CAT 2009: The unprecedented twist

Note: The target of this article is to help the CAT 2009 aspirants. However, the opinions produced by the author are based completely on his experience of taking his first computer-based mock CAT. Any corrections and suggestions are invited in the form of comments.

The CAT is going computer-based from 2009. The computer-based version is more different than I had assumed it would be. It not only checks your ability to solve a question but also tests your dexterity at mental pictures and calculations. Elaboration on this shall follow but, before that, I must say, if the level of questions remains similar, CAT 2009 will turn out to be much less scoring than its paper-based predecessors.

The paper-based version offered an unnoticed advantage: the use of pencil. Imagine if you had to copy every given figure in a geometry question before you could start solving it; or imagine copying a given table every time you wanted to find the missing links in a DI question; or worse, imagine answering the RCs without underlining! Never had I completely appreciated the help that the pencil provided me in solving all those questions.

Considering that CAT is as much a test of your ability to manage time and selecting the right questions as it is of your analytical and logical ability, the computer-based version has brought an unprecedented twist in the entire approach of taking the test. Drawing mental pictures is now more important than it ever was. Someone who can visualise those angles, tables, and underscores, without “pencil” ling them, can now save double the time he saved earlier.

Anyone seriously preparing for CAT 2009 must make sure that he makes visualising things as much a part of his preparation as clarity of concepts. This alone may account for almost 50% of your preparation for this new version of the test.

Evolution full stop : Devolution begins

What stimulates thought? Is it sitting on a desk and concentrating hard? Its interesting how mundane activities are actually the best thought stimulator. One such thing happened with me yesterday.Walking into the washroom, I noticed a mosquito fly by close to my left foot. Fraction of a second earlier, it was sitting exactly where I placed my foot. If it were not for its ability to fly, the mosquito was dead.

I'm not a student of evolution and my exposure to the theory of Darwin is limited to what I read at high school and a brief introduction during college. As is common knowledge, the possession of wings is an evolutionary development. All winged species originally were land-bound. Development of wings was the only option left to miniature species who given their size and speed on land would've otherwise been crushed under the feet of huge reptiles or gobbled up by lizards and frogs.

Human evolution is no different. Over the last million years or so, the homo sapiens have changed significantly. From moving around on 4 legs, we've gone on to use just 2. The change was indispensable as it helped humans run faster and use the other two limbs more efficiently, which was required, given our weak physical built. This and many other such changes have shaped man as we know him now.

But, are we still evolving? "Oh c'mon, don't be silly, of course we are! Its a natural phenomenon. All species evolve with time. Didn't your high school text books contain that part?You're just being stupid. " Is that what you're thinking? Then, think again; are we still evolving?

All evolution takes place because there is a pressing natural need for it. Evolution is important for survival. A species either evolves or perishes. But, humans are different. Humans developed science, a short-cut. Ever since philosophy was put into mathematical equations and even before that, we have come up with methods to simplify our lives. We have tried making everything easier for ourselves. Today, we control the temperature we live in, the kind of food we eat and the purity of water we drink; our body doesn't need to fight diseases anymore, there are medicines to do that. To put it simply, whenever there is a pressing need for change, we simply find a way out of it using technology. Then, where is the need to evolve further? We are fit to survive without physical evolution.

However, this simplification may result into something unprecedented. With time and the kind of precautions we take these days, humans may become the first species whose bodies start devolving. Sooner than later, we shall lose immunity to diseases we are currently not vulnerable to; we may not be able to survive temperatures beyond a certain range; and water may be rendered totally unfit for consumption. After all, it cannot be merely co-incidence that mosquitoes have developed immunity to DDT in merely a few decades while we have continued to remain vulnerable to malaria for millennia.

The Brain Gain

So, the government has finally come to the conclusion that research in India is going through a poor phase. Well spotted, I must say! And what does the government do? An announcement: Breaking News - "14 National Universities to promote research shall be funded INR 200 crore/annum for research activities. This will also result in NRIs researching in foreign universities coming back to India for world class research." But, wait a minute...turn the clock some 50 years back...An announcement: "The IITs will be the temples of modern India. They will provide world class education and will catapult India to the forefront of research in the field of science and technology."

The government had noble intentions then, the government has noble intentions now. But, i'm afraid, these National Universities (if at all they are separate establishments) will fall in the same lane as the IITs. Why did the government not muse over the failure of IITs in research? Why is it that the IITs, so widely acclaimed, never delivered the quality of research expected of them? Was it lack of funds? I beg to disagree.

The quality of research in any institute depends as much on the students as it does on the faculty. Don't get me wrong, I do not mean to take away any credit from those who made it to the IITs cracking what is touted to be the world's toughest engineering entrance test. In fact, this is the point I want to make. All you need to make it to an IIT (or for that matter any other school in India) is crack a test. What this fundamentally means is that the best schools in India are taking in people who are brilliantly articulate but, may not be great at application. To put it simply, solving a complex electric circuit problem doesn't imply you know how to fabricate the circuit. Research is not just an idea and mathematics to supplement the idea. No research can succeed without successful experimentation and real-life modelling. Successful experimentation requires dexterity with the hand and not just the mind.

If the government really wants research to flourish in India, it should make sure that the induction procedures in Indian Universities is radically changed. Here's a suggestion: Defer the establishment of the National Universities by a couple of years. De-route some of the funds set aside for these universities and commit them to a research on how can the IITs be more effective in research. The research may throw unexpected results. May be, we won't need separate establishments; may be, the IITs can finally live up to what is (also) expected of them.