Cracking the AMCAT: How to solve (and score) in AMCAT English Language Test

If you’re preparing for an upcoming AMCAT test or scheduling one, then you are probably ready for this one section. A compulsory segment of the AMCAT test, the multiple-choice AMCAT English language questions test is an easy scoring paper, provided you know your way around it. And that’s why it is Part 2 of our ‘Cracking the AMCAT’ series.

The AMCAT English Language Module:

The AMCAT English test Module is a compulsory test section – one of three: English Language, Logical Reasoning and Quantative Section. Each AMCAT test takes a measure of a candidate on these counts, while their domain knowledge can guide them through the specific sections.

What is an English language test (in a CAT)?

An essential component of any Common Aptitude Test (CAT), an English Language test is generally used to gauge the proficiency in a candidate in the common operating language. Simply put, it judges a candidate’s ability in three areas:

1. The written text
2. The spoken word
3. Communication skills in dealing with written documents

Unlike the earlier logical reasoning test, this linguistic test is relatively straightforward. Understanding the pattern ensures that you can easily work through it. And good answers will lead to tougher questions (according to the adaptive pattern of the test).

How to prepare for an English language test?

The 16-minute AMCAT English language offers 18 questions to a candidate in the following areas:

• Vocabulary – Synonyms, Antonyms, Contextual Vocabulary
• Grammar – Checking for errors, sentence construction and improvement
• Comprehension analysis

Best Fresher Job Roles for High Scores in English Language

AMCAT Candidates are known to have scored as high as 99 percentile in the English Language paper. A high proficiency in the module can show that the candidate is best suited to business consulting, HR/Admin, iTeS/BPO, Marketing, Engineering, Sales and Customer Management, IT, Hotel Management, Life Sciences and Content Development.

Need examples of these questions. Then try your hand at these queries (section-wise):

VOCABULARY:

An example from the English language module:

The Correct answer: Option b

Economical means using no more of something than is necessary and being careful of not wasting money and resources. Let’s look at each of the options:

1) Frugal – It means the same as economical and is NOT the opposite.

2) Wasteful – It means using something of value carelessly or to no purpose.

3) Efficient – It means achieving maximum productivity with minimum wasted efforts or expenses.

4) Plain – It means something that is simple and basic in character.

Option b is most nearly opposite in meaning to the given word.

GRAMMAR:

The grammar component looks at how good the candidate is at ferreting out errors from the copy before them, including how to best construct sentences.

Here is an example:

The Correct answer is Option C

Solution:

Here, ‘devoted’ is the correct word. It means giving appropriate time or concentrating on a particular pursuit. As most of the time of the woman/girl goes to music, so we say that she devotes her time to music.

COMPREHENSION ANALYSIS

Read the passage and answer the questions.

Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology to run smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organising, staffing, controlling and problem-solving.

Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 percent leadership and only 10 to 30 percent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don’t have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problem here as one of managing change.

For most of this country, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn’t have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. Many companies and universities developed management programs and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership.

To some degree, management was emphasized because it’s easier to preach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth century agenda because that’s what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever-growing enterprises. Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome.

The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: Success creates some degree of marked dominance which in turn produces much growth. After a while, keeping the ever-larger organisation under control becomes the primary challenge. So, attention turns inward and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus takeover. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. Arrogant managers can over-evaluate their current performance and competitive position listen poorly and learn slowly.

Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities. Bureaucratic cultures can smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organisations to break out of the morass.

1. Why did companies and universities develop programs to prepare managers in such large numbers?
2. Companies and universities wanted to generate funds through these programs.
3. Companies and universities did not have many good managers for the proper functioning of the establishments.
4. Organisations did not want to spend their scarce resources in training managers.
5. Organisations wanted to create a communication network through trained managers.

Correct answer: Option b

Solution: This part of the passage answers the question:

For most of this country, as we created thousands and thousands of large organisations for the first time in human history, we didn’t have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. Many companies and universities developed management programs and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job.

It can be inferred that the companies and universities developed management programs to tackle the problem stated in the previous sentence – i.e. lack of good managers needed to ensure proper functioning of the establishments.

1. Which of the following characteristics helps an organisation in its efforts to transform?
2. Emphasis on leadership and not management
3. Strong and dogmatic culture
4. Bureaucratic and inward-looking approach
5. Failing to acknowledge the value of customers and shareholders

Correct answer: Option a

Solution: This part of the passage answers the question:

Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 percent management.

Also, with a strong emphasis on management but not leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus takeover. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult.

Keen on honing your vocabulary? Then try your hand at the AMCAT sample papers, before you schedule a test.