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) 1/2 — The ratio 1:2:3 has 1 + 2 + 3 = 6 parts in total. Amir and Bo together receive 1 + 2 = 3 of those parts, so together they receive 3/6 of the £60, which simplifies to 1/2. Using only Amir's single part, 1/6, ignores Bo's share entirely. Adding Bo's and Chen's parts instead of Amir's and Bo's, 2 + 3 = 5, gives 5/6. Comparing Amir and Bo's 3 parts to Chen's 3 parts, rather than to the total of 6 parts, gives 3/3 = 1.
- (c) 7 + 4√3 — Expand the brackets fully: (2 + √3)² = 2² + 2 × 2 × √3 + (√3)² = 4 + 4√3 + 3. Adding the two whole-number terms, 4 + 3 = 7, gives 7 + 4√3. Using (a + b)² = a² + b² and skipping the middle cross term entirely gives just 4 + 3 = 7, with no surd term at all. Treating (√3)² as if it stayed √3 rather than becoming 3, then merging it with the existing surd term, gives 4 + 5√3. Squaring only the surd term correctly but carrying the whole-number term as 2 instead of squaring it to 4 gives 2 + 3 + 4√3 = 5 + 4√3.
- (d) £33.00 — The profit is 3/8 of £24 = (£24 ÷ 8) × 3 = £3 × 3 = £9.00. Selling price = £24 + £9.00 = £33.00. A candidate who gives the profit instead of the selling price gets £9.00. A candidate who subtracts the profit instead of adding it gets £24 − £9 = £15.00. A candidate who works out one eighth of £24 and adds that on, forgetting to multiply by the numerator 3, gets £24 + £3 = £27.00.
- (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.)
- (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... .
- (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) Yes, because 14.8 cm rounds to 15 cm to the nearest cm — Method: a recorded measurement is not an exact length; it stands for every length that rounds to it, so the two records agree if one rod can produce both. Working: Ben's record of 14.8 cm to the nearest 0.1 cm means the rod is between 14.75 cm and 14.85 cm, and 14.8 is nearer to 15 than to 14, so a rod of that length is recorded as 15 cm to the nearest centimetre. Both records can therefore come from the same rod. Answer: Yes, because 14.8 cm rounds to 15 cm to the nearest cm. The distractors: the claim that 14.8 cm rounds to 15.0 cm to 1 decimal place is false, since 14.8 cm is already written to 1 decimal place and stays 14.8 cm; the claim that it rounds to 14 cm is false, because 14.8 is 0.2 away from 15 and 0.8 away from 14; the claim that the two lengths are not the same treats each record as an exact length, when each is only a rounded record of one rod.
- (c) 0.0065 — Leading zeros are never significant, so counting from the first non-zero digit, the first two significant figures of 0.006482 are 6 and 4. Look at the next digit along, 8, to decide whether the second figure rounds up: since 8 is 5 or more, the 4 rounds up to 5, giving 0.0065. Rounding to 2 decimal places instead of 2 significant figures gives 0.01, which answers a different question. Wrongly counting one of the leading zeros as a significant figure and stopping one figure short gives 0.006. Keeping an extra digit, as in 0.00648, gives 3 significant figures rather than 2.
- (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) 5 — Method: work out the volume of one box, divide the total volume by it, then round down since a partial box cannot fit. Working: volume of one box = 7³ = 343 cm³. 2000 ÷ 343 = 5.83 (2 d.p.). Since only whole boxes fit, the greatest number is 5. Answer: 5. (6 comes from rounding 5.83 up to the nearest whole number instead of rounding down to the number of boxes that actually fit. 343 comes from giving the volume of one box instead of the number of boxes. 5.8 comes from leaving the division as a decimal instead of rounding down to a whole number of boxes.)
- (c) 2/5 — To find a fraction of a fraction, multiply them together: 3/5 × 2/3 = 6/15, which simplifies to 2/5. Multiplying only the numerators, 3 × 2 = 6, but adding the denominators, 5 + 3 = 8, instead of multiplying them gives 6/8, which simplifies to 3/4. Using only the fraction who study French, 3/5, and ignoring that a further fraction of them also study Spanish gives 3/5. Dividing by 2/3 instead of multiplying by it, using its reciprocal 3/2, gives 3/5 × 3/2 = 9/10.
- (d) 16π cm² — Method: for a circle, area = π × radius². Working: area = π × 4² = π × 16 = 16π cm². Answer: 16π cm². The student squared the radius but left out the π, which is why 16 cm² is not the exact area. 4π cm² comes from multiplying by the radius once instead of squaring it: π × 4 = 4π. 8π cm² comes from using the circumference formula 2 × π × radius instead of the area formula: 2 × π × 4 = 8π. 64π cm² comes from using the diameter (8 cm) as the radius in the area formula: π × 8² = 64π.
- (b) 93.9975 — Each measurement was rounded to 1 decimal place, so the error is half of 0.1: length is 12.35 ≤ L < 12.45, and width is 7.45 ≤ W < 7.55. The upper bound for the area comes from multiplying the upper bounds of both dimensions: 12.45 × 7.55 = 93.9975 m². Using the lower bound of both dimensions instead, 12.35 × 7.45 = 92.0075 m², gives the lower bound of the area rather than the upper one. Multiplying the two given rounded values directly, 12.4 × 7.5 = 93, forgets that a rounded measurement is not exact and needs its own error interval. Bounding only the length and leaving the width at its given value, 12.45 × 7.5 = 93.375, misses that the width also has an upper bound of its own.
- (a) 4 + √6 — Multiply top and bottom by the conjugate, 4 + √6. The denominator becomes (4 − √6)(4 + √6) = 4² − (√6)² = 16 − 6 = 10. The numerator becomes 10 × (4 + √6) = 40 + 10√6. So the fraction is (40 + 10√6)/10 = 4 + √6, since both terms in the numerator divide by 10. Distributing the conjugate to only the whole-number term of the numerator, and forgetting the surd term entirely, leaves just 4. Rationalising by multiplying the numerator by the conjugate but leaving the ORIGINAL denominator's sign unchanged instead of squaring it lands on 4 − √6, with the surd's sign never actually flipping to positive. Dividing only the whole-number part of the numerator by 10 and forgetting to divide the surd term too leaves 4 + 10√6.
- (b) £300 — The increased price is 110% of the original, so the original price = £330 ÷ 1.1 = £300. A candidate who finds 10% of £330 and subtracts it, wrongly treating £330 as the original, gets £330 − £33 = £297. A candidate who adds 10% of £330 again instead of reversing the increase gets £330 + £33 = £363. A candidate who divides by 0.1 instead of 1.1 gets £3,300.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.