CAT 2018 Analysis – Slot 2
In continuation to the Morning slot analysis, CAT did good justice of balancing both the slots. While students would have felt a slightly higher difficulty level in DILR and VA. Quant was mostly felt to be of the same difficulty level.
The sectional, in depth analysis is as follows:
With 24 RC questions and 10 non-RC questions, the overall format was as expected. The surprise was in the 5 questions per RC in 4 RCs and 4 questions in 1 RC. This also meant that the length of each RC was 550 to 650 words. So, the pattern was exactly as that of the morning slot. The RC topics were contemporary with easy language making comprehension easy. The topics were Science- based discussing Saturn Planet rings/moons, Use of technology in education, Limitations of Performance matrix, Evolution/speciation of snails and Psychology-based – Random decision making. The questions were the usual main idea, except, inferences, direct and logical purpose questions with a good number of strengthen/weaken the argument questions thrown in.
The Para-jumbles were surprisingly easy involving only 4 sentences (last year, all of them had 5 sentences), 2 of the 4 questions being really easy. The 3 Summary questions had one-liner but tricky options making it rather difficult. The 3 Out of Context questions made one think a little more, but not a tough ask for a student who has prepared well. The 7 key-in questions were Para-jumbles and Out of Context.
The section was moderate. For a 98 percentile, 27 attempts here with an 80% accuracy should be considered good.
CAT continued its legacy with keeping the DI section most challenging out of three. Selecting the right set was certainly the key. Students who got stuck or spent more than required time on a particular set would have lost the section altogether. Compared to the morning slot, DI in afternoon was a notch difficult. The eight sets with four questions each are explained below:
|New Age DI||Products of two companies plotted across axes and area of the graph||Difficult|
|Traditional LR||Coding -Decoding (Alphanumeric)||Moderate|
|DI – Table||College Ranking with weights||Easy to Moderate|
|Traditional DI (Table)||Revenue- Market Share- Profitability||Moderate|
|New Age LR||Ticket purchased by different generation||Moderate|
|Set Theory||Maximum Minima based||Moderate|
|Traditional LR||Arrival of People – Linear Arrangement||Easy|
Overall, a student who has prepared well should be able to attempt 4 to 5 sets properly in the allocated 60 minutes. This section could be termed moderate. For a 98 percentile, 19 attempts with an 80% accuracy should be considered good.
This was indeed the surprise of the paper and unnerved the test-takers. CAT certainly increased the difficulty level of this section from last year. Thus, unlike last year Quant was of moderate level. Afternoon slot had a high proportion of Geometry, Alligation- Mixtures ,Time and Work and Time Speed and Distance questions, this altered the balance of this section. A lot of students ended up skipping questions which were below average in difficulty-level because of the look of the question!
Overall, it was a far more balanced section compared to previous years’ formats and students had to spend some time on questions rather than look for sitters as sitters were fewer in number. Another feature was that the 12 key-in questions were time consuming and required students to be clear about concepts and careful in calculations.
The section was moderate to difficult. For a 98 percentile, 25 attempts with 80% accuracy should be considered good.
Find below the percentile projections on the basis of raw scores:
|Expected Percentile on basis of Raw Scores|
Overall, this paper was balanced across all sections and one needs to appreciate CAT authorities for creating a blockbuster of a paper which will only increase students’ faith in the system.
Wishing all the best to all the test takers for the results!
Recommended for you
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 …
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 …
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 …
- Top 5 reasons to subscribe to CAT Mock Tests July 22, 2021
- Endeavor Careers Choicest Blogs: July 2021, Week 03 July 21, 2021
- Is MBA still relevant in 2021? July 15, 2021
- Current Affairs Choicest Blog: May 2021, Week 3 May 18, 2021
- Endeavor Careers Choicest Blogs: July 2021, Week 02 July 12, 2021