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
- (a) 12 + 4√2 — a₁ = 4, a₂ = 4√2, and a₃ = a₁ × r² = 4 × (√2)² = 4 × 2 = 8. The sum of the first three terms is 4 + 4√2 + 8 = 12 + 4√2. 8 + 4√2 comes from leaving out a₁ and adding only a₂ + a₃ = 4√2 + 8. 36 + 4√2 comes from squaring the whole second term instead of applying the ratio to the first term: (4√2)² = 32 used as a₃, giving 4 + 4√2 + 32 = 36 + 4√2. 4 + 12√2 comes from using r³ instead of r² for the third term: 4 × (√2)³ = 4 × 2√2 = 8√2, giving 4 + 4√2 + 8√2 = 4 + 12√2.
- (c) £8,000 — The multiplier for one year is 1 − 0.18 = 0.82, so 0.82 × 0.82 = 0.6724. Original value = 5,379.20 ÷ 0.6724 = £8,000. Treating the total drop as simple depreciation (18% × 2 = 36% lost in total, so dividing by 0.64 instead of 0.6724) gives 5,379.20 ÷ 0.64 = £8,405 (nearest pound) — wrong, because the depreciation compounds year by year rather than adding up. Dividing by 0.82 only once, forgetting the second year entirely, gives 5,379.20 ÷ 0.82 = £6,560 — wrong, because two years of depreciation have passed, not one. Multiplying by 0.6724 instead of dividing by it — repeating the depreciation forward instead of reversing it — gives 5,379.20 × 0.6724 = £3,617 (nearest pound) — wrong, because to find the ORIGINAL value you must undo the depreciation, not apply it again.
- (c) y = 3x + 5 — Method: find the gradient from the two points, then substitute one point into y = mx + c to find c. Working: gradient = (14 − 2) ÷ (3 − (−1)) = 12 ÷ 4 = 3. Using the point (3, 14): 14 = 3(3) + c, so 14 = 9 + c, giving c = 5. Answer: y = 3x + 5. y = 6x − 4 comes from mishandling the negative x-coordinate, treating 3 − (−1) as 3 − 1 = 2, so the gradient becomes 12 ÷ 2 = 6, and then c = 14 − 18 = −4. y = 3x + 23 comes from a sign error isolating c, adding 9 to 14 instead of subtracting it: c = 14 + 9 = 23. y = x/3 + 13 comes from dividing the change in x by the change in y instead of the other way round, giving a gradient of 4 ÷ 12 = 1/3, and then c = 14 − 1 = 13.
- (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) The fixed call-out fee, charged before the hourly rate. — Method: compare the formula with C = (fixed charge) + (rate) × h, where the fixed charge is the part that does not depend on h. Working: in C = 40 + 25h, the term 25h depends on the number of hours, h, but 40 does not change however many hours the job takes. Answer: 40 is the fixed call-out fee. 'The hourly rate' confuses the fixed term with the coefficient of h, which is actually 25. 'The total cost for a job lasting 1 hour' comes from substituting h = 1 into the formula (40 + 25 = 65) rather than reading off the constant term. 'The number of hours worked before charging starts' wrongly treats the constant, which is in pounds, as if it were measured in hours.
- (d) 2 — The gradient between two points on a line is the change in y divided by the change in x. Using (5, 2) and (0, −8): (2 − (−8)) ÷ (5 − 0) = 10 ÷ 5 = 2. Inverting the fraction, dividing the change in x by the change in y instead, gives 5 ÷ 10 = 0.5. Reversing the order of the x-values in the denominator, giving (2 − (−8)) ÷ (0 − 5) = 10 ÷ (−5), gives −2. Misreading the y-intercept as 8 instead of −8, giving (2 − 8) ÷ 5 = −6 ÷ 5, gives −1.2.
- (b) −0.5 — Method: gradient = change in height ÷ horizontal distance, and the height decreases so the change is negative. Working: change in height = 5 − 25 = −20, horizontal distance = 40, so gradient = −20 ÷ 40 = −0.5. Answer: the gradient is −0.5. 0.5 comes from dropping the negative sign, ignoring that the zip-line descends. 2 comes from inverting the gradient, dividing the horizontal distance by the drop in height instead of the other way round. −0.8 comes from dividing the drop by the platform height, 25, instead of by the horizontal distance, 40.
- (a) Yes — the gradients multiply to −2 × 1/2 = −1. — Rearrange Q into the form y = mx + c: 2y = x + 6 gives y = (1/2)x + 3, so Q has gradient 1/2. P has gradient −2. Two lines are perpendicular exactly when the product of their gradients is −1: −2 × 1/2 = −1. Since this holds, P and Q are perpendicular. Distractor routes: "the product is −1, but perpendicular needs 1" works out the product correctly but misremembers the condition — the perpendicular test is a product of exactly −1, and parallel lines are spotted by their gradients being equal, not by a product of 1. "Q's gradient is 2, and −2 × 2 = −4" comes from reading the 2 in front of y in 2y = x + 6 as the gradient, instead of dividing the whole equation by 2 first to reach y = (1/2)x + 3, where the gradient is 1/2. "Both equations have a negative x-term" is not a valid test at all — P's equation does have a negative x-term, but Q's, once rearranged, does not, and matching signs say nothing about the actual gradients.
- (a) 4 — Rectangle 1: P = 2(9 + 4) = 2 × 13 = 26 cm. Rectangle 2: P = 2(6 + 5) = 2 × 11 = 22 cm. Difference = 26 − 22 = 4 cm. 2 comes from finding the difference between (l + w) for each rectangle, 13 − 11 = 2, but forgetting to double it. 26 comes from giving rectangle 1's whole perimeter instead of the difference between the two. 6 comes from doubling only the change in length, 2 × (9 − 6), and ignoring that the width also changed.
- (c) 6x(2x + 3) — The highest common factor of 12x² and 18x is 6x. Dividing each term by 6x gives 12x² ÷ 6x = 2x and 18x ÷ 6x = 3, so 12x² + 18x = 6x(2x + 3). A candidate who only takes out the number 6 (missing the x) gets 6(2x² + 3x), which is not fully factorised. A candidate who only takes out 2x (missing the extra factor of 3 in 6) gets 2x(6x + 9), also not fully factorised — the bracket still shares a common factor. A candidate who takes out 3x instead of the full 6x gets 3x(4x + 6), which again is not fully factorised since 4x + 6 shares a common factor of 2.
- (a) (4, 1) — y = −f(x) reflects the graph of y = f(x) in the x-axis: every point (x, y) maps to (x, −y). Applying this to (4, −1): the x-coordinate stays 4, and the y-coordinate −1 becomes its negative, 1. Leaving the y-coordinate unchanged skips the reflection entirely, giving (4, −1); reflecting the x-coordinate instead, or reflecting both, mixes this up with a reflection in the y-axis or a rotation, giving (−4, −1) or (−4, 1).
- (b) 5 — Set n² + 4n = 45, so n² + 4n − 45 = 0. This factorises as (n + 9)(n − 5) = 0, giving n = −9 or n = 5. Since a term number must be positive, n = 5. Taking the magnitude of the rejected negative solution, 9, instead of discarding it, gives 9. Dividing 45 by the coefficient of n and ignoring the n² term entirely, 45 ÷ 4 = 11.25, rounded to the nearest whole number, gives 11. Dropping the linear term 4n and solving n² = 45 instead, the nearest whole number to √45 = 6.708 is 7.
- (a) 8 — f(x − 1) means every input to f is reduced by 1 before it is looked up. At x = 2, the input to f becomes 2 − 1 = 1, so f(x − 1) at x = 2 is f(1) = 8. Reading f(2) = 4 directly from the table, without applying the shift, gives 4. Shifting in the wrong direction, using x + 1 = 3 instead of x − 1 = 1, gives f(3) = 1. Confusing f(x − 1) with f(x) − 1 — taking f(2) = 4 and then subtracting 1 — gives 3.
- (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.
- (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.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.