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.
Answer key: Ratio, proportion and rates of change worksheet — GCSE Higher
MathsUKwww.geekhero.co.uk
- (c) 21% — Method: an increase of 10% is a multiplier of 1.1, and two successive increases are found by multiplying the multipliers. Working: 1.1 × 1.1 = 1.21, so the rent is 121% of the original, which is an increase of 21%. Answer: 21%. The distractors: 20% comes from adding the two percentages, which ignores that the second 10% is taken of a larger amount; 121% is the multiplier written as the change rather than the change itself; 11% comes from slipping in the multiplication and getting 1.11 instead of 1.21.
- (c) They are in direct proportion, because y ÷ x = 2.5 for both pairs. — Testing direct proportion means checking that y ÷ x is the same for every pair: 15 ÷ 6 = 2.5 and 25 ÷ 10 = 2.5, so the quantities are in direct proportion. Saying they are not in proportion because x + y differs uses addition, which is not the correct test for proportion. Saying they are not in proportion because y − x differs also uses the wrong test — subtraction, not division. Saying they are in proportion because x × y is 90 and 250 uses multiplication, which is the test for inverse proportion, and the two products are not even equal to each other, so this option also contradicts itself.
- (d) 4.7 km — Multiply the map length by the scale factor: 9.4 × 50 000 = 470 000 cm. Convert to kilometres: 470 000 cm = 4700 m = 4.7 km. Converting only to metres and calling the answer 4700 kilometres mistakes metres for kilometres. Misreading the scale as 1 : 5000 instead of 1 : 50 000, 9.4 × 5000 = 47 000 cm = 0.47 km, is ten times too small. Misplacing the decimal point in 9.4 and effectively using 94, 94 × 50 000 = 4 700 000 cm = 47 km, is ten times too big.
- (a) No — the cost per metre differs: £2.50/m vs £2.20/m — Method: divide cost by length for each pair and compare the unit rates. Working: £7.50 ÷ 3 = £2.50 per m; £11.00 ÷ 5 = £2.20 per m. The rates are different, so this is NOT direct proportion. Wrong options: 'Yes — both amounts increase' wrongly assumes any increasing relationship is proportional; 'No — because 5 m costs more in total' judges by total cost rather than the rate per metre, which is not valid reasoning on its own; 'Yes — the cost per metre is £2.50 in both cases' miscalculates the second rate (11.00 ÷ 5 is £2.20, not £2.50).
- (b) 1500 — The rate is 3 ÷ 2 = 1.5 litres per minute. Converting to cm³: 1.5 × 1000 = 1500 cm³ per minute. Getting 3000 comes from converting 3 litres to cm³ first (3000 cm³) and forgetting to divide by the 2 minutes. Getting 750 comes from dividing by the 2 minutes a second time after converting (1500 ÷ 2). Getting 2000 comes from converting the 2 minutes as if it were litres (2 × 1000) instead of using the correct rate of 1.5 litres per minute.
- (c) 4 — The gradient of a tangent at a point equals the instantaneous rate of change of y with respect to x at that point. A straight line's gradient is found from the change in y divided by the change in x between two points on it. Here the tangent passes through (1, 4) and (5, 20), so the change in y is 20 − 4 = 16 and the change in x is 5 − 1 = 4. The gradient is 16 ÷ 4 = 4. Stopping after finding the change in y, 16, without dividing it by the change in x, is not a gradient at all — that rise happened across 4 units of x, not 1. Adding the two changes instead of dividing one by the other gives 16 + 4 = 20, which is not how a gradient is found. Subtracting in the wrong order, (4 − 20) ÷ (5 − 1), gives −16 ÷ 4 = −4, the wrong sign. The instantaneous rate of change of y with respect to x at x = 3 is 4.
- (d) 90 cm — Method: scale each dimension by the scale factor, then find the perimeter. Working: model height = 240 ÷ 8 = 30 cm; model width = 120 ÷ 8 = 15 cm. Perimeter = 2 × (30 + 15) = 90 cm. Wrong options: 11.25 cm comes from squaring the scale factor as if finding an area (720 ÷ 64); 510 cm comes from scaling only one dimension and leaving the other at full size; 720 cm comes from finding the real perimeter (2 × (240 + 120)) but forgetting to scale it down at all.
- (d) 3 : 2 — Convert both amounts to pence: £3.60 = 360p and £2.40 = 240p, giving the ratio 360 : 240. Divide both parts by their highest common factor, 120, to get 3 : 2. Giving 360 : 240 has not been simplified at all. Giving 2 : 3 swaps the order. Giving 36 : 24 has been divided by 10, which is a common factor but not the highest one, so it is not yet in simplest form.
- (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) £32 — First find the gradient: (26 − 14) ÷ (50 − 20) = 12 ÷ 30 = £0.40 per minute. Using the point (20, 14), the charge for 65 minutes is 14 + 0.40 × (65 − 20) = 14 + 18 = £32. Choosing £26 comes from treating the charge as directly proportional to the time, multiplying the gradient by 65 minutes and ignoring the fixed part of the charge (0.40 × 65 = 26). Choosing £40 comes from treating £14 as if it were the charge at 0 minutes, then adding the gradient multiplied by the full 65 minutes (14 + 0.40 × 65 = 40), instead of multiplying by the extra time past 20 minutes. Choosing £33.80 comes from assuming the charge is directly proportional to the minutes already known, scaling up from the point (50, 26) in the ratio 65:50 (65 ÷ 50 × 26 = 33.80).
- (c) 1.25 cm — Method: find the real length using the first map's scale, then use the second map's scale to find its drawn length. Working: real length = 5 × 20 000 = 100 000 cm. On the second map: 100 000 ÷ 80 000 = 1.25 cm. Wrong options: 20 cm comes from inverting the ratio of the two scales (5 × 80 000 ÷ 20 000); 5 cm comes from wrongly assuming the length looks the same on both maps; 12.5 cm comes from dropping a zero from the second scale factor and dividing by 8 000 instead of 80 000 (100 000 ÷ 8 000).
- (c) Yes — 700 ÷ 7 = 100 ml for the 1 part of concentrate — Method: add the ratio parts to find the total number of parts, divide the total volume by this, then use the ratio to find concentrate's share. Working: 1 + 6 = 7 parts. 700 ÷ 7 = 100 ml per part. Concentrate = 1 part = 100 ml, so Freya is correct. Wrong options: 'divide 700 by 6' uses only one of the ratio numbers instead of the total of 7 parts, giving about 117 ml; '600 ml is concentrate' swaps which ratio number belongs to the concentrate and which belongs to the water; 'half of 700 ml should be concentrate' ignores the ratio altogether and assumes an equal split.
- (a) 8/5 — Scaling down from 8 people to 5 people uses the multiplier 5/8. To reverse this and scale back up from 5 people to 8 people, use the reciprocal of that multiplier: flip 5/8 to get 8/5. 5/8 comes from using the forward (scaling down) multiplier again, instead of reversing it. 3/5 comes from writing the difference in people (8 − 5 = 3) over 5, instead of using the reciprocal of 5/8. 25/64 comes from multiplying the forward multiplier by itself (5/8 × 5/8), instead of finding its reciprocal.
- (b) 12 — The difference between the parts of the ratio is 5 − 2 = 3 parts, and this is worth 18. Divide to find one part: 18 ÷ 3 = 6. Cats have 2 parts: 2 × 6 = 12. (30 is the number of dogs, using 5 parts instead of 2. 6 is the value of one part — the number of cats is 2 lots of this, not just one. 9 comes from dividing 18 by 2 and stopping there, instead of dividing by the difference in parts, 3, and then multiplying by 2.)
- (d) y = 3x/4 — y : x = 3 : 4 means y/x = 3/4. Rearranging to make y the subject gives y = (3/4)x = 3x/4. A student who mixes up which quantity goes on top gets y = 4x/3. A student who treats the ratio numbers as the coefficient and constant of a linear equation instead of a proportional relationship gets y = 3x + 4. A student who mistakes the relationship for inverse proportion gets y = 3/(4x).
Build your own mix at the worksheet builder.