Printable · GCSE Higher · ages 14-16
Ratio, proportion and rates of change worksheet — GCSE Higher
Fifteen questions across the ratio, proportion and rates of change 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: Ratio, proportion and rates of change worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (a) 0.62 miles — The gradient of the line is the change in miles divided by the change in kilometres: 31 ÷ 50 = 0.62, so 1 kilometre converts to 0.62 miles. Dividing the wrong way round, 50 ÷ 31 = 1.612..., rounds to 1.61 miles — that finds how many kilometres are in 1 mile, not the reverse. Doubling the gradient, 1.24 miles, comes from using 62 ÷ 50 instead of 31 ÷ 50. Reading off the y-coordinate of the given point without dividing by the x-coordinate gives 31.00 miles, which is the number of miles for 50 kilometres, not for 1 kilometre.
- (a) 4:3 — Multiply both parts by the lowest common denominator, 6: (2/3) × 6 = 4 and (1/2) × 6 = 3, giving the ratio 4 : 3, which is already in simplest form.
- (a) 100 — The difference between the parts of the ratio is 7 − 3 = 4 parts, and this is worth 40 beads. Divide to find one part: 40 ÷ 4 = 10. The total number of parts is 7 + 3 = 10, so the total number of beads is 10 × 10 = 100. (40 is just the given difference between gold and silver, not the total. 70 is the number of gold beads only, using 7 parts. 30 is the number of silver beads only, using 3 parts.)
- (b) 1:1.6 — To write 5 : 8 in the form 1 : n, divide both parts by 5, the first number, so that it becomes 1: 5 ÷ 5 = 1 and 8 ÷ 5 = 1.6, giving 1 : 1.6. Dividing both parts by 8 instead gives 0.6 : 1 (5 ÷ 8 = 0.625, rounded to 0.6) — the first part is no longer 1, so this is not in the required form. Dividing 5 by 8 but writing the result after the 1 gives 1 : 0.6, which divides in the wrong direction: n must come from 8 ÷ 5, not 5 ÷ 8. A slip in the division 8 ÷ 5, rounding it to 1.5 instead of the correct 1.6, gives 1 : 1.5.
- (b) 12 days — This is inverse proportion: fewer painters take longer. Multiply the original numbers to find the total painter-days needed: 8 × 6 = 48 painter-days. Divide by the new number of painters: 48 ÷ 4 = 12 days. Working out 6 × 4 ÷ 8 = 3 days treats it as direct proportion, as if fewer painters needed less time. Stopping at 48 gives the total painter-days, not the number of days. Working out 6 + (8 − 4) = 10 days adds the change in the number of painters straight onto the number of days, treating painters and days as the same kind of quantity. 4 painters take 12 days.
- (b) 250 g — Method: adding water changes the total mass but not the mass of salt, so find the salt, hold it fixed, use the new ratio to find the new total mass and subtract the mass already in the beaker. Working: 12:100 = x:500 gives 12 ÷ 100 × 500 = 60 g of salt; that 60 g must be 8% of the new mixture, so 8:100 = 60:y gives y = 60 ÷ 8 × 100 = 750 g; the water added is 750 − 500 = 250 g. Answer: 250 g. The distractors: 750 g is the mass of the diluted solution, given without taking away the 500 g that was in the beaker to start with; 60 g is the mass of salt, the quantity that stays the same, given instead of the mass of water; 20 g comes from treating the fall from 12% to 8% as 4% of the original 500 g, which measures a change in concentration as though it were a mass of water.
- (a) It's an average over 20 days, which may miss the day-5 rate. — Method: a chord's gradient is the AVERAGE rate of change across the whole interval it spans; it only closely approximates the INSTANTANEOUS rate of change at a point inside that interval when the rate of change is roughly constant across the interval, which usually means the interval needs to be short. Working: here the chord spans 20 days while the point of interest, t = 5, is only a quarter of the way along it, so if the reservoir's level rose or fell at different rates over that time, the chord's gradient will not be close to the true gradient of the curve at t = 5 — this is the correct reason. Claiming the chord's gradient needs the water level at every day in between is wrong: a chord's gradient needs only the two endpoint values, at t = 0 and t = 20. Claiming a chord can only estimate the rate at its own endpoints is wrong: a chord between two points can be used to estimate the instantaneous rate of change at any point inside the interval, including one that is not an endpoint — that is exactly the technique being used here, and it is the SIZE of the interval that makes the estimate poor, not the fact that t = 5 is an interior point. Claiming the units do not match is wrong: the chord's gradient and the instantaneous rate of change are both measured in metres per day, so the units are the same. A chord is only a good estimate of an instantaneous rate when the interval it spans is short enough that the rate does not change much within it — always check how long the interval is compared with how far it is to the point you actually want.
- (c) 3 : 2 — Method: 'A is k times B' means that if B is taken as 1 part then A is k parts, and a ratio in its simplest form is written with whole numbers that have no common factor. Working: taking B as 1, A is 1.5, so A : B = 1.5 : 1; multiplying both parts by 2 clears the decimal and gives 3 : 2, and 3 and 2 share no factor. Answer: 3 : 2. The distractors: 2 : 3 comes from writing B before A, reversing the order the question asks for; 1.5 : 1 is the right relationship but is not in its simplest form, because a ratio in its simplest form uses whole numbers; 3 : 5 comes from comparing A with the combined length rather than with B, since A : (A + B) = 1.5 : 2.5 = 3 : 5.
- (d) d ÷ t — Average speed = distance ÷ time, so the expression is d ÷ t. Writing t ÷ d inverts the formula, giving the time per kilometre instead of the speed. Writing d × t confuses speed with the formula for distance travelled (distance = speed × time) used the wrong way round. Writing d + t treats the relationship as additive instead of using division.
- (d) £5.40 — Method: work out the reduced price at each shop separately, then subtract the smaller from the larger. Working: Shop A's reduced price is £45 × 0.8 = £36, and Shop B's reduced price is £34 × 0.9 = £30.60, so the difference is £36 − £30.60 = £5.40. Answer: £5.40. £11.00 comes from comparing the two ORIGINAL prices, £45 − £34, without applying either shop's reduction at all. £1.60 comes from finding Shop A's reduced price correctly, £36, but then subtracting Shop B's original (unreduced) price of £34 instead of its reduced price. £66.60 comes from adding the two reduced prices together, £36 + £30.60, instead of subtracting them.
- (d) 1.5 — Method: the length scale factor is the square root of the area scale factor, not the area scale factor itself. Working: the area scale factor is 45 ÷ 20 = 2.25, and the square root of 2.25 is 1.5. Answer: 1.5. Nadia's answer, 2.25, is the AREA scale factor — she never took the square root to get back to the length scale factor. 4.5 comes from doubling the area scale factor instead of taking its square root. 0.67 comes from taking the square root in the wrong direction, finding the scale factor from the larger rug to the smaller rug instead of the other way round.
- (c) Falling at £950 per year — The gradient of a tangent on a value-age graph is a rate, in pounds per year, so −950 means the van's value is falling at £950 per year at that instant. Writing this as 950% per year mistakes a rate measured in pounds per year for a percentage — the units of a gradient come from the units on the two axes, £ and years, not from a percentage. Saying the value 'falls by £950 over the next year' treats the instantaneous rate at age 2 as if it stayed constant for a whole year, which finds an average future change, not the instantaneous rate at age 2 itself. Reading the sign the wrong way round gives 'rising at £950 per year', which would mean the van is gaining value. Always match the units of a gradient to the units on the two axes of the graph.
- (c) Yes, correct, because 24 ÷ 8 × 3 = 9. — Method: divide the count you know by its ratio part to find the value of one part, then multiply by the part you want. Working: one part = 24 ÷ 8 = 3 counters, so green = 3 × 3 = 9 counters, and the student is correct. Dividing 24 by 3 instead of 8 gives 24 ÷ 3 × 8 = 64, the ratio parts the wrong way round. Stopping after 24 ÷ 8 = 3 gives 3, forgetting to multiply by the green ratio part. Adding 24 + 3 = 27 confuses adding a ratio part with scaling by it.
- (d) 48 — Find the rate first: 18 ÷ 3 = 6 bottles per minute. Then apply it to the new time: 6 × 8 = 48 bottles. Working out 18 + (8 − 3) = 23 adds the extra 5 minutes onto the number of bottles instead of scaling proportionally. Working out 18 × 8 = 144 multiplies the given number of bottles by the new number of minutes without finding the rate first. Writing 18 keeps the count the same, not realising it must change with the time. In 8 minutes the machine fills 48 bottles.
- (b) 2/5 — Method: a fraction taken 'of the total' has the whole batch as its denominator, so add the two masses first and then write the butter over that total. Working: the total mass is 450 g + 300 g = 750 g, so the fraction is 300/750; the highest common factor of 300 and 750 is 150, and 300 ÷ 150 = 2 while 750 ÷ 150 = 5. Answer: 2/5 of the batch. The distractors: 2/3 comes from comparing the butter with the flour, 300/450, a part-to-part fraction when the question asks for a part compared with the whole; 3/5 comes from writing the flour over the total, 450/750, which answers about the wrong ingredient; 3/2 comes from writing the flour over the butter, 450/300, which both uses the wrong denominator and reverses the order.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.