Some days ago, we at TestFunda.com had written an article on Last Minute Tips to prepare for IIFT. There, we had cautioned students about the possibility of the IIFT exam having 6 sections this year and had accordingly advised them to prepare for DI and LR separately, as well as VA and RC separately. Students who would have read and followed those tips would have got a pleasant surprise in the IIFT exam. Following the trend of the IIFT 2007 exam, the IIFT 2011 Paper had six sections - bifurcating Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning into sections of their own. Verbal Reasoning and Reading Comprehension, which were two sub-sections of a single section last year, were made into full-fledged sections this year. The section on verbal reasoning was difficult, though not lengthy. The other sections were the opposite - not difficult but very lengthy. In these sections, speed was crucial in getting more marks.
The tradition of having a different number of questions in each section and different marks for questions in different sections continued.
The paper surprisingly, was not sealed. Hence, students opportunistically glanced at the paper when the invigilator was not looking.
Number of Sections
Options per Question
1/3rd of Marks for the Question
Marks per Question
Reading Comprehension Section:
Passages: The four passages had a length of around two pages each. They were easy to read and understand. The last passage on “financial inclusion” had questions with relatively higher level of difficulty.
Questions: In typical IIFT fashion factual questions dominated almost exclusively - but required great attention to detail.
Verbal Reasoning Section:
The paper also threw a googly in terms of a large number of new question types. These questions did not check any new skills - they could have been solved by someone with a strong grasp of fundamentals.
However, the questions in the paper were on the difficult side. There was also a large emphasis on vocabulary questions.
Data Interpretation Section:
The data interpretation section was in line with the level and style of DI that have come to be associated with IIFT over the years. The section had 3 sets, out of which the most time consuming was sandwiched between the relatively more manageable ones. The set on GDP was extremely calculation intensive and could have been avoided. While the set on country XX’s exports to various countries was more or less standard, the set on export and import data for 10 countries was the red herring. It involved simple calculations and was conceptually simple as well. However, some students could have skipped it looking at the large tables. Students attempting these 2 sets would have been able to save time and still do well.
Logical Reasoning Section:
The logical reasoning section was on the simpler side and could have given a student a lot of scoring opportunities. While there were a couple of time-eating questions (such as the “fill the missing letter” questions), the overall section was manageable. The only issue with this section was that at least one question had more than one correct answer (the set on mathematical symbol based coding) while there was a question where the data was inconsistent but the answer could be marked “None of these”. These could have potentially eaten up a lot of time. However, on the whole, this section was quite simple.
General Knowledge and Current Section:
The G.K section covered a wide range of questions including sports, films, banking, history, social and industrial sector. Overall it was a manageable section provided one has kept himself or herself up-to-date with the current affairs. For the ‘match the column’ type of questions, some of the options could be eliminated rather easily. In totality, it was a good test of your awareness for the developments in the current year.
Quantitative Ability Section:
The Quantitative Ability section, unlike the previous years, was quite simple this year. The number of questions reduced from 30 last year to 24 this year. The weightage given to this section in terms of marks also correspondingly changed from 30% to 24%.
Arithmetic(8 questions) and Algebra(10 questions) dominated the section this year, covering 75% of questions. Higher Mathematics was conspicuous by its absence. In general, the questions were very easy. 13 of the 24 could be classified as easy and the remaining were of a medium level of difficulty only owing to their verbosity. There were no difficult questions.
About 18 questions could be attempted in 30 minutes with fairly high accuracy.
Questions which should have been attempted:
x/y = 7/4, √(225/729), Aniket and Animesh, EF public library, Amita; Sumita and Paramita, value of gift, volume of cylinder formed by rolling of paper, logarithms, arrange volumes in descending order, Mr Sinha, Journalists, ratio of metal 1 and metal 2, arithmetic progression, probability.
Most of the other questions were also simple, but they were verbose and reading them would take some time.