Overall, the IIFT exam this year was tougher than last year’s exam, with the QA-DI and LR sections being a lot tougher. Unlike the previous year, QA and DI were combined in one section while LR was a separate section. Comparatively higher weightage was given to LR (1 mark per question vis-à-vis 0.75 marks per question last year).
The Quantitative Aptitude section contained a mix of questions from various topics and various levels of difficulties. Overall, the level of difficulty of the questions in QA was higher than last year’s. About 8 to 10 questions in QA were easy to moderate in terms of difficulty. There were 3 DI sets and all of them were fairly calculation-intensiveand time-consuming.There were a number of questions on Arithmetic (for e.g. X and Y are the two alloys…, Ravindra and Rekha got married (age problem), a problem on a milk vendor) and some standard questions in Modern Mathematics (such as the question on probability, sequences-series and set theory) and Geometry (the ladder problem) which should have been attempted.
Ideally one should have attempted about 18-20 questions in the section in 45-50 minutes.The expected cut-off for this section is around 9-10 marks.
The Logical Reasoning section consisted of sets on selection criteria, sequential output, matrix arrangement, syllogisms and other verbal reasoning. One set on matrix arrangement was extremely difficult and should have been avoided. The 4 verbal reasoning questions (statement-assumption, course of action and syllogisms) were very easy and should have been attempted.
Ideally one should have attempted about 12 questions in 20-25 minutes. The expected cut-off for this section is around 7-8 marks.
Though each RC question carried a mark this time, as opposed to .75 marks last time, the overall level of difficulty of RC was much tougher than last time! Though the questions were not very inferential, they were time-consuming. Two of the passages were 2.5 pages long and most of the questions required searching for four pieces of information throughout the passage. As English on the whole carried 32 marks, it made sense to spend about 35 minutes to attempt the doable questions. Out of the 20 VA questions, at least 13 questions should have been attempted (with 90% accuracy). The word creation questions could have been left out if this is not something you are used to. For a serious aspirant, the vocabulary questions should not have been challenging at all but as most students do not learn much vocabulary, we would expect them to have a low accuracy in this area or leave out a few questions. The sentence jumble questions were a bit confusing. The VA questions should have taken you less than 20 minutes. In RC, the two shorter passages should have been attempted. The correct approach would have been to look at and solve the questions while reading the passage. These questions would not take more than 15 minutes to solve. Target accuracy in RC should also be 90% as 6 of the 7 questions were direct and 5 of these were very easy. Based on the actual cut-offs in the previous year, we expect the cut-off to be about 8-9.
For the first time in a long time, the GK section of IIFT was very simple. Most questions were based on current important events which had made headlines. Hardly 4 questions could be classified as being difficult. One could have gone through all these questions and attempted the ones they were confident of (at least 10) in less than10 minutes. As the actual cut-offs for GK are normally very low, we expect the cut-off to be about 3 marks.
The expected overall cut-off for a call from IIFT Delhi is about 41-43. (All the cut-offs are for general category students).