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) Week 16, £37,000 — y = f(x − 6) − 8000 combines a horizontal translation of 6 units RIGHT (subtracting 6 inside the brackets) with a vertical translation of £8000 DOWN (subtracting 8000 outside). Applying both to the maximum (10, 45000): 10 + 6 = 16, so the new maximum is in week 16. And 45000 − 8000 = 37000, so the maximum weekly profit is £37,000.
- (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.
- (a) £50 — Substituting x = 200 into y = 0.15x + 20 gives y = 0.15 × 200 + 20 = 30 + 20 = £50. A candidate who forgets to add the standing charge would get only 0.15 × 200 = £30. A candidate who misplaces the decimal point in the rate, using 1.5 instead of 0.15, would get 1.5 × 200 + 20 = £320. A candidate who swaps the roles of the rate and the number of units would work out 0.15 × 20 + 200 = £203.
- (b) 6 — Reflecting y = f(x) in the x-axis turns the minimum point (2, −3) into a maximum point at (2, 3), since −f(x) negates every y-value: −(−3) = 3. Adding a then gives 3 + a = 9, so a = 9 − 3 = 6. Forgetting the reflection and using the original y-value of −3 gives −3 + a = 9, so a = 12 — this ignores that −f(x) changes the sign of the y-coordinate before a is added. Writing a = −12 comes from subtracting in the wrong order, working out 9 − (−3) as −3 − 9 instead. Writing a = −6 comes from taking the negative of the correct answer, as if the final value of a needed to be reflected too, on top of the turning point.
- (c) (0, 0) — A curve crosses the y-axis where x = 0. Substituting x = 0 into y = x³ − 4x gives y = 0³ − 4(0) = 0 − 0 = 0, so the curve crosses the y-axis at (0, 0). A candidate who reads off the coefficient of x as the y-intercept, instead of working out the constant term, might write (0, −4). A candidate who swaps the coordinates might write (4, 0). A candidate who takes the coefficient of x but drops its sign might write (0, 4).
- (a) 19 — Each time x increases by 1, y increases by 3 (4, 7, 10, 13 — a constant difference of 3). So at x = 4, y = 13 + 3 = 16, and at x = 5, y = 16 + 3 = 19. A candidate who stops one step early, giving the value for x = 4 instead of x = 5, answers 16. A candidate who overcounts and adds three steps of 3 instead of two from x = 3 gets 13 + 9 = 22. A candidate who mistakes the y-intercept (4) for the common difference and adds 4 twice from x = 3 gets 13 + 8 = 21.
- (a) x = 6 or x = −4 — We need two numbers that multiply to −24 and add to −2: these are −6 and 4, since −6 × 4 = −24 and −6 + 4 = −2. So x² − 2x − 24 = (x − 6)(x + 4) = 0, giving x = 6 or x = −4. A candidate who swaps the signs, using 6 and −4 the wrong way round in the brackets, gets x = −6 or x = 4. A candidate who picks the wrong factor pair, 8 and −3 (which multiply to −24 but add to +5, not −2), gets (x + 8)(x − 3) = 0 and answers x = −8 or x = 3. A candidate who makes both factors negative gets x = −6 or x = −4, which would require the constant term to be +24, not −24.
- (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.
- (c) 2.61 — The limit L satisfies L = 12 ÷ (L + 2), so L(L + 2) = 12, giving L² + 2L − 12 = 0 and L = (−2 + √52) ÷ 2 = 2.6056, which is 2.61 to 2 decimal places (the early iterates 4, 2, 3, 2.4, 2.73, ... oscillate around this value before settling). Choosing 3.00 reads off x₃, one of the early oscillating values, before the sequence has settled close to the limit. Choosing 4.00 reads off x₁, the very first iterate, not the value the sequence approaches. Choosing 6.00 comes from writing the limit equation as L = 12 ÷ 2, leaving L itself out of the denominator.
- (d) (4, 3) — The sides are parallel to the axes: the missing vertex must share the y-coordinate 3 with (−2, 3) and the x-coordinate 4 with (4, −3), giving (4, 3). (−4, 3) comes from a sign error on the x-coordinate. (4, −9) comes from continuing the pattern of the given points by subtracting 6 from the y-coordinate again instead of matching it to (−2, 3). (3, 4) comes from swapping the x- and y-coordinates.
- (b) 6x + 6 — Perimeter = 2[(2x + 5) + (x − 2)] = 2(3x + 3) = 6x + 6. A candidate who adds the length and width but forgets to double for the perimeter gets 3x + 3. A candidate who makes a sign error and adds 2 instead of subtracting it before doubling gets 2[(2x + 5) + (x + 2)] = 6x + 14. A candidate who multiplies the length and width instead of adding them, confusing the perimeter formula with the area formula, and then doubles that product, gets 2(2x + 5)(x − 2) = 4x² + 2x − 20.
- (c) L/5 − 3 — Each of the 5 equal pieces is L/5 metres long, and removing 3 metres from one piece gives L/5 − 3. Subtracting the 3 metres before dividing by 5, (L − 3)/5, divides the removed length between all 5 pieces instead of taking it from just one. Dividing only the 3 by 5 instead of dividing L by 5, L − 3/5, divides the wrong number. Writing 5/L − 3 inverts the fraction, swapping which number is the numerator.
- (a) 1 — a² − 2b = (−3)² − 2(4) = 9 − 8 = 1. A candidate who squares −3 but keeps the negative sign gets −9 − 8 = −17. A candidate who forgets to square a and substitutes it as −3 gets −3 − 8 = −11. A candidate who adds instead of subtracting 2b gets 9 + 8 = 17.
- (a) s/f — Sharing s sweets equally between f friends means dividing the total by the number of friends, written as a fraction: s/f. Writing f/s divides the wrong way round, sharing the number of friends between the sweets instead of the sweets between the friends. Writing s − f mistakes sharing for taking away, subtracting the number of friends from the number of sweets. Writing sf multiplies the two quantities together, which would make the total larger rather than splitting it into smaller equal parts. The number of sweets each friend receives is s/f.
- (b) £115, and C = 40 + 25h is a formula — Substitute h = 3 into the rule, multiplying before adding. The hours cost 25 × 3 = 75, and adding the call-out fee gives 40 + 75 = 115, so the charge is £115. The rule itself links two different quantities, C and h, and lets one be worked out from the other, so it is a formula; an expression would have no equals sign in it. Adding the fee before multiplying gives 65 × 3 = 195, which charges the call-out fee three times over, and stopping at 40 + 25 leaves £65, the charge for a single hour.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.