Analysis of IIFT’15: Speed, Selection, Strategy…Cutoff!

Endeavor Careers Posted on March 8, 2017

A genuine roller coaster ride: Three years, three papers.
Cutoff for IIFT’13 was around 48.3
Cutoff for IIFT’14 was a little less than 38.5
Cutoff for IIFT’15 seems to be around 50
IIFT’15 was an easy paper wherein speed and selection will be the decider.

Section Wise Analysis:

Section 1:

Subsection 1 – Analytical Reasoning:

This can be called an absolute sitter. Nearly all the sets & individual questions were doable. Just one set was tricky because the questions were ambiguous (The set on countries) and hence a little time consuming, otherwise, the whole section can be completed in 20 mins. 15-16 can be said to be good attempts and approximately 10 marks can be considered a good score in this section. All in all, a section worth spending 20 mins in and a section that won’t disappoint a test taker.

Subsection 2 – Data Interpretation:

There were 4 sets, out of which 2 sets were manageable, one was time consuming and one difficult to interpret. The set on www.jay.com had the Graph C Y-axis not so clear and hence possible that kids would have gotten disillusioned and left that set, however, an above average test taker would have guessed the values on the y-axis. Otherwise, if a test taker puts in 7-8 mins into each set, each set could have been solved. Just because the return on investment of time for this section isn’t as good as the AR or the Verbal Ability or the Quant section, it is a little not-so-much-worth to overspend time in this section. All in all, putting in 22-23 mins into this section to fetch 12-13 attempts to eventually fetch 6-7 marks in this section can be considered a good score.

Section 2:

Subsection 1 – Reading Comprehension:

4 RCs, 4 questions each. So, it was more or less last year’s CAT’s RC section. Even the intensity and difficulty level matches that of CAT14. The RCs on steel industry, IMF & worldwide information network were doable. Again, because it is poor return on investment on time (the realization is not more than 1 Question per min) and hence even RCs are not a glamorous steal. Spending 25 mins and attempting 3 RCs can be considered ideal. All in all, making a comfortable 10 attempts with a net realization of 7-8 marks can be considered a good score.

Subsection 2 – Verbal Ability:

This section can be considered fast-food. With 2 questions on parajumbles, 2 questions on idioms, 2 on word usage, 9 questions on vocabulary, the whole section seems a quick run-through. Also, the fact that a lot of words were from the “frequently asked words” in any competitive exam, this subsection seemed easy. Moreover, the return on investment of time was good. So, ideally, every test taker would have left after finishing the section and that ideally would have taken him / her around 15 mins. A good score in this section can be around 9 marks with good attempts being around 15-16 questions.

Section 3 – General Knowledge:

It is difficult to rate a GK section because perceptions differ from person to person. However, the spread of questions was impressive. There were questions on Eurozone, world history, authors and books, awards and recognition, inventions, world economy etc. All in all, 12 mins spent in this section is enough to see through the length of this section and to go through every question. A person with good awareness will be able to attempt around 16 questions. 5-6 marks can be considered a good score in this section.

Section 4 – Quantitative Ability:

The spread of the section wasn’t as good as last year. Arithmetic had unprecedented weightage with 10 questions from it. Algebra & Geometry had just 3 questions from each. Modern mathematics had a representation of 6 questions. The questions from the difficulty level standpoint was such: There were 9 sitters & 6 other moderate questions which would have taken less than 1-1.5 mins per questions. All in all, with 25 mins given to the section, attempting 16-17 questions and scoring 12-14 marks can be considered a good score.

Overall, this is how it seems:

IIFT 2015 Analysis Snapshot

		124		100		120	87	55
		No of Qs	Weightage	Total	Difficulty Level	Time Allocation (Mins)	Good Attempts	Good Score	Predicted Sectional Cutoffs	Predicted Total Cutoffs
Sec 1	Analytical Reasoning	20	0.75	15	Easy	20	16	10	9	48.67
Sec 1	Data Interpretation	18	1	18	Moderate to Difficult	23	11	7	9
Sec 2	Reading Comprehension	16	1	16	Moderate	25	12	8	8
Sec 2	Verbal Ability	20	0.75	15	Easy to Moderate	16	15	10	8
Sec 3	General Awareness	28	0.5	14	Moderate	12	16	6	3
Sec 4	Quantitative Ability	22	1	22	Easy to Moderate	24	17	14	6