FMS 2010 had no major structural surprises. The pattern was similar to that of last year-200 questions, four sections, 50 questions each and each section having an adequate number of sitters to keep one busy for the entirety of 2 hours.

Here is a brief review of the test vis-a-vis the previous FMS paper.

Reading Comprehension:

FMS stuck to its 4 passage RC section for the second successive year. There wasnt any 24-question RC though. The questions were well-distributed across the RCs and one could pick and solve 2-3 of ones choice to sail through the cut-offs. Almost everything was straightforward and could have been done if one had given more time to this section. Time was the key here and it would have been very tempting for some to leave this section. The Google RC was the longest of the three but the questions were probably the easiest of all. The PI management passage was unattractive but careful selection of questions and quick searching skills would have helped fetch some quick marks here.

The Idea of Justice passage was the trickiest and most time consuming of them all and a careful reading of the passage was required to score marks in this. The article on Delhi was again easy to read and the questions straightforward. If one were to attempt only a few selective questions in this section, the first and the last passages could have been done.

Last year, the cut-off was 35 marks. Last time around, the questions were in the order in which they appeared in the passage. So, searching for the answers did not take much of the time. It was not the case in this paper. But if the overall level of difficulty of the questions were compared, this years section was definitely a couple of notches below last years section. So, the 50%ile mark should hover somewhere around 45 marks.

Verbal Ability:

If FMS 2010 (January) was about synonyms and antonyms, this one was about sentence correction. A lot of questions from previous year FMS papers made an appearance in this section. But even then, the difficulty level was something which could take care of that. No questions were overtly difficult and a basic knowledge of grammar rules would have taken care of this part.

One new addition to this section was the comeback of the parajumbles. The level of difficulty was high and it could have stumped even the most prepared aspirant.

There were a few questions on idioms and their meaning and these were of moderate difficulty.

The last 15 questions in this section were dedicated to fill-in-the-blanks questions. Again, the questions were of moderate difficulty level and even if one didnt know the meaning of words, one could have easily attempted the question by just knowing the tone of the sentence and eliminating options which didnt fit.

Overall, this section was lengthier than last year and one would have needed to spend more time on it so as to maximise the score. Last year, the cut-off for this section was 37, so, owing to the reduced focus on vocabulary and more sitters than last year, the cut-off can be something around 45-50 marks.

Quantitative Aptitude:

A drastic change both in content and in difficulty levels from last years section. If last year there were parabolas, graphs, trigonometry questions, this year saw the comeback of basic math questions. Plenty of questions based on equations, arithmetic, algebra and geometry made up the section. The ones which were easy were a piece of cake and few others required one to be persistent without losing it midway. A few questions were directly lifted from previous year FMS papers and if one were familiar, one could have solved the questions without breaking into a sweat.

Compared to last year, the section was on the easier side and would have attracted even the non-serious aspirants towards itself. This might lead to a slight increase in the sectional cut-off from the 41 of last year to something around 50.

Logical Reasoning and Data Interpretation:

Very much similar to the last FMS test. The section was heavily bent in favour of the logical reasoning questions and there was only a single set on DI which consisted of 8 questions. The LR sets were similar to last year with the focus being on arrangements, an alphanumeric caselet, sets on blood relations, a Venn diagram based caselet and data arrangement sets. Three questions were based on the unscrambling of letters to form a meaningful word and then choosing an antonym of the constructed word.

Compared to the previous FMS test, there was not much of a difference in the difficulty level. The questions were time-consuming and if one were to cash in on this section, one would be required to spend a good amount of time in this section. Last time around, the cut-off was 64, so it might be similar or might go a bit on the lower side this time. A score of above 70 in this section should be a safe score.

The overall picture:

The difficulty level was definitely a bit on the lower side as compared to last time. The repeat questions even if present should not make much of a difference to the serious aspirant. The paper was purely a speed test with the emphasis being on how quick one could solve questions. All the sections were of moderate difficulty level and leaving a section at the right time is the key in this type of paper. It was very easy to get lured into allotting more time to a particular section thus neglecting the last section. Last year saw the cut-offs shot up, belying all the predictions. This year, with people being more prepared mentally for an easier paper and FMS dishing out an easy paper, the cut-offs are expected to go higher than last year. According to me, the overall cut-off can be something around 370-380. Any score of above 400 should be good enough to get a call.