XAT 2018: The Xavier Association of Management Institutes (XAMI) successfully conducted the Xavier Aptitude Test (XAT) on January 7, yesterday. The online exam was conducted for admission to the post graduate management programmes. But reports of aspirants complaining about poor internet connection and server problems surfaced. XLRI also tweeted that at 2 centres, due to server related technical issues, the exam couldn’t be conducted. Re-examination will be conducted at these centres for the affected students and the new date will be announced soon.
The test was carried out for three hours and 35 minutes, from 10 am to 1:35 pm on Sunday. For the first time, XAT was also conducted in the computer-based format.
XAT 2018, check out the exam analysis here
In terms of the pattern, the paper was exactly similar to that of the last year.
A total number of questions were increased to 74 this year as compared to last year’s 72. The duration of the test was 170 minutes for the first part and 40 minutes for the second.
The paper was divided into parts:
Part-A: Verbal and Logical Ability (ii) Decision Making (iii) Quantitative Ability and Data Interpretation,
Part-B: General knowledge, and essay.
Negative marking: The section on general knowledge did not have any negative marking. Apart from that, all questions carried equal marks with negative marking (one-fourth of a mark for a wrong answer). There was a negative marking of 0.05 for un-attempted questions, for such questions over and above 8.
Part-A- Section 1: Verbal and Logical Ability
This section was very challenging. The four RC passages were very demanding. Besides, as expected, many of the non-RC questions had very close answer-choices. Since the questions following the RC passages were challenging because they were followed by very close options, the right thing to do would have been to try only 6 or 7 carefully selected questions. The poetry was on transcendental love and the questions would have proved a handful for a student who is not used to finding hidden meanings in the text.
The five critical reasoning questions included one question each on a fallacy in the argument, basis of decision-making, redundancy of text, inference and conclusion.
There were 2 para formation questions, one was extremely complex and the other one was relatively simpler. A sensible student would have attempted only one of these. Of the two vocabulary based questions, one was of a medium difficulty level, enabling a well-prepared student to attempt at least this. The two grammar questions were of a medium difficulty level.
14-16 attempts can be considered to be good in this section.
Expected cut-off: 7.5 – 8.5
Section 2: Decision Making
There were 21 questions in this section, from eight sets – Five sets of three questions each and three sets of two questions each. The questions were subjective and the answers choices were not too easy to eliminate. This year’s DM section was tougher, mainly for the reason that a couple of sets (Four Kingdoms and Three persons living on hills) were quite vague. The set of courier services, based on calculations, was doable.
The answer choices were very close to the sets based on Microfinance, Lal & Sons and Ava CEO. A couple of sets were seemingly modelled on the recent Board crisis of Infosys (Lal & Sons) and CEO crisis at TATA (Ava CEO).
Expected cut-off: 7-8
Section 3: Quantitative Ability and Data Interpretation
There was an equal distribution of easy and moderate-difficult questions. Only a few questions were tricky and required a thorough understanding of concepts. This year, the quant section was less difficult. Six questions from two DI sets were framed and both these sets were of moderate difficulty level.
An attempt of 18-20 with an accuracy of about 80 per cent can be considered to be a good bet.
Expected cut-off: 12-13
Questions were asked based on various areas, including history, geography, sports, business and Indian constitution. As the section is not used for shortlisting, there will be no cut-off requirement for this section. However, those who attempted over 11-13 with about 80 per cent accuracy can consider themselves to have done well.
The topic for the essay was “Can ethical values and sustainability coexist?”. Students were required to see if these two important things are mutually exclusive. A student who could logically establish that they are not – and in simple, grammatically correct English and in about 200 words – would have performed well.
Overall cut-off prediction