|Section||No. of Questions||No. of non-MCQ questions||Difficulty Level||Good Attempts|
|Verbal Ability and Reading comprehension||34||10||Easy - moderate||27-28|
|Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning||32||8||Moderate - Difficult||16|
The questions in this section were of easy to moderate difficulty level. The trick was to aim for high accuracy by correctly identifying the factual questions in the RC section. However, one must have practiced adequately in order to tackle this lengthy session. . RC’s were majorly factual, not being inordinately lengthy or abstract. At most only two of the five given passages were tricky or tough.
The questions in Verbal ability were dominated by Verbal Logic and did not carry any negative marking, though they needed prior practice to aim for a high percentile.
Surprises: There were no questions of vocabulary or grammar and odd sentence out had five options contrary to the previous years making them a little tricky. No negative marking for Non-MCQs.
With an easy level of paper many students ended up attempting a lot of questions from RC passages and all questions from Verbal Logic. An attempt of 25-27 would be considered good in this section. 17-18 correct will ensure a 95 + percentile.
|Area||Topic||No. of Questions||Description|
|Reading Comprehension||24||There were total 5 passages - three passages (450 words each approximately) and two passages (300 words each). The three passages had 6 questions each and the other two had 3 questions each. Four passages were very easy to read. One passage was slightly tedious due to its length and even the questions were tricky. Most of the questions were factual. There were three idea based questions. Only two inferential questions were there. They were very easy. The difficulty level of the passages varied from easy to moderate. Any serious aspirant could have easily attempted 4 passages with about 75% accuracy.|
|Para-jumble||4||5 Sentence type. Two were very easy. Two para jumbles were really difficult. As they were non-MCQs, one should have attempted all. The trick was to identify the opening sentence and go ahead with the mandatory pair. The sentences were not lengthy either (unlike the previous years). Needed prior practice in order to be sure of the answer.|
|Summary||3||Small paragraph of about 150 words followed by four options. Elimination of options made the task easy. Only one question had two extremely close options. One had to simply type in the correct option number. Hence, it was not really non-MCQ.|
|Para-jumble (Odd sentence out)||3||New pattern. 5 sentence paragraphs and one was the odd sentence. Simple paragraphs with short sentences. Correct answer was easy due to the thematic difference. One needed to have practice of identifying mandatory pairs.|
In Data interpretation two sets were easy. There were two sets that were difficult and involved a lot of calculations. Most of the DI questions were lengthy. There were two sets of LR that were do able. In all anything more than 16 attempts is a very good try. An attempt of 20 is an excellent attempt.
|Section||Topic||No. of Questions|
|Data Interpretation||Line Chart (Names of People) - Easy||4|
|Table ( Cartridges ) - Moderate||4|
|Table ( Assets ) - Difficult||4|
|Drugs ( Table ) - Difficult||4|
|Logical Reasoning||Exam Scores - 5 student Scores - Easy||4|
|Project Management teams - Easy||4|
|Auction - Difficult- Non MCQ||4|
|Scheduling - Professors, Courses - Difficult||4|
There were 34 questions of QA. There were 15 Questions of Non MCQ type and the rest were MCQs. The difficulty level was marginally higher than the CAT 2014 (because of 15 non MCQ questions). The questions were designed to test the grasp of basic fundamentals. There were a couple of questions that were “sticky”. At the same time there were some that were straight out of formulae books!!
|Section||Topic||No. of Questions|
|Quantitative Ability||Number System||3|
|Trigonometry (Height & Distance)||1|
|Geometry and Mensuration||7|
With a moderately easier QA section, an attempt of 25-27 questions was definitely on.
Please Note: All information on analysis and scores are based on the accuracy of attempts provided by you as well as independent analysis and evaluation made by Career Launcher Academic Team. We do not take responsibility for any decision that might be taken, based on this information.