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.
Number worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- 1.By considering fourth powers, work out which two consecutive integers ⁴√200 lies between.
- 2.Write 5/6 as a decimal, showing clearly which digit recurs.
- 3.4ˣ = 64. Work out the value of x.
- 4.A spreadsheet shows that 812 − 397 = 315. Work out an estimate for 812 − 397, by rounding each number to the nearest 100, to check whether the spreadsheet's answer is reasonable.
- 5.Simplify x⁶ ÷ x²
- 6.Work out (2 × 10³) × (3 × 10⁴). Give your answer in standard form.
- 7.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.
- 8.A café meal deal is one sandwich, one snack and one drink. There are 4 different sandwiches, 3 different snacks and 2 different drinks to choose from. Work out how many different meal deals are possible.
- 9.Amelia estimates 48 × 21 by working out 50 × 20 = 1,000. Work out whether her estimate is an under-estimate or an over-estimate, and by how much.
- 10.Write down the exact decimal value of the fraction 1/6.
- 11.A choir has sopranos, altos and tenors in the ratio 6 : 4 : 5. What fraction of the choir is not tenors?
- 12.Robert is converting 0.999... (with the 9s recurring forever) into a fraction. He lets x = 0.999... . Multiplying by 10 gives 10x = 9.999... . Subtracting x from 10x gives 9x = 9, so x = 1. Which statement correctly explains this result?
- 13.Simplify (5² × 2³)³ ÷ (5³ × 2²)²
- 14.A length, L cm, has the error interval 24.5 ≤ L < 25.5. Write down the degree of accuracy to which the length was measured.
- 15.A photography studio offers 4 backdrops and 3 outfits for a portrait session. The plain grey backdrop, one of the 4 backdrops, cannot be used with the formal suit outfit, one of the 3 outfits. Work out how many different backdrop-and-outfit combinations are possible.
Answer key
- (c) 3 and 4 — Find the two consecutive fourth powers either side of 200: 3⁴ = 81 and 4⁴ = 256. Since 81 < 200 < 256, ⁴√200 lies between 3 and 4. Answering 14 and 15 comes from taking a square root instead of a fourth root: √200 ≈ 14.14, which does lie between 14 and 15, but that is not the root the question asks for. Answering 5 and 6 comes from taking a cube root instead of a fourth root: ∛200 ≈ 5.85, which lies between 5 and 6. Answering 4 and 5 comes from working 4⁴ as though it were 4 × 4 × 4 = 64 and stopping a factor short, then concluding that 200 is already past 4⁴ and the root must be above 4.
- (b) 0.83333... — Divide 5 by 6 using long division. 5.000... ÷ 6: 50 ÷ 6 = 8 remainder 2, giving the first decimal digit 8. Bring down a 0 to make 20, and 20 ÷ 6 = 3 remainder 2 — the remainder 2 has reappeared, so from here the digit 3 repeats forever. This gives 5/6 = 0.83333... . Stopping after two decimal places and writing 0.83 treats the division as if it terminated, when the remainder never reaches zero. Shifting the decimal point one place too far to the left gives 0.083333..., the same digits divided by an extra power of ten. A slip in the long division itself, misreading a remainder, can produce the wrong repeating digit, 0.85555... .
- (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) 400 — Method: round each number to the nearest 100, then subtract the rounded values. Working: 812 rounds to 800 (nearest 100) and 397 rounds to 400 (nearest 100). 800 − 400 = 400. Answer: 400. 500 comes from rounding 397 down to 300 instead of up to the nearest 100, 400. 300 comes from rounding 812 down to 700 instead of up to the nearest 100, 800. 415 is the exact value of 812 − 397, found without rounding first, so it is not an estimate — the spreadsheet's answer of 315 is too far from the estimate of 400 to be correct.
- (d) x⁴ — Method: dividing two powers of the same letter subtracts the index of the divisor from the index of the term being divided. Working: six factors of x on the top and two on the bottom cancel in pairs, leaving 6 − 2 = 4 factors of x. Answer: x⁴. The distractors: x³ comes from dividing the indices, 6 ÷ 2, instead of subtracting them; x⁸ comes from adding the indices, 6 + 2, as though the powers were being multiplied; x¹² comes from multiplying the indices, 6 × 2, as though a power were being raised to a power.
- (d) 6 × 10⁷ — Method: the coefficients and the powers of ten are handled separately — multiply the coefficients, and add the indices because the powers share the base 10. Working: 2 × 3 = 6 for the coefficients, and 10³ × 10⁴ = 10⁷ for the powers; 6 lies between 1 and 10, so the coefficient needs no adjustment. Answer: 6 × 10⁷. The distractors: 5 × 10⁷ comes from adding the coefficients, 2 + 3, instead of multiplying them; 6 × 10¹² comes from multiplying the indices, 3 × 4, instead of adding them; 6 × 10¹ comes from subtracting the indices, 4 − 3, which is the rule for dividing rather than for multiplying.
- (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.
- (d) 24 — Method: the three parts of the deal are chosen independently, so every sandwich can be taken with every snack and every one of those pairs with every drink; the product rule multiplies the number of choices in each part. Working: there are 4 choices of sandwich and each can be taken with any of the 3 snacks, giving 4 × 3 = 12 sandwich-and-snack pairs; each of those pairs can be completed with either of the 2 drinks, so the number of meal deals is 12 × 2 = 24. Answer: 24. The distractors: 9 comes from adding the choices, 4 + 3 + 2, instead of multiplying them, and a candidate who adds writes that total down as the count; 12 comes from multiplying the sandwiches by the snacks and never bringing the drink into the count at all; 27 comes from adding the items on the menu to get 9 and then multiplying that by the 3 parts of the deal, which counts the menu rather than the combinations.
- (c) An under-estimate, by 8 — Method: work out the exact product, then compare it with the estimate; an estimate that is smaller than the exact value is an under-estimate, and the difference between them is the size of the error. Working: 48 × 21 = 48 × 20 + 48 = 960 + 48 = 1,008, and 1,008 − 1,000 = 8, so the estimate falls short. Answer: an under-estimate, by 8. The distractors: an over-estimate by 8 has the size of the error right but the direction wrong, and comes from assuming that rounding 48 up to 50 must push the estimate above the exact value, without allowing for 21 being rounded down; an over-estimate by 19 comes from working out 48 × 21 as 48 × 20 + 21 = 981, adding a 21 where another 48 belongs; the claim that the estimate is exactly right comes from arguing that one number was rounded up and the other down, so the two changes must cancel.
- (a) 0.1666... — Method: a fraction bar means divide, so the decimal is found by dividing the numerator by the denominator; when a remainder comes back unchanged the division never ends, the digit it produces repeats for ever, and the exact value has to be written with that recurring digit rather than a rounded one. Working: 1 ÷ 6 is set out as 1.000 ÷ 6; six does not go into 1, and six goes into 10 tenths once with 4 left over, so the first decimal digit is 1; the 4 left over makes 40 hundredths, and six goes into 40 six times with 4 left over again; that same remainder of 4 returns at every step, so the digit 6 repeats without end. Answer: 0.1666... The distractors: 0.16 comes from carrying the division out to two decimal places and stopping there, as though the decimal terminated; 0.17 comes from rounding the division to two decimal places, which gives a value close to one sixth but not equal to it; 0.6 comes from writing the digit of the denominator straight after the decimal point, as though 1/6 meant six tenths.
- (a) 2/3 — Total parts = 6 + 4 + 5 = 15. Sopranos and altos together are not tenors: 6 + 4 = 10 parts, so the fraction is 10/15, which simplifies to 2/3. 1/3 comes from finding the fraction of tenors instead of the fraction that is not tenors. 2/5 comes from counting only the sopranos as not tenors and leaving the altos out. 4/9 comes from leaving sopranos out of the total, 4 + 5 = 9, and then using only the altos as the fraction that is not tenors.
- (c) Exactly 1: the subtraction has no rounding at any step. — 10x − x removes the recurring part completely, because the digits after the decimal point in 10x and in x are identical from the tenths place onward, so they cancel exactly: 9.999... − 0.999... = 9.000... = 9. Nothing was rounded to reach 9x = 9, so x = 1 is an exact equality, not an approximation, and the statement that the value is exactly 1, with no rounding at any step, is the correct one. Calling it only approximately 1, on the ground that a recurring decimal can never reach a whole number, misunderstands what the subtraction has just shown: the recurring tail cancels completely, leaving no gap to approximate away. Claiming the method only works because the recurring digit is 9 is also wrong — the same subtraction cancels the recurring part for any repeating digit, not just 9; it is the choice of multiplier (10, matching the one-digit repeat) that makes the cancellation exact, not the digit itself. Saying 10x minus x gives 8.999... rather than 9 misreads the subtraction: 9.999... − 0.999... has no digit to borrow from, since every decimal digit in the two numbers matches, so the result is exactly 9, not 8.999... .
- (b) 2⁵ — Method: a power outside brackets multiplies the index of every factor inside them, and dividing powers of the same base subtracts their indices. Working: (5² × 2³)³ = 5⁶ × 2⁹ and (5³ × 2²)² = 5⁶ × 2⁴. Dividing gives 5⁶⁻⁶ × 2⁹⁻⁴, and since 5⁰ = 1 the whole expression reduces to 2⁵. Answer: 2⁵. The distractors: 2² comes from adding the outside index to each inside index instead of multiplying, which gives 5⁵ × 2⁶ over 5⁵ × 2⁴; 2¹³ comes from adding the indices of 2 when dividing, 9 + 4, instead of subtracting them; 2 comes from applying the outside power to the first factor inside each bracket only, leaving 5⁶ × 2³ over 5⁶ × 2².
- (a) to the nearest centimetre — Method: the error interval of a rounded measurement runs from half a unit below the stated value to half a unit above it, so the width of the interval is one whole unit of the accuracy used. Working: the interval runs from 24.5 to 25.5, a width of 25.5 − 24.5 = 1, so the unit of accuracy is 1 cm; the stated value is the midpoint, 25 cm, and 25 correct to the nearest centimetre is exactly what gives 24.5 ≤ L < 25.5. Answer: to the nearest centimetre. To the nearest 0.5 cm comes from reading the half-unit, 0.5, as the accuracy itself instead of doubling it back to the full unit. To 1 decimal place comes from seeing the bounds written with one decimal place and taking that as the accuracy, but the bounds of a value given to 1 decimal place would be only 0.05 either side. To the nearest 10 cm comes from confusing the size of the value, about 25, with the unit it was rounded to; rounding to the nearest 10 cm would give an interval 5 cm either side of the stated value.
- (c) 11 — Method: work out the total number of combinations as if there were no restriction, then subtract the one combination that is not allowed. Working: without any restriction there are 4 backdrops × 3 outfits = 12 combinations. The grey backdrop with the formal suit is not allowed, removing 1 combination: 12 − 1 = 11. Answer: 11. 12 comes from forgetting to remove the combination that is not allowed. 8 comes from removing the entire formal suit outfit from the count instead of just the one combination with the grey backdrop. 10 comes from removing two combinations instead of just the one that is not allowed.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.