Solving by factorisation
A quadratic equation like hides two numbers inside it — its roots — and factorisation is the fastest way to dig them out. The trick is to rewrite the quadratic as a product of two simple linear pieces, , and then lean on one very old fact: a product can only be zero if one of its factors is zero. No square roots, no long formula — just splitting the middle term and reading off two equations. This is the first method CBSE Class 10 teaches for the Quadratic Equations chapter, right after the standard form is introduced. It works beautifully when the numbers cooperate, turns word problems (ages, consecutive integers, areas) into two-line solutions, and builds the number sense that later makes the quadratic formula easy to trust rather than just memorise.
Rewrite as by splitting the middle term, then use the zero product rule to read off the roots and .
The core idea
Factorisation rests on one small, powerful fact called the zero product rule: if two numbers multiply to give zero, at least one of them must itself be zero. There is no other way to get a product of exactly .
where: and are any two real numbers (here, the two linear factors of the quadratic). To reach that factored form, CBSE uses the splitting the middle term technique. Two numbers and are found so that and ; the middle term is then rewritten as , and the four resulting terms are grouped in pairs to pull out a common binomial factor.
where: , , are the coefficients of the standard quadratic, and , are its two roots. Once both roots are found, they can be sanity-checked against and — if either check fails, an arithmetic slip crept in somewhere. Not every quadratic splits into nice integers. When no such exist as simple numbers, factorisation becomes impractical, and the quadratic formula (a separate technique) is used instead — factorisation is best thought of as the fast first attempt, not the universal tool. Factorisation is popular in exams precisely because it needs only integer arithmetic when the numbers cooperate — no square roots to simplify and no fractions to carry through several lines of working. Many textbook quadratics are deliberately constructed so that splits into two friendly integer factors, which is exactly why this is usually the method worth trying first, before reaching for the quadratic formula. The skill is largely pattern recognition, and it improves with repetition: the more factor pairs you have tried mentally, the faster you spot which split works.
The goal is to show, step by step and without skipping the algebra, exactly why splitting into two carefully chosen pieces always turns into a product of two linear factors, so that the zero product rule can be applied honestly rather than as a memorised shortcut.
Step 1. Choose and so that and . This is always possible when the quadratic has rational roots, because these are precisely the conditions that make the grouping in the next step work out with a common factor.
Step 2. Rewrite the middle term. Since , we have , so becomes — the same equation, just written with four terms instead of three.
Step 3. Group into two pairs and pull out the common factor from each. The first pair shares a common factor, and the second pair shares a (possibly different) common factor; because was chosen deliberately, both pairs factor to leave the same binomial behind.
Step 4. Factor out that common binomial. The equation now reads , a genuine product of two linear expressions equalling zero.
Step 5. Apply the zero product rule. Set each linear factor to zero separately and solve; this gives the two roots and , and no other value of can satisfy the original equation. Verified: with satisfying and , expanding reproduces term by term for any quadratic that factors over the rationals.
Worked example
Solve by factorisation.
Step 1. Identify , , . Here , , , so .
Step 2. Find two numbers that multiply to and add to . Try and : and . These work.
Step 3. Split the middle term: .
Step 4. Group and factor each pair: .
Step 5. Factor out the common binomial: .
Step 6. Apply the zero product rule. , and .
Roots: or .
Competitive stretch
Check the roots against the sum/product shortcut before moving on. Sum: , and — matches. Product: , and — matches too. This 10-second check catches most factorisation slips before they cost marks, and it is exactly how the word problem below can be verified: for with roots and , sum and product , confirming and (after rejecting the negative root) are correct for the consecutive-integer problem whose product is .
Common traps
- Applying the zero product rule before the equation equals zero. is required first; never split directly into or .
- Picking that satisfy only one condition. Always check both and , not just the sum or only the product.
- Losing a sign while cancelling a common factor, e.g. going from to is fine, but rushing the step can flip a sign — write out before dividing.
- Not rejecting invalid roots in word problems. A negative length, a negative count of people, or (as in the consecutive-integer problem) a negative integer when the problem demands positive values must be discarded.
- Substituting the wrong number back to verify. After solving, always plug the root back into the original equation, not into an intermediate grouped form — a slip in an earlier step can otherwise go unnoticed.
Ask the tutor: Stuck on finding the right pair of numbers to split the middle term, or want to practise turning a word problem into a factorisable quadratic? Ask the AI tutor for a guided walkthrough.
How do I quickly find the right pair of numbers to split the middle term
List the factor pairs of and scan for the pair that adds to . For , , so the pairs are ; only adds to . With practice you start recognising common splits instantly, but when is large or the numbers are unfriendly, list all factor pairs systematically rather than guessing at random — it is faster than it feels.
What if I cannot find any integer pair that works
That usually means the quadratic does not factorise neatly over the integers — its roots may be irrational or fractional in a way that splitting the middle term cannot reach easily. In that case, switch to the quadratic formula, which always works regardless of whether the numbers are "nice." Factorisation is the fast first attempt; it is not meant to be forced when it clearly is not cooperating.
Why do we reject one of the two roots in some word problems
The quadratic equation is a mathematical object with two roots by construction, but the word problem it models usually has extra real-world restrictions — lengths, ages, and counts of people cannot be negative, and "consecutive positive integers" rules out negative values outright. Always translate both roots back into the context of the problem and discard any root that violates a stated condition, keeping only the one that makes physical sense.