iCAT 6.0 Live Analysis | Strategy to Increase Your Score by 20+ Marks | iQuanta

Summary

The session reviews iCAT 6.0 and uses students’ reported scores and difficulties to explain how to improve mock performance. The instructor’s central message is that success depends less on attempting everything and more on consistent practice, careful analysis, sensible selection, and accuracy. Students are advised not to judge their ability from one mock: performance often improves as they become accustomed to timed tests.

Main lessons

• Practice matters more than attending classes alone. Classes can clarify concepts, but students must apply them through assignments, timed practice, sectionals, and mocks.
• Analyse performance by cause, not just by score. Identify whether a problem comes from weak concepts, difficulty applying concepts, poor time management, careless errors, or ineffective question or set selection.
• Use mock results to adjust strategy. A difficult section or a low score in one mock is not a reason to give up; look for patterns across several mocks.
• Work to time limits. Being able to solve something after seeing the solution—or without a time limit—does not mean it was usable in the exam.

Section-by-section advice

VARC / VRC

For students whose accuracy is below about 70%, the instructor recommends reducing attempts and spending longer on each question.

• Initially aim for roughly 12–16 attempts, focusing on reaching at least 80% accuracy before increasing attempts.
• For reading-comprehension questions:
  • Read the passage thoroughly but efficiently; the instructor suggests about three minutes as an initial target.
  • Spend roughly two minutes per question on elimination and checking the passage.
  • Verify that an answer is supported by the text instead of choosing it based only on intuition.
  • If accuracy is weak, spend around 11–12 minutes on an RC passage and its questions.
• Build confidence by selecting answers carefully. The instructor argues that repeated inaccurate guessing can undermine confidence and “intuition.”

LRDI / DILR

The instructor stresses that LRDI is primarily about choosing suitable sets and solving them accurately, not attempting every set.

• In iCAT 6.0, the instructor identifies three relatively accessible sets containing 14 questions in total; the later sets are described as much harder. The session suggests those three sets could have been sufficient for a strong score if solved accurately.
• Learn your strengths and weaknesses. Track which set types you decode readily and which remain difficult, and use that knowledge when selecting sets.
• Important set types to know include:
  • Distribution
  • Ranking and ordering
  • Quant-based reasoning
  • Reasoning-based DI
  • Caselets
  • Scheduling
• During the initial scan, look for familiar structures that match your strengths. For example, a linear arrangement combined with distribution may suit a student who is strong in those types.
• Five-minute rule: If you have not decoded roughly half the set after five minutes, leave it and move on. Continuing to struggle can consume time needed for a more suitable set.
• Initially target two sets, often around eight to ten questions, rather than trying to solve all four.
• Practise sets under timed conditions. The instructor suggests allowing about 10–15 minutes per set during practice, rather than solving without a time limit.
• Sectionals are useful for practising set selection, but mock performance may differ because students must switch into LRDI after spending the first section on VARC.

Quant

The instructor recommends building a dependable base in Arithmetic and Algebra and selecting questions strategically.

• Finish and practise Arithmetic, then work through Algebra. Geometry can be added according to each student’s preparation.
• In the reviewed paper, the instructor says several questions were accessible and that a student selecting carefully could have attempted about ten questions. The exact difficulty and count are the instructor’s assessment of this mock.
• Do not feel obliged to attempt all 22 questions. The initial target is to identify and solve about ten suitable questions accurately.
• Follow a planned order—for example, starting with Arithmetic and moving to Algebra—and check during analysis whether you followed it.
• Record careless mistakes, such as marking the wrong answer, as well as conceptual or application gaps.

Suggested preparation and analysis process

1. Make notes during classes so that key concepts and methods can be reviewed.
2. Practise through assignments, practice sessions, and books, rather than relying on class attendance alone.
3. Review notes and important questions weekly, especially when concepts are being forgotten.
4. Complete sectionals as topics become ready. The instructor recommends beginning sectionals when a reasonable part of the syllabus is complete, while continuing VARC practice.
5. Analyse each sectional or mock:
   • Did you follow your planned strategy?
   • Were errors caused by concepts, application, timing, or carelessness?
   • Were your chosen questions or sets appropriate?
   • What should you change in the next attempt?
6. Use mocks to test performance under exam conditions. Sectionals help practise a section in isolation, but full mocks are needed to assess transitions and overall performance.
7. One student is given a short-term target of 100 questions daily for 22 days—50 Quant, 25 LRDI, and 25 RC—as individualized advice, not a universal requirement.

Score targets discussed

The instructor offers rough targets for students aiming for a high percentile: approximately 18 VARC questions, 12 LRDI questions, and 12 Quant questions, with strong accuracy. Later, the instructor emphasizes a more conservative starting plan: improve VARC accuracy, aim for two LRDI sets, and focus on around ten well-chosen Quant questions.

These are presented as guidance, not guarantees. The instructor’s broader point is to prioritize accuracy and selection over maximizing attempts.

Speakers and sources featured

• Primary speaker: One instructor leading the live mock-analysis session. The subtitles do not reliably establish the instructor’s name.
• Audience participants whose names or usernames are mentioned: Suran/Sharanyo, Abhishek, Sahil, Shreya, Richa, Anurag, Amritveer, Aastha Tanwar, Pulkit, Chandan (also rendered as Lohit/Kohli), Aditya, Gargi, Chhavi Gupta, Jagbandhan/Jagvandan, Harsh, Hariharan, Pawan, and Harshita Upadhyay.
• Other source: The instructor refers to a displayed mock-score/percentile comparison while discussing LRDI performance.