Printable · GCSE Higher · ages 14-16
Geometry and measures worksheet — GCSE Higher
Fifteen questions across the geometry and measures statements at Higher tier. Choose the non-calculator filter to rehearse Paper 1, which counts for a third of the marks.
Non-calculator
Answer key: Geometry and measures worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (d) 60° — Method: the six angles at the centre together make one complete turn of 360°, and because the hexagon is regular they are all equal, so divide 360° by 6. Working: 360 ÷ 6 = 60. Answer: 60°. The distractors: 120° is the interior angle of a regular hexagon, 720 ÷ 6, which is the angle at a vertex and not the angle at the centre; 45° comes from dividing 360 by 8, treating the hexagon as though it had eight sides; 30° comes from halving the angle at the centre, as though each of the six triangles were split again by a line of symmetry.
- (a) 3 : 5 — Method: for similar figures the ratio of the areas is the square of the ratio of the lengths, so the length ratio is found by taking the square root of each part of the area ratio. Working: the areas are in the ratio 36 : 100, and taking square roots gives √36 : √100 = 6 : 10, which cancels to 3 : 5. Answer: 3 : 5. The distractors: 9 : 25 is 36 : 100 in its simplest form, so it is still the ratio of the areas and the square roots were never taken; 5 : 3 takes the roots correctly but writes the parts the wrong way round, giving DEF to ABC when ABC to DEF was asked for; 25 : 9 makes both mistakes at once, leaving the area ratio and reversing it.
- (b) (7, 3) — Reflecting in the line y = x swaps the x- and y-coordinates: (3, 7) → (7, 3). A pupil who reflects in the x-axis instead gets (3, −7). A pupil who reflects in the y-axis instead gets (−3, 7). A pupil who confuses y = x with y = −x, swapping the coordinates and changing both signs, gets (−7, −3). The correct image is (7, 3).
- (a) Reflex + non-reflex angle BOD = 360°, so 2a + 2c = 360°. — A correct proof must build in a strictly logical order: the reflex and non-reflex angles at O, which together make a complete turn about the centre, must be added to 360° before 2a and 2c can be combined and divided. The statement 'Reflex + non-reflex angle BOD = 360°, so 2a + 2c = 360°' is the only one that follows directly from having 2a and 2c already established, and it is exactly what is needed before the final division step. Jumping straight to 'Divide by 2 throughout to get a + c = 180°' skips the step that justifies why 2a + 2c equals 360° in the first place — there is nothing yet to divide. Repeating 'Angle BOD is 2a and 2c, by the centre theorem' does not move the proof forward at all, since that fact has already been established in the sentence given. Introducing 'OB = OD are radii, so triangle OBD is isosceles' brings in an unrelated triangle and an unrelated method that plays no part in this particular proof.
- (b) 25 cm² — Method: a square has four equal sides, so divide the perimeter by 4 to recover the side length, then square that side to get the area. Working: 20 ÷ 4 = 5 cm, then 5 × 5 = 25. Answer: 25 cm². The distractors: 400 cm² comes from squaring the perimeter itself, 20 × 20, treating the 20 cm as though it were the side length; 100 cm² comes from dividing the perimeter by 2 rather than by 4, giving a side of 10 cm, and squaring that; 5 cm is the side length, from stopping as soon as the perimeter has been divided by 4 and never squaring it, which also leaves a length where an area was asked for.
- (b) 5 cm by 3 cm — The plan view looks straight down on the cuboid's footprint, so it shows the length (5 cm, left to right) and the depth (3 cm, front to back) — the two dimensions that do not involve height. "5 cm by 2 cm" repeats the front elevation's dimensions, pairing the length with the height instead of the depth. "3 cm by 2 cm" repeats the side elevation's dimensions, again pairing the depth with the height rather than with the length. "5 cm by 5 cm" comes from mistakenly assuming the plan must be a square, pairing the length with itself instead of with the depth.
- (c) 18 — Method: divide the real length by 5 to find how many 'units' of 5 m it contains, then multiply by 2 cm for each unit. Working: 45 ÷ 5 = 9, so the real bridge is 9 lots of 5 m; each lot is represented by 2 cm on the model, so the model length is 9 × 2 = 18 cm. Options: 9 comes from stopping after the division, without multiplying by the 2 cm per unit; 90 comes from multiplying the real length by 2 directly, without dividing by 5 first; 4.5 comes from dividing by 5 and then dividing by 2 again, instead of multiplying by 2. Answer: 18.
- (b) 80° — Method: opposite angles of a cyclic quadrilateral sum to 180°, so form and solve an equation for x, then substitute back to find angle DAB. Working: (2x + 10) + (3x − 5) = 180, so 5x + 5 = 180, x = 35, and angle DAB = 2(35) + 10 = 80°. Using 360° instead of 180° as the total (as if the two angles were the whole circle rather than a pair of opposite angles) gives x = 71 and angle DAB = 152°; solving correctly for x but reporting x itself instead of substituting it back into 2x + 10 gives 35°; and mishandling the signs when combining the two expressions, using (2x + 10) + (3x + 5) = 180 instead of (2x + 10) + (3x − 5) = 180, gives x = 33 and angle DAB = 76°. Opposite angles of a cyclic quadrilateral — not adjacent ones — are the pair that sums to 180°.
- (a) Yes - SSS, the three side lengths all match — Bracket P's sides (12 cm, 16 cm, 20 cm) can each be matched to one of Bracket Q's sides (16 cm, 20 cm, 12 cm) — the same three lengths, just listed differently — so the brackets are congruent by SSS. SAS is wrong here because no angle is stated for either bracket, only three sides. The order the sides are listed in does not matter for SSS — only whether the SET of three lengths matches, and it does, so 'listed in a different order' is not a reason to say no. Nothing extra is needed: SSS proves congruence from side lengths alone, without any angles, so it can be determined.
- (a) Translation by the vector (0, 6) — Method: reflecting twice in two parallel horizontal lines is always equivalent to a single translation, at right angles to the lines, of twice the distance between them. Working: the two lines are 4 − 1 = 3 units apart, so the translation is 2 × 3 = 6 units in the positive y-direction. Answer: translation by the vector (0, 6). Using just the gap itself, without doubling it, gives (0, 3); translating in the negative y-direction, from the second line back towards the first, gives (0, −6); and describing the combination as a single reflection in the line halfway between them, y = 2.5, confuses this combination with the effect of a single reflection — two reflections in parallel lines are always equivalent to a translation, never to another reflection. Always double the gap between the lines, and translate in the direction from the first line towards the second.
- (a) Parallel, since both gradients are 2 — Gradient of line 1 = (5 − 1) ÷ (2 − 0) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Gradient of line 2 = (6 − 2) ÷ (5 − 3) = 4 ÷ 2 = 2. The two gradients are equal, so the lines are parallel. "Not parallel, since the gradients are 2 and 4" uses 4 for line 2, which comes from dividing the change in y, 4, by 1 rather than by the change in x, 5 − 3 = 2. "Not parallel, since the two lines cross the y-axis at different points" confuses parallel lines with the same line repeated — parallel lines are distinct lines, and where a line crosses the y-axis has no effect on its gradient. "Parallel, since both lines pass through positive coordinates" reaches the right conclusion for the wrong reason: lines are parallel because their gradients are equal, not because the coordinates given happen to be positive.
- (d) 5 — Method: since the triangles are congruent by SAS, the corresponding sides AB and DE must be equal, because both are the side next to the given right angle that is not BC or EF. Working: AB = DE gives 2x + 3 = 13, so 2x = 10, so x = 5. Options: 10 comes from dropping the coefficient of x and solving x + 3 = 13 instead of 2x + 3 = 13; 4 comes from matching AB to the wrong side, EF, giving 2x + 3 = 11, so 2x = 8, so x = 4; 8 comes from a sign error, solving 2x − 3 = 13 instead of 2x + 3 = 13, giving 2x = 16, so x = 8. Answer: 5.
- (c) 80 cm² — Method: a composite shape made of two rectangles that do not overlap has an area equal to the sum of the two rectangle areas, so work out each area and add them. Working: the first rectangle has area 12 × 4 = 48 cm² and the second has area 4 × 8 = 32 cm², so the total is 48 + 32 = 80. Answer: 80 cm². The distractors: 48 cm² comes from working out the larger rectangle only and treating it as the whole shape; 32 cm² comes from working out the smaller rectangle only; 28 cm comes from adding the four given lengths, 12 + 4 + 4 + 8, which is a distance rather than an area and so carries a plain centimetre unit.
- (a) 3 m — Height = sloping length × sin 45° = 3√2 × √2/2 = (3 × 2)/2 = 3 m, since √2 × √2 = 2. 3√2 m comes from forgetting to multiply by sin 45° at all. 3√2/2 m comes from using sin 30° = 1/2 instead of sin 45° = √2/2. 6 m comes from using √2 instead of √2/2 for sin 45°, dropping the denominator of the exact value: 3√2 × √2 = 6.
- (b) (3, 10) — Method: multiply every part of p by 2, then add the matching parts of q. Working: 2p = (4, 6); adding q gives top 4 + (−1) = 3 and bottom 6 + 4 = 10. Answer: 2p + q = (3, 10). A candidate who forgets to double p first, working out p + q instead, gets (1, 7). A candidate who doubles q instead of p, working out p + 2q, gets (0, 11). A candidate who subtracts q instead of adding it, working out 2p − q, gets (5, 2).
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.