(For video analysis please scroll to the bottom)
CAT 2017 had 3 sections as mentioned in CAT Notification and Online Demo:
As per the format, the first section was Reading Comprehension and Verbal Ability. The break-up of questions were the same as last year i.e. 24 questions of RC divided in 5 Passages as 2 passages having 3 questions each and 3 passages having 6 questions each. There were 3 questions on Summary, 4 in Parajumbles and 3 Out of Context questions. The second Section of 32 questions had the expected break up of 16 questions from each sub section i.e. Logical Reasoning and Data Interpretation. There were 4 sets in each sub-section carrying 4 questions each. The third Section was Quantitative Ability having 34 questions spread across different concepts of Arithmetic, Algebra, Modern Mathematics and Geometry.
The in-depth analysis of the sectionals is as follows:
CAT 2017 had exactly same format as CAT 2016 with the difficulty level a notch lower.
With 10 questions of Verbal Ability and 10 questions of Reading Comprehension, the Verbal Section of CAT 2017 was a close replica of CAT 2016 with minor changes. Like last year, Vocabulary based, Grammar based, Logical Continuation and Critical Reasoning questions were missing.
RCs were 5 in number: 3 RCs (450-600 words) with 6 questions each & 2 RCs (250-350 words,) with 3 questions each. One RC was a 250+ words single paragraph. Though, by the look of it, this subsection might have appeared intimidating, it wasn’t really difficult. The passages were fairly contemporary; spread across Economy, Culture, Technology, Science, History. Of the 24 questions, 10-12 questions were direct and called for a lot of regression. About 4-5 questions were of the format: “The author would agree to all of the below, EXCEPT” which again led to back and forth reading of the passages. About 5 questions were related to main idea and primary purpose of the passage. There were several inferential questions, a logical continuation and an assumption question. Overall, the RCs in terms of intensity of language / density or depth of the topic were light but slightly time consuming because of the regression it called for.
Verbal Ability had just 3 types of questions: Logical Discontinuity / Out of Context questions (3 questions), Summary/Main point of the passage (3 questions) & Parajumbles (4 questions).
Parajumbles were ‘key ins’. The 5 sentences to be re-arranged made them slightly challenging. Links were available, but were two broken links, making these questions a little tricky and time consuming. Since these questions carried no negative marking, a smart test taker would be able to attempt them with 75% accuracy.
Out of Context was also of the non-MCQ variety but with just a number to be keyed-in, appeared “pseudo non-MCQ”. Out of context questions comprised 5 sentences. They were easy in difficulty level, hence should not have been missed.
Summary questions were not ‘key ins’ this time like in CAT 2016. This slot had rather short passages (75 to 100 words), with one question being abstract. The one-sentence options made them less of a summary and more of the main point of the author. The difficulty level for this question type was moderate to difficult. Overall, the VARC section was of moderate difficulty-level.
27-28 attempts with 90% accuracy can be classified as a good score in this section.
Challenging section – Could be the final decider, again.
This section seemed to be toughest, though little easier than the Morning Slot.
Sets of Chess, Dorms and Asset Distribution were relatively easy among the 8 sets the section had. The set of finger prints and arrangement was also doable. Basic calculation skills were tested through the set having fours types of Pizza. Arguably the set discussing re-allocation of students among six courses was a tricky one and needed understanding of data analysis in depth.
Overall, Attempting 18+ questions with 80% accuracy can be considered for good score.
Overall, again LR/DI section may become bottleneck for most of the students. Though, this section was expected to be tough, but handling newer varieties of question is always difficult. Moreover, lot of sets were time consuming and hence, it would not have been easy to skip sets.
This section was very easy even with comparison of previous year’s Quant section. A huge number of easy questions maintained the pace right. Almost all the chapters had a usual share of 1-2 Qs in the section. However, just one question from Number System was a surprise. Three questions from function and Progressions each were also on the higher side. Geometry had a usual share of six questions.
Overall distribution of questions was as below:
|Modern Maths||12 Questions|
With just 3-4 questions being difficult and more than a third of the section easy and remaining moderate, overall the difficulty level of section was easy to moderate.
Such a paper has advantages as well as disadvantages – you should have been prepared with everything and just in case you have left just a chapter or two, the damage isn’t astounding. Hence, a cheer-worthy paper for a prepared test taker.
27 attempts with 90% accuracy can be classified as a good score in this section.
Below mentioned is the expected break up of sectional scores with respective percentiles:
|Percentile||Verbal Ability||DI + LR||Quantitative Ability||Overall|
View our analysis below
Best wishes for the results.
Recommended for you
Here’s a faster and easier way to stay updated – Subscribe to Endeavor on Whatsapp CLAT 2019 Exam Analysis Overview of CLAT 2019: Total Questions: 200 | Total Duration: 120 minutes | Marking: +1 for Correct answer and – 0.25 for Incorrect answer …
Here’s a faster and easier way to stay updated – Subscribe to Endeavor on Whatsapp IPMAT 2019 Exam Analysis- IIM Rohtak Overview of IPMAT 2019 for IIM Rohtak: Total Questions: 120 | Duration: 120 minutes | Marking: …
Here’s a faster and easier way to stay updated – Subscribe to Endeavor on Whatsapp CHRIST BBA Entrance Test Analysis – 2018 Total Questions: 120 Total Marks: 120 Total Duration: 120 minutes (No sectional Time …
MAH Law CET (5-Year Law Program) – 2018: Exam Analysis Total Questions: 150 Total Marks: 150 Total Duration: 120 minutes (No sectional Time Limit) Marking System Marking: +1 for Correct, No Negative Marking Paper Pattern …
Here’s a faster and easier way to stay updated – Subscribe to Endeavor on Whatsapp CMAT 2018 Exam Analysis: Afternoon Slot Quantitative Techniques and Data Interpretation (25 Questions): Slot 2 had 3 questions from Data …
Total Questions: 150 Total Marks: 150 Total Duration: 120 minutes Negative Marking: No Negative Marking Section 1: Legal Aptitude and Legal Reasoning No. of Questions: 30 MHCET-Law for admission to the 3-year LLB courses consisted …
Total Questions: 150 Total Marks: 150 Total Duration: 120 minutes Negative Marking: No Negative Marking Section 1: Legal Aptitude and Legal Reasoning No. of Questions: 40 The legal section of MHCET LAW was pretty comfortably …
Exam Analysis: CLAT 2017 Total Questions: 200 Total Duration: 120 minutes Negative Marking: 1/4th or – 0.25 Elementary Mathematics Total questions: 20 Quantitative section was dominated by Arithmetic based questions, especially Time & Work (4 questions) …
Exam Analysis: NPAT 2017 Total Questions: 120 Total Duration: 120 minutes No Negative Marking Section 1: Quantitative and Numerical Ability No. of Questions: 40 Time Allotted: 45 Minutes When it was clearly known to students …
Total Questions: 150 Total Marks: 150 Total Duration: 150 minutes Negative Marking: No Negative Marking Section 1: Quantitative Ability No. of Questions: 40 The section had questions dominated by Arithmetic. Questions ranged from topics like …
Total Questions: 150 Total Marks: 150 Total Duration: 150 minutes Negative Marking: No Negative Marking Section 1: Logical Reasoning No. of Questions: 30 This sections had some good quality and tough questions on Cause-Effect, Statement …
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 …
Name of Exam: Maharashtra Common Entrance Test (MHCET-2016) for MMS/MBA/PGDM Exam Date: 12th and 13th March 2016 Other Details: 200 Questions 200 Marks (1 mark for correct and No negative markings) 5 options Computer-Based Linear …
SET 2016 ( BBA, BSc, BA, BMS, BCA) Exam Complete Analysis Total Questions: 150 Total Marks: 150 Total Duration: 120 minutes Negative Marking: No Negative Marking Section 1: Quantitative Ability No. of Questions: 40 This section was more or less like last …
Total Questions:130 Total Marks:130 Total Duration:120 minutes Negative Marking: 0.25 marks Section1: Quantitative Ability No. of Questions: 30 This was supposed to be moderate section for a well prepared student. Like last year this year …
Total Questions: 150 Total Duration: 120 minutes Negative Marking: 1/4th of allotted marks Section 1: Proficiency in English Language No. of Questions: 50 It seems this season is favouring students who have good command over …
Analysis of NMAT 2016-17 Other Examinations like to be Unpredictable. NMAT likes to be Standardized. NMAT has once again maintained its format and difficulty level (except for a couple of minor tweaks) same as the …
One Sentence Analysis: “Quant and DI Questions were even more time consuming than what they were expected to be.” Section-wise detailed Analysis is as follows: Quantitative Ability & Data Interpretation (48 Questions, 60 Minutes): This …
- NMAT 2019 Exam Analysis October 4, 2019
- Fact File | ICFAI Business School | 2019 September 27, 2019
- Benchmark Your Preparation With Online Mock CET September 10, 2019
- Strategy To Crack CAT Online Exam In The First Attempt September 8, 2019
- Endeavor’s BBA Online Course – The Easiest & Fastest Way To Prepare For BBA Entrances September 8, 2019