XAT 2016: Analysis of the paper-pattern

The exam consisted of two parts. The First part comprised of Verbal Ability, Decision making and Quantitative ability consisting of each 26,23 and 29 questions respectively totaling up to 78. The second part consisted of 25 GK questions and one essay-writing exercise to be done in 35 mins.

Verbal and Logical Ability

• The section was set to be moderately difficult. Out of 12, 4 were from vocabulary and grammar while the other 8 were from verbal reasoning comprising of poems, reasoning questions, para jumbles, and relations.

• There were about 14 questions based on reading comprehension, out of which most of them were inferential, one or two being direct.

• The usual mode of the attempt was to keep the reading comprehension to the last and attempt others before hand.

• Attempting about 80% of this section in 45 minutes was considered ideal.

Decision making and analytical reasoning

• The non-mathematical part of the section comprised of 7 sets of 2–3 questions. All of them were brief and all the questions were set to medium difficulty.

• Choice of questions would depend on each individual’s preferences.

• Attempting about 5 sets and 15 questions confidently was considered optimum.

Quantitative Ability

• This section was slightly easier than the XAT exam in the previous year.

• Questions on quantitative ability were based on Geometry, arithmetic, and modern mathematics.

• There were two sets of data interpretation section one with 4 questions and 3 questions, the prior being slightly tough and the latter being a tad easier.

• Attempting 80% of the paper right in an hour was considered good enough.

General Knowledge

• The section comprised of 25 questions spanning across national and international affairs.

• The student was required to possess the requisite general knowledge to attempt this section consisting of at the most 2 or 3 easy questions.

• A score of about 10 was considered good.

Essay writing

• An open-ended topic titled technology and nature are natural enemies was given.

• The student would clearly have to bring out points explaining both the aspects clearly.

• One must be capable of articulating his view accordingly and reach a conclusion not only well-supported but determined accurately.