SLAT / SET LAW 2018 Analysis

SLAT / SET LAW 2018 Analysis

Symbiosis International University conducted SET Law 2018 (SLAT 2018) test for admission to Symbiosis law schools located in Pune, Hyderabad and Noida on May 5, 2018. For the first time, it was conducted in ONLINE mode
The test had 5 sections with 30 questions in each section. The duration of the examination was 150 minutes (2.5 Hrs.). Each question had 4 options and carried one mark each. There was no negative marking for incorrect answers

Analytical Reasoning (30 Q)

The section had 5 questions from verbal reasoning, out of which 2 were based on strong-weak arguments, 1 was Inference based & 2 were of statement-assumption type. They were quite easy. Remaining 25 questions were of non-verbal reasoning type. The topic wise split was as follows
Circular arrangements – 2 Q (Separate questions)
Selection based puzzle – 5 Q (One case let)
Alphabet series – 5 Q
Analogies – 5 Q (Number based – 2, word based – 3)
Visual puzzles – 4 Q
Problem solving – 4 Q (2 on P&L, percentages, 2 on AP-GP series)
A few questions were a little tricky, but overall difficulty level was easy. A good score could be 23-24 by spending about 20 minutes

2. Legal Reasoning (30 Q)

There were 23 Q based on principle-facts. 2 Q only had facts, without principles. 4 Q were based on static LGK. 1 Question was based on Assertion-Reasoning
Within legal reasoning, around 20 Q were based on constitution, criminal law & contracts. The rest were based on miscellaneous & torts
Out of these, around 4-5 were quite difficult & the rest were manageable. Questions were not too lengthy. A careful reading could fetch 22-23 marks in this section

3. Logical Reasoning (30 Q)

This section entirely comprised of analytical reasoning questions
Coding & decoding – 5 Q
Family tree – 5 Q (One set), 2 Q (Independent)
Analogies – 5 Q (Number based)
Odd-man out - 5 Q (3 – Word based, 2 – Alphanumeric based)
Circular arrangement – 2 Q (Independent Q)
Calendar – 2 Q
Data Sufficiency – 2 Q
Logical puzzles – 2 Q

Overall section was easy. 23-24 should be a good score by spending 25 minutes

4. Reading Comprehension (30 Q)

There were three passages with around five questions per passage.Last two passages had 7-8 Q each. No. of words ranged between 300-350 words
Most questions in first few passages were fact-based & easy. Passages with 7-8 questions needed close reading, since questions were based on tone, inference, supportive arguments and so on. Paragraph topics ranged from India-Maldives-China relations, Supreme Court’s commentary on Khappanchayat, World history & economics. Across passages, very few questions were based purely on vocabulary
One passage looked quite similar to the one in IMS material. Overall section was manageable. Reading questions before the passage would have helped to score smart marks. 22-23 would be a good score by spending around 30 minutes

5. General Knowledge (30 Q)

The section was dominated by current affairs questions. Topic wise break up was science & technology (2 Q), national & international awards (8 Q), world news & forums (7-8 Q), national insignia (1-2 Q), Sports (2-3 Q), personalities (5 Q)& static LGK (2 Q). Except 2-3 unusual Q, most of them were of familiar type with medium difficulty. A score of 18-20 was gettable
Experts’ Take
Like a typical SETLaw paper, time was not a constraint & with a decent reading speed and comprehension, one could easily solve entire paper with 15-20 minutes to spare
Good attempt & score in each section for PI - WAT short list should be as follows:

Sr. No Section No. of Questions Total Marks Good Score
1 Logical Reasoning 30 30 23-24
2 Legal Reasoning 30 30 22-23
3 Analytical Reasoning 30 30 23-24
4 Reading Comprehension 30 30 22-23
5 General Knowledge 30 30 18-20
  Total 150 150 108-114

We wish students all the best for results & will be happy to assist short listed students for next stage with PI-WAT preparation

Disclaimer: All information on cut-offs, analysis, answer key and scores are based on independent analysis and evaluation made by IMS. We do not take responsibility for any decision that might be taken, based on this information



Social Media