XAT 2006 Analysis

Suddenly the word “new and different” has become clichéd.XAT 2006 new format, with 127 questions,
CAT type three sections, but with a catch! Rather than differential marking, there was differential
negative marking! 0.33 negative marking for first 5 wrong questions in each section, which escalated to
0.5 for errors beyond 5 mistakes. This signifies a shift from speed to accuracy.

The salient feature was the paradigm shift. In English from direct vocabulary based questions to usage-
based questions. Quant saw a distinct emphasis on algebra and functions. DI was plagued with a few
ambiguous problems and had a healthy mix of analytical reasoning. As announced, GK was missing.

Overview
XAT 2006

Section Topics No. of Q’s Suggested Time Possible Attempts Cut-off’s

1 EU+RC 40 40 min 22+ 11-12

2 DI+LR 43 40 min 16+ 10-11
3 QA 44 40 min 14+ 7-8
Total 127 120 min 52+ 32-33
Comparison with XAT 2005 & 2004

Parameter XAT 2006 XAT 2005 XAT 2004

Number of sections 3 3 3

Number of questions 127 175 80+60+60=200

Difficulty level (Overall) Difficult Average Average

Difficulty level (Quant
Difficult (For QA) Average Average
+DI)
Difficulty Level (DI+LR-
Average - -
2006)
Difficulty level (EU +
difficult Average Easy
RC)
Difficulty level (GA) NA Average Difficult

Expected cut-off (BMD) 32+ 70+ 108

Expected cut-off (PMIR) 28+ 65-68 104

Expected cut-off (Quant
7-8* 25-27 28 to 30
+DI)
Expected cut-off
10-11** - -
(DI+LR)
Expected cut-off (EU +
11-12 27-28 58
RC)
Expected cut-off (GA) NA 8-10 15 to16
*
Only Quant for 2006, **For XAT 2006 only

Section wise Analysis

Section I: English Usage & Reading Comprehension

Executive Summary

Have a glass of water, before reading this analysis and should have had two glasses of water before
attempting XAT English section, is the first advice we have to offer; second is, don’t panic, welcome to
the party. It’s a party you won’t forget easily. The English section of XAT was entirely different from the
general expectation of a vocabulary heavy one. XAT English, this time around, put premium on
inferential English usage .Qs were logic and rationale driven. The paper setter had worked hard to come
up with some innovative question types, like a fill in the blank where you had to choose an option ‘which
did not fit in’, rather than the standard type where in you choose the option that best fits in.