CAT 2006
What was the change?
CAT 2006: To describe the paper, we quote an old saying: Change is the only constant!
The nail-biting suspense regarding the structure and composition of CAT 2006 finally ended on November 19. The 300-mark paper had a lean look [almost anorexic], with just 75 questions. Each question carried four marks. There was no differential marking. The penalty for every wrong answer was 1 mark. Another departure from the norm was that there were five options instead of the usual four.
The Quantitative and Data Interpretation sections were easier compared to the earlier years but the English section was high voltage, with extremely close options and called for exemplary logical ability.
As we have always maintained, the test focused on reasoning and comprehension skills and discouraged “mechanical preparedness”.
The Visible Change
Overall Test : 3 sections 75 questions
Section I : Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning - 25 questions
Section II : Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension - 25 questions
Section III : Problem Solving - 25 questions
The breakup of questions was as follows:

The Real Change:
The Real Change is the decisive shift towards reasoning-intensiveness. The CAT wants to test your conceptual clarity and application skills. The reason for 5 options was to eliminate the ‘short-cut’ approach.
It was perfectly in sync with the IIMs’ philosophy of placing emphasis on reasoning intensive questions and not technique-based questions. Our emphasis has always been on building accuracy and application skills. If you carefully analyse and compare the CAT with the SimCATs, you will find many similarities.
The Analysis of the three sections:
Section I: Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning
As in the past few years, this section was once again reasoning-intensive with a minimal need for calculations. However, this section was far easier as compared to last year. This section comprised 25 questions based on DI (20 questions) and LR (5 questions). Out of the four sets in DI, two were reasoning-based and two were calculation-based. One should have attempted the set based on traffic flow and the set based on board exams. The set based on Erdos numbers was difficult to interpret but easy to solve. The LR set was the easiest set in the section. One could have attempted 3 out of 5 sets in the stipulated time to meet the cut-offs.
The breakup of questions was as follows:

Section II: Verbal Ability
The English Section was challenging and had logic as the only decisive element. Clearly, reasoning ruled the roost. Old favourites like vocabulary-based questions, grammar-based questions and jumbled paragraphs were given a burial. Instead, we had five Fact-Inference-Judgement questions which were definitional in nature. Once you were clear about the stated definitions, you could have solved the questions confidently. ‘Providing the conclusion’ type questions were five in number and tested your understanding of the given text. Reading Comprehension comprised three dense passages that had mostly interpretative and inferential questions. If your logical skills were in place, you could have solved this section without heartbreak. Careful reading, comprehension & interpretation could yield the right answers.
The breakup of questions was as follows:

Section III: Problem Solving
Unlike the past few years, the PS section turned out to be the easiest of the lot. If one devoted 50 minutes to this section, one could easily score around 50 to 60 marks right here. The section covered all the four areas of Math viz, Arithmetic, Algebra, Modern Maths and Geometry. Thus to perform well, a student needed to be equally competent in all the four areas. The questions tested basic fundamentals as well as strong reasoning skills and decision-making abilities. It was crucial for a student to know when to apply conventional methods and when to evaluate options for managing time efficiently.
The breakup of questions was as follows:

Now, we deal with the all-important query in the student’s mind:
What could be the probable cut-offs?
The cut-offs:

Overall score

Please note that these are generalized indicators without taking into consideration a student’s academic profile, work experience etc.
CAT 2006: To describe the paper, we quote an old saying: Change is the only constant!
The nail-biting suspense regarding the structure and composition of CAT 2006 finally ended on November 19. The 300-mark paper had a lean look [almost anorexic], with just 75 questions. Each question carried four marks. There was no differential marking. The penalty for every wrong answer was 1 mark. Another departure from the norm was that there were five options instead of the usual four.
The Quantitative and Data Interpretation sections were easier compared to the earlier years but the English section was high voltage, with extremely close options and called for exemplary logical ability.
As we have always maintained, the test focused on reasoning and comprehension skills and discouraged “mechanical preparedness”.
The Visible Change
Overall Test : 3 sections 75 questions
Section I : Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning - 25 questions
Section II : Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension - 25 questions
Section III : Problem Solving - 25 questions
The breakup of questions was as follows:

The Real Change:
The Real Change is the decisive shift towards reasoning-intensiveness. The CAT wants to test your conceptual clarity and application skills. The reason for 5 options was to eliminate the ‘short-cut’ approach.
It was perfectly in sync with the IIMs’ philosophy of placing emphasis on reasoning intensive questions and not technique-based questions. Our emphasis has always been on building accuracy and application skills. If you carefully analyse and compare the CAT with the SimCATs, you will find many similarities.
The Analysis of the three sections:
Section I: Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning
As in the past few years, this section was once again reasoning-intensive with a minimal need for calculations. However, this section was far easier as compared to last year. This section comprised 25 questions based on DI (20 questions) and LR (5 questions). Out of the four sets in DI, two were reasoning-based and two were calculation-based. One should have attempted the set based on traffic flow and the set based on board exams. The set based on Erdos numbers was difficult to interpret but easy to solve. The LR set was the easiest set in the section. One could have attempted 3 out of 5 sets in the stipulated time to meet the cut-offs.
The breakup of questions was as follows:

Section II: Verbal Ability
The English Section was challenging and had logic as the only decisive element. Clearly, reasoning ruled the roost. Old favourites like vocabulary-based questions, grammar-based questions and jumbled paragraphs were given a burial. Instead, we had five Fact-Inference-Judgement questions which were definitional in nature. Once you were clear about the stated definitions, you could have solved the questions confidently. ‘Providing the conclusion’ type questions were five in number and tested your understanding of the given text. Reading Comprehension comprised three dense passages that had mostly interpretative and inferential questions. If your logical skills were in place, you could have solved this section without heartbreak. Careful reading, comprehension & interpretation could yield the right answers.
The breakup of questions was as follows:

Section III: Problem Solving
Unlike the past few years, the PS section turned out to be the easiest of the lot. If one devoted 50 minutes to this section, one could easily score around 50 to 60 marks right here. The section covered all the four areas of Math viz, Arithmetic, Algebra, Modern Maths and Geometry. Thus to perform well, a student needed to be equally competent in all the four areas. The questions tested basic fundamentals as well as strong reasoning skills and decision-making abilities. It was crucial for a student to know when to apply conventional methods and when to evaluate options for managing time efficiently.
The breakup of questions was as follows:

Now, we deal with the all-important query in the student’s mind:
What could be the probable cut-offs?
The cut-offs:

Overall score

Please note that these are generalized indicators without taking into consideration a student’s academic profile, work experience etc.

