Top 10 mistakes while doing numerical reasoning tests
We are all fear about the one section in Banking Exams that is Aptitude cums Numerical section the hard true is that most of us score more marks in this section and yet we do fear about this and score less in other sections. Just like our school days where we do prepare Mathematics for 10 days and score a 70+ and scoring only 60+ with 3-4 days preparation in other subjects.
Whether you're doing a standard numerical
reasoning test or a case
interview, ability to handle numbers is critical. Many sweat at the prospect of
writing another numerical reasoning test (or a purely data interpretation test)
or face a quantitative - numbers laden case interview as part of job
interviews, assessment days or school admissions, Let's look at the top 10
mistakes committed by most numerical reasoning and quantitative aptitude test
preparers (let's keep the mathematically gifted out of this equation)
1. Not preparing for
the format of the test -
not a surprise. Going into a test or a case interview without really knowing
the format of the assessment is a basic, yet very widely committed mistake! If
you just took the time out to understand the format and style of the test or an
interview, prepared for it even for a few days, you've probably already got a
foot ahead of more than 1/2 your competitors.
2. Advance fear of the
test - for many
people, the very fact that there is a "mathematics" test is enough to
undermine their confidence even before the test. Shakiness with numbers, and
just fear of calculations can take chunks of performance away from you. If
you're prepared, this will get you ahead of another bunch of competitors.
3. Worrying about the
past - many people
worry about a question they could not solve, when they move on to the next
question. They worry about their previous test where they may not have done
well.This distracts from a singular focus of the current test, current
question. In all numerical tests, focus on the TEST YOU'RE DOING NOW, and the
QUESTION YOU'RE DOING NOW. Everything else is inconsequential and damaging.
4. Obsession with test
score - There are two
critical elements in a test. Absolute score (total correct / total possible),
and Accuracy (total correct/ number attempted). Some worry about
"finishing every question in time" and get many wrong, or guess them
randomly. This reduces accuracy. Some others focus so much on accuracy, that
they miss out many questions and have a low score. Both will weaken your
chances! The best strategists know how to do as much as possible, efficiently,
and accurately. There will be hard tests where very gifted few can actually
finish all questions in the allotted time - the smart test takers know how to
play the game. They know when to skip a question and when to guess.
5. Obsession with
accuracy - this is one of
the most common reasons for poor test performance. Many numerical reasoning or
data interpretation tests have questions that simply cannot be solved in the
given time. A lot of test takers just don't realize that they spent way too
much time on some of them. If a test has 20 questions and 25 minutes, and you
spend 3 minutes on a question - you're digging your own grave. It's critical to
learn the skill of "when do I skip a question?" our tests often have
questions which simply cannot be answered in time and they're there to just
test one thing - "did you skip this question?"
6. Using poor question
solving strategy - there are
usually three ways of solving quantitative questions (a) compute the answer (b)
use the answers and see which answer fits the question (backsolving) (c)
eliminate answers that don't make sense. Smart test takers use all of the
techniques when taking a test. Some questions may seem long, but all it needs
is quick elimination of nonsensical choices. Some seem really hard to create an
equation for, but all it needs it to plug the answer into the question. You
should be comfortable with each strategy and not rely on any one. Keep this in
mind: Solving a question in a time-bound numerical test to derive the answer is
neither the only, nor the best way to get an answer!
7. Forgetting the
calculator! - Oh yeah.
Happens. All the time. Many companies (say SHL) administer tests on behalf of
recruiters. More often than not, you are allowed to use calculators to do these
tests, so don't forget to use one when needed! You're usually never allowed to
use calculators in case interviews though. The complexity of the questions in
tests that allow use of calculators will often be higher than those without.
8. Not reading the
entire question - Many test
takers will jump to solving the first part of the question before even reading
the entire question. Read the entire question first! Many a time there will be
a question where part of the data is completely irrelevant to the solution.
It's there just to waste your time. Only a piece of the data in the question is
relevant, and you won't know that if you don't read the question in its
entirety.
9. Marking the wrong
answer - solving for
(b) and marking (c). Yes, many do that, and in fiercely competitive tests
(maybe a McKinsey test, for example) a single wrong question can mean not
progressing to the next round. Take just 2 seconds (literally) to cross-check
that you marked the question you really intended to.
10. Insufficient
preparation - the biggest
mistake of them all. Not taking the time and effort to do many practice tests,
analyze weakness, and improve upon them. Assuming that just doing a 'bunch of
tests' will improve numerical skills. If you're weak at these tests, the only
way to get better is to practice, learn techniques to do better, analyze your
weaknesses and strengths and do more tests by addressing them.
Now that you know it,
pay attention to them and good luck with your preparation! Remember -
systematic preparation, practice and improvisation are key to success.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteThe kinds of psychometric testing People Central recommend would be specific to the job, but Evans says that a typical capability test would cover: oral and numerical reasoning, abstract reasoning.
http://www.numericalreasoning.org/