MSE 2016

[nishtha92]

How was the paper? Was there any sectional cut off ?

[knowpraveen]

The paper was too easy. For me and everyone I spoke to. The cutoff should be high this time. Going by MSE's cutoffs in 2014 or 13, this time it should be a bit more on the higher side. Somewhere in the 70x3 range. No sectional cutoffs. The format was different the previous year, and had 30 as the cutoff. How was the paper for you, Nishitha.

[nishtha92]

It was definitely easy but I found it a bit lengthy for 2 hours. Can't really say about the cut-offs.
Did you also feel the options were all wrong for 2-3 questions?

---

From: [hidden email]
Sent: ‎21-‎05-‎2016 22:36
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: MSE 2016

The paper was too easy. For me and everyone I spoke to. The cutoff should be high this time. Going by MSE's cutoffs in 2014 or 13, this time it should be a bit more on the higher side. Somewhere in the 70x3 range. No sectional cutoffs. The format was different the previous year, and had 30 as the cutoff. How was the paper for you, Nishitha.

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/MSE-2016-tp7600959p7600960.html

To unsubscribe from MSE 2016, click here.
NAML

[knowpraveen]

Yeah, for a couple of questions. The English section was all messed up. Poorly made and there were errors in the question itself. Coming to the other sections, yeah, just a few of them. But, since we had a lot of questions to choose from, that didn't matter. How many questions did you attempt!

[nishtha92]

I could only attempt 74. How many did you attempt?

---

From: [hidden email]
Sent: ‎22-‎05-‎2016 09:26
To: [hidden email]
Subject: RE: MSE 2016

Yeah, for a couple of questions. The English section was all messed up. Poorly made and there were errors in the question itself. Coming to the other sections, yeah, just a few of them. But, since we had a lot of questions to choose from, that didn't matter. How many questions did you attempt!

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/MSE-2016-tp7600959p7600965.html

To unsubscribe from MSE 2016, click here.
NAML

[amoleco2016]

Answer key is out.. can everybody upload der score so we can get the idea abt. Cuttoff..
My score 167

[varnika1880]

I am getting 204

[varnika1880]

But I believe there should be a few corrections in the uploaded answer key ....cut off should be in the 210+ range paper was very easy

[SM]

Oh yes! Grammatical errors were at its peak, even for the English Section! :P
The paper was stressful more so when calculators aren't allowed.

[varnika1880]

How much did u score based on the uploaded key

[amoleco2016]

Answer given to Question on type I error is also wrong, i think.

[abhishek23]

212 according to the key

[jigglypuff666]

I got 198. Any chances?

[nishtha92]

Can anybody please post the link for the pdf file that they have uploaded? I have been trying since afternoon..can't open their website.

[abhishek23]

PGQP47(4).pdf

[varnika1880]

Last year it was 32 to for general category ...but this time the pattern was completely different ...so we can't really predict

[nishtha92]

Thank you so much!
Getting only 190 😓

---

From: [hidden email]
Sent: ‎23-‎05-‎2016 17:14
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: MSE 2016

PGQP47(4).pdf

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/MSE-2016-tp7600959p7601010.html

To unsubscribe from MSE 2016, click here.
NAML

[jigglypuff666]

The question about maximum P for type 1 error, is it Null Hypothesis or Level of Significance?

I think the answer is Level of Significance, given wrong in the answer key, unless of course there is some grammatical twist to the question.

[jyoti sharma]

Yes! Even I think that the correct answer is level of significance.

[amoleco2016]

Level of significance for sure..