Examiners’ Report

Principal Examiner Feedback

January 2020

Pearson Edexcel International GCSE

in Mathematics A (4MA1) Paper 1F
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

Grade Boundaries

Grade boundaries for all papers can be found on the website at:
https://qualifications.pearson.com/en/support/support-topics/results-certification/grade-
boundaries.html

January 2020
Publications Code 4MA1_1F_2001_ER
All the material in this publication is copyright
© Pearson Education Ltd 2020
IGCSE Mathematics 4MA1 1F January 2020 Principal Examiner’s Report

Students who were well prepared for this paper were able to make a good attempt at all
questions. It was encouraging to see some worthy attempts at topics new to this
specification. Students were less successful in using trigonometry, bearings and solving
linear equations.

On the whole, working was shown and easy to follow through. There were some instances
where students failed to read the question properly. For example, in question 18 students
regularly found 16/25 of 120 or did not work out the ratios correctly or mixed the boys
and girls up.

A striking weakness in students was the question on bearings, trigonometry and

transformations. On the whole, problem solving questions and questions assessing
mathematical reasoning were not tackled well in particular question 12 and 18.

Question 1

(a) This part was answered well. It was encouraging to see that the majority of students
wrote down Tanzania.

(b) This part was answered well. A common error by some students was to write 800 000

(c) This part was answered well. An answer of −2410 was accepted.

(d) This part was answered well. A common answer was to write ‘ten thousand hundred
and twenty’.

Question 2

(a) Majority of the students drew the bar to the correct height of 13. A common error by
some students was to draw the bar to 12. All students are encouraged to use a sharp pencil
and a ruler.

(b) This part was answered well. It was encouraging to see that the majority of students
wrote down Brazil.

(c) Many students answered this question well. The first mark allowed incorrect notation
29
such as 29 out of 113 or 29:113. Some students wrote down answers such as with k
k
n
> 29 or with n < 113 which were given the first mark. However, answers such as
113
29million 29000000
or were given full marks.
113million 113000000
Question 3

(a)(i) This was answered well. A common incorrect answer was m, metres or miles

(ii) This was answered well. A common incorrect answer was kg or kilometres.

(iii) This was answered well. A common incorrect answer was cm2, square centimetres
or a unit of length.

(b) Students generally answered this question well. Many students multiplied by 1 by
1000 and then divided by 30 and then left their answer as 33.3… or 34. Some students
lost the final mark for not rounding down. Some students did not know the conversion
from litres to millilitres as they were multiplying by 100. Most knew to divide by 30, so
a common answer was 3 from 100/30. Repeated addition was used often with 30ml to
reach 100ml. The alternative method of dividing 1 by 1000 and then using this answer to
divide into 1 was rarely seen.

Question 4

(a) Most students were able to continue the pattern correctly. A small number of students
lost the mark because they included an extra square on the bottom of the diagram or had
not drawn enough squares horizontally.

(b) The majority of questions were answered correctly for this part.

(c) Majority of the students answered this part well. Many students continued the
sequence by adding 2 although occasional arithmetic errors were made. Very few students
attempted to use the nth term or simply working out 31 × 2. Some students incorrectly
gave 72 as their solution thinking that the pattern number and the number of squares were
proportional eg some multiplied the fifth term by 6 to reach the 30th term.

(d) This part was a challenge to a large number of students. Many students simply wrote
down no and 2 needs to be added. Many wrote that the nth term was n + 2. Some who
attempted to explain a counter example were unable to do so convincingly. Even though
they could not see the correct formula, often a link was made to 2n meaning a sequence
going up in 2’s. A number of students who said yes, explained it by the series consisting
of even numbers.

Question 5

This question was done well. Most students were able to write down all the possible
combinations from the CEW and OMW. A common mistake by some students was to
write down the correct combinations and then continue writing out combinations in
different orders, e.g. (C, O) and (O, C)
Question 6

0.25
(a) This was answered well. Some students wrote
1
34
(b) Many students could write as a mixed number but it was not uncommon to see
10
17 4
3.4, or 3 , which gained 1 mark and there were even some non-responses.
4 10

(c) It was clear in this part of the question that some students lacked the experience of
past papers in dealing with fraction manipulations without the use of a calculator. Many
resorted to a decimal treatment and this work always gains no credit. The most successful
attempts involved inverting the second fraction and changing division to multiplication.
Then either cancelling had to be shown to have taken place, or the numerators and
48
denominators had to be multiplied out to obtain for example . For some students the
60
traditional methods for division of fractions clearly remain a mystery. All kinds of
muddled manipulation of numbers appeared as did frequent blank answer spaces. Some
16 15 16 15
attempts to use and were seen. ÷ is mathematically correct but an unsuitable
4 3 4 3
method of division if there are no common factors. Students who tried to use this method
were not successful because they were unable to show sufficient convincing working.
Very few were successful with the “common denominator then divide the numerators”
approach.

Question 7

(a) This was answered well. Many students giving the correct angle and the correct reason.
Some students gave calculations instead of reasons, which scored no marks.

(b) It was very pleasing to see a good number of fully correct responses here, with the
size of angle y calculated and reason(s) given for the answers. In-between these were a
significant number of responses with the correct values found but no reasons given. The
student could approach this question in two different ways, firstly by considering
quadrilateral ABDE or secondly by considering quadrilateral ACDE and the straight line
DB. Many students could work out 137° but did not give complete reasons. For example,
if the student approached the question by considering quadrilateral ACDE and the straight
line DB they only gave one reason when two were required for the final mark.

Question 8

(a) Collecting like terms in was not well done, the directed number aspect is still an issue
for some. The most commonly seen error was simplifying −2k – k giving −k or + k. Many
students simplified 6m + 5m to 11m correctly where they gained 1 mark.

(b) This part was well answered. Many students could multiply 2 by 5 and multiply 3 by
8 and obtain 10 and 24 respectively with an addition sign between which gained the first
mark. Some students just wrote 10 and 24 thus not gaining the first mark. A common
error was to add 10 and 24 and write for example 44. Students can use a calculator to add
their numbers up.
(c) It was encouraging to see a number of students were able to achieve full marks, with
a good number of the rest able to gain one mark for correct substitution. A common error
was to rearrange the equation incorrectly by writing down 60 – 16 = 2a. Students who
rearranged correctly went on to gain full marks but some forgot to divide −44 by 2.
Numerical methods were rarely seen. Some substituted 16 as the value of ‘a’ instead of
P.

Question 9

The majority of students gained one mark by working out the number of large ice creams
or the number of small ice creams by dividing 240 by 3 and/or multiplying this answer
by 2 to obtain 80 or 160. Some students tried to convert the 1/3 into a decimal such as 0.3
or 0.33. Students wrote down that 1/3 = 0.3 or 0.33 and then multiplied 0.3 or 0.33 with
240 could gain the first mark. Students who just did 240 × 0.3 did not gain any marks.
Many students could gain the second mark but a minority of students multiplied 160 with
3.8 trying to find the cost of the large ice creams. Many students lost the final 2 marks as
they did not use a complete method to work out the cost of a small ice cream. Again, there
was a significant amount of often convoluted working that made little sense
mathematically; amongst this were attempts to divide 640 by 3. There was evidence that
some students did not read through the question carefully enough.

Question 10

(a) Most students wrote down the correct answer. Some students just gained 1 mark by
writing 16 : 40 or 8 : 20 or 4 : 10 ie: partially simplified. Some students wrote answers in
the form of a fraction such as 2/5 which did not gain any marks.
(b) This part was well answered. Students are encouraged not to write probability in ratio
notation.

Question 11

(a) Many students obtained the correct method by working out 16/40 of 360 or dividing
360 by 40 and then multiplying by 16. Some students tried to use a two stage approach
by expressing 16/40 as 40%, however, they never completed the second stage and gained
no marks.
(b) Many students realised that each person was represented by 4° but then failed to realise
that they needed to divide 56 by the 4° that represented each person. Some students tried
to use a two stage approach by expressing 48/192 as 25%, however, they never completed
the second stage and gained no marks.

Question 12

This question was a challenge to the majority of students. Those who read the question
carefully and understood what was required tended to gain full marks. Many students
gained 1 mark for working out the minimum number of marks needed out of the two
papers or working out the marks obtained in paper1. To gain the second mark the students
had to find two values which could be used to find the final answer such as 96 and 44 or
48 and 44 or 48 and 4. Most candidates managed to achieve M2 for using BC, but many
lost marks by just stating 4 and not adding 4 to their 48. Showing that 65% (of 80 was
required) gained 2 marks. The majority of students did not gain the final two marks. two
marks. Many students are not showing the method in the % calculations so gaining no
55
method marks, e.g. 55% of 60 would score no marks but  60 would score 1 mark.
100

Question 13

A large number of students didn't understand bearings.

(a) Majority of students did not know which angle to measure. Many found the acute
angle at P which was 50° or the obtuse angle 130
(b) Many students failed to measure the line from S to P correctly and many students did
not use a ruler to measure the line. Some students who measured the line correctly failed
to multiply this length by 20 or even divide by 24. The second method was rarely used
by the majority of students. The final mark was often lost by otherwise successful students
by not giving the answer to the nearest hour (7.08, rather than 7). It was not unusual to
see division by 60 in an attempt to change units of time.

Question 14

(a) Some students were able to find the coordinates of the midpoint of AB, but there were
several spurious attempts, showing little understanding of what was required. Some
students simply subtracted the x values or the y values and then divide by 2 while others
simply added the coordinates, showing no intention of dividing by 2. Sketches often failed
to show a method to find the midpoint. If students picked up only one mark, it was
generally for the x coordinate being correctly given as 9; the y coordinate of −1.5 seemed
harder to find or the coordinates written in reverse. The formula for gradient was
sometimes seen.
(b) Many students wrote down the incorrect answer of 2 or 3.
(c) Many students answered this question poorly. A minority of students substituted x into
y = 2 – 3x and obtained –298 and then wrote down no or equivalent. A minority of students
substituted y into the equation and obtained 103.3 (if this is to gain a mark it should be
101.3) or compared the y-intercept values. Some students lost the mark by not evaluating
their expression such as –302 ≠ 2 – 3(100) and stating no.

Question 15

For parts (a) and (b), the first mark was gained when the students only had to show both
numbers written as prime factors, which could be at the end of factor trees or on 'ladder'
diagrams, or 4 factors (in part (a)) or 4 multiples (for part (b)) for each number or use of
the table method. Most managed to do this for one mark, and a significant number
achieved full marks. Some students used factor trees or ‘ladder’ diagrams and then tried
to draw a Venn diagram which they tried to use and lost the final mark. Generally this
question was answered poorly as many students could not gain the second mark as they
had no understanding of the meaning of HCF’s and LCM’s.
Some candidates confused HCF and LCM. They often do not know what a factor or a
multiple is. The majority of students gained one from the factor tree. The most common
mistake as an answer for part (a) was 7.
Question 16

This question proved straightforward for the majority of candidates. A few found only
the area of the one rectangle such as 12 × 9 or 12 × 6. Many students did not approach
the question using an algebraic method. A common approach was 129 – 108 and then
divide by 3. Some students left their answers as 3 × 7 = 21 thus losing the final A mark.
Some who had 21 then divided by 6

Question 17

(a) This part was answered well. Only a minority of students wrote down 16. It was
encouraging to see the majority write down 3 < w ≤ 4. Correct notation was not required
to identify the modal class.
(b) Many students answered this question well. The majority of the students showed clear
working However, a common error by some students was to use the lower limits or the
upper limits to work out ∑ 𝑓𝑥 so gained 2 out of the 4 marks available. This method is
incorrect and the students need to understand that they must use the mid points. Other
144
common errors were to write (students should note that the value of the sum of
their freq
144
the frequencies was given in the question) or writing . A common error was to
5
multiply the frequencies by the class width (10). Another frequently seen error was to
divide 40 by 5. It seems that although the weight had to be between 2 & 7 kg, answers of
8 and 28.8 were common.

(c) The correct answer was common, but a significant number of students included the
9 + 2 +1
class interval 4 < w ≤ 5 so obtaining which resulted in an incorrect answer.
40

Question 18

Whilst many correct answers were seen, some students were unable to successfully
navigate their way through this problem.
It was not uncommon, for example, to see students who correctly shared 120 in the given
16 16
ratio but then found of 45 rather than of 75. Those who did get as far as
25 25
16
calculating of 75 then did not know how to divide the 45. Some students did not
25
understand the statement ‘Twice as many girls go sailing as go climbing’ as they divided
45 by 2. Some students found 30 or 15 but went on to add 30 with 48 or 15 with 48 or 15
with 27 not realising they had to add 30 with 27 to obtain the correct answer.

Question 19

This question was answered poorly. If incorrect, most students enlarged the shape
successfully but did not draw it in the correct position, this was awarded 1 mark for having
the shape in the correct orientation. Many students had problem with understanding that
‘Enlargement’ doesn’t necessarily mean the resulting figure will be larger. Many did
manage to achieve B1 for, at least showing the correct size & orientation. Even when they
drew the guidelines correctly from the vertices, they were unable to complete this
correctly.

Question 20

(a) This part was answered well as majority of the students gave the correct answer. Only
a minority wrote down 78 000. Although 000.78 was sometimes seen.
(b) This part was frequently incorrect and those who often gained 1 mark was for 22 500
000 or for an equivalent such as 22.5 × 106, or for writing 2.25 × 10n where n could be
any value but not 7. Some candidates may benefit from being reminded how to use the
standard form button on their calculators.

Question 21

(a) This part was not answered well. A common error was for adding the second term in
the brackets and obtaining − 3 rather than multiplying to obtain − 40; some students also
had difficulty in simplifying −8m + 5m correctly. Overall the errors made were usually
down to poor arithmetic skills when dealing with negative numbers.
(b) This was generally poorly answered. Some students gained 1 mark for partial
factorisation rather than factorising the expression fully, y(5 +20y) was frequently seen.
(c) This was answered poorly as most students had no idea that anything to the power
zero is one.
(d) This part was very demanding in that it required clear algebraic working and involved
expanding the bracket on the LHS and a fraction on the RHS. Students sitting this tier
were often unable to make the correct start to solving the equation by multiplying both
sides by 2 or expanding the bracket. Some of those that made a good start and did multiply
correctly by 2 and expanded the bracket correctly. A common error in expanding the
bracket on the LHS was to write 6x – 5. Even when some students passed this hurdle they
had difficulties in isolating the x’s on one side and numbers on the other side due to poor
algebraic rearranging.

A correct answer without clear algebraic working was awarded no marks as the questions
told the students this was needed.

Question 22

At this tier either students score full marks or no marks at all. Some of the students worked
with cos 63. Others used sin 27 using the trigonometric ratio successfully. A few students
gave a two stage solution generally using tan to find the other shorter side and then
Pythagoras's Theorem. Provided that accuracy was maintained throughout, this lead to
the correct answer and full marks. The most common error seen was to start correctly
24.3
with cos 63 = but then make an error in rearranging this to get 24.3 × cos 63. It was
PQ
disappointing to see many students use 63 × cos (24.3) suggesting a total misconception
of angles and sides. It was also interesting to see students using 24 instead of 24.3.
Students should not round the numbers given in the question.
Summary

Based on their performance in this paper, students should:

• learn and be able to recall metric conversions such as 1 litre = 1000 millilitres

• know the difference between metric and imperial units

• learn how to use fractions and percentages

• use a ruler when measuring lines and a protractor when measuring angles

• know how to measure reflex angles

• know how to initially write SOHCAHTOA equations prior to rearrangement.

• differentiate between factors and multiples and HCF and LCM

• show clear working when answering problem solving questions

• read the question carefully and review their answer to ensure that the question set is the
one that has been answered

• make sure that their working is to a sufficient degree of accuracy that does not affect the
required accuracy of the answer

• ensure their working is well-presented in a structured format and that any unnecessary
working is crossed out.
Pearson Education Limited. Registered company number 872828
with its registered office at 80 Strand, London, WC2R 0RL, United Kingdom