Back to subject papers

MATHEMATICS-SPECIFICATION-A · Pearson Edexcel IGCSE

MATHEMATICS-SPECIFICATION-A/22

H: Higher Tier

Mathematics Specification A · June 2024 · Variant 2

Relative difficulty

Demanding · 3.8/5

Analysis source: Pearson Edexcel

Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.

Relative difficulty

3.8 / 5

Total marks

200

Duration

240 min

Most tested topic

Equations, formulae and identities (Algebraic manipulation, simultaneous and quadratic equations)

Cohort performance

Session statistics from official examination reports

Total marks

200

Duration

240 min

Session difficulty

3.8 / 5

Key examiner messages

Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise

1

The Summer 2024 Edexcel International GCSE Mathematics A Higher Tier papers (1HR and 2HR) maintained a robust level of rigour, aligning with standard historical difficulty.

2

However, they presented several unique algebraic and geometric hurdles that tested deep conceptual understanding.

3

While Paper 1HR featured heavy procedural demands in algebraic manipulation, Paper 2HR elevated the challenge with non-routine multi-step geometry and vector methods.

4

Candidates who relied on rote memorisation struggled with late-paper problem-solving, whereas mathematically fluent students were able to demonstrate clear, structured working.

Question difficulty map

How candidates performed on each question in this series

No data available in official reports

Assessment objectives

Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary

Algebraic8
Fluency7
Geometric & Graphical Reasoning6
Trigonometry5
Statistical &4
Arithmetic &3
Problem Solving & Reasoning2
Formulati1

Skill weighting

Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.

AlgebraicAlgebraicFluencyFluencyGeometric & Graphical ReasoningGeometric &GraphicalTrigonometryTrigonometryStatistical &Statistical &Arithmetic &Arithmetic &Problem Solving & ReasoningProblem Solving &ReasoningFormulatiFormulati
SkillWeightShare
  • Algebraic

    Weight: 8100%
  • Fluency

    Weight: 788%
  • Geometric & Graphical Reasoning

    Weight: 675%
  • Trigonometry

    Weight: 563%
  • Statistical &

    Weight: 450%
  • Arithmetic &

    Weight: 338%
  • Problem Solving & Reasoning

    Weight: 225%
  • Formulati

    Weight: 113%

Method marks watchlist

Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost

No data available in official reports

Recurring mistakes across years

Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject

No data available in official reports

Question choice intelligence

Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)

No data available in official reports

Level exemplars

What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like

No data available in official reports

Grade & admission context

How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards

Report type

Examiner report — national grade boundaries and question-level commentary

Deep insights

What top candidates did

Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series

No data available in official reports

Command word playbook

How to match each command word to the expected response style

SolveFrequency: 12

Match the expected response style for “Solve” questions.

ShowFrequency: 5

Match the expected response style for “Show” questions.

SimplifyFrequency: 14

Match the expected response style for “Simplify” questions.

outFrequency: 22

Match the expected response style for “out” questions.

FindFrequency: 11

Match the expected response style for “Find” questions.

downFrequency: 9

Match the expected response style for “down” questions.

Time traps

Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks

Paper 1HR - Section…80m / 63 marks

Min per mark: 1.3

Paper 1HR - Section…40m / 34 marks

Min per mark: 1.2

Paper 2HR - Section…80m / 66 marks

Min per mark: 1.2

Syllabus traceability

Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session

Algebraic manipulation

19 marks this session

Quadratic equations

15 marks this session

Mensuration of 2D shapes

15 marks this session

Trigonometry and Pythagoras’ theorem

15 marks this session

MCQ trap analytics

Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary

No data available in official reports

Topic heatmap across years

Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject

Mark intensity

LowHigh
Topic
2023
2024
2025
Σ

Trigonometry and Pythagoras’ theorem

31
15
46

Algebraic manipulation

17
19
36

Algebraic manipulation (Equations, formulae and identities)

26
26

Powers and roots

17
17

Percentages (Numbers and the number system)

16
16

Probability (Statistics and probability)

15
15

Quadratic equations

15
15

Mensuration of 2D shapes

15
15

Difficulty trend

How session difficulty has shifted across recent years

2023202320242025
2023 June 2023 · 3.5/52023 Winter 2023 · 3.8/52024 June 2024 · 3.8/52025 June 2025 · 3.0/5

Paper comparison

Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session

Paper 1HR:

100 marks120 min

Paper 2HR:

100 marks120 min

Marks you can still earn

Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit

No data available in official reports

Practise what examiners flagged

Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app

Self-diagnostic checklist

Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise

  • 1Message

    The Summer 2024 Edexcel International GCSE Mathematics A Higher Tier papers (1HR and 2HR) maintained a robust level of rigour, aligning with standard historical difficulty.

  • 2Message

    However, they presented several unique algebraic and geometric hurdles that tested deep conceptual understanding.

  • 3Message

    While Paper 1HR featured heavy procedural demands in algebraic manipulation, Paper 2HR elevated the challenge with non-routine multi-step geometry and vector methods.

  • 4Message

    Candidates who relied on rote memorisation struggled with late-paper problem-solving, whereas mathematically fluent students were able to demonstrate clear, structured working.

Teacher briefing pack

One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review

June 2024 2024

Mathematics Specification A

The Summer 2024 Edexcel International GCSE Mathematics A Higher Tier papers (1HR and 2HR) maintained a robust level of rigour, aligning with standard historical difficulty. However, they presented several unique algebraic and geometric hurdles that tested deep conceptual understa

  • The Summer 2024 Edexcel International GCSE Mathematics A Higher Tier papers (1HR and 2HR) maintained a robust level of rigour, aligning with standard historical difficulty.

  • However, they presented several unique algebraic and geometric hurdles that tested deep conceptual understanding.

  • While Paper 1HR featured heavy procedural demands in algebraic manipulation, Paper 2HR elevated the challenge with non-routine multi-step geometry and vector methods.

Total marks
200
Duration
240 min
Session difficulty
3.8 / 5

Session analysis

The Summer 2024 Edexcel International GCSE Mathematics A Higher Tier papers (1HR and 2HR) maintained a robust level of rigour, aligning with standard historical difficulty. However, they presented several unique algebraic and geometric hurdles that tested deep conceptual understanding. While Paper 1HR featured heavy procedural demands in algebraic manipulation, Paper 2HR elevated the challenge with non-routine multi-step geometry and vector methods. Candidates who relied on rote memorisation struggled with late-paper problem-solving, whereas mathematically fluent students were able to demonstrate clear, structured working.

Updated Jun 13, 2026

Paper breakdown

Paper 1HR:

100 marks120 min

Paper 2HR:

100 marks120 min

Top chapters

Algebraic manipulation19 marks
Quadratic equations15 marks
Mensuration of 2D shapes15 marks
Trigonometry and Pythagoras’ theorem15 marks

Exam structure insights

Marks by chapter

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

Algebraic manipulation19 marks
Quadratic equations15 marks
Mensuration of 2D shapes15 marks
Trigonometry and Pythagoras’ th15 marks
Probability13 marks
Graphs12 marks
Percentages12 marks
Similarity10 marks

Mark accessibility

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

70% within easy or medium reach

54
86
60
Easy: 54 marksMedium: 86 marksHard: 60 marks

Command word frequency

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

Solve12 times
Show5 times
Simplify14 times
out22 times
Find11 times
down9 times

Question type mix

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

200Marks
  • problem_solving

    56·12·28%

  • numerical_and_arithmetic

    32·10·16%

  • algebraic_manipulation

    31·8·16%

  • data_and_probability

    29·7·14%

  • geometric_proofs_and_properties

    27·6·14%

  • graphs_and_functions

    25·6·13%

Study ROI

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

DifficultyRecurrence %Algebraic manipula…Quadratic equation…Calculus (differen…Probability (combi…Vectors (parallelo…

Time vs marks

Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.

MarksMinutesMarks / min

Paper 1HR - Section…

0.79 m/min
63
80

Paper 1HR - Section…

0.85 m/min
34
40

Paper 2HR - Section…

0.82 m/min
66
80

Total marks

163

Total time

200 min

Avg pace

0.81

Next-year prediction

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

3D trigonometry and bearings

85%

85%

Composite and inverse functions (with domain restrictions)

80%

80%

Histogram interpreting and comparison

75%

75%

Executive Difficulty Verdict

The Summer 2024 Edexcel International GCSE Mathematics A Higher Tier papers (1HR and 2HR) maintained a robust level of rigour, aligning with standard historical difficulty. However, they presented several unique algebraic and geometric hurdles that tested deep conceptual understanding. While Paper 1HR featured heavy procedural demands in algebraic manipulation, Paper 2HR elevated the challenge with non-routine multi-step geometry and vector methods. Candidates who relied on rote memorisation struggled with late-paper problem-solving, whereas mathematically fluent students were able to demonstrate clear, structured working.

Examiner notes & key calculations

  • Insufficient Geometric Explanations: In circle theorem tasks, candidates frequently lost the communication marks by writing incomplete reasons. Saying 'angle at center is double' was deemed insufficient; the full phrase 'Angle at the centre is twice the angle at the circumference' must be stated clearly.
  • Scaling Area and Volume: In the similar shapes question (similar vases), a common pitfall was applying the linear ratio directly to the difference of surface areas, completely neglecting the quadratic scaling factor k2k^2k2.
  • Calculus and Stationary Points: When differentiating cubics to locate coordinates of stationary points, a significant number of candidates failed to substitute x=6x = 6x=6 back into the original cubic equation to obtain the corresponding yyy-value, instead mistakenly substituting into the derivative dy/dxdy/dxdy/dx.

Exam tips

Paper format

Duration
2h
Total marks
100
Weighting
50%
Question types
Short Answer, Structured, Complex

Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.

MATHEMATICS-SPECIFICATION-A/22 — Pearson Edexcel IGCSE Mathematics Specification A (June 2024) | Revui