4/3)x + 25/3 — The radius from (0, 0) to (−4, 3) has gradient 3 ÷ (−4) = −3/4. The tangent is perpendicular to the radius, so its gradient is the negative reciprocal, 4/3. Using y − y₁ = m(x − x₁) with the point (−4, 3): y − 3 = (4/3)(x + 4), so y = (4/3)x + 16/3 + 3 = (4/3)x + 25/3. Using the radius's own gradient, −3/4, instead of taking the perpendicular gradient, gives y − 3 = (−3/4)(x + 4), which simplifies to y = −(3/4)x once the −3 and +3 in the constant cancel out. Taking the reciprocal of the radius's gradient but keeping the wrong sign, using −4/3 instead of 4/3, gives y = −(4/3)x − 7/3. Correctly finding the gradient 4/3 and expanding the bracket, but forgetting to add the y-coordinate 3 at the end, gives y = (4/3)x + 16/3.
- (b) 4.39 — x₁ = ∛(150 − 3 × 4²) = ∛(150 − 48) = ∛102 = 4.672 (unrounded). x₂ = ∛(150 − 3 × 4.672²) = ∛(150 − 65.49) = ∛84.51 = 4.39 (2 d.p.). Choosing 4.67 stops after only one iteration, giving x₁ instead of x₂. Choosing 84.51 finds the value inside the cube root for x₂ but never takes the cube root. Choosing 6.32 comes from adding 3xₙ² instead of subtracting it inside the root, which does not match the given formula.
- (d) Yes, because 3² + 4² = 25. — A point lies on the circle x² + y² = 25 exactly when substituting its coordinates makes the equation true. Squaring each coordinate separately and adding: 3² + 4² = 9 + 16 = 25, which matches the right-hand side, so (3, 4) does lie on the circle. Adding the coordinates without squaring them, 3 + 4 = 7, and then reasoning that 7 is less than 25 happens to reach the same verdict, but it is not testing the equation of the circle at all — the circle equation depends on x² + y², not x + y. Squaring the sum instead of summing the squares, (3 + 4)² = 49, not 25, wrongly rules the point out. Doubling each coordinate instead of squaring it, so that 4² is taken as 8, gives 9 + 8 = 17, not 25, which also wrongly rules the point out.
- (b) s = d / t — Method: undo the multiplication by t by dividing both sides by t. Working: d = st, so dividing both sides by t gives s = d / t. The value s = dt comes from multiplying by t instead of dividing. The value s = t / d comes from inverting the fraction, dividing t by d instead of d by t. The value s = d − t comes from subtracting t instead of dividing by it.
- (d) V = lwh — V = lwh is a formula: it relates one quantity, the volume V, to others, the length, width and height, in a way that is true generally. A candidate who picks lwh has chosen the expression, not a full statement relating two quantities. A candidate who picks lwh = 60 has chosen an equation, since it is only true for particular values of l, w and h that multiply to 60. A candidate who picks 2(l + w) ≡ 2l + 2w has chosen an identity, mistaking the identity symbol ≡ for a sign that makes a statement a formula.
- (d) 8 — Working backwards by halving (undoing the doubling), one 4-hour step at a time: 9,600 (20 h) → 4,800 (16 h) → 2,400 (12 h) → 1,200 (8 h) → 600 (4 h) → 300 (0 h). Reading these in time order — 300, 600, 1,200, 2,400, 4,800, 9,600 at 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 hours — the population is still at or below 1,000 at 4 hours (600) and first goes above 1,000 at 8 hours (1,200). So the recorded population first exceeds 1,000 at 8 hours. Answering 20 just reads off the time stated in the question, without working out when the threshold was actually first crossed — wrong, because 9,600 is only the value AT 20 hours, not necessarily the first time the population passed 1,000. Answering 0 comes from recovering the starting population by dividing 9,600 by 5 (the number of 4-hour gaps up to 20 hours) instead of by 2⁵ = 32 (the correct number of halvings), giving a wrongly-inflated starting value of 9,600 ÷ 5 = 1,920 — already above 1,000 at 0 hours — wrong, because doubling means the value must be halved five times, dividing by 2 five times (2⁵ = 32), not divided once by the number of gaps. Answering 12 comes from halving back only twice, from 9,600 to 4,800 (16 h) to 2,400 (12 h), and stopping there because 2,400 is already above 1,000, without checking that 1,200 at 8 hours is also above 1,000 and occurs earlier — wrong, because the FIRST recorded time above 1,000 is the earliest such time, not the first one reached while working backwards from 20 hours.
- (b) k = 6 — Method: two simultaneous linear equations have no solution when the lines they describe are parallel, so write each equation in the form y = mx + c and make the gradients equal. Working: kx + 2y = 4 rearranges to y = −(k/2)x + 2, so its gradient is −k/2, and 3x + y = 5 rearranges to y = −3x + 5, so its gradient is −3; setting −k/2 = −3 gives k = 6, and the first equation is then 6x + 2y = 4, which simplifies to 3x + y = 2 and can never agree with 3x + y = 5. Answer: k = 6. The distractors: k = −6 comes from reading the gradient of kx + 2y = 4 as +k/2 and solving k/2 = −3; k = 3 comes from making the x terms identical instead of making the gradients equal; k = 2/3 comes from writing the gradient of 3x + y = 5 upside down as −1/3 and solving −k/2 = −1/3.
- (d) £195 — Substituting x = 3 into y = 45x + 60 gives y = 45 × 3 + 60 = 135 + 60 = 195. A candidate who forgets to add the call-out fee would get only 45 × 3 = £135. A candidate who adds the hours to the fee and the rate instead of multiplying would get 45 + 60 + 3 = £108. A candidate who multiplies both the hourly rate and the call-out fee by the number of hours would get 45 × 3 + 60 × 3 = £315.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.