Printable · GCSE Higher · ages 14-16
Number worksheet — GCSE Higher
Fifteen questions across the number statements at Higher tier. Choose the non-calculator filter to rehearse Paper 1, which counts for a third of the marks.
Non-calculator
Number worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- 1.By listing systematically, work out how many two-digit multiples of 5 can be made using the digits 0, 3 and 5, if each digit can be used at most once and the number cannot start with 0.
- 2.A company sells 4 × 10³ items per day, each priced at £2.50. It operates for 3 × 10² days a year. Work out the company's total revenue for the year. Give your answer in standard form.
- 3.Work out 1 1/2 ÷ 3/4 exactly, giving your answer in its simplest form.
- 4.A roll of ribbon is 8.4 m long. Ribbon is cut into pieces that are each 0.6 m long. Work out how many complete pieces can be cut from the roll.
- 5.Work out the value of .
- 6.Work out √3 × √12, giving your answer as an integer.
- 7.A recipe for one cake needs 2/3 of a cup of sugar. Priya has 3 1/2 cups of sugar. Work out how many complete cakes she can make.
- 8.A padlock code is formed from 3 different digits chosen from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 (no digit may be used twice in the same code). Work out how many different codes can be made.
- 9.Find the missing number: 17 × ▢ = 391
- 10.Insert one pair of brackets into 2 + 3 × 5 − 1 so that the calculation is equal to 24. Which calculation is correct?
- 11.Write 0.35 as a fraction in its lowest terms.
- 12.A van has a mass of 2,000 kg, correct to 1 significant figure. Using m for the mass of the van in kilograms, write down the error interval for m.
- 13.Work out 5⁰ + 5¹ + 5²
- 14.A pizza is cut into 12 equal slices. Ben eats 5 slices and Mia eats 3 slices. What fraction of the pizza is left, giving your answer in its simplest form?
- 15.A garden path is measured by Jon as 12 m, correct to the nearest metre, and by Mia as 12.6 m, correct to the nearest 0.1 m. Which statement about the two measurements is correct?
Answer key
- (b) 3 — Method: list all valid two-digit numbers that can be made without starting with 0, then keep only the ones that are multiples of 5. Working: the two-digit numbers possible are 30, 35, 50 and 53. A number is a multiple of 5 only if it ends in 0 or 5: 30 ends in 0, 35 ends in 5, 50 ends in 0, but 53 ends in 3. So there are 3 multiples of 5. Answer: 3. 4 comes from including 53 as a multiple of 5 without checking that its last digit is not 0 or 5. 2 comes from leaving out 50, wrongly assuming 0 cannot be used as the second digit either. 6 comes from listing every two-digit arrangement of the three digits, including ones that start with 0, without applying either restriction.
- (c) 3 × 10⁶ — Daily revenue = (4 × 10³) × 2.5 = 1 × 10⁴ (£10,000). Multiplying by the number of days, (3 × 10²), gives annual revenue = (1 × 10⁴) × (3 × 10²) = 3 × 10⁶ (£3,000,000). A candidate who forgot to multiply by the price and just multiplied the number of items by the number of days worked out (4 × 10³) × (3 × 10²) = 1.2 × 10⁶. A candidate who added the number of days to the daily revenue instead of multiplying worked out 1 × 10⁴ + 3 × 10² = 1.03 × 10⁴. A candidate who misread £2.50 as £25 worked out a daily revenue of (4 × 10³) × 25 = 1 × 10⁵, giving an annual total of (1 × 10⁵) × (3 × 10²) = 3 × 10⁷.
- (c) 2 — First write 1 1/2 as an improper fraction, 3/2. To divide by 3/4, multiply by its reciprocal, 4/3: 3/2 × 4/3 = 12/6 = 2. Dropping the whole number and dividing only the fractional part, 1/2 ÷ 3/4 = 1/2 × 4/3, gives 2/3. Multiplying by 3/4 directly instead of using its reciprocal, 3/2 × 3/4, gives 9/8. Using the reciprocal of the first fraction instead of the second, 2/3 × 3/4, gives 1/2.
- (a) 14 — Multiply both numbers by 10 to clear the decimals: 8.4 becomes 84 and 0.6 becomes 6. Then divide: 84 ÷ 6 = 14, so 14 complete pieces can be cut. Scaling only the divisor by 10 and leaving the dividend as 8.4 gives 8.4 ÷ 6 = 1.4, which rounds down to 1 complete piece — the dividend was never converted. Scaling only the dividend by 10 and leaving the divisor as 0.6 gives 84 ÷ 0.6 = 140. Rounding the divisor from 0.6 to 0.7 before dividing, trading accuracy for a rounder number, gives 8.4 ÷ 0.7 = 12. So 14 complete pieces of ribbon can be cut.
- (d) 1/4 — Method: deal with the fractional index first, then the negative sign. Working: $8^{2/3} = (\sqrt[3]{8})^2 = 2^2 = 4$. A negative index means take the reciprocal of that result, so $8^{-2/3} = \frac{1}{8^{2/3}} = \frac{1}{4}$. Answer: 1/4. A candidate who evaluates $8^{2/3}$ correctly but forgets the negative sign entirely gets 4 — they have dropped the instruction to take a reciprocal. A candidate who takes the reciprocal step but applies it as a sign change to the finished number instead of inverting it gets −4. A candidate who multiplies 8 by −2/3, treating the index as an ordinary factor rather than a power, gets −16/3.
- (a) 6 — Use √a × √b = √(ab): √3 × √12 = √(3 × 12) = √36 = 6. Adding the numbers under the roots instead of multiplying them, 3 + 12 = 15, gives √15 — that comes from applying the rule for adding surds to a multiplication question. Multiplying the two numbers under the roots but then forgetting to take the square root at the end leaves 36. Simplifying only √12 to 2√3 and then dropping the other √3 factor entirely gives 2√3.
- (b) 5 — Method: divide the total amount of sugar by the amount needed for one cake, then round down because a part-used amount of sugar cannot make an extra whole cake. Working: 3 1/2 ÷ 2/3 = 7/2 × 3/2 = 21/4 = 5.25; only 5 complete cakes can be made, since the leftover 0.25 of a portion is not enough for a 6th cake. Answer: 5. 5.25 gives the exact result of the division without rounding down to a whole number of cakes. 7 comes from multiplying 3.5 by 2 and ignoring the need to also divide by 3 as part of dividing by the fraction 2/3. 6 comes from rounding 5.25 up to the nearest whole number instead of down, wrongly assuming a 6th cake could be made from the leftover sugar.
- (a) 120 — There are 6 choices for the first digit. The second digit must be different from the first, leaving 5 choices, and the third digit must differ from both of the first two, leaving 4 choices. By the product rule, the number of codes is 6 × 5 × 4 = 120. Allowing every digit to repeat, ignoring the 'no digit twice' rule entirely, gives 6 × 6 × 6 = 216. Adding the number of choices at each position instead of multiplying them, 6 + 5 + 4, gives 15. Treating the three chosen digits as one unordered set, rather than as digits in a fixed order on the padlock, divides by the 3! = 6 ways of arranging them: 120 ÷ 6 = 20.
- (a) 23 — Division undoes multiplication, so the missing number is 391 ÷ 17 = 23. Writing down 17 repeats the number already given instead of solving for the missing one. Subtracting instead of dividing gives 391 − 17 = 374. Multiplying instead of dividing gives 391 × 17 = 6647.
- (b) (2 + 3) × 5 − 1 — 2 + 3 = 5, then 5 × 5 = 25, then 25 − 1 = 24, so the brackets belong around 2 + 3. Placing them around 5 − 1 instead gives 5 − 1 = 4, then 3 × 4 = 12, then 2 + 12 = 14. Leaving the multiplication bracketed instead changes nothing, because it already had priority: 3 × 5 = 15, then 2 + 15 = 17, then 17 − 1 = 16. Bracketing both 2 + 3 and 5 − 1 uses two pairs instead of the one asked for: 2 + 3 = 5, 5 − 1 = 4, then 5 × 4 = 20.
- (d) 7/20 — Method: write the decimal over the power of ten that matches the number of digits after the point, then divide the numerator and the denominator by their highest common factor. Working: 0.35 has two digits after the point, so it is 35 hundredths and can be written as 35/100; the highest common factor of 35 and 100 is 5, and 35 ÷ 5 = 7 with 100 ÷ 5 = 20. Answer: 7/20. The distractors: 3/10 comes from reading only the first digit after the point and converting 0.3; 7/25 comes from dividing the numerator by 5 but the denominator by 4, using a different factor on the top and on the bottom; 35/10 comes from counting one decimal place instead of two and writing the digits over 10.
- (a) 1,500 ≤ m < 2,500 — Method: a four-digit figure written to 1 significant figure has been rounded to the nearest 1,000, so the mass lies within half of 1,000, that is 500, of the figure given. Working: 2,000 − 500 = 1,500 and 2,000 + 500 = 2,500. The lower limit is included, because 1,500 kg rounds up to 2,000 kg to 1 significant figure, while 2,500 kg rounds up to 3,000 kg, so the upper limit is not. Answer: 1,500 ≤ m < 2,500. The distractors: 1,950 ≤ m < 2,050 comes from rounding to the nearest 100 instead of to 1 significant figure; 1,000 ≤ m < 3,000 goes a whole 1,000 either side instead of half of it; 1,500 < m ≤ 2,500 has the two limits the wrong way round.
- (c) 31 — Method: work out each power separately, remembering that any non-zero base raised to the power 0 is 1 and a base raised to the power 1 is itself, then add the three values. Working: 5⁰ = 1, 5¹ = 5 and 5² = 25, so the total is 1 + 5 + 25 = 31. Answer: 31. The distractors: 30 comes from taking 5⁰ as 0 instead of 1; 35 comes from taking 5⁰ as 5, treating a zero index as leaving the base unchanged; 125 comes from adding the indices first, as though the three terms were being multiplied, and working out 5³.
- (a) 1/3 — Method: find the total fraction eaten, then subtract it from the whole pizza. Working: together they eat 5/12 + 3/12 = 8/12, so the fraction left is 12/12 − 8/12 = 4/12 = 1/3. Answer: 1/3. 2/3 comes from giving the fraction eaten instead of the fraction left. 7/12 comes from only subtracting Ben's slices and forgetting Mia's. 1/2 comes from comparing the 4 slices left with the 8 slices eaten, 4/8, a part-to-part comparison instead of comparing with the whole pizza of 12 slices.
- (a) They cannot both be describing the same path — Jon's measurement means the true length, l, satisfies 11.5 m ≤ l < 12.5 m. Mia's measurement means the true length satisfies 12.55 m ≤ l < 12.65 m. These two ranges do not overlap, so the two measurements cannot both be describing the same path. 'They must both be describing the same path' ignores that the two ranges do not overlap at all. 'Jon's measurement must be wrong' wrongly assumes Jon is the one at fault, when the mismatch does not show which measurement, if either, is wrong. 'Mia's measurement must be wrong' makes the same unjustified assumption in the other direction.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.