Previous Exam & Analyses

CAT 2018 Comprehensive Analysis

Abraham Lincoln famously said, ‘Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe.’ If there is something that has vindicated the sense of importance good preparation deserves, it is CAT 2018.

The big day arrived with plenty of anticipation about pattern changes and difficulty levels. Long into the night, discussions will be raging for sure, across student communities. Did CAT spring a major surprise this year? Well, no! Was CAT 2018 more difficult than CAT 2017? Well, maybe not!

The VARC section gave a mild surprise to students across both slots. Out went the taken-for-granted 6-Q and 3-Q passages. Making a surprise entry were five-question and four-question passages. That would have straightaway increased the overall length of the content that needed to be read by test-takers to attempt the 24 RC questions. Decision-making for those who weren’t looking to solve all the RCs would have been trickier, what with all the RCs seemingly of similar difficulty level. The subjects covered were also more exotic than usual – environment, biology, sociology, and history were the flavours of the day.

The slight upsurge in difficulty in RC was largely compensated for by easier VA sections in both slots, the big relief for students being four-sentence Para Formation Questions. Odd-Man-Out questions were also low-hanging fruits, with Summary questions proving to be slightly trickier. All in all, the VARC section hovered around the same difficulty level as last year; those who haven’t practised a lot might have found it a little tougher, given the nature of options in some questions and the intensity of the subjects.

The DILR Section was relatively easier compared to CAT 2017, but make no mistake, it was still challenging in both slots. However, unlike last year, there was at least one doable set in both the slots along with some manageable/fight-worthy sets.

Both the slots saw some straightforward set-types – Distributions/Venn-Diagrams/Calculation based sets. Nevertheless, the time that these sets demanded was a dampener which would contribute to lowering the cut-offs.

T.I.M.E. students reported that the LRDI in AIMCATs and the inputs they received from faculty in classes along with the study material helped them navigate this section with a lot of confidence.

The Quant Section proved to be the high tide in both slots. It was easily a few notches higher in difficulty level compared to CAT 2017. This difficulty was induced largely by the need to work around fixed methods. There were no low-hanging fruits and very few questions could be solved without breaking a sweat. Questions were lengthy, and some also had additional conditions (read twists) that the students needed to watch out for. The number of Easy questions saw a conspicuously drastic fall compared to last year which will contribute to a steep fall in the cut-offs this year.

The other apparent feature of the QA section this year is the continued focus on Arithmetic. Pure-maths questions (on Functions, P&C, CG, etc.) were present, albeit lower in number. Within Arithmetic, the focus on usual suspects like Numbers was very low in both the slots, while Geometry, TW and TD had very good representation.

While a very well-prepared student would not have broken much sweat, those who were tentative on their preparation would have found out that the going was not as smooth as they would have liked it to be.

Overall

CAT 2018 was a smooth experience for students across the country (as per the reports received till now). We congratulate the IIMs for yet another seamless CAT.

From the students’ perspective, it turned out to be more or less on the expected lines with a bit of fluctuation in the difficulty of sections here and there. The cut-offs are expected to be a tad lower than those of last year, overall, QA being the spoilsport this time around.

 CAT 2018 Slot 1 Analysis

The first slot of CAT 2018 was a mixed bag. While it didn’t throw astronomical surprises, there were some changes, across sections, which in itself was not entirely unexpected. Students who have taken all the AIMCATs would have definitely been well-prepared to handle the few surprises (in terms of questions/difficulty) which were thrown at them.

As has generally been the case and reinforced by the feedback that we received from the students, there were quite a few doable questions across sections this year, as there were last year.

Although the number of lengthy questions in QA seems to have gone up, the presence of easy questions coupled with the art of filtering the difficult questions out would make students feel somewhat at ease. Nonetheless, most of the test-takers would have felt it to be an arduous task to push their overall attempts beyond a certain number. This is because any further move beyond it was being blocked by the difficult questions that were present aplenty across the sections, and which would have tested the core fundamentals of the students.

As usual, the order of the questions and the order of the options for various questions were different for different students.

In short, QA proved to be much tougher compared to CAT 2017, due to the lengthy and involved nature of the questions. VARC remained more or less at the same level and DILR was a tad easier compared to CAT 2017. As a result of this, the overall cutoff this year is expected to hover around the same level as that of CAT 2017.

Before we dig deeper into the discussion, let’s quickly look at the test pattern.

Comprehensive analysis – Slot 1

Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension Analysis

The Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension section is a section that most aspirants fear on account of its unpredictable nature. In one year if the RCs were lengthy which made them time – consuming then there were other years in which the questions were mostly inferential in nature which made the test tough. However, in CAT 2018 the passages were of moderate length and were from topics which are considered to be interesting reads – Biology, Environment, History, and Sociology.

Known to be a silent killer, the VARC section of CAT 2018 may live up to its name once again was deceptive, simple but could be hazardous if one were not careful enough. This is largely because of a pattern-change in the RC section. However, the slight increase in difficulty level of RC (compared to CAT 2017) might have been offset to a large extent by the Para Formation Questions, which were relatively simpler compared to CAT 2017. So, test-takers who have managed to ride the initial surprise and gather themselves would have done well.

With many readable and not-so-tough RC passages, the VARC section may have appeared very crackable. The surprise was the number of questions in the passages. Instead of the expected 6-Q and 3-Q passages, the test had four 5-Q passages and one 4-Q passage, which may have upset the strategy of students a little bit. The passages were mostly readable (except for one), and in almost 80% of the questions, it was, as expected, quite easy to eliminate two options. The question types were also quite similar to the previous year’s CAT.

The VA questions, on Para Formation/Para Odd-One-out were quite simple to crack especially given that the PFQs only had four sentences instead of the expected number of five. This made the four PFQ questions must-attempts. The sentences in these questions were not very long reducing the difficulty level and making the questions appealing. The Odd-One-Out questions were relatively easy to crack as well. LackThe absence of negative marking for these questions was definitely a plus for the students. The Para summary questions might have posed a challenge for some students. While one of them was simple, the other two were reasonably time-consuming.

A good number of attempts for this section would be around 24 (getting at most 1/3rd of the questions wrong) to be able to score 85 percentile (sectional cut-off)

Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning Analysis

CAT 2016 and CAT 2017 had a ferocious bout between them in terms of setting a new benchmark in difficulty level for the LRDI section. And then CAT 2018 took place. The test takers would have been pleasantly surprised to find the difficulty level going down slightly. Students who could remain calm and composed would have been able to score well. The difficulty level of the Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning section certainly went down a notch in CAT2018 to the relief of the students. Some of the DI sets were not difficult in terms of interpretation and the questions too in these sets were not tricky in nature. Students who had persisted throughout the AIMCATs would have kept their balance and found this section very manageable.

A good number of attempts for this section would be around 15 (getting at most 1/3rd of the questions wrong) to be able to get 85 percentile (sectional cut-off)

Quantitative Ability Analysis

The Quant section had 34 Questions with around 8 Questions of non-MCQ type. The number of questions on Geometry was on the higher side and some of them can be considered to be moderately difficult. This was offset by the large number of doable arithmetic questions which would have helped aspirants increase their attempts.

The low weightage trend for numbers continued this year in the morning slot. All in all, the difficulty level of this section can be classified as being slightly higher than moderate level (maybe a moderate plus).

A good number of attempts for this section would be around 15 (getting at most 1/3rd of the questions wrong) to be able to score 85 percentile (sectional cut-off)

 CAT 2018 Slot 2 Analysis

The second slot of CAT 2018 also did not have many major surprises in store compared to CAT 2017. However, overall, it turned out to be slightly tougher than the morning slot. While the VARC section was more or less at the same difficulty level as that of the morning slot, the bump up in the difficulty level is largely on the back of relatively tougher DILR and Quant sections.

Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension Analysis

The VARC section, was of moderate level – nothing too intimidating, but at the same time, not too simple. There was a marginal increase in the difficulty level of the RC section (compared to CAT 2017). The RC passages weren’t very lengthy. They were from topics which were engaging – Biology, Environment, Sociology, Science. In VA, the Para Formation Questions were simpler compared to those of CAT 2017. So, test-takers who could keep their wits upon them, would have done reasonably well.

As was the case with the morning slot, the surprise was the number of questions in the passages. 6-Q and 3-Q passages were replaced by four 5-Q passages and one 4-Q passage, which may have given a few students an initial jolt. The passages were not too straight forward to read, but at the same time wouldn’t pose too many challenges to the seasoned reader. The question types were also quite similar to those of CAT 2017. There were 27 MCQs and 7 non-MCQs. The VA questions, on Para Formation/Para Odd-One-out were quite simple to crack especially given that the PFQs only had four sentences instead of the expected number of five. The Odd-One-Out questions were relatively easy to crack as well, and so were the Para Summary Questions.

A good number of attempts for this section would be around 23 (getting at most 1/3rd of the questions wrong) to be able to 85 percentile.

Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning Analysis

Test takers from the second slot would have found the difficulty level of this section slightly more doable compared to that of CAT 2017. It was also a tad tougher than the difficulty level in the morning slot. There were 24 MCQs and 8 non-MCQs. Nevertheless, there were relatively easier sets such as the one with ‘room numbers’ and the one with ‘profitability and market share’ which should have been solved comfortably. Most of the sets were found to be lengthy and time-consuming. Some of them were quite difficult to comprehend, owing to the depth of reasoning involved. Students who had persisted throughout the AIMCATs would have kept their balance and found this section manageable.

A good number of attempts for this section would be around 12 (getting at most 1/3rd of the questions wrong) to be able to get 85 percentile.

Quantitative Ability Analysis

The Quant section had 22 MCQs with 12 questions of non-MCQ type. The low weightage trend for Numbers continued this year in the afternoon slot as well. At the same time, Arithmetic was heavily favoured. There were a good number of questions from Geometry and Mensuration. All in all, the difficulty level of this section can be classified as being moderate to difficult level.

A good number of attempts for this section would be around 12 (getting at most 1/3rd of the questions wrong) to be able to get 85 percentile.

SNAPSHOT-FEB 2020 MAT EXAM

This MAT exam(Paper based test), conducted on 16Tth FEB 2020, had 200 questions to be attempted in 150 minutes. These 200 questions were from five test areas viz. Language Comprehension, Data Analysis and Sufficiency, Mathematical Skills, Intelligence and Critical Reasoning, Indian and Global Environment with exactly 40 questions in each. Each question had equal marking and one-fourth mark was deducted for every wrong answer. For the sake of convenience, 1 mark has been taken for every correct answer.

OVERALL SUMMARY(ESTIMATED FOR FEB 2020 MAT EXAM)

The consolidated score is evaluated by taking only four areas into account. Indian and Global Environment (GK) is not the part of the consolidated score. Hence, the scoring is done out of a maximum possible score of 160 marks(@1 mark for 160 qs). However, the score card(by AIMA) doesnot give the net marks. It gives the scaled score and the percentile in each and every section. It also gives the overall composite score and the overall percentile.

Let us analyze the different types of questions from each of the test area along with the overall difficulty level of each of the test area.

DATA ANALYSIS AND SUFFICIENCY

As shown in the table below, this test area comprises Data Interpretation (DI), Data Sufficiency (DS) and Data Comparison, with DI accounting for 30 out of 40 questions while Data Sufficiency and Data Comparison put together accounting for the remaining 10 questions. The questions in DI involved were based on observation, calculations like comparison of fractions, computing the averages , percentage based calculations etc. The types of charts were related to Line Graphs, Bar Charts, Tables, Pie Charts. Overall, this test area can be considered to be Moderate. A good time allocation strategy would be to spend around 35-40 min for a good net score of 16 marks.

INTELLIGENCE AND CRITICAL REASONING

This test area is a mix of Analytical reasoning (25 questions) and Critical reasoning (15 questions). A good time allocation strategy would be to spend around 30 min. Overall, the questions on Analytical Reasoning were of easy-moderate difficulty level and a good student would have found this area manageable.

Overall this test area can be classified as MODERATE. A net score of 21 marks or above is considered to be a good score in this section.

LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION

This test area, once again, had a good mix of 20 questions from Reading Comprehension and 20 questions from Verbals. A good time allocation strategy would be to spend around 30-35 min. There were four passages and each passage had five questions to be answered. The questions in Verbal require basic knowledge about English usage & functional grammar. Overall, the test area can be classified as MODERATE. A good score is estimated to be 17 in the time limit of 30-35 min.

MATHEMATICAL SKILLS

The paper predominantly had questions from the Arithmetic areas like (Percentages, Profit and Loss, Time and Work, Mensuration, Time and Distance, Simple Equations, Ratio, Proportion, Variation). The questions involved only the basics and those who would have done adequate practice would have found those questions quite doable. The success in this particular test area depended on one’s basic conceptual skills, and calculation skills. Overall, the test area can be classified as MODERATE- DIFFICULT.

A good time allocation strategy would be to spend around 35-40 min for a very good net score of 14.

INDIAN AND GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

The questions in this test area were, predominantly, from business, Current Affairs, Awards, Sports, Person and their associated fields, etc. Those who read newspapers on a regular basis will find this area comfortable. Overall this test area can be classified as Moderate. It is to be noted that the marks scored in this section is NOT counted in the consolidated score. A good time allocation strategy would be to spend a maximum time ofaround 5 minutes for a good net score of 6 marks.

CMAT 2020 was conducted on January 28, 2020 in a single slot from 9.30 am to 12.30 pm. CMAT scores are accepted by many top MBA colleges like Goa Institute of Management, SIMSREE, K J Somaiya etc.

The exam was conducted in the Computer Based Test (CBT) format. The duration of the exam was three hours (180 minutes). The structure of CMAT 2020 remained the same as that of the earlier CMAT exams.

The test had four sections with 25 questions each. Each question was of MCQ type with four options. Each correct answer carried four marks while there was a penalty of 1 mark for every wrong answer. There was no time limit for each section. A candidate could freely move across the sections throughout the exam duration.

The distribution of the questions is as given in the table below:

Students who reported at the center venues after the Gate Closure time (which was 30 minutes before the commencement of the exam) were not allowed to enter. Like last year, this year also CMAT exam was conducted by National Testing Agency (NTA).

Students were permitted to take breaks during the exam but not in the first 30 minutes and in the last 30 minutes of the exam. However, candidates were NOT allowed to move out of the exam hall with their hall tickets even if they ended their test ahead of the stipulated time.

The hall tickets of the candidates and the rough sheets taken by the candidate were collected after everybody ended their tests. This time, there was an additional procedural step of pasting one’s photograph on the attendance sheet during the exam.

Given below is a summary of the CMAT test based on students’ observations and reactions post the exam:

Quantitative Techniques and Data Interpretation (QTDI):

As compared to the paper pattern two years back, there were fewer number of calculation-intensive questions. The questions were spread across a wide range of topics viz., Numbers, Ratio & Proportion, Time & Work, Time & Distance, Geometry, Mensuration, P&C, Probability, Sets & Venn Diagrams, etc.

There were four questions based on Data Interpretation which was actually easy to solve. The set was a table comprising the strength of boys and girls of five schools in 6 years.

A well-prepared student could have attempted 21-22 questions in the section.

Logical Reasoning (LR): There was one set (family tree) comprising four questions. Similar to last year, most questions in this section were on the easy to moderate side. Questions included coding-decoding, direction sense, alpha-numeric-symbolic series, cubes, Venn diagrams, visual diagrams, comparisons, series based, analogies and odd man out.

There were four questions on Verbal Reasoning (Analogy, Strong-Weak Arguments, etc.). A good student could have answered 21-22 questions.

Language Comprehension (LC): There was only one Reading Comprehension passage in the third section with five questions. A good student could have attempted 4 out of the 5 questions easily.

The Verbal Ability segment had 20 questions. These included questions on Synonyms, Antonyms, Error spotting, Fill in the Blanks, One-word substitution, Para jumbles, Meanings of words and their usage in sentences, Grammatically correct sentence etc.

The section was easy to moderate, and a serious test taker should have been able to answer 20-21 questions.

General Awareness (GA): This section was moderate in difficulty level. Most of the questions were based on Static GK. The section had questions on:

• Geography,
• Literature,
• Religion,
• Government Ministries,
• Booker prize, Awards and Honors,
• General Science,
• Politics,
• Banking,
• International organizations,
• Sports and Games,
• Current Affairs & General Knowledge.

A good student would be able to answer around 16 questions in this section.

The overall cut offs are expected to increase as CMAT 2020 is easier as compared to last year’s paper.

IBS Aptitude Test (IBSAT) 2018 was an online computer based test conducted in a 2 days test window. Some of the candidates had been allotted December 22 as their IBSAT exam date and others December 23.

The paper was pretty much without any surprises except that there were 4 sections this time and not five. The total number of questions was 140 and a student was given two hours to attempt the test. A student was given the flexibility to answer questions from any section, in any order, i.e. the sections were not timed. The question panel appeared on the left-hand side of the screen. The questions were displayed on the right.

Most of the questions were straightforward. RCs were moderate reads with most of the questions directly from the passages. There were difficult and unfamiliar words introduced in the Vocabulary area. Questions in QA were mostly easy barring a few which were from higher maths. The DI sets had easy to moderate calculations.

A snapshot analysis of the four sections is presented below:

We now give a detailed analysis of the four sections:

Section I – Verbal Ability 1

This section had a mix of vocabulary, grammar, and verbal ability questions.

1. Pure Vocabulary included a total of 25 questions – five questions each of synonyms, antonyms, analogy, a one-word replacement for a phrase, and idioms. The vocabulary segment was slightly difficult as compared to last year. There were unfamiliar words in the options for these questions. Some of the idioms were also uncommon. In the case of antonym questions, working with the options would have helped. The wrong choices were all synonyms of the given word. So the antonym would be the odd one out and hence the answer.
2. The Grammar area had a total of 10 questions. There were five questions on error spotting where the sentence was divided into four parts. The fifth choice was labeled as ‘no error’. The grammar part also included five questions on underlined phrase replacement. The five underlined phrase replacement questions were difficult with long stretches of the sentence underlined and which needed correction.
3. The Verbal ability segment had a total of 15 questions within the section. These included five questions on double or paired fill in the blanks in a sentence, five questions on paragraph or sentence formation questions where four sentences or parts of sentences were given jumbled up and five questions on Para completion (Cloze Test)(5 words missing in the paragraph). The level of difficulty of the Verbal Ability segment was moderate.

Section II – Reading Comprehension

This section comprised four RC passages with a total of 30 questions. Two passages had 8 questions each, one passage had 9 questions and the fourth passage had 5 questions. The number of words varied from 380 to 870 words. The passages made for very interesting reading and the questions were also pretty much straightforward.

As far as strategy was concerned, one could have looked at the questions first and chosen the passages based on interest and question types. There was one passage which had really lengthy questions and this could have been attempted last or at the end of the test (after a student has done questions from the other sections). The passages had their fair share of specific detail, inference, and vocabulary based questions.

Section III – Quantitative Ability

 The Quant section had a good mix of questions from Numbers, Arithmetic, Geometry-Mensuration, and Higher Maths. Most of the questions can be classified as Easy to Moderate difficulty level.

The Quant section this year had a toned down difficulty level as compared to the paper two years ago. There were no questions on Coordinate Geometry, Trigonometry and Differential Calculus.

Below is the distribution of the questions from various topics:

Section IV – Data Sufficiency & Data Interpretation

The Data Sufficiency segment was purely Quant based. There were no logical reasoning concepts tested in this segment. The Quant based DS segment had questions mainly from Numbers, Probability, Mixtures and Alligations, Averages, Time and Work, Calendars and Geometry. The questions in the Data Sufficiency segment were all moderate questions. There were a total of 15 questions of this type.

The Data Interpretation segment presented a total of 15 questions in three sets of five questions each. The three DI sets included:

1) A pie chart and bar graph presenting the distribution of Relief Fund among 5 states.

2) A caselet based on percentages. It included data about students appearing for exams in three courses in two colleges.

3) A table and a caselet providing data about male and female employees of five companies working in the day or night shift. Again this set was all about the application of percentages.

The first two DI sets had easy questions. The last set required one to first plug in the missing data in the table based on conditions given in the caselet and was time-consuming. The third set could have been done at the end.

OVERALL ANALYSIS

Good vocabulary, high reading speed, smart question selection and keeping a tab on time would have ensured a student did well on the test. Being flexible in terms of moving across sections during the test also would have helped. Leaving lengthy questions with lengthy choices especially in RC would have ensured that you maximized the number of attempts on the test.

A total of 80 could be termed as a good number of attempts on this test.

All the best!