yay. Big thanks to everyone on here that helped answer my questions, really appreciate it
PA-21-87.9%
QR-21-96.4%
RC-21-76.7%
BIO-21-92.3%
GC-22-91.8%
OC-29-98.9%
TS-23-97.8%
AA-23-98.7%
PA
CDP PAT all the way. I was absolutely horrible at this section to start with, I remember going through the PA section of KBB and even finding that difficult, only to find that many people on here commented on how easy it was vs the real thing. Realistically, I just wanted to get an 18+ on this section so I wouldnt have to retake due to a low score, so Im more than happy with a 21.
Compared to the real thing, I'd say that keyholes were on par, although I will say that I got really good at this section really fast, I was getting 15s on just about all the practice tests. TFE seemed a bit easier, but not by too much. Hole punches again seemed a tad easier, although I got one pretty weird one. Cube counting was very similar as well, although there were no illusions and each pattern had less cubes than the CDP tests, which was cool. Angles were...ehh I dunno, its tough to say. I never finished a CDP angle test thinking "wow that section was really easy" and knowing I got a good score, and I had that same lack of approximation on the DAT. Overall it must have been similar because I was averaging low 20s on the CDP tests and got a 21 here so just find something that works for you, practice it a bit, and have the confidence that your performance on practice tests will translate pretty well to the real thing. Pattern folding IMO was a bit tougher, the right answer wasnt always very obvious and oftentimes was recognized from looking at very subtle differences between answer choices. Generally I found that on CDP the right answer choice tended to really stand out. Anyways, save some $$ and get the 5 test version of CDP. When you first start out, work all of your strategies on only one test so you dont become familiar with anything on the other tests. Also, work through that single test a few times w/o looking at the answers until you start getting decent scores, that way youre actually coming up with your own strategies.
QR
I realize a 21 isnt anything godly, but this section seemed pretty easy. There was one word problem that I ended up guessing on but thats because I realized it would take awhile to figure out at the expense of easier questions and skipped it. That, IMO, is the key to doing well on this section. Each question is worth the same amount, dont get bogged down on one difficult one when the next few could be really easy. I used math destroyer for this. Overall, the real thing was extremely similar to MD although on average the questions seemed easier than any given test from destroyer. Really happy to have broken a 20 on this section.
RC
Again, really happy to crack a 20. I didnt do any prep for this section, although I wouldn't recommend that to anyone else. Basically what I did was scan through the passages for no more than 5 mins, and then attacked the questions. By the time you get to the last few questions, youre familiar enough with the passage to really pinpoint where the answers are. I had one really long,annoying ethics passage, one about fungus, and I forget the 3rd one.
BIO
This was....interesting. And by interesting I mean ****ing gay. Dont get me wrong, Im happy with this score and dont wanna be "that guy" complaining about a 21 in bio, but it was really frustrating. I studied ALOT for this section, read cliffs 2-3 times, barrons AP bio once, and about 70% of campbells. I also did a few destroyer questions but they seemed very irrelevant, which ironically is exactly how I'd describe the bio section as opposed to random like most people do. Since the destroyer questions didnt really seem to test on much I learned from cliffs or campbells, I only did 30-40 questions and stopped. So yeah, this section isnt random in the sense that it focuses on little,obscure details of processes, its just irrelevant in that it sucks donkey balls. In retrospect, I would recommend doing the destroyer problems, and reading cliffs a few times.
GC
Overall it was pretty straightfoward, I had one random question on something Ive NEVER seen before and one absolutely ******ed calculation question. The concept itself was very easy as was setting up the calculation, but the answer choices compared to approximating the necessary math were ridiculous. I dont wanna go into too much details about it, but PM me if you want me to explain further. For this section, I used chads videos and went through destroyer once.
OC
This was cake, very straightforward. Pretty sure the one I missed was a disparity I noticed between chads videos and destroyer. I meant to make a thread about it but forgot...Anways, I used chads videos and went through destroyer once for this section.
For those of you looking to begin studying, I would recommend using:
-CDP 5 test version
-Chads videos
-DAT destroyer, do ALL sections, not just the chemistries
-Cliffs AP bio, supplemented with any online sources for fuzzy areas.
-Also optional Math destroyer. Its definitely a valuable resource for QR but its kinda pricey, and if youre solid in math, I dont think its worth the price tag.
Overall Im really happy with my scores, did better than I thought I would. I havent really started looking at schools yet, but do you think I would have a shot at some of the more competitive schools like columbia and stonybrook? I have a 3.91overall and ~3.95 science GPA as well as pretty typical ECs and shadowing experience (nothing too crazy).
Anyways, thanks again to everyone that helped me out throughout this process. Its a pain in the ass, but totally worth it in the end. Let me know if you have any questions and Ill do my best to help.
PA-21-87.9%
QR-21-96.4%
RC-21-76.7%
BIO-21-92.3%
GC-22-91.8%
OC-29-98.9%
TS-23-97.8%
AA-23-98.7%
PA
CDP PAT all the way. I was absolutely horrible at this section to start with, I remember going through the PA section of KBB and even finding that difficult, only to find that many people on here commented on how easy it was vs the real thing. Realistically, I just wanted to get an 18+ on this section so I wouldnt have to retake due to a low score, so Im more than happy with a 21.
Compared to the real thing, I'd say that keyholes were on par, although I will say that I got really good at this section really fast, I was getting 15s on just about all the practice tests. TFE seemed a bit easier, but not by too much. Hole punches again seemed a tad easier, although I got one pretty weird one. Cube counting was very similar as well, although there were no illusions and each pattern had less cubes than the CDP tests, which was cool. Angles were...ehh I dunno, its tough to say. I never finished a CDP angle test thinking "wow that section was really easy" and knowing I got a good score, and I had that same lack of approximation on the DAT. Overall it must have been similar because I was averaging low 20s on the CDP tests and got a 21 here so just find something that works for you, practice it a bit, and have the confidence that your performance on practice tests will translate pretty well to the real thing. Pattern folding IMO was a bit tougher, the right answer wasnt always very obvious and oftentimes was recognized from looking at very subtle differences between answer choices. Generally I found that on CDP the right answer choice tended to really stand out. Anyways, save some $$ and get the 5 test version of CDP. When you first start out, work all of your strategies on only one test so you dont become familiar with anything on the other tests. Also, work through that single test a few times w/o looking at the answers until you start getting decent scores, that way youre actually coming up with your own strategies.
QR
I realize a 21 isnt anything godly, but this section seemed pretty easy. There was one word problem that I ended up guessing on but thats because I realized it would take awhile to figure out at the expense of easier questions and skipped it. That, IMO, is the key to doing well on this section. Each question is worth the same amount, dont get bogged down on one difficult one when the next few could be really easy. I used math destroyer for this. Overall, the real thing was extremely similar to MD although on average the questions seemed easier than any given test from destroyer. Really happy to have broken a 20 on this section.
RC
Again, really happy to crack a 20. I didnt do any prep for this section, although I wouldn't recommend that to anyone else. Basically what I did was scan through the passages for no more than 5 mins, and then attacked the questions. By the time you get to the last few questions, youre familiar enough with the passage to really pinpoint where the answers are. I had one really long,annoying ethics passage, one about fungus, and I forget the 3rd one.
BIO
This was....interesting. And by interesting I mean ****ing gay. Dont get me wrong, Im happy with this score and dont wanna be "that guy" complaining about a 21 in bio, but it was really frustrating. I studied ALOT for this section, read cliffs 2-3 times, barrons AP bio once, and about 70% of campbells. I also did a few destroyer questions but they seemed very irrelevant, which ironically is exactly how I'd describe the bio section as opposed to random like most people do. Since the destroyer questions didnt really seem to test on much I learned from cliffs or campbells, I only did 30-40 questions and stopped. So yeah, this section isnt random in the sense that it focuses on little,obscure details of processes, its just irrelevant in that it sucks donkey balls. In retrospect, I would recommend doing the destroyer problems, and reading cliffs a few times.
GC
Overall it was pretty straightfoward, I had one random question on something Ive NEVER seen before and one absolutely ******ed calculation question. The concept itself was very easy as was setting up the calculation, but the answer choices compared to approximating the necessary math were ridiculous. I dont wanna go into too much details about it, but PM me if you want me to explain further. For this section, I used chads videos and went through destroyer once.
OC
This was cake, very straightforward. Pretty sure the one I missed was a disparity I noticed between chads videos and destroyer. I meant to make a thread about it but forgot...Anways, I used chads videos and went through destroyer once for this section.
For those of you looking to begin studying, I would recommend using:
-CDP 5 test version
-Chads videos
-DAT destroyer, do ALL sections, not just the chemistries
-Cliffs AP bio, supplemented with any online sources for fuzzy areas.
-Also optional Math destroyer. Its definitely a valuable resource for QR but its kinda pricey, and if youre solid in math, I dont think its worth the price tag.
Overall Im really happy with my scores, did better than I thought I would. I havent really started looking at schools yet, but do you think I would have a shot at some of the more competitive schools like columbia and stonybrook? I have a 3.91overall and ~3.95 science GPA as well as pretty typical ECs and shadowing experience (nothing too crazy).
Anyways, thanks again to everyone that helped me out throughout this process. Its a pain in the ass, but totally worth it in the end. Let me know if you have any questions and Ill do my best to help.
Last edited:
