OCR GCSE · Analysis & Prediction

2024 OCR GCSE Mathematics - J560 Past Paper Analysis

A comprehensive evaluation of the J560 GCSE Mathematics June 2024 series across both Foundation and Higher tiers. This series tested students on a wide range of topics with a strong emphasis on multi-step reasoning, percentage change, non-calculator arithmetic, and geometric justification.

Updated: 14 Jun 2026

Analysis Sample paper

Difficulty 3.8/5

Total marks

300

Duration

270 mins

Most tested

Interpreting and representing data

Paper breakdown

J560/01 Paper 1 (Foundation Tier): 100 marks · 90 minsJ560/02 Paper 2 (Foundation Tier): 100 marks · 90 minsJ560/03 Paper 3 (Foundation Tier): 100 marks · 90 minsJ560/04 Paper 4 (Higher Tier): 100 marks · 90 minsJ560/05 Paper 5 (Higher Tier): 100 marks · 90 minsJ560/06 Paper 6 (Higher Tier): 100 marks · 90 mins

Top chapters

Interpreting and representing data · 34 marksCalculations with ratio · 28 marksAlgebraic equations · 26 marks

Executive Summary of J560 June 2024

The June 2024 OCR GCSE (9-1) Mathematics (J560) series presented a balanced but demanding set of papers. Papers 1, 2, and 3 served the Foundation tier, while Papers 4, 5, and 6 served the Higher tier. The papers maintained a rigorous split between calculator and non-calculator assessments, challenging candidates' conceptual understanding and arithmetic fluency under pressure.

Where Marks Were Won

On the Foundation papers, candidates secured high success rates on initial standard recall questions, simple coordinates, and basic sequences. On the Higher papers, candidates who demonstrated robust algebraic fluency performed well on quadratic equations and coordinate intersections. The use of clear ratios in comparison questions also rewarded structured working.

Pitfalls and Traps

Candidates frequently struggled with units and scale conversion, particularly where composite units like population density or map scales in centimetres were involved. Additionally, candidates often dropped marks in compound interest problems by reverting to simple interest calculations, and lost reasoning marks in circle theorem questions by omitting specific geometric justifications.

Strategic Advice & Predictions

For future series, students should prioritize non-calculator fraction and decimal manipulation, alongside the formal vocabulary of geometric proofs. Based on historical frequency, vectors and three-dimensional trigonometry are heavily predicted to occupy higher-tariff slots in upcoming examinations.

Charts

Marks by chapter

See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.

Question type mix

Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.

Short Answer80 marks · 35 questions
Structured/Multi-step110 marks · 25 questions
Show that/Proof48 marks · 12 questions
Drawing/Construction24 marks · 8 questions
Multiple Choice/Matching38 marks · 10 questions

Mark accessibility

Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.

70%within easy or medium reach

120

easy: 90 marksmedium: 120 markshard: 90 marks

Difficulty trend

Compare difficulty across recent years.

Command word frequency

Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.

Skill weighting

Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.

Study ROI

Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.

Interpreting and representing data

34 marks · Difficulty 2.2 · recurrence 95%

Calculations with ratio

28 marks · Difficulty 2.5 · recurrence 90%

Percentages

15 marks · Difficulty 2.1 · recurrence 85%

Algebraic equations

26 marks · Difficulty 3.2 · recurrence 80%

Time vs marks

Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.

marksmins

Next-year prediction

Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.

Plane vector geometry85%

Vectors were lightly tested in this series and have traditionally held higher weight in earlier sittings; expect a major vector proof question in the next series.

Triangle mensuration80%

While triangle mensuration appeared in basic contexts, complex 3D Pythagoras/trigonometry scenarios did not dominate, making them overdue for a prime position.

Direct and inverse proportion75%

Consistently tested across series; upcoming papers are highly likely to feature inverse square relationships algebraically.

Topic-year heatmap

Compare topic weight by year to spot recurring and returning areas.

Jun 2022

Nov 2022

Jun 2023

Nov 2023

Jun 2024

Combined events and probability diagrams

Graphs of equations and functions

Algebraic expressions

Interpreting and representing data

Calculations with ratio

Algebraic equations

Area calculations

Percentages

Volume and surface area calculations

Triangle mensuration

Examiner insights

Official report

Common pitfalls

In best-value comparisons, failing to write down the final comparison statement despite calculating the unit costs correctly.
Underestimating compound interest by treating it as simple interest over multiple years.
Incorrectly expanding bracketed expressions when solving algebraic inequalities on a number line, leading to incorrect endpoints.
Failing to draw a straight line of best fit that passes through the centroid or within acceptable gate coordinates on scatter diagrams.

Misconceptions

Believing that a scale factor of 1/2 enlargement means dividing coordinates by 2 without considering the center of enlargement.
Confusing density as mass multiplied by volume, rather than mass divided by volume, when performing estimations.
Assuming that non-calculator percentages can be computed with simple linear addition of incorrect labels without shown operations.

Where marks are lost

Omitting the necessary angle reasons (such as 'alternate segment theorem' or 'angles on a straight line') when requested to justify steps.
Truncating intermediate decimals too early in multi-step trigonometry questions, which compounds inaccuracies in the final answer.
Not representing inequalities on a number line with the correct open (hollow) or closed (solid) circles.

Estimated grade cut-off

Updated: 15 Jun 2026

Source: OCR

Level	Mark	Percentage
9	245/300	82%
8	195/300	65%
7	145/300	48%
6	110/300	37%
5	76/300	25%
4	42/300	14%
3	25/300	8%

Official grade boundaries published by OCR.

Know what the examiners want — now go get those marks

Thinka is an AI practice app used by 100,000+ DSE students to drill questions and get instant feedback on every answer. You already know the high-frequency topics and where marks are lost — now practice those specifically on Thinka and turn this analysis into actual marks.

Start Practising Free See pricing

Know what's tested? Drill those topics on Thinka — AI questions, instant marking.

Start Practising Free