GCSE Maths Higher · AQA · Index laws and standard form
Rewrite the base as a prime power first
When students see , the instinct is to add the indices and write . That answer is wrong because the product rule only applies when the bases are identical. The fix: rewrite first, then .
A paired error appears in standard-form calculations: students raise only the power of ten to the bracket power and leave the coefficient untouched. So they write instead of the correct . Both errors share the same root cause: a step is skipped before an index law is applied.
Already know this is your gap? Skip the diagnostic and jump straight into the targeted lesson.
How to spot it in your own work
- You wrote , adding indices across two different bases without rewriting first.
- You wrote , applying the power only to the and leaving 2.5 unchanged.
- You left as without rewriting to express the answer as a power of 7.
- You wrote , forgetting to include the index from rewriting .
An exam question that triggers it
Here is the structure of a typical AQA Higher index-laws question:
(a) Write as a single power of 2.
(b) Evaluate , giving your answer in standard form.
For (a): the misconception gives or some other wrong answer. The fix: rewrite , then .
For (b): the misconception gives . The fix: raise both factors to : .
Why students fall for this
The product rule is so well-drilled that students apply it to any product of powers, regardless of whether the bases match. The bases and feel related (one is a multiple of the other), so the check “are these actually the same base?” is skipped.
The standard-form error follows the same pattern. Students have practised applying powers to and correctly compute , but they treat the coefficient 2.5 as a label rather than a factor. The bracket signals that the exponent governs everything inside, not just the power-of-ten term.
A third pattern is composite bases in power-of-a-power questions. Students who see apply the rule immediately to get and stop there, not recognising that the question asks for a power of 7 and that rewriting is the required first step.
The fix: Rewrite to a common prime base first, then apply the index law
Step 1: check whether the bases are identical. If yes, apply the index law directly. If no, rewrite each base as a power of the common prime before proceeding.
Step 2: rewrite composite bases. , , , . Write each factor as a power of the smallest prime factor, then proceed.
Step 3: for a bracket power, raise every factor. . For this means computing as well as .
Step 4: renormalise if needed. After applying the power to the coefficient, check that the result is in the range . Here , so adjust the exponent accordingly.
Worked example
Simplify as a single power of 2.
- Rewrite. , so
- Add indices. Check: , and . Confirmed.
Evaluate in standard form.
- Raise both factors to -3.
- Compute each part. . , so .
- Renormalise. Trap: leaves 2.5 untouched.
Simplify as a power of 7.
- Rewrite. , so .
- Apply the outer power. Check : .
Find out if this is costing you marks
The 10-minute diagnostic checks for this pattern (and four others) using AQA-style GCSE Higher items. Free, no signup, anonymous.
Common questions
- Why is not equal to ?
The product rule only applies when the bases are identical. 8 and 2 are different bases. Rewrite first: . The trap is wrong.
- Why is equal to and not ?
A bracket power applies to every factor inside the bracket. . Since and , the result is . The trap leaves 2.5 unchanged, which misses the step of raising the coefficient to the power.
- How do you simplify as a power of 7?
Rewrite . So . Then . Check for : .
Related misconceptions
- Negative indices mean reciprocals, not negative numbersReading the minus in 8^-5 as a sign on the result instead of recognising a^-n = 1/a^n, the companion misconception in the same Higher index-laws vertical.
- Fractional indices mean roots, not divisionReading 9^(1/2) as 9 divided by 2 = 4.5 rather than the square root 3, the second misconception in the Higher index-laws vertical.