A lot of people keep asking me “How should I analyse a SimCAT?” so I felt I should do a post on that.
My observation is that most people write a test, then quickly check the answers/solutions to the ones they got wrong, and move on. They then wonder why the score doesn’t magically improve over time – after all, they are working so hard and taking so many tests! The thing is, taking a lot of tests, by itself, is not enough – one needs to identify areas of improvement and consciously work on them. So how does one proceed to do this?
The first step is the easiest (and consequently everyone does it mindlessly) – take the test, within the prescribed time limits. See the score if you like (but don’t check the correct answers just yet!)
Then, after a short rest break, attempt the test again without time limits. This will tell you which questions you were genuinely clueless about and which ones you lost out on solely because of the time constraints (in other words, it will help you identify the bottleneck in your preparation – conceptual clarity or speed). It will inform the first phase of your analysis below. After this exercise, go to the answer and explanations. And do the following 3 phases of analysis (in any order):
Phase 1: The ones you left (within the timed test)
The results obtained by taking the test a second time without time limits would guide you in this analysis. Identify which questions turned out to be easy, but which you ended up leaving for some reason or another. The two main reasons a question would go unsolved are
(a) You never got round to seeing it: in this case, the blame is squarely on your shoulders. Leaving questions unseen is extremely bad practice. Make sure that, during the 170 minutes available, you have managed to at least read every question and consciously decided whether or not to attempt it on its merits.
Understand that the broad, superficial topic should not be the only criterion for attempting or leaving a question. Don’t leave a question just because “it is from Probability” or “I hate Parajumbles” – you should be capable of attempting a simple question in any and every sub-field within the syllabus. Conversely, don’t attempt a question beyond your skills just because of some flawed logic like “I must do all TSD questions in every paper” or “I will attempt all the LR or die trying”. In analyses, I often found that people skipped questions from an area of discomfort in 3-4 seconds (even with a phenomenal reading/comprehension speed, there is no way they would have read, understood and decided rationally about it in that span of time!), while in other cases the same people spent 6-8 minutes or more struggling with an intractable poser, just because it was from a topic they considered themselves experts at.
(b) You found it incomprehensible or just downright scary: in this case, your analysis needs to identify whether it actually was a tough problem or just masquerading as one. In a 100 question test, chances are that there will be a few questions which are really gruelling; the only intent of these is to test whether you have the presence-of-mind to leave them and move on. But these will be few in number. A larger bunch of questions will look extremely difficult without being nearly as bad as they appear; exams like CAT, XAT and IIFT specialise in these. Identifying these might make a key difference in your scoring patterns and provide a 10-15 mark boost.
Phase 2: The ones you got wrong
Find out, among those, how many of them you goofed up because of silly mistakes, how many were because of misreading the question (as in you failed to understand the English of the question, what it was asking you to find) and how many were because your concepts were unclear (you understood what needed to be found but were unable to hit upon the right logic/formula/concept).
(a) There were lots of silly mistakes: work on focus, on avoiding those lapses of concentration (in one way it is a good thing – it means you can achieve significant score improvement in a short time as your concepts are sound). Examples of this would be taking the diameter of a circle as the radius, forgetting the factor of ½ in the area of a triangle, taking the sum of n natural numbers as n(n-1)/2 instead of n(n+1)/2, writing 3 x 3 = 6, etc.
(b) Understanding was the issue: learn how to identify the language cues in the question, so that in future you would be better equipped to notice the subtle traps and shades of meaning inherent in a well-set question. For example, if the question uses the phrase “non-negative integer solutions” then it should ring a warning bell in your mind; why hasn’t the examiner used the simpler “positive integer solutions”? And immediately the answer should strike you – you need to watch out for the zero as well.
(c) Conceptual clarity was a problem: revisit the relevant topic in your Basic Reference Materials and textbooks and internalise the concept thoroughly so that in future you will be able to apply it properly. For example, if you lost 3 easy marks because you forgot the volume of a sphere or the concept of a dangling modifier or the number of ways to put identical objects into distinct groups, you should chastise yourself mentally and ensure that in future you know everything you need to.
Phase 3: The ones you got right
This is the part of the analysis most people ignore, even the serious ones. I mean, it is right, right? Why bother analysing it? seems to be the thought here. However, there are crucial lessons to be learned here as well. After all, these are the question types you are surely going to attempt on the D-day as well, so it behooves you to be as efficient as possible in them.
(a) Questions you got right by a fluke: ensure that, in the future, you will know the correct logic for these. You don’t want to rely on luck in the real thing, do you?
(b) Questions you got right by a valid logic: it is always great to get 3 marks, no doubt, but if you spent 7-8 minutes on them then that takes off some of the sheen; the price is a little too high. Try to seek a better, more efficient way to do them, reduce the effort and time spent. And what of those which took only 2 minutes? Even there, see if you can reduce it to 1.5 minutes? 1 minute? 40 seconds? Because that will give you more time to spend on the other, tougher questions. Start with the assumption “However good I am at this, I can always get better”, let that be a cantrip guiding your preparation.
In my next “strategy” post I will try to look at a broader analysis; how to find your strengths and weaknesses and use them to optimise the order of attempting questions.
I heard from a lot of aspirants thst they are able to solve most of the questions if they are provided with unlimited time.
My issue is different. I am unable to solve more than half of the questions in the mocks even if I am doing it without time constraints.
I have been preparing for the exams for more than a year. Even if I understand a solution, I am unable to apply the same logic or another logic to a similar question.
This might sound to be a stupid query. But I need some guidance on how to apply my logic or understanding on the questions.
Hitesh, you will have to learn how to apply/transfer a logic from one problem to another related one. If you cannot, then you will have a difficult time in the CAT, no matter what. It is a slow process but it is possible to train one’s mind in the relevant ways of thinking – most people don’t manage to do it particularly well though. Remember that 99% of the aspirants will fail the exam in any given year (and many of those have been prepping for 2-3 years or more!)
Stumbled upon your blog while I was looking for something else on quick Quant attack and i am surprised I haven’t heard about your blog. Outstanding stuff, wish i had chanced upon it earlier but its never too late. Waiting for more sir , please add more super stuff like these !
Thanks, glad you like it. I will keep adding, but slowly…don’t want to trade off on quality in the name of haste 🙂
my problem is that if i take same test in same time limit bt at home. I m able to score much better rather than in coaching or actual exam specially in quatns and di section.
This might be a stupid problem. But I need some assistance.
If you mean the exact same test, of course you will score better because you know the questions. So you will save the time required to read and comprehend. If you mean a similar test (of equivalent level) then probably the issue is of nerves – you are panicking under test conditions and will have to work out a way to cure that.
My problem is VA. I am able to manage above 90+ in DI/LR and QA but i am getting a meagre 40 percentile in VA while appearing for mocks. Basically i dont read novels or newspaper but now i am trying to improve my language skills by reading them and I am attempting 25+ questions in VA but atleast half of the questions which i had attempted are going wrong. Thanks in advance sir
Reading is definitely the best way to improve, but it is slow. It would have been good if you had started say 6 months back! Still, keep reading, and keep solving and analysing and understanding the logic behind the correct answer, and hopefully it will be enough over the next 4-5 months!
bro great to hear you’ve been getting 90+ in di/lr. whats your source of preparation for di/lr (material)? thanks in advance
These strategies work wonders on the quant section. But I am really not srue how to analyse VARC and DILR section. I have given roughly 5 mocks and have scored similar marks in the mentioned 2 sections just because i am unable to efficiently analyse them, whereas my quant performance is an upward curve.
For me, somewhat similar approaches work in DI as in QA. Obviously it might be different for different people, there is no one-size-fits-all solution in something like CAT! For VA, my approach is based more on reading (I typically read upwards of 70 books a year) than on studying theory. Still, I have found that careful analysis, option-by-option, helps, wherein you try to understand not just why one option is right but why the others are wrong.