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.Simplify (3a²)² × (2a)³
- 2.A shop assistant says that 7.2 × 3.9 = 56.16. Work out an estimate for 7.2 × 3.9, by rounding each number to the nearest whole number, to show that the assistant’s answer cannot be correct.
- 3.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.
- 4.Find the missing number: ▢ ÷ 15 = 24
- 5.A school orders 187 packed lunches for a trip. Each packed lunch costs £4.85. The school has £900 to spend. By rounding each number to 1 significant figure, work out an estimate for the total cost and decide whether £900 is enough.
- 6.Write 0.325 as a fraction in its simplest form.
- 7.4ˣ = 64. Work out the value of x.
- 8.Which of these statements about −0.7 and −0.25 is true?
- 9.The decimal 0.111... has the digit 1 repeating for ever. Write 0.1 recurring as a fraction in its simplest form.
- 10.Four students each estimate √70 without a calculator. Ben says: '8² = 64 and 9² = 81, and 70 is about a third of the way from 64 to 81, so √70 ≈ 8.3.' Chloe says: '8.5² = 72.25, which is close to 70 but a little too big, so I'll bring it down slightly to √70 ≈ 8.4.' Dan says: '9² = 81 is closer to 70 than 8² = 64 is, so √70 ≈ 8.9.' Ella says: '8² = 64 and 9² = 81, so I'll just take the midpoint of 8 and 9: √70 ≈ 8.5.' Given that √70 = 8.3666... to 4 decimal places, whose estimate is closest?
- 11.The length of a pencil is 8.4 cm, correct to 1 decimal place. Using L for the length of the pencil in centimetres, write down the error interval for L.
- 12.Work out 3/4 − 5/12 exactly, giving your answer in its simplest form.
- 13.A vending machine sells 4 types of crisps, 5 types of chocolate bar and 2 types of drink. Work out how many different combinations of one crisp packet, one chocolate bar and one drink can be bought.
- 14.Work out the value of 2⁻²
- 15.Ten athletes run in a final. Gold, silver and bronze medals are awarded to the first three athletes to finish, and there are no ties. Work out how many different ways the three medals can be awarded.
Answer key
- (d) 72a⁷ — Method: a power outside brackets applies to every factor inside them, and multiplying two powers of the same letter adds their indices. Working: (3a²)² = 3² × a⁴ = 9a⁴, and (2a)³ = 2³ × a³ = 8a³. Multiplying the two results gives 9 × 8 = 72 for the number and 4 + 3 = 7 for the index of a. Answer: 72a⁷. The distractors: 36a⁷ comes from squaring the 2 in (2a)³ instead of cubing it, giving 4a³ and then 9 × 4; 72a¹² comes from multiplying the indices 4 and 3 when the two terms are multiplied, instead of adding them; 17a⁷ comes from adding the coefficients 9 and 8 rather than multiplying them.
- (d) 28 — Method: round each number to the nearest whole number, then multiply the rounded numbers to get an estimate that can be compared with the assistant's answer. Working: 7.2 rounds to 7, and 3.9 rounds to 4, so the estimate is 7 × 4 = 28. Since 28 is much smaller than 56.16, the assistant's answer cannot be correct. 56 comes from rounding the assistant's answer to the nearest whole number, instead of rounding the two numbers being multiplied and then multiplying them. 35 comes from rounding both numbers correctly but then slipping in the seven times table, writing 7 × 5 = 35 in place of 7 × 4 = 28. 21 comes from rounding 3.9 down to 3 instead of 4, giving 7 × 3 = 21. Answer: 28.
- (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.
- (a) 360 — The inverse of ÷ 15 is × 15, so the missing number is 24 × 15 = 360. Subtracting instead of multiplying gives 24 − 15 = 9. Dividing by 15 again instead of multiplying gives 24 ÷ 15 = 1.6. Adding instead of multiplying gives 24 + 15 = 39.
- (b) £1,000, so £900 is not enough — Method: round each number to 1 significant figure, multiply to estimate the total cost, then compare the estimate with the money available. Working: 187 rounds to 200 and £4.85 rounds to £5, so the estimate is 200 × 5 = 1,000, and £1,000 is more than the £900 the school has. Answer: £1,000, so £900 is not enough. The distractors: £800 comes from cutting £4.85 down to £4 instead of rounding it up to £5, giving 200 × 4 = 800, and that estimate wrongly suggests the money stretches; £935 comes from rounding the price only and keeping 187 lunches, giving 187 × 5 = 935; £950 comes from rounding 187 to the nearest 10 rather than to 1 significant figure, giving 190 × 5 = 950.
- (a) 13/40 — Method: write the decimal over 1000 using its three decimal places, then simplify. Working: 0.325 = 325/1000 = 13/40 (dividing both numerator and denominator by 25). Answer: 13/40. 13/4 comes from writing the decimal over 100 instead of 1000, as if there were only two decimal places. 8/25 comes from rounding 0.325 down to 0.32 before converting. 3/8 comes from recalling the learned conversion 3/8 = 0.375 and matching it to 0.325 because both are three-place decimals beginning with 3, instead of converting the decimal given.
- (b) 3 — Method: solving an index equation like this means finding how many factors of the base multiply together to give the number on the right. Working: 4¹ = 4, 4² = 16 and 4³ = 64, so three factors of 4 are needed. Answer: 3. The distractors: 4 comes from listing 4, 16 and 64 and counting the base itself as a step, which gives one more than the index; 6 comes from solving the equation with 2 as the base instead of 4, since 2⁶ = 64; 16 comes from dividing 64 by 4, treating the index as an instruction to divide.
- (b) −0.7 < −0.25 — Method: compare the two negative decimals by their distance from zero on a number line. Working: −0.7 is 0.7 away from zero and −0.25 is 0.25 away from zero, so −0.7 is further from zero in the negative direction, making it the smaller number. Answer: −0.7 < −0.25 is true. "−0.7 > −0.25" comes from comparing 0.7 and 0.25 as if both numbers were positive, ignoring the negative signs. "−0.7 = −0.25" comes from assuming the two numbers are equal because they are both negative decimals. "−0.7 ≥ −0.25" combines the false statement "−0.7 > −0.25" with the false statement "−0.7 = −0.25".
- (b) 1/9 — Method: let x stand for the recurring decimal, multiply by the power of ten that moves exactly one repeating block past the decimal point, subtract the original equation so that the recurring tail cancels, and solve the equation that is left. Working: let x = 0.111...; the repeating block is one digit long, so multiply by 10 to give 10x = 1.111...; subtracting the first equation from the second gives 10x − x = 1.111... − 0.111..., that is 9x = 1; dividing both sides by 9 gives x = 1/9. Answer: 1/9. The distractors: 1/10 comes from dividing by the multiplier 10 at the last step instead of by the 9 that is left in front of x; 1/11 comes from recalling the elevenths family instead of the ninths, although 1/11 = 0.0909... has a two-digit repeating block rather than a one-digit one; 11/100 comes from stopping the decimal after two digits and converting 0.11 into hundredths.
- (b) Chloe's estimate — √70 = 8.3666... to 4 decimal places. Comparing each estimate against this: Ben's 8.3 is 0.0666 away; Chloe's 8.4 is only 0.0334 away; Dan's 8.9 is 0.5334 away; Ella's 8.5 is 0.1334 away. Chloe's estimate is closest, because her method tests an actual calculation, 8.5² = 72.25, sees that it overshoots 70, and corrects slightly downward from it, rather than only comparing which perfect square is nearer. Ben's sharing-out is not a bad idea in itself — 70 sits 6 of the way along the 17 from 64 to 81, so 'about a third of the way' from 8 to 9 points at roughly 8.35 — but he then rounds that position down to 8.3, and it is that rounding, not the sharing-out, that leaves him twice as far from √70 as Chloe. Dan's claim that 81 is closer to 70 than 64 is is backwards: 70 − 64 = 6, while 81 − 70 = 11, so 64 is in fact the nearer square, which makes his estimate of 8.9 the furthest from the truth of all four. Ella's plain midpoint of 8 and 9 tests nothing at all: √70 does not sit halfway between 8 and 9, and her 8.5 lands further from √70 than Chloe's checked estimate does.
- (a) 8.35 ≤ L < 8.45 — Method: a length rounded to 1 decimal place lies within half of 0.1 cm, that is 0.05 cm, of the value written down. The lower limit is included because it rounds up to that value, and the upper limit is excluded because it rounds up to the next value instead. Working: 8.4 − 0.05 = 8.35 and 8.4 + 0.05 = 8.45, so a length of 8.35 cm still rounds to 8.4 cm while a length of 8.45 cm rounds to 8.5 cm. Answer: 8.35 ≤ L < 8.45. The distractors: 8.3 ≤ L < 8.5 goes a whole 0.1 cm either side instead of half of it; 8.35 < L ≤ 8.45 has the two limits the wrong way round, excluding the length that does round to 8.4 cm and including the one that does not; 8.4 ≤ L < 8.5 is the interval for a length truncated to 1 decimal place, not one rounded to it.
- (a) 1/3 — To subtract these fractions, first write 3/4 with a denominator of 12: 3/4 = 9/12. Then 9/12 − 5/12 = 4/12, which simplifies to 1/3. Subtracting the numerators and the denominators separately, (3 − 5)/(4 − 12), gives −2/−8, which simplifies to 1/4. Changing 3/4 to twelfths by only changing the denominator, without scaling the numerator to match, gives 3/12 − 5/12 = −2/12, which simplifies to −1/6. Adding the fractions instead of subtracting them, 9/12 + 5/12, gives 14/12, which simplifies to 7/6.
- (a) 40 — Multiply the number of choices for each item: 4 × 5 × 2 = 40. 11 comes from adding the three numbers instead of multiplying them. 20 comes from multiplying only the crisps and chocolate bars, 4 × 5, and forgetting the drink. 10 comes from multiplying only the chocolate bars and drinks, 5 × 2, and forgetting the crisps.
- (c) 1/4 — A negative index means the reciprocal of the positive power, so 2⁻² = 1 ÷ 2² = 1/4. Treating the negative sign as making the answer negative instead gives −(2²) = −4. Ignoring the negative sign altogether gives just 2² = 4. Finding the reciprocal correctly but then also applying a negative sign gives −1/4.
- (d) 720 — Method: the three medals are awarded one after the other, and each award removes one athlete from the pool available for the next, so the product rule multiplies the number of choices at each stage. Working: 10 athletes could take gold; once gold is settled 9 could take silver; once silver is settled 8 could take bronze; so the number of ways is 10 × 9 × 8 = 720. Answer: 720. The distractors: 1000 comes from working out 10 × 10 × 10, which allows the same athlete to take more than one medal; 120 comes from dividing the product by 6, which would be right only if the three medals were identical, whereas gold, silver and bronze are different; 30 comes from multiplying the 10 athletes by the 3 medals instead of multiplying the choices at each stage.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.