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
- (d) 4/3 — Method: the product of two negative numbers is positive, so work with 2/5 × 10/3 and then simplify. Multiply the numerators together and the denominators together. Working: 2 × 10 = 20 and 5 × 3 = 15, giving 20/15; both 20 and 15 divide by 5, so 20/15 = 4/3. Answer: 4/3. The distractors: −4/3 has the arithmetic right but keeps a minus sign, from treating negative × negative as negative; 3/25 comes from turning the second fraction upside down and multiplying, which divides instead of multiplying and gives 2/5 × 3/10 = 6/50; −56/15 comes from adding the two fractions instead of multiplying them, giving −6/15 − 50/15.
- (c) 0.001 — Method: a negative index means 'one over' the positive power, so $10^{-3}$ means one over $10^{3}$. Working: ten cubed is 1000, and one over 1000 is 0.001. 1000 comes from ignoring the negative sign and working out ten cubed instead of its reciprocal. −1000 comes from ignoring what the negative index does to the size, while still writing a negative sign on the large value. −0.001 comes from correctly finding the size, 0.001, but wrongly keeping a negative sign because the index was negative. Answer: 0.001.
- (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.
- (a) 4,000 nanometres — Method: the number of nanometres is the diameter divided by the length of one nanometre, and dividing powers of ten means subtracting the indices. Working: −6 − (−9) = 3, so 10⁻⁶ ÷ 10⁻⁹ = 10³, and the diameter is 4 × 10³ nanometres. Answer: 4,000 nanometres. The distractors: 400 nanometres comes from taking the difference between the indices as 2 instead of 3; 4 nanometres comes from changing the name of the unit without converting, leaving the coefficient untouched; 0.004 nanometres comes from dividing by 10³ instead of multiplying by it, as though a nanometre were the larger of the two units.
- (d) 11 mm — Method: for a square, the side length is the square root of the area. Working: 11 × 11 = 121, so the side length is 11 mm. 60.5 mm comes from working out 121 ÷ 2 = 60.5, halving the area instead of finding its square root. 242 mm comes from working out 121 × 2 = 242, doubling the area instead of finding its square root. 22 mm comes from working out 11 × 2 = 22, doubling the correct side length. Answer: 11 mm.
- (a) 1/2, 3/5, 2/3, 5/6 — Convert all four fractions to a common denominator of 30: 2/3 is 20/30, 3/5 is 18/30, 5/6 is 25/30, and 1/2 is 15/30. Ordering by these numerators, smallest to largest, gives 15/30, 18/30, 20/30, 25/30, which is 1/2, 3/5, 2/3, 5/6. Ordering by the size of the numerator in the original fractions, 1, 2, 3, 5, rather than converting to a common denominator, gives the wrong order 1/2, 2/3, 3/5, 5/6, because it ignores that the denominators are different. Ordering largest to smallest instead of smallest to largest, as the question asks, gives 5/6, 2/3, 3/5, 1/2. Using the rule "the bigger the denominator, the smaller the fraction" to place the last two, so that 5/6 is put below 2/3 because 6 is bigger than 3, gives 1/2, 3/5, 5/6, 2/3 — that rule only holds when the numerators are the same, and here 20/30 really is smaller than 25/30. So the correct order, smallest to largest, is 1/2, 3/5, 2/3, 5/6.
- (d) 3√5 — Split 45 into a perfect square times a factor: 45 = 9 × 5. Take the square root of each part separately: √45 = √9 × √5 = 3√5, since √9 = 3. Writing the perfect-square factor itself (9) as the coefficient instead of its root would give 9√5 — that trap comes from forgetting the last step, rooting 9. Multiplying 3 and 5 together instead of keeping them as coefficient and radicand gives 15, which throws away the surd entirely. Doubling the correct coefficient by mistake gives 6√5.
- (a) 12 — Compare the powers of each prime that appears in both factorisations. In 2² × 3² and 2² × 3 × 7, the prime 2 appears with power 2 in both, and the prime 3 appears with power 2 in one and only power 1 in the other — take the lower power, 3¹. Multiplying the shared primes at their lower powers, 2² × 3, gives 12. Using power 1 for both primes instead of comparing the powers properly, 2 × 3, gives 6, which misses that 2 is common at power 2, not power 1. Multiplying the primes at their higher powers and including 7, which only appears in 84, gives 2² × 3² × 7, which comes to 252 — this is the lowest common multiple, not the highest common factor. Only spotting that 3 is a common prime and overlooking that 2 is common as well gives 3. So the highest common factor of 36 and 84 is 12.
- (d) 17 — Without the restriction there would be 5 × 4 = 20 combinations. The dragon piece can only be paired with the gold token, so of the 4 tokens, 3 are not allowed with the dragon piece, giving 20 − 3 = 17 valid combinations. 20 comes from ignoring the restriction completely. 19 comes from subtracting only 1 of the 3 invalid dragon combinations instead of all 3, 20 − 1 = 19. 16 comes from multiplying only the 4 non-dragon pieces by the 4 tokens, 4 × 4 = 16, and forgetting to add back the one valid combination of the dragon piece with the gold token.
- (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.
- (c) 43 — Method: work out each power separately before adding. Working: 3³ = 27 and 2⁴ = 16, so 3³ + 2⁴ = 27 + 16 = 43. Answer: 43. (25 comes from using 3² instead of 3³, giving 9 + 16. 35 comes from working out 2⁴ as 2 × 4 = 8 instead of 2 × 2 × 2 × 2, giving 27 + 8. 432 comes from multiplying the two powers together instead of adding them.)
- (b) 2/5 — The statement compares girls with boys, so girls : boys = 2 : 3. The club is therefore 2 + 3 = 5 equal shares and the girls take 2 of them, so 2/5 of the members are girls. 2/3 repeats the part-to-part fraction the question gives, 3/5 is the fraction that are boys, and 1/3 comes from treating 2/3 as a fraction of the whole club and taking what is left.
- (b) −18 — Method: the multiplication is carried out before the addition, and a negative multiplied by a positive is negative. Working: (−4) × 3 = −12, so the calculation becomes (−6) + (−12) = −18. Answer: −18. The distractors: −30 comes from adding first and multiplying afterwards, giving (−6 + −4) × 3 = −10 × 3 = −30; 6 comes from treating (−4) × 3 as +12 on the grounds that a minus sign makes a product positive, giving −6 + 12 = 6; 18 comes from ignoring both minus signs and working out 6 + 4 × 3 = 18.
- (c) £384.00 — Adding 20% VAT means multiplying the price by 1.2: £320 × 1.2 = £384.00. Treating the 20% as a flat £20 rather than a percentage of the price, £320 + £20, gives £340.00. Working out the VAT amount alone, £320 × 0.2 = £64.00, and stopping there without adding it back to the original price gives just the VAT, not the total price. Misplacing the decimal point and using 2% instead of 20%, £320 × 1.02, gives £326.40.
- (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... .
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.