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.
Answer key: Number worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 4.1 × 10³, 3.2 × 10⁴, 2.9 × 10⁵ — The exponent decides the size first: 10³ is smaller than 10⁴, which is smaller than 10⁵, so the order is 4.1 × 10³, then 3.2 × 10⁴, then 2.9 × 10⁵. Reversing the whole list gives largest to smallest instead of smallest to largest. Comparing 3.2 × 10⁴ and 4.1 × 10³ by their coefficients alone, 3.2 against 4.1, and swapping them ignores that 10⁴ is bigger than 10³ regardless of the coefficient. Comparing 2.9 × 10⁵ and 3.2 × 10⁴ by their coefficients alone and swapping them makes the same mistake at the top of the list.
- (b) 5 — Method: find the square root first, then divide. Working: √225 = 15, and 15 ÷ 3 = 5. Answer: 5. (75 comes from dividing 225 by 3 first and forgetting to take the square root at all. 8.7 comes from dividing 225 by 3 inside the root, √(225 ÷ 3) ≈ 8.7, instead of taking the root first. 45 comes from misreading the divisor as 5 instead of 3, working out 225 ÷ 5 = 45.)
- (d) 64 — Method: each time the power increases by 1, the value doubles, since one more 2 is multiplied in. Working: 2⁶ = 2⁵ × 2 = 32 × 2 = 64. Answer: 64. (37 comes from adding the power to the value, 32 + 5, instead of multiplying by the base. 192 comes from multiplying 32 by the new power, 6, instead of by the base, 2. 34 comes from adding the base to the value, 32 + 2, instead of multiplying.)
- (a) 8 × 10² — Method: to multiply numbers written in standard form, multiply the coefficients and add the indices. Working: 4 × 2 = 8 for the coefficients, and −3 + 5 = 2 for the indices; 8 already lies between 1 and 10, so no adjustment is needed. Answer: 8 × 10². The distractors: 6 × 10² comes from adding the coefficients, 4 + 2, instead of multiplying them; 8 × 10⁸ comes from ignoring the minus sign and adding 3 + 5; 8 × 10⁻¹⁵ comes from multiplying the indices, −3 × 5, instead of adding them.
- (a) 33.2 — The radius was rounded to 1 decimal place, so its error interval is 3.15 ≤ r < 3.25. The upper bound for the area uses the upper bound of the radius, squared: area = π × 3.25² ≈ 33.183, which rounds to 33.2 m² (3 s.f.). Using the given value of the radius directly instead of its upper bound, π × 3.2² ≈ 32.2, ignores that the radius itself has a range of possible values. Bounding the radius correctly but forgetting to square it, using area = π × 3.25 ≈ 10.2 instead of π × 3.25², drops the whole squaring step from the area formula. Using the LOWER bound of the radius instead of the upper one, π × 3.15² ≈ 31.2, finds the lower bound of the area, not the upper one.
- (a) 1,850 — Method: find the error interval, then check which value falls outside it. Working: half of 100 is 50, so the actual number of visitors, v, satisfies 1,750 ≤ v < 1,850. 1,850 sits exactly on the excluded upper boundary, since a value of 1,850 would round to 1,900, not 1,800. Answer: 1,850. (1,750 is a genuine possible value — it sits at the included lower boundary. 1,799 is a genuine possible value, just below the upper boundary. 1,760 is a genuine possible value, well inside the interval.)
- (a) 8.15 ≤ y < 8.25 — Rounding to 1 decimal place means the error interval spans half of 0.1, so 0.05, either side of 8.2: 8.2 − 0.05 = 8.15 and 8.2 + 0.05 = 8.25. The lower bound uses ≤ because 8.15 itself rounds to 8.2, but the upper bound uses < because 8.25 would round up to 8.3. So the error interval is 8.15 ≤ y < 8.25. A candidate who used the wrong rounding band gave 8.1 ≤ y < 8.2. A candidate who used a strict inequality at both ends wrote 8.15 < y < 8.25, wrongly excluding 8.15 itself. A candidate who added the full 0.1 instead of half of it wrote 8.2 ≤ y < 8.3.
- (c) 3:4 — The jacket costs 3/7 of £84, which is 3 × (84 ÷ 7) = 3 × 12 = £36. The bag then costs the rest of the money, £84 − £36 = £48. The ratio of the jacket to the bag is 36:48, which simplifies to 3:4. Writing the fraction spent on the jacket, 3/7, directly as the ratio, without working out that the bag's share is the remaining 4/7, gives 3:7. Giving the ratio the wrong way round, bag to jacket instead of jacket to bag, gives 4:3. Assuming the jacket and bag cost the same, ignoring the fraction given, gives 1:1.
- (c) 24 — Method: round each number to the nearest whole number, then multiply the rounded values. Working: 6.4 rounds to 6 (nearest whole number) and 3.9 rounds to 4 (nearest whole number). 6 × 4 = 24. Answer: 24. 18 comes from rounding 3.9 down to 3 instead of up to the nearest whole number, 4, giving 6 × 3. 28 comes from rounding 6.4 up to 7 instead of down to the nearest whole number, 6, giving 7 × 4. 25 is the exact value of 6.4 × 3.9, which is 24.96, rounded to the nearest whole number after multiplying, rather than estimated by rounding first.
- (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... .
- (a) 17 — Method: work out each power separately, then combine them as the question asks. Working: $2^3 = 8$ and $3^2 = 9$, and 8 + 9 = 17. 72 comes from working out 8 × 9 = 72, multiplying the two powers instead of adding them. 12 comes from misreading the powers as repeated multiplication of the base by the index, 2 × 3 + 3 × 2 = 6 + 6 = 12. −1 comes from working out 8 − 9 = −1, subtracting the powers instead of adding them. Answer: 17.
- (a) 36 — Method: find the lowest common multiple of 6 and 9, then move up the list of common multiples until one is greater than 20. Working: the common multiples of 6 and 9 are 18, 36, 54 …. 18 is not greater than 20, so the next one, 36, is the smallest value of n that is greater than 20. 18 is the lowest common multiple itself, but it fails the 'greater than 20' condition. 54 is the common multiple after 36, one step too far. 27 is a multiple of 9 but not of 6, since 27 ÷ 6 is not a whole number. Answer: 36.
- (c) 3/11 — Method: let a letter stand for the recurring decimal, multiply by the power of ten that shifts exactly one repeating block past the point, subtract the original equation so that the recurring tail cancels, then solve and cancel. Working: let x = 0.272727...; the repeating block is two digits long, so multiply by 100 to give 100x = 27.272727...; subtracting gives 99x = 27, so x = 27/99; the highest common factor of 27 and 99 is 9, and 27 ÷ 9 = 3 with 99 ÷ 9 = 11. Answer: 3/11. The distractors: 27/100 comes from writing the repeating block over 100 instead of over 99, forgetting that subtracting x leaves 99x rather than 100x; 3/10 comes from rounding the decimal to one place and converting 0.3; 2/9 comes from treating only the 2 as recurring and converting 0.222... instead.
- (b) 0.58333... — Divide 7 by 12 using long division. 70 ÷ 12 = 5 remainder 10, so the first decimal digit is 5. Bring down a 0 to make 100: 100 ÷ 12 = 8 remainder 4, so the second digit is 8. Bring down a 0 to make 40: 40 ÷ 12 = 3 remainder 4, so the third digit is 3. Bring down a 0 to make 40 again — the remainder 4 has reappeared, so the digit 3 repeats forever from here. This gives 7/12 = 0.58333... . Stopping the division after two digits and writing 0.58 treats it as if it terminated, when the remainder is not yet zero. Misreading the pattern as a two-digit repeating block, '58', gives 0.585858..., which wrongly makes the 5 recur as well as the 3. A slip in the long division that carries the wrong remainder forward can make the second digit itself appear to repeat instead of the third, giving 0.588888... .
- (a) 2 × 3² × 5 — Method: divide repeatedly by the smallest prime number until only prime factors remain. Working: 90 ÷ 2 = 45, 45 ÷ 3 = 15, 15 ÷ 3 = 5, and 5 is prime, so 90 = 2 × 3 × 3 × 5, written as 2 × 3² × 5. 2 × 3 × 15 stops before the 15 is broken down into 3 × 5, so it is not fully factorised. 3 × 3 × 10 stops before the 10 is broken down into 2 × 5. 2 × 45 stops after only one division. Answer: 2 × 3² × 5.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.