CET 2006 ANALYSIS

CET chose to remain different than most of the other exams this year by sticking towards its
normal pattern and not undergoing any change. This year’s CET was an exact replica of last five
years paper patterns and more towards the easier side. Most of the questions in Quant, Verbal
and Logic were the regular ones which were covered in the KITS Classroom Sessions. The only
new entry in this year’s paper was entry of permutation and combination questions, although
these questions were not tough

Overall it was easily possible to attempt more than 150 questions with a net score of 130+. Here
is the complete analysis of the paper.

The break up of the overall test is as follows:

Type Difficulty No. of Time Comfortable Expected

level questions Allotted attempts Scores
English Usage Easy 65 marks 35 min 60 50
Quantitative Aptitude Easy 50 marks 25 min 45 34
Reasoning Average 85 marks 90 min 55 47
Total 200 marks 150 min 160 131
 Section wise Analysis

English Usage: 65 questions

Type of questions No. of questions Difficulty level Possible score

Para jumble 5(5 in 1 Para jumble) Easy 5
Verbal Logic 15 Tough 10
Vocab + 20 Easy 15
Grammar
Reading 15(including 6 vocab base) moderate 12
Comprehension
Paragraph 10 moderate 8
completion
Total 65 Easy 50

Para jumbles: It was a very average difficulty level set and very similar to previous year’s Para
jumble, and as expected, there were 5 questions, with only one 6-sentence Para jumble.

Verbal Logic: The only difficult part of English section. PTPF part was tough, assumptions based
questions were from moderate to tough. Conclusions were pretty easy. Where as courses of
actions were easy to tough.

Vocab and grammar: vocab was easy. Hardly any word that student should not know. A lot of
focus on contextual vocab. Even grammar was too easy.

Reading comprehension: there were total of 15 questions, 6 of which were basically vocab
questions and were pure word meaning based on the passage.

Paragraph Completion: A set of 10 questions which was again very moderate in terms of
difficulty level.
Quantitative Aptitude: 50 questions

Type of No. of questions Difficulty level Possible score

questions
DI 20 Moderate (one set was 13
extremely tough, others
were pretty easy)
Data Sufficiency 15 Moderate 10
Quant 10 Moderate (even 5 P & C 7
questions were very easy)
Matematical 5 Easy 4
comparison
Total 50 Easy 34

Quant
Not as easy quant as last year’s paper, but still an easier one. The worst part of the paper was
that it contained 5 permutation and combination question, although all these questions were very
straight forward but tending to bigger number.

Data Interpretation (DI)

Much easier DI from our mock CETs, hardly any of the calculations
CET 2006 presented 4 very simple DI sets of 5 questions each. 1 of these sets was actually
picked up from Career Launcher KITS Funda Books. And only one of these sets was extremely
tough, with lots of calculations and too much of logic.

Data Sufficiency (DS)

15 questions – In an ideal scenario all of them should have been solved correctly.

Mathematical Comparison (MC)

5 questions – although it contained lot of x and y, but very easy to deal with
 Reasoning based questions: 85 questions

Type of No. of questions Difficulty level Possible score

questions
Logical Puzzles 15 Easy 13
Reasoning 40 Moderate 28
Visual 30 Tough 6
reasoning
Total 85 Moderate 37

Puzzles were a delight this time at CET 2006. 55 questions in all and pretty simple to attempt.
Mathematical puzzles followed similar logics to what was included in Career Launcher KITS
Funda Books. Verbal Puzzles too did not showcase any different logic than what we have
already done in our classes.

Visual Reasoning was the easiest in the last 5 years so much so that at least 20 questions would
have been comfortably attempted. Also the types of the questions was largely series type.

Eligibility Criterion questions could have been cracked easily and hence all 5 questions were
easily manageable. The same was the case with the 2 case lets of Logical Data Interpretation.

The problem area in logic was Syllogisms largely because of the low accuracy areas like
Arguments and Probably True/Probably False. Also there was an introduction of new type of
questions, i.e. Cause-Effect.