I have sent the following mail to firstname.lastname@example.org and am waiting for their reply.
I write this letter on behalf of the 25,000 CMAT candidates who appeared only in the February 2014 CMAT.
I am an MBA/MMS candidate for session 2014-16. I got the Rank 6 in CMAT held in February 2014. The reason I write to you is to clarify a concern that a lot of my fellow CMAT candidates have. It relates to the conversion of CMAT ranks to percentiles. The information brochure states the following:
“CMAT examination does not give result in percentile. CMAT Result shall be converted into percentile by the competent Authority. Percentile figure shall be considered up to 2 decimal places without rounding off. The best percentile of CMAT shall be considered for preparation of Merit.“
The popular understanding of the last line in the above paragraph is:
1. That September 2013 CMAT percentiles will be calculated separately from February CMAT percentiles. Then, the best percentiles for candidates who have appeared in both will be taken. In this case, the Rank 6 in September who scored 305/400 will have a percentile equivalent to the Rank 6 in February, who scored 296/400 and ties will be resolved as per 12th%, 10th% and AGE criteria.
So the percentile at 296/400 in February 2014 CMAT will be 99.99 (Rank 6 in approximately 90,000 candidates). While the percentile of the person getting 296/400 in September 2013 CMAT will be 99.96 (Rank 20 in approximately 65,000 candidates).
2. Another interpretation that is being identified is that all the scores of both CMAT exams will be taken and arranged in a descending order and THEN the percentiles will be calculated. The best percentiles of candidates appearing for both exams will be considered. In this case, the Rank 6 in September CMAT who scored 305/400 will be ranked higher than the Rank 6 in February CMAT, who scored 296/400.
It must be brought to light that in September 2013, approximately 65,000 candidates appeared for CMAT while in February 2014, approximately 90,000 candidates appeared for the same but the scores obtained for corresponding ranks in February 2014 are lower than those in September 2013 – as shown below.
In September (65,000 candidates):
Rank 1 = 326
Rank 20 = 296
rank 300 = 265
In February (90,000 candidates):
Rank 1 = 317 (9 marks less)
Rank 20 = 284 (14 marks less)
Rank 300 = 242 (23 marks less)
– and the difference goes on increasing for lower ranks.
This disparity clearly signifies that the February 2014 CMAT was considerably more difficult than the September 2013 version.
Hence it will be unfair for the 25,000 students (at least) who could not appear for the exam in September – if the DTE calculates the percentiles based on scores and not the ranks obtained in the separate exams, as then the February (only) candidates will be ranked lower.
Unlike the IIMs, which operate in secrecy, we have a very high regard for the DTE, when it comes to ensuring fair competition – as was done by re-initiating the MAH-CET.
But unfortunately, this is a big confusion for all of us and we, very humbly request you to kindly clarify the doubt about the method used for rank to percentile conversion for CMAT, while considering the difference in difficulty levels of both September 2013 and February 2014 CMAT exams.
It might be that I may have to move to court. I will do it. If anyone wants to support my cause, by just adding his/her name to the petition (in case the need arises) – please PM me your mail IDs, I’ll add you to the correspondence list in my E-Mails to the DTE.