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
- (c) 3 : 5 — If orange juice is 3/8 of the total, apple juice is the remaining 1 − 3/8 = 5/8. The ratio of orange to apple is therefore 3 : 5. Inverting gives 5 : 3, apple to orange instead of orange to apple. Using the denominator 8 as the second part of the ratio, 3 : 8, compares orange juice to the whole drink rather than to the apple juice alone. Pairing the total 8 with the apple fraction's numerator 5 gives 8 : 5, which mixes a whole-total figure with a part figure.
- (a) 1000m — Method: kilograms are a smaller unit than tonnes, so change tonnes into kilograms by multiplying by 1000. Working: m tonnes = m × 1000 kg = 1000m kg. So the expression is 1000m. Distractor m/1000 comes from dividing by 1000 instead of multiplying, which would make the number of kilograms smaller than the number of tonnes, the wrong way round. Distractor 1000 + m comes from adding the conversion factor instead of multiplying by it. Distractor m − 1000 comes from subtracting the conversion factor instead of multiplying by it.
- (d) £3.60 per component — The gradient of a cost-against-components graph has units of pounds per component, since cost is measured in pounds and the horizontal axis counts components. So 3.60 means it costs an extra £3.60 to produce one more component at that point. Calling it '£3.60 total cost' confuses the gradient, a rate, with the y-value on the graph, which is the total cost itself. Giving it as 3.60 components per pound swaps which axis is on top, giving the units of the reciprocal gradient, not the gradient itself. Turning 3.60 into a percentage invents a unit that has no basis in the graph's axes — a gradient here is a number of pounds, not a percentage. Always build the gradient's units from the two axes' own units, in the order y-axis over x-axis.
- (b) 9 m/s — The gradient of line P is 21 ÷ 3 = 7, so P has a rate of 7 m/s. The gradient of line Q is 45 ÷ 5 = 9, so Q has a rate of 9 m/s. Because 9 is greater than 7, line Q is the steeper line, with gradient 9 m/s. Taking line P's gradient instead of Q's gives 7 m/s, the less steep line. Subtracting the two lines' coordinates directly, (45 − 21) ÷ (5 − 3) = 24 ÷ 2 = 12 m/s, mixes points from different lines rather than using one line's own two points. Adding the two gradients, 7 + 9 = 16 m/s, treats 'steeper' as a total rather than a comparison.
- (c) 250 miles — Find the distance travelled in 1 hour: 150 ÷ 3 = 50 miles. Multiply by 5 hours: 50 × 5 = 250 miles. Giving 300 miles doubles the original distance (150 × 2 = 300) using a scale factor of 2 instead of the correct 5 ÷ 3. Giving 200 miles adds only one extra hour's distance, 50, instead of the two extra hours actually needed (150 + 50 = 200, rather than 150 + 100). Giving 90 miles divides by the scale factor instead of multiplying (150 × 3 ÷ 5 = 90).
- (d) 4:1 — Write the ratio online : in-store using the numbers in the question: 180 : 45. Divide both parts by their highest common factor, 45, to give 4 : 1. (1:4 comes from writing the ratio the wrong way round, in-store : online. 3:1 comes from subtracting the in-store orders from the online orders, 180 − 45 = 135, and comparing that to the in-store orders, 135:45, instead of dividing. 4:5 comes from comparing the online orders to the total number of orders, 180:225.)
- (b) 7.2 m — Multiply the model wingspan by the scale factor: 15 × 48 = 720. This is in centimetres, and 720 cm = 7.2 m, since 1 m = 100 cm. Giving 0.31 m divides by the scale factor instead of multiplying (15 ÷ 48 ≈ 0.31), scaling the model down rather than the real aircraft up. Giving 72 m converts centimetres to metres by dividing by 10 instead of 100. Giving 0.72 m converts by dividing by 1000 instead of 100.
- (a) 18 — Method: write both numbers with the same multiplier, turn the second ratio into an equation by cross-multiplying, solve for the multiplier and then build A from it. Working: let A = 3k and B = 5k, so 3k : (5k + 6) = 1 : 2; cross-multiplying gives 2 × 3k = 5k + 6, so 6k = 5k + 6 and k = 6; A = 3 × 6 = 18. Answer: 18, and the check works, because B = 30, B + 6 = 36 and 18:36 = 1:2. The distractors: 9 comes from reading the 6 as the difference between the two numbers — 5 − 3 = 2 parts, so one part is 3 and A is 3 × 3 — but the 6 is added to B, it is not the gap between A and B; 6 comes from solving A : (A + 6) = 1 : 2, adding the 6 to A instead of to B; 30 is the value of B, found from the correct multiplier but given in place of A.
- (a) 2/3 — Put the laptop bag's mass over the school bag's mass: 2.4/3.6. Multiply both numbers by 10 to clear the decimals: 24/36. Divide both by their highest common factor, 12: 24÷12 = 2, 36÷12 = 3, giving 2/3. (3/2 comes from writing the masses the wrong way round. 1/3 comes from finding the difference in the masses, 3.6 − 2.4 = 1.2 kg, and writing it as a fraction of the school bag's mass, 1.2/3.6. 2/5 comes from comparing the laptop bag's mass to the total mass of both bags, 2.4/6.)
- (d) 4:5 — Write the ratio pounds : dollars as 1 : 1.25. Multiply both parts by 4 to clear the decimal: 1 × 4 = 4 and 1.25 × 4 = 5, giving 4 : 5. (5:4 comes from writing the ratio the wrong way round, dollars to pounds. 1:1 comes from rounding 1.25 dollars down to the nearest whole dollar. 1:5 comes from multiplying only the dollars by 4 to clear the decimal and leaving the pounds as 1 — both parts of a ratio must be multiplied by the same number.)
- (c) 3 — Method: for a tangent written in the form y = mx + c, the coefficient m is the gradient of the line, and the gradient of the tangent at its point of contact equals the curve's instantaneous rate of change there. Working: y = 3x − 2 has gradient 3, so the instantaneous rate of change of y with respect to x at x = 4 is 3. Reading the constant term as the rate instead of the coefficient of x gives −2, but −2 is only where the tangent crosses the y-axis, not a rate. Reading the x-coordinate of the point of contact as the rate gives 4, but 4 only tells you where on the curve the tangent touches, not how fast y is changing there. Substituting x = 4 into the tangent equation, 3 × 4 − 2 = 10, gives the y-coordinate of the point of contact, not the rate; a candidate who works out the height of the point instead of the gradient gives 10. Whenever a tangent is given as an equation, the rate of change is always the coefficient of x — do not let the constant term, the x-value or a substituted y-value stand in for it.
- (a) 2 — Since y is inversely proportional to x², y = k/x². Using x = 2, y = 8: 2² = 4, so 8 = k ÷ 4, giving k = 8 × 4 = 32. The equation is y = 32/x². When x = 4: 4² = 16, so y = 32 ÷ 16 = 2. Treating the relationship as inversely proportional to x itself, rather than to x², gives k = 8 × 2 = 16 and then y = 16 ÷ 4 = 4, a different relationship. Using x instead of x² in the new calculation gives y = 32 ÷ 4 = 8, skipping the square. Multiplying by x² instead of dividing by it gives y = 32 × 16 = 512, the wrong operation for an inverse relationship. When x = 4, y = 2.
- (d) 7/5 — The number of unbroken crayons is 60 − 25 = 35. The comparison is with the broken crayons, so the broken crayons are the denominator: 35/25. Both parts divide by 5: 35 ÷ 5 = 7 and 25 ÷ 5 = 5. The fraction is 7/5, which is greater than 1 because there are more unbroken crayons than broken ones.
- (d) 500 ml — Varnish covers a surface, so the amount needed scales with the area scale factor, which is the square of the length scale factor. The length scale factor is 50 ÷ 20 = 2.5, so the area scale factor is 2.5 × 2.5 = 6.25. The varnish needed for the larger statue is 80 × 6.25 = 500 ml. Using 2.5 on its own would scale a length, not a surface.
- (a) £7.80 — Rate of pay = total pay ÷ number of hours. £58.50 ÷ 7.5 = £7.80 per hour. £438.75 comes from multiplying the pay by the hours instead of dividing (£58.50 × 7.5). £0.13 comes from dividing the hours by the pay instead of the pay by the hours (7.5 ÷ 58.50). £51.00 comes from subtracting the hours from the pay (£58.50 − 7.5) instead of dividing.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.