MBA Tests and Analysis      2015   |   2014   |   2013   |   2012

Analysis: XAT 2013

XAT 2013 was different from XAT 2012 in terms of difficulty level as well as in number of questions. The numbers of questions were reduced to 85 from 101. As announced earlier, the difficulty level was comparatively easier than last year's paper. Like last year, this year also there was differential marking scheme. There were questions of 1, 1.5 and 2marks. Right selection of questions will play an important role in clearing the cutoffs.

Overview of the paper:

There were 85 questions (3 Sections) in all and the time allotted was 2hrs. The three sections were as follows:

Decision making
Quantitative ability
English language ability and logical reasoning making

Overview of the XAT 2013 Paper

Time allotted 2Hrs. + 20 Minutes for paragraph
Total no. of questions 85
Marking Scheme Different for different questions
Sections 3
Number of choices 5
Negative Marking One fourth of the mark(s) allotted for each question
Expected cut-offs* A score of 36+ can expect a call from XLRI 32+ can expect a call from XIMB 26+ can expect a call from GIM/BIM/LIBA 18+ can expect a call from XIME/XISS

Overview of Different Sections

Sr. No. Sections No. of Questions Difficulty Level
1 Decision Making 25 Moderate to Tough
2 Quantitative ability& DI 28 Moderate
3 English Language ability & Logical Reasoning 32 Easy to Moderate

SECTIONAL - ANALYSIS

SECTION I: Decision Making
Area Tested Description No. of Questions
Decision Making Decision Making 25

Evaluation: There were 16 questions of 1 mark each, 8 questions of 1.5 marks each and 1 question of 2 marks each. Thus the section had 30 as the maximum marks. Last year Decision Making and AR section were combined while this year decision making section was made separate. There were no AR blocks in the whole paper making the paper comparatively easier this year. In Decision Making the students found (Tina, a blast furnace expert) block tough and calculative. Rest of decision making questions required thorough and repeated reading. Choices were very close. One should have attempted this section with much caution.

Comfortable Attempt: A score totaling to 15+
Achievable Score: 9+ was an achievable score.



SECTION II: Quantitative Ability
Area Tested Description No. of Questions
Quantitative ability & DI BAR Graph 3
Percentage 3
Number System 3
Time, Speed & Distance 3
Mixtures and Partnership 2
Geometry 5
Trigonometry 1
Profit & Loss 3
Pie Chart 2
Sets 1
Misc. 5

Evaluation: There were 19 question of 1 mark each, 4 questions of 1.5 marks each and 5 question of 2 marks each. So this section had (1 × 19 + 1.5 × 4 + 2×5 = 35) 35 as maximum marks. The 1 mark questions were easy as compared to 1.5 & 2 marks questions. There were no higher math questions this year in this section. Right selection of questions was important as there were random traps in this section.

Comfortable Attempt: A score totaling to 12+
Achievable Score: 10+ was an achievable score.



SECTION III: Verbal & Logical Abilities
Area Tested Description No. of Questions Difficulty Level /Remarks
Verbal & Logical Abilities RC 13 Moderate to Tough
CR 6 13
Grammar 2  
Sentence Rearrangement 3  
Analogies / vocabulary/ odd man out 7  
Syllogism 1  

Evaluation: Verbal section predominately consisted of critical reasoning and reading comprehension along with few questions on vocabulary, grammar, parajumbles etc. Overall feel of the section was easy.

Comfortable Attempt: A score totalling to 20+
Achievable Score: 12+ was an achievable score.


ESSAY TOPIC

There were two topics to be chosen from in the Essay writing section.
Government is not addressing the root cause of poverty.
Government is not able to implement the policies properly due to the huge magnitude of poverty.

The test takers were asked to select one of the statements and were asked to present his/her judgment/views along with justifications and examples in approximately 250 words.
































*Disclaimer: All the above given information is based on personal opinion of Bulls Eye Expert faculty. Several factor have been considered before giving these cut-offs however, It has nothing to do with original cut-offs.
Logo
Cybrain Logo
© 2012 | Legal Notice | Terms
/javascript"> /* */