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
- (a) 24 — Method: rearrange the relationship so that the lowest common multiple stands alone; it is the product of the two numbers divided by their highest common factor. Working: 48 = 2 × the lowest common multiple, so the lowest common multiple is 48 ÷ 2 = 24. Checking, 24 is in the 6 times table and in the 8 times table. Answer: 24. The distractors: 48 comes from giving the product of the two numbers and never dividing by the highest common factor; 96 comes from multiplying by the highest common factor instead of dividing by it; 12 comes from dividing by the highest common factor twice, once for each of the two numbers.
- (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.
- (c) £0.45 — Method: find the total cost, then subtract from £20. Working: 4 × £3.20 = £12.80. £12.80 + £6.75 = £19.55. Change = £20.00 − £19.55 = £0.45. Answer: £0.45. (£7.20 comes from forgetting to include the compost and subtracting only the plants' cost from £20. £1.45 comes from dropping the carry when adding the pence: 80p + 75p = £1.55, but only the 55p is written down, giving £18.55 instead of £19.55. £10.05 comes from buying only one plant instead of four, using £3.20 + £6.75.)
- (d) £143 — From 09:15 to 12:45 is 3 hours 30 minutes, which is 3.5 hours. The charge for the time is 3.5 × £28 = £98, and the call-out fee is added on once: £98 + £45 = £143. £98 leaves out the call-out fee altogether, £129 charges for 3 hours instead of 3.5 hours, and £255.50 adds the fee to the hourly rate before multiplying, which charges the £45 for every hour.
- (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.
- (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... .
- (d) −1.4, −6/5, 0, 5/4, 1.3 — Method: convert the fractions 5/4 and −6/5 to decimals so every number is written the same way, then compare all five decimals. Working: 5/4 = 1.25 and −6/5 = −1.2. Comparing −1.4, −1.2, 0, 1.25 and 1.3 in size gives the order −1.4, −1.2, 0, 1.25, 1.3. Answer: −1.4, −6/5, 0, 5/4, 1.3. −6/5, −1.4, 0, 5/4, 1.3 swaps the two negative numbers, treating −6/5 as more negative than −1.4 even though −1.2 is closer to zero than −1.4. 1.3, 5/4, 0, −6/5, −1.4 lists the numbers from largest to smallest instead of smallest to largest. −1.4, −6/5, 0, 1.3, 5/4 swaps 5/4 and 1.3, comparing the numerator 5 directly with 1.3 instead of converting 5/4 to the decimal 1.25 first.
- (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) 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.
- (d) 1/16 — Method: a negative index means the reciprocal of the power, so 2⁻⁴ is 1 divided by 2⁴. Working: 2⁴ = 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 = 16, so the value is 1/16. Answer: 1/16. The distractors: −16 comes from reading the negative index as a minus sign on the result; 16 comes from ignoring the minus sign and working out 2⁴; 1/8 comes from multiplying the base by the index, 2 × 4, and writing 1 over that product.
- (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.
- (b) 14.5 ≤ l < 15.5 — A measurement given to the nearest metre could have been rounded from anywhere up to half a metre below or above it: 15 − 0.5 = 14.5 and 15 + 0.5 = 15.5. Every value from 14.5 up to (but not reaching) 15.5 rounds to 15, so the error interval is 14.5 ≤ l < 15.5, with the lower bound included and the upper bound excluded. Making both ends strict, 14.5 < l < 15.5, wrongly excludes 14.5 itself, even though 14.5 does round to 15. Making both ends inclusive, 14.5 ≤ l ≤ 15.5, wrongly includes 15.5, which actually rounds up to 16, not 15. Using a whole metre either side instead of half a metre, giving 14 ≤ l < 16, comes from forgetting that the error is only half the rounding unit.
- (c) 3 — Method: the index counts how many times the coefficient has been multiplied by 10, which is the number of places the decimal point moves from the end of the number to just after the first significant digit. Working: 2,000 = 2 × 1,000, and 1,000 = 10 × 10 × 10, which is three tens. Answer: 3. The distractors: 4 comes from counting the four digits of 2,000 rather than the three places the decimal point moves; 2 comes from copying the coefficient 2 into the index; −3 comes from making the index negative, which would describe a number smaller than 1 rather than two thousand.
- (a) 20 — Method: round each number to 1 significant figure, then divide the rounded values. Working: 588 rounds to 600 (1 s.f.) and 31 rounds to 30 (1 s.f.). 600 ÷ 30 = 20. Answer: 20. 17 comes from cutting 588 down to 500, keeping the leading digit as it stands instead of rounding it up to 1 significant figure, 600, then dividing by the correctly rounded 30. 200 comes from misreading the rounded divisor 30 as 3, giving 600 ÷ 3 instead of 600 ÷ 30. 19 is the exact value of 588 ÷ 31 rounded to the nearest whole number, found without rounding the numbers first.
- (b) £96.90 — Method: multiply the number of units by the cost per unit, then convert the result from pence to pounds. Working: 340 × 28.5p = 9690p; converting to pounds, 9690p ÷ 100 = £96.90. Answer: £96.90. £969.00 comes from misplacing the decimal point when converting pence to pounds, dividing by 10 instead of 100. £9.69 comes from misplacing the decimal point the other way, dividing by 1000 instead of 100. £102.00 comes from rounding the rate to 30p per unit before multiplying.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.