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
Answer key: Number worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (b) 3²⁰ is larger — Method: two powers with different bases and different indices can be compared once they are rewritten with a common index, which is possible whenever the indices share a factor. Working: 30 and 20 have a highest common factor of 10, so 2³⁰ = (2³)¹⁰ = 8¹⁰ and 3²⁰ = (3²)¹⁰ = 9¹⁰. Both are now tenth powers, and since 9 is larger than 8, 9¹⁰ is larger than 8¹⁰. Answer: 3²⁰ is larger. The distractors: 2³⁰ is larger comes from comparing only the indices and choosing the power with the bigger index; They are equal comes from multiplying base by index, 2 × 30 and 3 × 20, and finding 60 each time; They cannot be compared without a calculator comes from assuming that powers this large can only be ranked by evaluating them in full.
- (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) 12 — Method: round the number of pupils to the nearest 10, divide by the number of passengers each minibus can carry, then round up because a part-full minibus still needs a whole vehicle. Working: 179 rounds to 180 (nearest 10); 180 ÷ 16 = 11.25; 11 minibuses only carry 176 passengers, so a 12th minibus is needed for the rest. Answer: 12. 11 comes from rounding 11.25 to the nearest whole number in the usual way, without checking that the leftover pupils still need transporting. 10 comes from rounding 179 down to 170 instead of to the nearest 10, 180. 180 comes from stopping after rounding the number of pupils, without dividing by the number of passengers each minibus carries at all.
- (b) 24√2 — The side length of the tile is √72. Since 72 = 36 × 2, √72 = √36 × √2 = 6√2 cm. A square has four equal sides, so the perimeter is 4 × 6√2 = 24√2 cm. Simplifying √72 by writing the perfect-square factor itself as the coefficient instead of its root, 36√2 instead of 6√2, and then multiplying by 4 lands on 144√2. Working out the correct side length, 6√2 cm, but then giving that as the final answer without multiplying by 4 for the perimeter gives 6√2. Doubling the side length instead of quadrupling it, as if the perimeter were 2 × 6√2 rather than 4 × 6√2, gives 12√2.
- (b) 5/27 — Method: multiply the numerators together and the denominators together, then simplify. Working: (5 × 2)/(6 × 9) = 10/54 = 5/27. Answer: 5/27. 7/15 comes from adding the fractions instead of multiplying: (5+2)/(6+9) = 7/15. 15/4 comes from flipping the second fraction, as if dividing: (5 × 9)/(6 × 2) = 45/12 = 15/4. 5/3 comes from cancelling the two denominators against each other, dividing both 6 and 9 by 3 to leave 5/2 × 2/3 = 10/6 = 5/3; cancelling is only valid between a numerator and a denominator, never between two denominators.
- (a) 30 cm — The tile's side length must be a common factor of 90 and 120. The factors of 90 include 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 15, 18, 30, 45, 90; the factors of 120 include 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 40, 60, 120. The highest number common to both lists is 30, so the largest square tile has a side length of 30 cm. Picking 15 cm, a common factor but not the largest, gives tiles that are smaller than necessary. Picking 10 cm, also a common factor but smaller still, wastes even more of the possible tile size. Working out the lowest common multiple instead of the highest common factor gives 360 cm, a length far bigger than either side of the patio. So the largest square tile Ben can use has a side length of 30 cm.
- (b) 3/5 — Method: add all three parts for the total, add together the parts that are not green, then write this over the total. Working: total parts = 4 + 5 + 6 = 15. Not green = 4 + 5 = 9. Fraction = 9/15 = 3/5. Answer: 3/5. 2/5 comes from finding the fraction that IS green (6/15 = 2/5) instead of not green. 4/15 comes from only counting the red baubles as 'not green' and forgetting the gold ones. 9/10 comes from adding only two of the three ratio parts to find the total (4+6=10), missing out the gold part, while still using 9 for the numerator.
- (a) 0.0069 — Leading zeros are not significant, so the significant figures in 0.006852 start at 6: 6, 8, 5, 2. Rounding to 2 significant figures means keeping 6 and 8, and looking at the next digit, 5, to decide whether to round up. Since 5 rounds up, the second significant figure increases from 8 to 9: 0.006852 rounds to 0.0069. A candidate who rounded to 1 significant figure instead of 2 wrote 0.007. A candidate who rounded to 3 significant figures instead of 2 wrote 0.00685. A candidate who did not round up despite the next digit being 5 wrote 0.0068.
- (a) 10 — √49 = 7 and ∛27 = 3, so √49 + ∛27 = 7 + 3 = 10. Treating the cube root as dividing by 3 instead of finding the cube root gives 27 ÷ 3 = 9, then 7 + 9 = 16. Multiplying the two roots instead of adding them gives 7 × 3 = 21. Ignoring the cube root symbol and using 27 as it stands gives 7 + 27 = 34.
- (b) 5² — Method: multiplying two powers of the same base adds their indices, and a negative index is added as a negative number. Working: −2 + 4 = 2, so 5⁻² × 5⁴ = 5². Answer: 5². The distractors: 5⁶ comes from adding the sizes of the indices, 2 + 4, and ignoring the minus sign; 5⁻⁸ comes from multiplying the indices, −2 × 4, instead of adding them; 5⁻⁶ comes from subtracting the indices, −2 − 4, as though the powers were being divided.
- (b) 54 — Method: round each number to the nearest whole number, then subtract the rounded values. Working: 79.3 rounds to 79 (nearest whole number) and 24.6 rounds to 25 (nearest whole number). 79 − 25 = 54. Answer: 54. 54.7 is the exact value of 79.3 − 24.6, found without rounding first, so it is not an estimate. 55 comes from rounding 24.6 down to 24 instead of up to the nearest whole number, 25, giving 79 − 24. 59 comes from rounding 24.6 to the nearest 10, 20, instead of to the nearest whole number, 25, giving 79 − 20.
- (a) 3/5 — The question compares the rock albums directly with the pop albums, so write the rock part over the pop part: 3/5. 5/3 comes from writing the ratio the wrong way round, comparing pop with rock instead of rock with pop. 3/8 comes from comparing the rock albums with the total number of albums, 3 + 5 = 8, instead of with the pop albums. 5/8 comes from comparing the pop albums with the total number of albums instead of the rock albums with the pop albums.
- (a) 1/2 — To find a fraction of an amount, multiply the fractions together: 3/5 × 5/6 = 15/30, which simplifies to 1/2 litre. Adding the fractions instead of multiplying them, using a common denominator of 30, gives 18/30 + 25/30 = 43/30, a value greater than the whole bottle. Dividing by 5/6 instead of multiplying by it, using its reciprocal 6/5, gives 3/5 × 6/5 = 18/25. Multiplying 5/6 by itself instead of by 3/5 gives 25/36.
- (d) 3/10 — Total parts = 7 + 3 = 10. Gold beads are 3 of those 10 parts, so the fraction is 3/10. 7/10 comes from finding the fraction of red beads instead of gold beads. 7/3 comes from writing the ratio itself as a fraction, without adding the parts to find the total. 3/7 comes from comparing gold beads with red beads instead of with the total number of beads.
- (b) No — their possible jump lengths do not overlap — Method: each recorded jump stands for the lengths within half of 0.1 m, that is 0.05 m, of the figure recorded, and Priya is right only if the two ranges overlap. Working: Priya's jump is at least 3.8 − 0.05 = 3.75 m and below 3.85 m, because a jump of 3.85 m would have been recorded as 3.9 m; Nadia's jump is at least 3.85 m and below 3.9 + 0.05 = 3.95 m. Every length Priya could have jumped is below 3.85 m and every length Nadia could have jumped is at least 3.85 m, so Nadia jumped further whatever the exact lengths were. Answer: No — their possible jump lengths do not overlap. The distractors: the reason that a recorded jump is exactly the length jumped reaches the same verdict by treating a rounded record as exact, which is the idea this question tests; both jumps being 3.85 m would put 3.85 m inside Priya's range, when a jump of that length is recorded as 3.9 m; Priya jumping up to 3.9 m goes a whole 0.1 m above her record instead of half of it.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.