Examiners’ Report/

Principal Examiner Feedback

January 2016

Pearson Edexcel International GCSE

Paper 01R
Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications

Edexcel and BTEC qualifications are awarded by Pearson, the UK’s largest awarding body.
We provide a wide range of qualifications including academic, vocational, occupational and
specific programmes for employers. For further information visit our qualifications
websites at www.edexcel.com or www.btec.co.uk. Alternatively, you can get in touch with
us using the details on our contact us page at www.edexcel.com/contactus.

Pearson: helping people progress, everywhere

Pearson aspires to be the world’s leading learning company. Our aim is to help everyone
progress in their lives through education. We believe in every kind of learning, for all kinds
of people, wherever they are in the world. We’ve been involved in education for over 150
years, and by working across 70 countries, in 100 languages, we have built an
international reputation for our commitment to high standards and raising achievement
through innovation in education. Find out more about how we can help you and your
students at: www.pearson.com/uk

January 2016
Publications Code UG043272
All the material in this publication is copyright
© Pearson Education Ltd 2016
Grade Boundaries

Grade boundaries for this, and all other papers, can be found on the website on this
link:
http://www.edexcel.com/iwantto/Pages/grade-boundaries.aspx
Introduction to Paper 01R

In general, this paper was well answered by the overwhelming majority of students. Some parts
of questions did prove to be quite challenging to a few students and centres would be well
advised to focus some time on these areas when preparing for a future examination.

In particular, to enhance performance, centres should focus their student’s attention on the
following topics:

 Reasons in geometric problems

 Probability equations (without replacement)

 Defining regions by inequalities

 Using the length of vectors which are perpendicular to each other

 Variation

 Ratios of areas of similar figures to find a volume

 Correctly using volume formulae of standard three dimensional shapes

 Using mid-class values to aid in finding an estimate of the mean of a grouped frequency
distribution

In general, students should be encouraged to identify the number of marks available for each part of a question
and allocate a proportionate amount of time to each part of the question. In addition, students should also be
advised to read the demands of the question very carefully before attempting to answer.

It should be pointed out that the methods identified within this report and on the mark scheme may not be the
only legitimate methods for correctly solving the questions. Alternative methods, whilst not explicitly
identified, earn the equivalent marks. Some students use methods which are beyond the scope of the syllabus
and, where used correctly, the corresponding marks are given.

Report on Individual Questions

Question 1
The vast majority of students knew how to find a common multiple from the numbers given. Only half of this
majority, however, knew how to find the Lowest Common Multiple (LCM) and 15120 proved to be a popular,
but erroneous answer. Only a handful of students confused Lowest Common Multiple with Highest Common
Factor (HCF) and an answer of 12 was therefore only infrequently seen.

Question 2
Just over half of all students scored full marks on this question. The majority of errors seemed to be in giving
the answer to part (a) as either 0.061 or 0.062

Question 3
Students would have found it helpful to draw diagrams here to help to understand what was required. Many
students seemed to be confused between the given diameters and the requirement to find the sum, or differences,
between radii. As a consequence, answers of 14 cm and 38 cm proved to be popular, but erroneous answers.
Only one-fifth of all responses scored full marks for this question.
Question 4
The vast majority of students were able to find at least one factor (usually 2 or x), from the given expression.
Recognising the difference of two squares proved problematic for many resulting in just over half of all students
scoring full marks.

Question 5
Finding the number of lines of symmetry or the order of rotational symmetry from a given diagram continues
to be a challenge to many, and only about half of all students were successful here.

Question 6
13.60
Half of all students correctly identified that they needed to evaluate 100 to successfully arrive at the
85
required solution. Of those who didn’t, incorrect expressions of the form 13.60 1.15 or 13.60  0.85 were
frequently seen earning no marks at all.

Question 7
Many students correctly handled the fractional indices in this question and much correct working was seen with
seven-tenths of all responses achieving full marks. Of those who failed to score here, many evaluated a 2  a 2
1 1

1
as a 4 .

Question 8
Despite a seemingly innocuous column vector question, much incorrect working was seen in this question.
Indeed, many students did not seem to know that they simply needed to add the three vectors given for part (a)
and either left the question blank or simply manipulated the first and last of the vectors, ignoring the second
vector. In part (b) the negation of the student’s answer to part (a) earned a follow through mark but a common
 234 
error seen was inverting the values from their part (a) and   proved to be a popular, but incorrect answer.
 112 
Less than a third of students scored full marks on this question.

Question 9
Despite the odd arithmetical slip, the vast majority of students scored well on this question with three-quarters
of responses scoring full marks.

Question 10
The odd sign slip made by some students in expanding the numerator meant that such responses only achieved
the first mark. Of those that did evaluate the numerator correctly, a significant number failed to see any further
4 xy  12 x 2
simplification from the expression and consequently the final mark was lost.
y  3x

Question 11
The vast majority of students seemed to have been well drilled in the technique of writing an answer in standard
form, and this question was very well answered with over three-quarters of responses scoring full marks.

Question 12
Again, a well answered question with nearly eight-tenths of students scoring full marks. A very small number
of students ignored the requirements of the question and gave their answer as a range rather than a list. This
earned, at best, one mark only.
Question 13
Almost all students scored at least one mark on this question, this was invariably for part (a). Part (b), however,
proved to be more problematic for over half of all students as many did not seem to recognise that they needed
an equation in y which involved combining two probability fractions (without replacement) and equating to the
given fraction. As a consequence, there were many blank responses for this part of the question.

Question 14
Despite six-tenths of students getting this question fully correct, most of those who were unsuccessful treated
the numbers on the Venn diagram as elements of each subset, rather than the number of elements in each subset.
Consequently, answers of 4, 3 and 2 proved to be popular, but erroneous, answers.

Question 15
Whilst there were a significant number of students who wrote down statements with the inequality sign the
wrong way round, the most common error here was writing down one inequality as y  0 . Just under half of
all students scored full marks on this question.

Question 16
Nearly six-tenths of students scored full marks on this question. However, a significant number of students,
whilst able to divide the prize winnings in the given ratio, were unable to provide the correct values when given
the distribution by the winner to the other two prize winners.

Question 17
An large majority of students scored full marks on this question on surds, showing that centres had drilled their
students well on this topic.

Question 18
The vast majority of students scored well on part (a) of this question and many correct answers of 4a  2b
were seen. Part (b), however, proved to be more of a challenge as many students failed to connect the property
that the two vectors were perpendicular to each other and therefore, given their lengths, Pythagoras was
required. Many incorrect methods of the form 4  6  2  5 or 4  6  2  5 were seen which meant that the
marks for this part of the question were lost.

Question 19
This was a question that generally earned either full marks or no marks for students. The majority of students
who scored no marks simply gave the wrong equation, often using y  kx3 . This type of question occurs
frequently on papers and centres should focus their students’ attention on the correct processes. Just under two-
thirds of responses scored full marks on this question.

Question 20
Students taking this paper have invariably been good at algebraic manipulation, and the responses to this
question confirmed this with nearly two-thirds of responses scoring full marks on this change of subject
question.

Question 21
Students were evenly split with their ability to answer this question on similar solids. About half knew what
9 13.5
was required and scored full marks whilst the remainder scored no marks at all. Methods such as 
16 x
 3
 16 
or 13.5    were incorrect methods and earned no marks. Centres would be well advised to drill their
9
students in the basic process of similar solids for future examinations.

Question 22
A third of students either did not know how to begin this question or misquoted formulae for the area of a
hemisphere and/or the area of a cone. Successfully quoting one of the required formulae did enable a significant
number of students to achieve the first method mark but equating two correct formulae proved to be more
challenging. Once a solution of 2r had been found from two correct equations, the final hurdle preventing
students getting full marks was the failure to add the radius of the hemisphere (r) to the height of the cone (2r)
to arrive at the required answer of 3r. About one-sixth of responses achieved full marks for this question.

Question 23
About one-third of students did not seem to realise that they needed to equate the coefficients of the respective
components from the terms of the two sides of the equation, and consequently earned no marks at all for this
question. Once this had been realised by the remaining students, the vast majority went on to score full marks.

Question 24
Students taking this paper are usually well-drilled in the processes of algebraic manipulation and the responses
to this question showed that this was the case here. Nearly two thirds of responses scored full marks on this
question. Indeed, except for those few students who left the question blank or did not know how to remove
denominators, the remaining students who did not score full marks invariably made an arithmetical slip in
obtaining the trinomial quadratic.

Question 25
Rather than using mid-class values for the calculation of the estimate of the mean, a significant number of
students used the class width when determining fx and consequently lost the first three marks. Fortunately,
the marks for the completion of the histogram in part (b) was independent of part (a) and some students were
able to recover some marks here. Overall, this question was not done as well as expected, with only four-tenths
of responses achieving full marks.

Question 26
This question proved to be quite challenging for the almost half of all students. Many either did not begin, made
incorrect assumptions about the diagram or left (or misquoted) valid reasons. Not realising that the lengths of
the two tangents from outside the circle are equal in length was the main initial error – often with DAT  80
seen. Presumably, as triangle DAT looked like an isosceles triangle, with DA = DT, then this justified to the
student that this was the case. Clearly the notation Diagram NOT accurately drawn was ignored. Centres need
to focus their students’ attention on correct geometrical properties rather than assumptions from a drawn
diagram. Significantly, less than one-tenth of responses scored full marks on this question.

Question 27
The vast majority of students were able to use ratios correctly and find the size of the smallest angle in part (a).
Parts (b) and (c) proved to be more challenging; correct formulae were often quoted but with incorrect values
substituted and so marks were lost. As a consequence, only about four-tenths of responses scored full marks
on this question.

Question 28
The vast majority of students were able to make a good attempt at differentiating the cubic function. However,
about two-tenths of candidates either left a blank response or made an elementary mistake with their
differentiation and scored no more than one mark on the question. Of the remaining students, most realised that
they had to equate their trinomial quadratic to 1 but many of these stopped after they had found x  1 thus
losing the last mark. This question was a good discriminator, and one-quarter of responses achieved full marks
on this question.
Pearson Education Limited. Registered company number 872828
with its registered office at 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL