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
- (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.
- (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.)
- (b) Car A, 50 km/h — Method: speed = distance ÷ time for each car, then compare. Working: Car A = 150 ÷ 3 = 50 km/h. Car B = 180 ÷ 4 = 45 km/h. Since 50 > 45, Car A is faster, travelling at 50 km/h. Wrong options: Car B, 45 km/h correctly finds Car B's speed but wrongly names the slower car as faster; Car A, 45 km/h picks the correct car but uses Car B's speed by mistake; Car B, 50 km/h picks the wrong car but uses Car A's correct speed value.
- (c) £478.40 — Method: apply the percentage increase, then apply the percentage decrease to the new price. Working: after the increase, the laptop costs £520 × 1.15. Multiplying this result by 0.80 gives the final price, £478.40. Answer: £478.40. £494 comes from combining the two percentages into a single net change (15% − 20% = −5%) and applying it directly, £520 × 0.95 = £494, instead of applying the two changes one after the other. £416 comes from applying only the 20% decrease to the original price, £520 × 0.80 = £416, forgetting the increase entirely. £598 comes from applying only the 15% increase and stopping there, forgetting to apply the decrease at all.
- (d) 20 litres — The ratio of concentrate to water is 2 : 5, so water = concentrate × 5 ÷ 2. 8 × 5 ÷ 2 = 20, so Priya needs 20 litres of water. Giving 40 litres multiplies by 5 but forgets to divide by 2 (8 × 5 = 40). Giving 3.2 litres uses the ratio inverted, multiplying by 2 ÷ 5 instead of 5 ÷ 2 (8 × 2 ÷ 5 = 3.2). Giving 11 litres uses additive reasoning instead of multiplicative: it adds the difference between the ratio parts, 5 − 2 = 3, onto the amount of concentrate (8 + 3 = 11), but ratios scale by multiplying, not by adding a fixed amount.
- (b) 1500 m — Method: multiply the map length by the scale to get the real length in centimetres, then divide by 100 to change centimetres into metres. Working: 3 × 50 000 = 150 000 cm, and 150 000 ÷ 100 = 1500. Answer: 1500 m. The distractors: 15000 m comes from dividing the 150 000 cm by 10 instead of 100; 150 m comes from dividing by 1000, the conversion for kilometres; 50000 m comes from writing the scale itself as the answer and ignoring the 3 cm measured on the map.
- (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.
- (c) 9% — Method: a percentage concentration is the ratio of salt to solution written per 100 g, so scale each concentration to the mass it belongs to, add the two masses of salt, then scale the ratio of salt to mixture back to a denominator of 100. Working: 5:100 = x:400 gives 5 ÷ 100 × 400 = 20 g of salt, and 25:100 = y:100 gives 25 g of salt; the mixture holds 20 + 25 = 45 g of salt in 400 + 100 = 500 g of solution; 45:500 = 9:100. Answer: 9%. The distractors: 15% is the mean of 5% and 25%, which would only be right if the two masses were equal, and here one is four times the other; 21% comes from attaching the concentrations to the wrong masses, working out (400 × 25% + 100 × 5%) ÷ 500; 0.9% comes from working out 45 ÷ 500 = 0.09 and then moving the decimal point one place instead of two when writing the decimal as a percentage.
- (b) 1.5 km — Multiply the map length by the scale factor: 6 × 25000 = 150000 cm. Convert to kilometres, using 100 cm = 1 m and 1000 m = 1 km, so 100000 cm = 1 km: 150000 ÷ 100000 = 1.5 km. (1500 km comes from converting only as far as metres, 150000 ÷ 100 = 1500 m, and then writing kilometres on the end. 15 km comes from dividing by 10000 instead of 100000. 0.15 km comes from dividing by 1000000 instead of 100000.)
- (c) 2.5 — x : y = 2 : 5 means that for every matching pair of values, y ÷ x = 5 ÷ 2 = 2.5. So y = 2.5x, and comparing with y = kx gives k = 2.5. Dividing the other way round, 2 ÷ 5 = 0.4, gives x in terms of y — that is the constant for x = 0.4y, not for y = kx. Taking the y-part of the ratio on its own, 5, reads one number off the ratio instead of dividing the y-part by the x-part; 5 would only be right if the x-part were 1. Subtracting the two parts, 5 − 2 = 3, treats the ratio as a difference, but a ratio compares two quantities by multiplication, not by subtraction. The constant is k = 2.5.
- (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) £76.00 — One part of the ratio is £47.50 ÷ 5 = £9.50. The school receives 8 parts, so its share is 9.50 × 8 = £76.00. Dividing £47.50 by 8 instead of 5, treating the charity's amount as if it were 8 parts, gives 47.50 ÷ 8 = 5.9375, then × 5 = £29.69. Adding the charity's amount to the school's amount instead of stopping at the school's own share gives the total collected, 9.50 × 13 = £123.50. Adding one part to the charity's amount instead of multiplying one part by 8 gives 47.50 + 9.50 = £57.00.
- (c) 54 — Method: y = kx, so k = y ÷ x. Working: k = 18 ÷ 5 = 3.6. At x = 15: y = 3.6 × 15 = 54. Wrong options: 28 comes from adding the change in x (10) onto y instead of scaling; 6 comes from treating the relationship as inverse proportion (k = 5 × 18 = 90, then y = 90 ÷ 15 = 6); 60 comes from rounding the constant up to 4 instead of using 3.6.
- (a) 4 — Method: for inverse proportion, x × y always stays the same value. Working: when x = 5 and y = 8, the constant is 5 × 8 = 40. When x = 10, y = 40 ÷ 10 = 4. So y = 4. Distractor 16 comes from treating the relationship as direct proportion instead of inverse, working out 8 × 10 ÷ 5. Distractor 3 comes from assuming y decreases by the same amount that x increases, an additive rather than proportional idea. Distractor 0.8 comes from dividing the given y-value, 8, by the new x-value, 10, without first finding the constant.
- (a) 7 — The average rate of change of y with respect to x over an interval is the change in y divided by the change in x between its two endpoints — the gradient of the chord joining them, not a rate at a single point. At x = 1: 2 × 1 = 2, so y = 1 + 2 = 3. At x = 4: 2 × 4 = 8, so y = 16 + 8 = 24. The change in y is 24 − 3 = 21 and the change in x is 4 − 1 = 3, so the average rate of change is 21 ÷ 3 = 7. Reporting the change in y, 21, on its own is not a rate of change, because it has not been divided by the 3 units of x over which it happened. Reporting 3 is not a rate either — 3 is the width of the interval, and also the value of y at x = 1, and neither of those measures how fast y is changing. Subtracting in the wrong order gives −21 ÷ 3 = −7, the wrong sign. The average rate of change of y with respect to x over the interval is 7.
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.