How good are you with numbers? Take the National Numeracy test

euronorris

96.


I haven't checked which ones I got wrong yet, but I know at least one of them was because I stupidly rushed the answer. As soon as I clicked it, I realised I was wrong! Oh well!

angel549

I got 87 out of 100. Really disappointed in myself!! Thought i'd get around 93-95 but it was harder than I thought.

I didn't use a calculator, but did use pen and paper to work stuff out. And didnt spend more than a couple of minutes on a question.

!!!!!! was the bike wheel circumference one about though?!?!

Borneo6566

If £899 includes the Vat then the original cost is found by dividing by 1.2 (120)
Original cost is therefore £899 / 1.2 = £749.17
Vat is £899 - £749.17 = £149.83

Viniam

How many different questions are there on this test? I assumed it would be the same test for everyone but I do not recognise any of the questions people are talking about on this thread. If there are many different tests how comparable are the results?
The question I disagree with is the pie chart / bar chart comparison for company quarterly results. I cannot see how any answer could be correct.

rainmakergolf

The gross price is £899.00p
To calculate the vat divide such by 1.20, this gives a net price of £749.16 with the Vat of £149.84p.
It can be argued that the net is £749.166,which to the nearest pence becomes £749.17, the vat then becomes £149.83p
Hope this helps
Rainmakergolf

rollon60

£899 is 120% as it is the original 100% plus the VAT 20%. divide by 120 to find 1% and multiply by 20 to find 20% VAT

rollon60

Maths tests are designed to make you think about how to apply the maths not to catch you out

spude000

I got 96/100, anyone know which question Martin is disputing?

I got; 2 wrong by rushing, 1 because apparently I can't remember how to work out the circumference of a circle, and then the probability one...

Question
A Component has a 5% chance of being faulty. If you use 3 components in a device what is the chance that the device works?

I said 85%, as the chance of 1 being faulty is 1 in 20, if you have 3 it is 3 in 20, as you have 3 separate chances of it being faulty, so 15% chance of faulty or 85% not faulty.

They said 86%, which I assume means they have worked out the probability as 95% x 95% x 95% = 85.7% (86%), but that is the probability of the 3rd component being faulty, if you already know the first 2 are OK, which at this point we don't.

EDIT: Though some may argue the probability of the 3rd one failing if you already know the first 2 are OK is 5%, as previous history of results does not impact future events e.g. if you flip 10 heads in a row you are still just as likely to flip heads again as tales. Probability is FUN! with the exception of this question which is driving me mad.

Shrimply

spude000 wrote: »

I got 96/100, anyone know which question Martin is disputing?

I got; 2 wrong by rushing, 1 because apparently I can't remember how to work out the circumference of a circle, and then the probability one...

Question
A Component has a 5% chance of being faulty. If you use 3 components in a device what is the chance that the device works?

I said 85%, as the chance of 1 being faulty is 1 in 20, if you have 3 it is 3 in 20, as you have 3 separate chances of it being faulty, so 15% chance of faulty or 85% not faulty.

They said 86%, which I assume means they have worked out the probability as 95% x 95% x 95% = 85.7% (86%), but that is the probability of the 3rd component being faulty, if you already know the first 2 are OK, which at this point we don't.

I got it wrong too (and given what I do I really shouldn't have). However, what the question wants is the probability that none are faulty given that you have three. Which as you say is 95*95*95. Just like the probability of all three being faulty would be calculated as 5*5*5.

spude000 wrote: »

but that is the probability of the 3rd component being faulty, if you already know the first 2 are OK, which at this point we don't.

I THINK (although very happy to be corrected) that that probability would be 0.95*0.95*0.05 = 4.51%. Although I can also see an argument for it simply being 5%.

While the probability of exactly one being faulty would be 4.51% * 3 =13.5%



The other two that I got wrong was because I didn't read the question properly.

There is no advice about whether you should use a calculator or not, I didn't but would have been a lot quicker if I had, my mental maths is terrible and personally I don't think it is all that important these days. I also feel that while I do, remembering equations like the area of a circle, or an approximation of pi (I always use 22/7) just isn't something that should be tested as maths. The maths is the application of the equation.

owaisiqbal

Got 96, and I'm under 16!