Campus Performace Report

Aspiring Minds' Campus Analysis Report
XYZ Institute of Technology
(B.Tech/B.E, 2009)
Aspiring Minds Assessment Pvt. Ltd.
Study of Students' Employability and their Performance in AMCAT
Aspiring Minds Assessment Pvt. Ltd
323 Udyog Vihar, Phase II Gurgaon, Haryana 122015, India
Tel: (91) 124 4148777
Email: info@aspiringminds.in

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Purpose of this Report ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Score Interpretation ................................................................................................................................................. 8
Percentile Interpretation ........................................................................................................................................ 8
Section 1 - Score Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 9
I. Inferences ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
II. Performance Summary ............................................................................................................................... 12
III. Training Suggestion ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Section 2 - Company Match ................................................................................................................................. 14
I. Perspective on Company Shortlisting Criteria ........................................................................................ 14
II. Employability Prospects .............................................................................................................................. 15
III. Bird's-eye-view of Employability ............................................................................................................... 16
Section 3 - Intra Campus Comparison ............................................................................................................. 19
I. Degree Comparison ..................................................................................................................................... 19
II. Stream Comparison ..................................................................................................................................... 21
Section 4 - Perspective On Students ................................................................................................................ 24
I. Star Performers ............................................................................................................................................ 24
II. High Potential Students .............................................................................................................................. 24
Aspiring Minds' Concluding Words ................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix...................................................................................................................................................................... 29
I. Candidates Score Table ............................................................................................................................... 29
II. Statistical Significance (Confidence).......................................................................................................... 32
III. National Average (Norm) ............................................................................................................................ 33
IV. Variance (Standard Deviation).................................................................................................................... 33
V. About Aspiring Minds................................................................................................................................... 34
2
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Purpose of this Report
The Aspiring Minds Campus Analysis Report provides a detailed analysis of campus students'
quality and their employability in the industry. Our aim is to produce a report which is useful to the
campus and includes a comprehensive comparison across different degrees, streams and batches.
All such analysis will serve as an employability check up for students and accordingly, the campus
can prioritize efforts to increase the overall student employability.
The sections containing tables and charts in this report are those we constructed after an in-depth
analysis of AMCAT assessment data collected from your campus. Different sections of this report
give a broad view on numerous aspects related to the performance of students. We evaluate your
students with the national average, which is calculated on a sample of entry-level job-aspirants
over 12 states in India. This comparison reveals the areas in which your students fare better (or
otherwise) than the average student assessed by us, and determines the employability of students
for diverse industries. This report will give a clear picture of the status of students eligible for the
listed companies and also help the institute to work on the weak areas figured by Aspiring Minds'
analysis.
We also provide an intra-campus analysis to give an overview of the characteristics of better
performing students (so that they can be encouraged more) and others, such that proper rectifying
measures can be taken.
On the basis of the interpretation of the analysis, we suggest certain recommendations for your
campus. We are certain that these recommendations will help XYZ Institute of Technology towards
its goal of providing excellent education to the students, which will result in better employability.
Our recommendations, if properly implemented, will also help increase the standing of the campus
amongst prospective students.
Data Snapshot
Campus XYZ Institute of Technology
Date of testing 06.08.2009
Degree tested B.Tech/B.E (157 students)
Number of students tested in each degree compared
B.Tech/B.E 157 students
MCA 62 students
Number of students compared in each stream
Computer Science 32 students
Information Technology 43 students
Electronics 50 students
3
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Electrical 12 students
Mechanical 18 students
Others 20 students
Note: some students either did not enter their stream or entered it incorrectly. These students have not been included in
any stream. Thus total students tested could be more than students in all reported streams.
4
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Introduction
This report is written with reference to the AMCAT conducted in your campus on 06.08.2009 where
a total of 157 students were tested. The areas in which your students were assessed are:
AMCAT Modules
I. English
II. Quantitative Ability
III. Logical Ability
IV. Computer Fundamentals
V. Computer Programming
VI. Electronics & Semiconductor
VII. Aspiring Minds Personality Inventory (AMPI)
I. English
Familiarity with English Language in its various nuances is an essential skill, especially in the
current climate of global networking. Ideally, any recruitment should involve a test of skills
in handling the language in ways that promote the objectives of the company and establish
desired rapport. Needless to state, an appropriate test is necessary.
Our English test uses a variety of internationally standardized resources for framing
questions aimed at determining the candidate's ability to understand (a) the written text
(b) the spoken word and (c) communicate effectively through written documents. The test
broadly covers the following areas:
a. A wide-ranging Vocabulary to cope with general and specific terminology.
b. Syntax and sentence structure, the incorrect use of which distorts meaning and
becomes a communication hurdle.
c. Comprehension exercises designed to test a candidate's ability to read fluently and
understand correctly.
d. The ability to understand and use suitable phrases, which enrich the meaning of
what is conveyed.
Time management and accuracy in conformity with the examiner's criteria.
II. Quantitative Ability
The Quantitative Ability assesses the ability of the candidate in following two aspects:
a. Basic understanding of numbers and applications
This section tests whether the candidate has understanding of basic number
system, i.e., fractions, decimals, negative, positive, odd, even numbers, rational
numbers, etc. The candidate should know how to do basic operations on these
numbers, understand concepts of factors/divisibility and have good practice on
5
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

algebra. Apart from operations on numbers, the candidate should know how to
convert a real-world problem into equations, which is to be solved to find an
unknown quantity. The candidate is tested on Word Problems representing various
scenarios to assess the same.
b. Analytical/Engineering Maths
These are aspects of mathematics needed for Engineering disciplines and analysis
of data. This includes permutation-combination, probability and understanding of
logarithms.
III. Logical Ability
The Logical Ability section assesses capacity of an individual to interpret things objectively,
to be able to perceive and interpret trends to make generalizations and be able to analyze
assumptions behind an argument/statement. These abilities are primary for success of a
candidate in the industry. Specifically, these are divided into following sections:
a. Deductive Reasoning: Assesses the ability to synthesize information and derive
conclusions.
b. Inductive Reasoning: Assesses the ability to learn by example, imitation or hit-and-
trial. This also provides an indication of how creative the individual is.
c. Subjective Reasoning: Assesses the critical thinking ability of an individual to see
through loopholes in an argument or group of statements.
All these abilities are tested both using numerical and verbal stimuli. Coachable questions
have been identified and removed.
IV. Computer Fundamentals
In the current scenario, knowing how to use the computer is essential for all professions.
This module specifically assesses the suitability of candidates for the ITeS sector, Customer
Support positions, Data Entry positions, Content Writers, Journalists, Marketing/Sales, etc.
The basic thrust of the module is not to test theoretical computer concepts, but test
whether the candidate recognizes different parts of the computer and knows how to use
the computer for day-to-day tasks such as word processing, using the Internet, making
presentations, etc. The test also assesses whether the candidate has experience in
debugging problems in computer hardware/operations and whether he/she knows how to
change some basic settings. The test includes the following sections.
A. Hardware Usage and Organization
B. Operating System Usage and Concepts
C. Basic Software and Internet
6
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

V. Computer Programming
The Computer Programming Principles and Algorithms Module evaluate the suitability of
the candidate in the software industry. It not only tests the knowledge and application of
basic constructs of programming, but also concepts of data structures, algorithm analysis
and object-oriented-programming.
The test is language-independent and all programming questions use a pseudo-code.
Significant effort has been made to exclude memory-based and rote-learning questions.
The test contains questions on debugging programs, finding the output of programs,
completing incomplete programs, finding complexity of algorithms, questions on
implementation and operations on different data structures, etc.
The test contains the following sections:
a. Structure and constructs of Computer Programs
b. Data-structures and Basics Algorithms
c. Object Oriented Programming Concepts
VI. Electronics & Semiconductor
The Electronics and Semiconductor test assesses the suitability of the candidate for the
SOC, Embedded Systems, VLSI design, etc. companies. This test together with that of
Programming assesses suitability of candidate for EDA companies. The test has the
following sections:
a. Analog Electronics
1. Basic Components, their operations and Circuit Analysis
2. Active Components, Large, Small Signal and Circuit Analysis
3. Frequency domain and time domain analysis of systems, Feedback and
Stability
4. Opamp based circuits and analysis
b. Digital Electronics
1. Boolean Algebra, Minimization of Boolean Functions
2. Implementation and Analysis of logic gates
3. Sequential blocks - flip-flops and latches
4. Digital Circuits and Blocks
5. State Machines and design of Complex sequential circuits
VII. AMPI: Aspiring Minds Personality Inventory
It is the first personality inventory designed for personality analysis of Indian college
graduates for the purpose of inputs to corporate personnel selection. AMPI is based on the
five factor model, which is by far the only scientifically validated and reliable personality
model. Several scientific studies across the world have shown that different combinations
of the five factor personality traits strongly correlate to different job profiles and predict
long term job performance reliably. AMPI analysis will be a worthwhile objective input to
7
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

the corporate selection process and help find better matches to job profiles. The AMPI
questionnaire asks candidate reaction in scenarios, his/her beliefs, likes-dislikes to
ascertain their personality factors. Factors map to traits such as candidate motivation,
self-discipline, sociability, persistence, confidence, emotional stability, etc. which both
intuitively and scientifically map to job requirements. AMPI builds in a strong proprietary
methodology to control distortions due to social desirability and answer-faking.
AMPI has been designed specifically keeping the fresh Indian graduates in mind. Context
is very important in design of items. AMPI items take into consideration the cultural
sensibilities of Indians, the scenarios students face at college/home, also depending on the
socio-economic status of the target population. This brings AMPI into a unique position as
compared to generic/Western inventories, which do not suit our target population and fail
miserably.
AMPI's scoring is based on statistical techniques of factor analysis, polytomous item
analysis and structural modeling. Norms have been set on large candidate assessment
done on final year graduates. Testforms are auto-generated such that each factor can be
reliably predicted in feasible amount of time. Test-retest reliability and test validity are
statistically guaranteed.
AMPI traits are:
a. Extraversion
b. Conscientiousness
c. Neuroticism
d. Openness to Experience
e. Agreeableness
Score Interpretation
All scores lie between 100 and 900. The scores are normalized on a Gaussian curve using statistical
techniques. The scores follow global standards of validity and reliability. They are valid for three
years and remain consistent on repeat testing till the candidate's ability improves due to sustained
long term efforts.
Percentile Interpretation
The percentile of the candidate is calculated over a National average group based on the percentile
of all students tested by Aspiring Minds. Various studies conducted demonstrate clearly that the
percentiles are stable for a year and will not vary more than two percentile points. The percentile
is a very important metric and provides an idea as to the rank of the candidate in comparison with
all graduates nationwide.
8
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Section 1 - Score Analysis
This section shows the overall performance of the campus students, along with their average
and standard deviation in each module. In Campus Aptitude and Skill Chart below, BLUE triangles
represent (average) score of your campus in each module. The RED triangle represents Total
Aptitude score, which comprises of English, Quantitative Ability and Logical Reasoning scores.
The Campus Ability Table below shows the campus average and standard deviation along with the
National average, percentile of the average score of campus, difference between the campus and
Norm average, and significance of the difference (indicated by confidence). Norm is the National
Average of all the candidates tested on AMCAT. Confidence refers to the likelihood (ranging from 0
to 100%) that the results observed in the study are real, and not due to chance. In this analysis, if
confidence is less than 90%, it indicates that the difference between the Campus Average and the
National Average is not significant and that both the scores are equivalent. For confidence greater
than or equal to 90%, the difference between the campus and the National Average is considered
significant. If the difference is positive, campus students are better than the National Average and
vice versa.
9
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Campus Ability Table
Modules
Attempted
Campus
Average
Percentile
Campus
Average
(Std. Dev.)
National
Average
(Std. Dev.)
Difference
(Campus -
National)
Confidence
Is
Significant?1
English 39% 472 (107) 501 (106) -29 100% Yes
Quantitative
Ability
61% 551 (109) 520 (115) 31 100% Yes
Logical Ability 41% 481 (97) 502 (95) -21 100% Yes
Computer
Fundamentals
65% 588 (127) 545 (116) 43 100% Yes
Computer
Programming
40% 417 (118) 449 (120) -32 99% Yes
Electronics &
Semiconductor
50% 328 (73) 327 (91) 1 46% No
Total Aptitude 49% 505 (76) 508 (90) -3 100% Yes
1 if confidence is less than 90%, it indicates that the difference between Campus Average and National Average is not
significant and that both the scores are equivalent.
I. Inferences
1. English
Communication is the key to building relationships and trust that leads to success in
business. English is a corporate language and hence, the ability to read and comprehend
this language effectively is essential to qualify for all types of job profiles, whether it is
technical or non-technical. Although the difference is not large, it is not very pleasing to
find that the students of your institute have scored lower than the National Average in
English module. We sincerely believe that students can improve their English with a little
more effort and dedication towards the language. By making English communication and
reading a habit, students can improve their score to go beyond the National Average. The
campus and the faculty also need to create a conducive environment, where students are
encouraged to communicate in English.
2. Quantitative Ability
Quantitative Ability measures a person's ability to deal with numbers and real-world
problems quantitatively and mathematically. It is the ability to convert a real world
problem into equations which can then be solved to find the result. This module is
designed to measure a candidate's basic math and algebraic skills, his/her understanding of
basic quantitative concepts and his/her ability to reason quantitatively, solve quantitative
problems and interpret graphical data. Your campus has shown good performance in
Quantitative Ability module, scoring higher than the National Average; but note that the
10
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

difference is not substantial. Your students should practice different kinds of problems on
different topics like numbers, decimals, probability, logarithms, etc. This will help them to
get a good hold of this area, which in turn will increase their scores.
3. Logical Ability
The purpose of Logical Reasoning module is to test students' logical skills and check their
intuitive ability, decision making capability, problem solving approach and other areas
which are important from a company's perspective. People with strong Logical Reasoning
are quicker to perceive and interpret things objectively. Therefore, proficiency in logical
reasoning is desired for all job profiles. Students of your institute have scored equivalent
to the National Average in Logical Reasoning module. Proper guidance from the faculty
and focused efforts from students are required to succeed the National Average. Students
should solve various kinds of logical puzzles and play logical games regularly. This will
sharpen their skills tremendously, thereby increasing the employability of your students.
4. Computer Fundamentals
The Computer Fundamentals module tests for the basic knowledge of a candidate about
the working on Computer and its associated technology. The module tests student's
proficiency in using Windows, browsing the Internet, etc. As satisfactory computer
knowledge is expected of all in corporate world, good performance in this module is
a must for all job profiles. The students of your institute have performed well in this
module, scoring slightly higher than the National Average. Their performance can be
further elevated by focused effort by the institute and students together by enhancing
their knowledge on computers and different types of software. This can be achieved by
regularly reading computer magazines and journals and by gathering information on the
Internet.
5. Computer Programming
Computer Programming module assesses a candidate's programming skills. The sub-
categories of this module are basics of programming, data structures, object oriented
programming and theoretical computer science (complexity, data types, etc.). A high score
in this module is an indicator of proficiency in the role of software engineer or developer. In
this module, your campus has scored lower than the National Average, but the difference
is less. To overcome this gap, proper corrective measures are required before it is too late.
Students should practice a variety of simple coding problems from all the sub areas of this
module, increasing the difficulty level while attaining the excellence.
6. Electronics & Semiconductor
The Electronics and Semiconductor Module tests the student's understanding of analog
and digital electronics. Students need expertise in this area to pursue a career in fields
such as VLSI design, Embedded Systems, Computer-Aided-Circuit Design - in general, the
Semiconductor and SOC industry. The topics included in this module are taught to students
pursuing Electronics/Electrical engineering. In many cases, it is also taught to students
pursuing engineering in Computer Science, Instrumentation, etc. It is good that the campus
is equivalent to the National average, but there is lot of room for improvement. It seems
that students first require a brush up of basic concepts followed by lot of question solving.
Giving weekly or bi-weekly assignments to students and making them solve back problems
is a great way to further improve the conceptual understanding of students and develop
proficiency in applying the concept in various ways and situations.
11
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

II. Performance Summary
From the above analysis, it is clearly visible that the performance of the students at your campus
is good in Quantitative Ability and Computer Fundamentals, which is appreciable. They have
performed satisfactory in Logical Ability and Electronics & Semiconductor, whereas extra efforts
can make a tremendous difference in performance. However, the students' performance is not
satisfactory in English and Computer Programming, therefore additional training sessions and
corrective measures are required by the campus authorities. Methodologies such as mock tests,
assignments and extra classes can become a valuable strategy for the benefit of students. The
campus can also include proactive mentoring sessions for weak students and review their skills in
the given area(s). Another approach can be to hold training sessions focusing on comprehensive
guidance for the students to excel in their weak areas. The gain resulting from these training
sessions and your continuous support will allow overall development of the student and further
enhancement in their abilities.
III. Training Suggestions
This section lists areas where your students need to improve on the basis of their performance in
the AMCAT. For each module, according to the degree of the improvement needed, suggestions
are provided so that the performance of students can be improved.
Campus Training Requirement Table
Area to
Improve Upon
Degree of
Improvement
Suggestion
English Strong
Conduct a number of mock tests and make sure that the
students always appear for it, without missing any of the tests.
This will help them to know where they actually stand.
Encourage playing games like Scrabble, Crossword, etc. that
are based on English vocabulary. You can try placing such
games in campus library. Conduct tests and quizzes under time
constraints which would help students judge their
performance and further improve it.
Quantitative
Ability
Very Less
Examples on a variety of questions should be made and then
extensively discussed to equip the students with different
concepts.
Logical Ability Moderate
Include explicit training for reasoning skills to make the
students practice different types of questions such as
syllogism, blood relations, direction sense, pattern recognition,
etc. Encourage students to solve different types of puzzles and
solve questions which need logical thinking. Have them lay the
problem clearly in their minds and then only start solving it.
12
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Area to
Improve Upon
Degree of
Improvement
Suggestion
Computer
Fundamentals
Very Less
Give them assignments which entail usage of different parts of
computer system.
Computer
Programming
Strong
Sharpen your students' skills by making them design programs
for complex problems. Try giving them more challenging
assignments. One of the best ways to improve fundamental
skills in this module is by reading technical literature and good
books with lot of examples. You could subscribe to technical
journals and more books on computer programming in your
library. Choose a high-level language like C/C++/Java and let
the students try implementing many different programs
(pattern/series generation, arithmetic operations, decision-
making, use of functions, etc.) in the chosen language. Or,
in other words, practical exposure to programming should be
encouraged.
Electronics &
Semiconductor
Moderate
The right way of teaching Electronics and Semiconductor is to
make students do a lot of weekly or bi-weekly assignments.
Teachers should prepare solutions for back-problems of the
aforesaid texts and then give these problems to students to
solve. Electronics is a math like subject. One cannot read it to
learn it, it is application based and is learnt by doing. Good
understanding of combinational logic, circuit analysis and
design is required to excel in this module. We suggest that the
students should keep practicing a few questions in these areas
to keep their knowledge refreshed. Make sure they go through
various examples, understand and practice them. Then, make
them solve multiple choice questions under time constraint.
13
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Section 2 - Company Match
This section gives you an approximate idea about the kind of companies your students are
competent for. This section also provides an insight into the criteria used by different companies
for the process of hiring. Additionally, an estimate of the employability of your campus students
in different sectors is mentioned. To improve employability prospects, domains in which your
students need to concentrate their efforts are also listed.
I. Perspective on Company Shortlisting Criteria
Different companies use custom benchmarks on AMCAT to shortlist the types of candidates they
require. As per past usage of Aspiring Minds' pool by companies, following are few examples of
companies where the students can aspire to get in to kick-start their successful careers.
• Large Services Companies
These types of service companies have large training setups of their own. They provide
system integration solutions, software application development, testing solutions and
many other services. For large services companies, Computer Programming score is not
an important criterion. They look for candidates with acceptable English and Logical
Reasoning along with strong Quantitative Ability skills. A good score in computer
programming module is an advantage. HCL, TCS, Wipro, Satyam, Polaris etc are some of
the major large scale service based companies.
• Small or Core Technology Companies
These types of product based companies analyze the future requirements of market and
come up with exact solutions and product enhancements. That is, they develop their
own products/applications based on the market requirements. These companies primarily
look for good programming skills and quantitative ability. Since the job does not include
interaction with clients, they do not focus on good scores in English. Yahoo, Microsoft,
Texas Instruments, etc. are some of the product based technology companies.
• Hardware and Networking Companies
These companies specialize in Hardware and Network Support and basically provide
integrated solutions for business enterprise applications, networking equipment and
network management. That is they help manage organization's computing resources up
and running. These companies primarily look for average quantitative and logical ability.
Since the job does not include a lot of interaction with clients, they do not necessarily
require good scores in English Comprehension. Cisco, Hewlett Packard, Nortel, NEC, Citrix
and Netgear are some of the Hardware/Networking companies.
• Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) Companies
14
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Knowledge Processing Outsourcing (popularly known as KPO) calls for the application of
specialized domain pertinent knowledge. KPO business entities provide typical domain-
based processes, advanced analytical skills and business expertise, rather than just process
expertise. These companies look for an impressive command in English and sound
knowledge in both Quantitative and Logical Reasoning. Evalueserve, Ugam Solutions, 24/7
Customer, ICICI OneSource, etc. are some of the leading KPOs in India.
• Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) Companies
Business process outsourcing companies can be aptly defined as those that act to utilize
the services of a third party in order to perform its back office operations. The BPO market
is forecast to hit $450 billion by 2012. These companies look at moderate to outstanding/
exceptionally good English, depending on whether they have national or international
clients. The other parameters they use for short listing are acceptable Logical Reasoning
and Computer skills. GE Capital, Convergys, Wipro Spectramind and Dell are some of the
prominent BPO entities.
II. Employability Prospects
This section analyzes the students on the benchmarks of diverse companies and then indicates
the percentage of students from your campus eligible for a particular type of company. It also lays
emphasis on the number of students needing training and grooming sessions.
Campus Job Match Table
Type of Company
Percentage of Students
Eligible
Percentage of Students Need
Training
Large IT companies 22% 78%
Small/Core Technology
companies
3% 97%
KPO 9% 91%
BPO 49% 51%
Hardware & Networking
companies
38% 62%
It is clearly visible from the above table that the percentage of students eligible for both Large IT
companies and Small/Core Technology companies is very low. Also for Hardware & Networking
companies a moderate percentage of students meet the eligibility criteria. Since technical
students mostly aspire to go for product or service based technology companies, it is a matter of
deep concern that most of the students do not meet the companies' criteria. If the institute desires
15
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

a good placement record for these types of job profiles, it should provide regular assignments
of varying difficulty levels and conduct periodic tests with special stress on weak areas of the
students. This can go a long way in improving the quality of knowledge imparted to students,
thereby increasing their understanding as well.
Less number of students are eligible for KPOs whereas fair number of students are eligible for
BPOs. Extra effort by the campus and student self motivation can elevate the performance of the
students. To increase the employability in KPOs and BPOs, concentrated efforts are required in
English communication skills.
III. Bird's-eye-view of Employability
The following chart displays an overview of the employability of students in your institute. The
circles represent different company types and parts of circle indicate the percentage of students
eligible for the respective company. For example, an overlapping region between KPO and Large IT
companies circle represents percentage of students eligible for both the companies.
Note: the arrow in the figure above points to the number of students eligible for a particular company. BPO sector is not
shown in the figure.
It is evident that 51% students of your campus need training to become employable in the
industry. These are the students who are not eligible for any of the above mentioned companies.
Please also note that if we include students who are just eligible for BPO sector, the total percent
of students in need of training becomes 62%.
16
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

The following table suggests the methods to be implemented in order to improve employability
of your students for each type of company. These recommendations are provided on the basis of
weak modules for each company, which the faculty should work on to help their students. Campus
is requested to go through these suggestions and implement them to elevate the chances of getting
placed in that particular company.
17
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Campus Employability Enhancement Table
Type of
Company
Campus
Employability
Prospect
Areas in Need of Training for Improving Employability
Chances
Large IT
companies
Low
These companies are basically looking for good English
and Logical skills with average Quantitative ability. To
increase the employability prospects for this industry,
extra efforts are required by the campus authority on
English, Quantitative Ability and Logical Ability.
Small/Core
Technology
companies
Low
These companies are basically looking for good
Programming, Logical and Quantitative abilities. To
English, Quantitative Ability, Logical Ability and
Computer Programming.
KPO Low
These companies look for candidates having basic
knowledge of English and good Quantitative and
Reasoning abilities. If employability prospects is to be
increased for this industry, campus faculty will need to
focus on English and Logical Ability.
BPO Medium
These companies look for candidates having basic
knowledge of English and average Reasoning abilities. To
English.
Hardware &
Networking
companies
Medium
These companies are basically looking for candidates
having basic knowledge of English and good Quantitative
and Reasoning abilities. If employability prospects is to
be increased for this industry, campus faculty will need
to focus on English and Logical Ability.
According to our analysis, 49% and 38% of your students are eligible to work in BPO and Hardware
& Networking companies respectively which is good and 22%, 3% and 9% of your students are
eligible to work in Large IT companies, Small/Core Technology companies and KPO respectively
which is relatively low. It should be noted that 51% of the students do not meet the company
criteria at all and need training to be eligible for these companies.
18
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Section 3 - Intra Campus Comparison
In this section, we will compare assessment scores to create a comprehensive comparative analysis
between different degrees and different branches of a degree and different branches of a degree
of your college. This section shall explain the competitiveness of students of each degree, branch
and batch with others in the respective group.
I. Degree Comparison
In the Campus Degree Comparison Chart, performance of different degrees at your campus can
be visualized. Average percentiles in modules which are common between the two degrees are
compared below.
The table below provides the average score of the two degrees in their common AMCAT modules.
The difference between degree scores is also calculated, which will provide a perspective of which
degree has performed better in different areas. The confidence calculated alongside shows if the
difference in the scores is statistically significant or not.
19
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Campus Degree Comparison Table
Modules
B.Tech/
B.E
Percentile
(Average
Score)
MCA
Percentile
(Average
Score)
Percentile
Difference
(B.Tech/
B.E -
MCA)
Score
Difference
(B.Tech/
B.E -
MCA)
Is
Significant?
Confidence
English 39% (472) 22% (419) 17% 53 Yes 100%
Quantitative
Ability
61% (551) 41% (494) 20% 57 Yes 100%
Logical Ability 41% (481) 33% (460) 8% 21 Yes 94%
Computer
Fundamentals
65% (588) 62% (581) 3% 7 No 69%
Computer
Programming
40% (417) 48% (444) -8% -27 Yes 96%
Electronics &
Semiconductor
50% (328) 36% (294) 14% 34 No 64%
1. English
From the graph and table, we can easily infer that B.Tech/B.E students have good
command over English in comparison to the MCA students with a significant difference
of 17 percentile points. However, both degrees have scored below the National Average. It
is one area where high improvement is needed by students of both the fields.
It should be of no surprise that MCA students have scores less in this section as compared
to those in B.Tech as this is a general pattern observed by Aspiring Minds.
3. Logical Ability
In the Logical Reasoning section, B.Tech/B.E students have outdone the MCA students
of your campus. Steady efforts by both the students and the campus authorities are
required to maintain this performance and better it. But, the scores attained by students
of both the degrees are below the National Average. Your campus must channelize its
efforts in improving the level of students of both degrees, in order to upgrade their overall
performance.
The performance of the students of both the degrees is equivalent in Computer
Fundamentals section. Students of both the degrees have scored above the National
Average, which is a good indication. Students should not lose their focus and continuously
put in the desired efforts to enhance their performance.
20
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

MCA students, with a strong background in Computer Programming are known to have
good programming skills in comparison to B.Tech students. The comparison above proves
this point as it is evident that MCA students have given a remarkable performance in
Computer Programming. As both the degrees have scored below the National Average, it
is one area where high improvement is needed by students of both the fields
The performance of the students of both the degrees in Electronics and Semiconductor is
equivalent.
Our analysis shows that B.Tech/B.E students have performed well in English, Quantitative Ability
and Logical Ability modules, while they have not performed well in Computer Programming
module. Also, in Computer Fundamentals and Electronics & Semiconductor modules they have
performed equivalent to MCA students.
II. Stream Comparison
Different streams in your campus have been tested on the Aspiring Minds' benchmark to discover
the pattern of your students' performance in each stream. The streams that are compared in this
study are:
1. Computer Science
2. Information Technology
3. Electronics
4. Electrical
5. Mechanical
6. Others
The chart below shows the module-wise average scores comparison for each stream. To interpret
the chart, refer to the above illustration. Each horizontal bar represents the average score along
with the standard deviation of a particular branch in that module. The vertical line at the center of
each bar represents the average score. The length of bar represents the range of scores obtained
by students of that stream.
21
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Note: color bands are in order.
For each module, the following table lists the top scoring streams. Only the modules which are
common for all the streams have been considered in the table.
Top Scoring Streams For Each Module
Rank English
Quantitative
Ability
Logical
Ability
Computer
Fundamentals
Computer
Programming
Electronics &
Semiconductor
1 Electrical Electrical Electrical
Information
Technology
Others Electronics
2
Computer
Science
Others Others
Computer
Science
Information
Technology
Electrical
Note: streams with less than 5 students have not been considered for the analysis.
On the basis of AMCAT scores obtained by different streams in your campus, we make following
inferences -
1. English
Candidates having Electrical as specialization have scored highest in English among other
specializations. Computer Science students scored slightly lower than Electrical students
with a difference of 3.94 percentile whereas Mechanical students have scored significantly
lower with difference of 22.33 percentile from Electrical. Also, note that Computer Science,
Electronics, Information Technology, Mechanical and Others students have scored poorly
in comparison to the National Average whereas Electrical students have performed well
with respect to the National Average.
22
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

In Quantitative Ability Electrical students are the top scorers, succeeding Others with
a difference of 3.66 percentile while Information Technology students are the lowest
scorers. When compared with the National Average, Computer Science, Electrical,
Electronics, Mechanical and Others students have done better in this section. The
Information Technology students need to pay more attention to these areas as they have
underperformed.
3. Logical Ability
Electrical students have shown that they are the best when it comes to Logical Reasoning.
Others students follow them with a difference of 5.05 percentile while Computer Science
students are the last in the order with a difference of 22.68 percentile. Computer Science,
Electronics, Information Technology, Mechanical and Others students have not performed
up to the mark when compared with the National Average. On the brighter side, Electrical
students have done well with respect to the National Average.
Computer Fundamentals section is well attempted by Information Technology students
in comparison to the Computer Science students with a difference of 28.33 percentile.
Mechanical students' performance is comparatively lower with respect to the other
streams, scoring 41 percentile in this section. If nationwide comparison is made, then
Mechanical students have performed lower than the National Average, and Computer
Science, Electrical, Electronics, Information Technology and Others had done fairly well
with respect to the calculated National Average.
When it comes to Computer Programming, Others students have grabbed the top position
among all streams. Mechanical are the last rankers with a 36.92 percentile difference.
Also, Consider that all the streams have scored low in comparison to the National Average.
When it comes to Electronics and Semiconductors, students of Electronics are the best
performers in comparison to the Electrical with a 20.44 percentile difference. We have
observed that Electrical students have scored low in comparison to the National Average
whereas Electronics are better performers with respect to the National Average.
In your campus, Electrical stream performed outstandingly well in maximum number of modules.
Also, Mechanical stream performed poorly in maximum number of modules in comparison to other
streams, and therefore need special attention.
23
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Section 4 - Perspective On Students
I. Star Performers
In this section we analyze the performance of a few exceptional students and provide perspective
on them. This section will be helpful in identifying the most brilliant students in your campus and
the students who need a lot of improvement.
Campus Star Performers
English
Quantitative
Ability
Logical
Ability
Computer
Fundamentals
Computer
Programming
Total
Aptitude
Manav
Bhardwaj
(785)
Piyush
Farsaiya
(765)
Abhishek
Verma
(655)
Santosh Yadav
(833)
Suraj
Raghuvanshi
(665)
Manav
Bhardwaj
(655)
Neha Jaiswal
(745)
Ramesh
Chandra
(735)
Sandeep
Kumar
(635)
Manav Bhardwaj
(833)
Kaushal Kumar
(635)
Ramesh
Chandra
(648)
Peeyush
Pandey
(725)
Dipak
Agarwal
(725)
Vikas
Asthana
(635)
Suraj
Raghuvanshi
(800)
Jayant Shah
(595)
Apoorv
Moghey
(638)
Obaidullah
Siddiqui
(725)
Abhinav
Shrivastwa
(705)
Yogendra
Bharti
(625)
Rahul Gupta
(800)
Apoorv Moghey
(585)
Piyush
Farsaiya
(635)
Ramesh
Chandra
(715)
Rajnesh Patel
(685)
Rajnesh
Patel
(625)
Junaida Khan
(766)
Manav Bhardwaj
(575)
Jyotsna
Khanduja
(622)
We suggest the campus to provide due recognition to these students with awards, prizes etc. to
build a culture of excellence.
II. High Potential Students
There are certain students who we believe have great potential and some guidance and
encouragement by the campus authorities can go a long way in making a non-trivial difference in
their job prospects.
1. Manav Bhardwaj
2. Apoorv Moghey
3. Yogendra Bharti
4. Ambrish Kumar
8. Kaushal Kumar
9. Piyush Farsaiya
10. Vishal Chaudhary
11. Naveen Kumar
24
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

5. Yatendra Goswami
6. Jyotsna Khanduja
7. Abhinav Pratik
12. Nitya Gupta
13. Charu Sharma
14. Sanobar Riaz
These students of your campus have shown exceptional performance in all the modules
attempted in AMCAT. They have the potential to be placed in the companies of their choice.
Aspiring Minds recommends sustaining this positive attitude so that they strive to achieve more
and improve their current performance. To achieve this, persistent drilling and focused endeavor is
required.
1. Usha Singh
2. Ashish Jain
3. Virendra Harit
4. Shilpi Gupta
5. Krishna Gupta
6. Amit Kumar
7. Abhishek Dwivedi
8. Mamta Kumari
9. Suman Singh
These students have shown exceptionally good performance in English. However, as their
performance is not that great in other modules, we recommend that they work hard on their
Quantitative and Logical Reasoning and the subject of their domain to realize their potential to the
fullest.
1. Shitanshu Bhanot
2. Abhishek Verma
3. Abhishek Chandra
4. Gajendra Singh
5. Satendra Sharma
6. Akhilgulsia
These students have good English and aptitude skills, but they need to work hard on their major
subject if they want to do well in the job market. We suggest that they should be given special
attention so that they utilize their ability to the fullest.
1. Sandeep
Ram
2. Puneet Goel
3. Swati
Gandhi
4. Arjit Mittal
5. Sushil
Verma
6. Gaurav
Tripathi
7. Praveen
Sharma
8. Sandeep
Kumar
9. Tanuja
Kumari
10. Rahul Singh
11. Suraj
Raghuvanshi
12. Rohitkumar
13. Atul
Dhemaan
14. Pankaj
Mehra
15. Rahul
Verma
16. Nitin Kumar
17. Manikant
Sirohi
18. Akash -
19. Tejendra
Kashyap
20. Chandresh
Singh
21. Pradeep
Patanwar
22. Kamran
Ahmad
These students have shown the most disturbing results. They have not performed well in most
of the modules. These candidates need special encouragement and attention from the campus
to work harder before it is too late. To build their future, they need to act now! Special training
25
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

sessions should be of great help.
26
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Aspiring Minds' Concluding Words
To summarize the overall analysis of your campus done by Aspiring Minds, key-points from all
sections are highlighted below:
• The performance of the B.Tech/B.E students in your campus is good in Quantitative Ability
and Computer Fundamentals, which is appreciable. They have performed satisfactory
in Logical Ability and Electronics & Semiconductor, whereas extra efforts can make a
tremendous difference in performance. However, the students' performance is not
satisfactory in English and Computer Programming, therefore additional training sessions
and corrective measures are required by the campus authorities.
• According to our analysis, 49% and 38% of your students are eligible to work in BPO
and Hardware & Networking companies respectively which is good and 22%, 3% and
9% of your students are eligible to work in Large IT companies, Small/Core Technology
companies and KPO respectively which is relatively low. It should be noted that 51% of
the students do not meet the company criteria at all and need training to be eligible for
these companies.
• Our analysis shows that B.Tech/B.E students have performed well in English, Quantitative
Ability and Logical Ability modules, while they have not performed well in Computer
Programming module. Also, in Computer Fundamentals and Electronics & Semiconductor
modules they have performed equivalent to MCA students.
• In your campus, Electrical stream performed outstandingly well in maximum number of
modules. Also, Mechanical stream performed poorly in maximum number of modules in
comparison to other streams, and therefore need special attention.
The strongest recommendation Aspiring Minds will like to give is initiation of classes to improve the
weak areas of candidates. Apart from classes, regular quizzes and special training session should
also be initiated, where students answer questions under time constraints. The classes should be
student oriented so that the students are open to questions and are free to ask their doubts. Peer
teaching can be another way to increase the learning of students in the class
Along with increasing the employability of the institute, this will help your students compete with
other candidates in a more effective and efficient way. With regard to areas where your students
scored well, a sustained effort is needed. Regular assignments of problems should be given so that
the students can accelerate their performance.
We strongly request the campus authorities to direct all students to follow the feedback given
by Aspiring Minds to each one of them. The campus authorities can go a long way in reminding
students about their strengths and weaknesses, thus encouraging them to uphold their strengths
and improve on their weaknesses. Consider special classes, better teaching processes and focused
courses so that students get a good platform to improve and perform. We also strongly suggest
conducting AMCAT again at campus after 4 months of dedicated hard work by students and campus
authorities. This shall give students a benchmark to improve themselves, and help us understand
27
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

if the initiated training program was useful. Of course, it would help students as well, with better
scores leading to better job opportunities.
We thank XYZ Institute of Technology for giving us an opportunity to conduct AMCAT in their
campus. For any clarification or further analysis, we can be contacted at campus@aspiringminds.in
or (91) 124 4148777.
28
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Appendix
I. Candidates Score Table
The Candidates score table below shows the scores and percentile of all the students of your
campus tested on AMCAT. All scores lie between 100 and 900.
AMCAT Score, Percentile
AMCAT ID Name
English
Quantitative
Ability
Logical Ability
Computer
Fundamentals
Computer
Programming
Electronics &
Semiconductor
1047291287 Abhay Singh - - - - - - - - - - 333 9 %
1047609058 Abhinav Diwedi 315 7 % 575 73 % 565 70 % 633 86 % - - 333 9 %
1047154346 Abhinav Pratik 585 75 % 625 84 % 535 61 % 666 91 % 545 64 % - -
1047852991
Abhinav
Shrivastwa
515 55 % 705 95 % 435 30 % 733 97 % - - - -
1047678895 Abhishek Verma 505 52 % 665 91 % 655 89 % 666 91 % - - 233 2 %
1047925355 Abhishek Dwivedi 545 64 % 394 20 % 485 45 % 600 79 % - - - -
1047283631 Abhishek Chandra 625 84 % 565 70 % 615 82 % 500 50 % 305 6 % 366 14 %
1047972798 Abhishek Kamal 435 30 % 565 70 % 485 45 % - - - - - -
1047465807 Akash 365 14 % 445 33 % 435 30 % 366 14 % 335 9 % - -
1047589264 Akhil Gulsia - - - - - - - - 355 12 % 400 21 %
1047987095 Akhilgulsia 515 55 % 635 86 % 505 52 % 500 50 % - - - -
1047739327 Ambrish Kumar 665 91 % 635 86 % 525 58 % 700 95 % 505 52 % - -
1047507743 Amit Das 385 18 % 625 84 % 415 25 % 600 79 % 415 25 % - -
1047228315 Amit Kumar 545 64 % 464 39 % 425 27 % 533 60 % 325 8 % 166 0 %
1047867799 Amit Kumar 535 61 % 645 88 % 464 39 % 533 60 % 565 70 % - -
1047491515 Anil Verma 505 52 % 585 75 % 405 22 % 666 91 % - - 400 21 %
1047940922 Anil Jha 425 27 % 615 82 % - - - - - - - -
1047604794 Ankit Ranjan 525 58 % 485 45 % 585 75 % 700 95 % 365 14 % - -
1047821006 Ankit Singh 395 20 % 655 89 % 505 52 % 700 95 % 445 33 % - -
1047112059 Anoop Jain 405 22 % 655 89 % 525 58 % 400 21 % - - 200 1 %
1047525245 Anshul Yadav 385 18 % 615 82 % 605 80 % 633 86 % - - 266 3 %
1047186707 Anuj Yadav 455 36 % 585 75 % 605 80 % 633 86 % 335 9 % - -
1047111581 Anurag Srivastava 395 20 % 565 70 % 575 73 % 733 97 % 325 8 % 233 2 %
1047962527 Apoorv Moghey 695 94 % 625 84 % 595 78 % 700 95 % 585 75 % - -
1047246591 Arjit Mittal 415 25 % - - - - - - - - - -
1047399358 Arun Yadava 435 30 % 534 61 % 455 36 % 500 50 % 335 9 % - -
1047797439 Ashish Jain 565 70 % 465 39 % 475 42 % 633 86 % 425 27 % 266 3 %
1047566219 Ashish Kumar - - - - - - 433 30 % 545 64 % - -
1047305853 Ashish Kumar 324 8 % 575 73 % 415 25 % - - - - - -
1047842588 Ashutosh Singh 554 67 % 545 64 % - - - - - - - -
1047737182 Atul Dhemaan 405 22 % 495 48 % - - - - - - - -
1047167819 Avkash Kumar 544 64 % 585 75 % - - - - - - - -
1047221055 Brij Singh 365 14 % 645 88 % 515 55 % 500 50 % 335 9 % - -
1047346111 Chandra Prakash 545 64 % 585 75 % 475 42 % 500 50 % - - 233 2 %
1047385919 Chandra Singh 365 14 % 585 75 % 505 52 % 433 30 % - - 466 39 %
29
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

AMCAT ID Name
English
Quantitative
Ability
Logical Ability
Computer
Fundamentals
Computer
Programming
Electronics &
Semiconductor
1047818907 Chandresh Singh 324 8 % 355 12 % 405 22 % 533 60 % 405 22 % - -
1047851803 Charu Sharma 515 55 % 525 58 % 585 75 % 566 70 % - - 400 21 %
1047603134 Chetanya Sharma 435 30 % 405 22 % 465 39 % 333 9 % 555 67 % 233 2 %
1047368316 Deepak Kushwaha 445 33 % 625 84 % 605 80 % 633 86 % 245 2 % 400 21 %
1047367485 Deepak Singh 404 22 % 625 84 % 465 39 % 433 30 % 375 16 % - -
1047526207 Devendra Kumar 455 36 % 334 9 % 385 18 % 600 79 % - - 266 3 %
1047582138 Dipak Agarwal 425 27 % 725 96 % - - - - - - - -
1047504798 Gajendra Singh 554 67 % 645 88 % 545 64 % 700 95 % 425 27 % - -
1047964563 Gajwant Singh 485 45 % 655 89 % 595 78 % 700 95 % - - 266 3 %
1047416751 Gaurav Singh - - 315 7 % 305 6 % 566 70 % 295 5 % - -
1047484151 Gaurav Tripathi 485 45 % - - - - - - - - - -
1047202090 Gaurav Gupta 455 36 % 535 61 % - - - - - - - -
1047824303 Gaurav Sharma 395 20 % 605 80 % 485 45 % 466 39 % 455 36 % - -
1047180711 Hari Gupta 385 18 % 645 88 % 545 64 % 666 91 % 545 64 % 333 9 %
1047993237 Harish Kumar 435 30 % 405 22 % 545 64 % 366 14 % 155 0 % 400 21 %
1047582591 Hasan Raza 355 12 % 565 70 % - - - - - - - -
1047980847 Himanshu Agrahri 385 18 % 625 84 % 435 30 % 500 50 % 365 14 % - -
1047661927 Hriday Gupta 495 48 % 595 78 % 405 22 % 600 79 % 445 33 % - -
1047715487 Jayant Shah 365 14 % 645 88 % 515 55 % 666 91 % 595 78 % - -
1047273353 Jitendra Kumar 625 84 % 515 55 % 555 67 % 733 97 % 405 22 % - -
1047786395 Junaida Khan 375 16 % 495 48 % 425 27 % 766 98 % 495 48 % - -
1047863999 Jyotsna Khanduja 625 84 % 625 84 % 615 82 % 633 86 % 465 39 % - -
1047340955 Kamiesh Yadav 365 14 % 545 64 % 415 25 % 500 50 % - - 300 5 %
1047709247 Kamran Ahmad 365 14 % 425 27 % 375 16 % 400 21 % 395 20 % 233 2 %
1047567612 Kaushal Kumar 515 55 % 615 82 % 615 82 % 566 70 % 635 86 % - -
1047931830 Krishna Gupta 555 67 % 505 52 % 485 45 % 533 60 % - - - -
1047522213 Kumar Singh 425 27 % 625 84 % - - - - - - - -
1047991477 Kundan Pandey 395 20 % 585 75 % 395 20 % 533 60 % 315 7 % 400 21 %
1047132543 Mamta Kumari 535 61 % 505 52 % - - - - - - - -
1047537343 Manav Bhardwaj 785 99 % 635 86 % 545 64 % 833 100 % 575 73 % - -
1047822271 Mandeep Singh 455 36 % 625 84 % 455 36 % 433 30 % - - 300 5 %
1047671711 Manikant Sirohi 385 18 % 475 42 % 455 36 % - - 325 8 % - -
1047328607 Md.amim 464 39 % 405 22 % 345 11 % 666 91 % 435 30 % - -
1047675839 Mohit Jain 475 42 % 545 64 % 465 39 % 700 95 % 295 5 % 433 30 %
1047231295 Naveen Kumar 565 70 % 585 75 % 505 52 % 666 91 % 535 61 % - -
1047867107 Naveen Kumar 625 84 % - - - - - - - - - -
1047340601 Neeraj Bharti 485 45 % 395 20 % 425 27 % 600 79 % 435 30 % - -
1047247230 Neha Jaiswal 745 98 % 605 80 % - - - - - - - -
1047326399 Nitin Singh 525 58 % - - 545 64 % 533 60 % 405 22 % - -
1047972543 Nitin Kumar - - 645 88 % - - - - - - - -
1047282487 Nitin Kumar 375 16 % 404 22 % 405 22 % - - 365 14 % - -
1047162647 Nitya Gupta 555 67 % 625 84 % 525 58 % 666 91 % 455 36 % - -
1047961199
Obaidullah
Siddiqui
725 96 % 565 70 % 455 36 % 433 30 % 505 52 % - -
1047354269 Pallavi Katiyar 505 52 % 555 67 % 495 48 % 600 79 % - - 366 14 %
1047429754 Pallavi Verma 445 33 % 675 92 % 535 61 % 700 95 % - - 300 5 %
30
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

AMCAT ID Name
English
Quantitative
Ability
Logical Ability
Computer
Fundamentals
Computer
Programming
Electronics &
Semiconductor
1047372671 Pankaj Mehra 225 1 % 145 0 % 145 0 % 200 1 % 100 0 % 200 1 %
1047120573 Pankaj Mishra 365 14 % 565 70 % 445 33 % 400 21 % - - 366 14 %
1047658431 Paritosh Kumar 495 48 % 575 73 % 595 78 % 500 50 % - - 333 9 %
1047400334 Peeyush Pandey 725 96 % 585 75 % 455 36 % 533 60 % 475 42 % - -
1047995149 Piyush Farsaiya 535 61 % 765 98 % 605 80 % 700 95 % - - 333 9 %
1047439229 Pradeep Patanwar 375 16 % 475 42 % 455 36 % 466 39 % 335 9 % - -
1047732799 Prashant Singh 505 52 % 555 67 % 435 30 % 666 91 % 415 25 % - -
1047924411 Prateek Singh 455 36 % 595 78 % 535 61 % 500 50 % - - 266 3 %
1047922618 Praveen Sharma 494 48 % - - - - - - - - - -
1047421597 Preeti Gupta 465 39 % 554 67 % 495 48 % 566 70 % 475 42 % - -
1047114671 Puneet Goel 355 12 % - - - - - - - - - -
1047154607 Puneet Goyal 545 64 % 635 86 % - - - - - - - -
1047911149 Rahul Singh 485 45 % 585 75 % 495 48 % 600 79 % - - 266 3 %
1047670398 Rahul Gupta 395 20 % 585 75 % 565 70 % 800 99 % 465 39 % 266 3 %
1047736873 Rahul Singh 475 42 % 565 70 % 525 58 % 766 98 % - - 400 21 %
1047427935 Rahul Verma 475 42 % 435 30 % 415 25 % - - - - - -
1047554975 Rahul Singh 355 12 % - - 195 1 % 133 0 % 100 0 % - -
1047592829 Rajiv Kumar 445 33 % 565 70 % 495 48 % 466 39 % 455 36 % - -
1047301471 Rajneesh Kumar 425 27 % 475 42 % 355 12 % 400 21 % - - 366 14 %
1047412157 Rajnesh Patel 465 39 % 685 93 % 625 84 % 666 91 % 345 11 % - -
1047671543 Ramesh Chandra 715 96 % 735 97 % 495 48 % 466 39 % - - 266 3 %
1047966583 Ramji Yadav 385 18 % 545 64 % 525 58 % 666 91 % 545 64 % - -
1047436159 Ravindra Singh 415 25 % 565 70 % 435 30 % 700 95 % 385 18 % 366 14 %
1047760603 Ravindra Yadav 295 5 % 565 70 % 465 39 % 533 60 % 215 1 % 300 5 %
1047157695 Rohit Kumar 475 42 % 475 42 % 465 39 % 733 97 % - - - -
1047731113 Rohitkumar 395 20 % 265 3 % 185 1 % - - - - - -
1047559335 Rupendra Singh 385 18 % 595 78 % 465 39 % 566 70 % - - 400 21 %
1047845517 Sandeep Kumar 455 36 % 545 64 % 635 86 % 633 86 % - - 300 5 %
1047993279 Sandeep Ram - - - - - - - - 295 5 % - -
1047625659 Sandeep Kumar 464 39 % 185 1 % - - - - - - - -
1047483321 Sanjay Saxena 355 12 % 595 78 % 485 45 % 566 70 % 455 36 % - -
1047977815 Sanobar Riaz 675 92 % 655 89 % 525 58 % 633 86 % - - - -
1047139263 Santosh Yadav 415 25 % 485 45 % 425 27 % 833 100 % 465 39 % - -
1047726015 Sarita Jaiswal 425 27 % 645 88 % 455 36 % - - - - - -
1047183002 Satendra Sharma 534 61 % 625 84 % 565 70 % 466 39 % 405 22 % - -
1047762495 Satish Chand 335 9 % 375 16 % 415 25 % 400 21 % - - 333 9 %
1047724731 Satish Mishra 495 48 % 635 86 % 585 75 % 600 79 % - - 300 5 %
1047152055
Satyendra
Srivastav
355 12 % 555 67 % 475 42 % 700 95 % 385 18 % 400 21 %
1047373679 Saurabh Singh 315 7 % - - 245 2 % - - - - 400 21 %
1047462577 Saurabh Anand 355 12 % 635 86 % 595 78 % 666 91 % - - 366 14 %
1047345083 Saurabh Singhy - - - - - - 666 91 % - - 400 21 %
1047202749 Saurabh Singh 485 45 % 625 84 % - - - - - - - -
1047251855 Saurbh Singh - - - - 515 55 % - - - - - -
1047771031 Shekhar Singh 475 42 % 535 61 % 555 67 % 600 79 % - - 433 30 %
1047413375 Shilpi Gupta 565 70 % 455 36 % - - - - - - - -
31
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

AMCAT ID Name
English
Quantitative
Ability
Logical Ability
Computer
Fundamentals
Computer
Programming
Electronics &
Semiconductor
1047252877 Shitanshu Bhanot 615 82 % 635 86 % 605 80 % 666 91 % - - 300 5 %
1047971612 Shobhit Bareliya 495 48 % 645 88 % 475 42 % 433 30 % - - 433 30 %
1047382963
Somendra
Chaudhary
445 33 % 465 39 % 485 45 % 666 91 % 375 16 % - -
1047429503 Suman Singh 535 61 % 435 30 % 475 42 % - - - - - -
1047864127 Suraj Raghuvanshi - - - - - - 800 99 % 665 91 % - -
1047538493 Suraj Kataria 565 70 % 645 88 % - - - - - - - -
1047861183 Suraj Raghuvanshi 395 20 % 405 22 % - - - - - - - -
1047129023 Surendra Yadav 395 20 % 535 61 % 455 36 % 433 30 % 165 0 % 333 9 %
1047157183 Sushil Sharma 435 30 % 595 78 % 425 27 % 666 91 % - - 433 30 %
1047865788 Sushil Verma 195 1 % - - 105 0 % - - 165 0 % - -
1047376255 Swati Gandhi - - - - 415 25 % - - - - - -
1047407998 Syed Hasan 575 73 % 615 82 % 475 42 % 600 79 % 405 22 % - -
1047217785 Tanuja Kumari 365 14 % 395 20 % - - - - - - - -
1047391031 Tejendra Kashyap 415 25 % 345 11 % 455 36 % 533 60 % - - 200 1 %
1047128671 Usha Singh 565 70 % 435 30 % 425 27 % 700 95 % 485 45 % - -
1329231039 Usha Singh 334 9 % 295 5 % 325 8 % - - 555 67 % - -
1047469428 Vandana Shahi 335 9 % 415 25 % 495 48 % 633 86 % 425 27 % - -
1047872378 Vikas Asthana 295 5 % 475 42 % 635 86 % 700 95 % - - 300 5 %
1047304998 Vikash Yadav 415 25 % 665 91 % 355 12 % 633 86 % 495 48 % - -
1047310399 Vikrant Sachan 655 89 % 655 89 % 385 18 % 733 97 % 545 64 % - -
1047939370 Vipin Mishra 525 58 % 635 86 % 415 25 % 533 60 % 475 42 % - -
1047149230 Vipin Kumar 375 16 % 515 55 % 515 55 % 333 9 % 345 11 % 300 5 %
1047389463 Virat Vats 505 52 % 635 86 % 475 42 % 733 97 % 515 55 % - -
1047245723 Virendra Harit 565 70 % 295 5 % 385 18 % - - - - - -
1047973750 Vishal Kumar 445 33 % 515 55 % 545 64 % 666 91 % - - 366 14 %
1047209919 Vishal Chaudhary 515 55 % 585 75 % 585 75 % 700 95 % 515 55 % - -
1047119803 Yash Singh - - - - 615 82 % 600 79 % - - 433 30 %
1047889855 Yash Lal 655 89 % 675 92 % 485 45 % 733 97 % 535 61 % - -
1047764917 Yash Singh 535 61 % 635 86 % 455 36 % - - - - - -
1047994295 Yatendra Goswami 655 89 % - - - - - - - - - -
1047695163 Yatendra Goswami 695 94 % 625 84 % 535 61 % 633 86 % 475 42 % - -
1047103411 Yogendra Bharti 585 75 % 655 89 % 625 84 % 733 97 % 555 67 % - -
II. Statistical Significance (Confidence)
All score distributions generally follow a pattern called the National Average (alternatively,
Gaussian) distribution. National Average distribution is by far the most common assumption with
regard to score distribution. For the purpose of comparison, we express AMCAT scores as National
Average distribution. The most characteristic feature of National Average distribution is that the
scores for maximum number of students fall in a very narrow range around the average value.
The percentage of scores lying in the range falls exponentially as we move away from the average
value. The confidence percentage, which ranges from 0% to 100%, can be indicates the chances of
the difference in scores arising by chance. A high confidence percent indicates that it is very likely
32
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

that the difference observed is real and not by chance. In this analysis, we classify differences, with
confidence 90% and high, as significantly different (that is, not by chance).
III. National Average (Norm)
To construct the norms (National Average), balanced sampling was used to select more than
5000 students tested by Aspiring Minds nationwide. Balanced sampling technique ensures that
the selected candidates are representative of entry-level job-aspirants over 12 states in India. It is
ensured that the sample contains different degrees, specialization, gender, regions, etc. in the same
composition as the National distribution.
To summarize score distribution of the norms and XYZ Institute of Technology students, two values
(statistics) were used: average of the scores and standard deviation of the scores. While the former
value indicates what, on average, candidates score in the test, the latter value tells how much
do scores deviate from the average. High value of standard deviation means that the scores are
dissimilar and spread across the scale. In contrast, a low value of standard deviation means that
candidates score similar to each other and the average.
IV. Variance (Standard Deviation)
The variance (or standard deviation) is a measure of how spread out a distribution is. In other
words, it is the measure of variability. A low standard deviation indicates that the data points tend
to be very close to the same value (the average), while high standard deviation indicates that the
data are spread out over a large range of values.
33
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

V. About Aspiring Minds
Aspiring Minds was founded in 2007 by alumni of IIT and MIT (USA) with a vision to introduce
scientific assessment methodology to bring together job-seekers and campuses across India on a
common standardized platform that is recognized by multiple companies on a national level. The
aim of Aspiring Minds is to highlight the pool of talented students and progressive campuses to
corporates nationally, provide an insight on how they can improve their employability and help
them acquire jobs on the basis of their potential. In a short span of time, Aspiring Minds has earned
credibility and is working with multiple corporations such as Microsoft Research, HCL Technologies,
MPhasiS EDS, iTrust, Evalueserve, Godrej Agrovet, ICICI Prudential and SKS Microfinance.
Aspiring Minds' flagship test, AMCAT, has helped more than 35,000 students across 250 campuses
in 12 states in India. Today, AMCAT is India's largest Employability Test.
Board of Advisors
Prof. Tarun Khanna, HBS, USA
Dr. Una-May O'Reilly, MIT, USA
Dr. Vijay Bhushan, PhD., UIUC, USA
34
Tel: (91) 124 4148777

Campus Performace Report

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (18)

Ähnlich wie Campus Performace Report

Ähnlich wie Campus Performace Report (20)

Campus Performace Report