2012 Ranking of DS Based on GPA/DAT/Other

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

doc toothache

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
8,514
Reaction score
2,791
Here is some information prospective applicants may want to consider before applying for the next cycle. There is no substitute for being informed and without question, the best information can be found in the ADEA Official Guide to Dental Schools 2013.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=989334

Members don't see this ad.
 

Attachments

  • Ranking of DS Based on GPA-DAT-Other SDN 2-3-26-13.xls
    73 KB · Views: 5,432
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Note:

The ADEA book is fabulous (and thank you doc for posting its information here), but apparently some of the information has to be taken with a grain of salt. The average GPAs of SUNY Buffalo were confirmed to be erroneous in this year's addition - the real averages were around a 3.6, just like in the 2012 edition. If there's one error, there could be more? Something to consider.
 
Last edited:
Wait is this from the ADEA book that just came out?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
As usual, thanks doc! :)
 
Note:The ADEA book is fabulous (and thank you doc for posting its information here), but apparently some of the information has to be taken with a grain of salt. The average GPAs of SUNY Buffalo were confirmed to be erroneous in this year's addition - the real averages were around a 3.6, just like in the 2012 edition. If there's one error, there could be more? Something to consider.


What you should have confirmed is whether or not the correct information was sent to ADEA. There are likely to be plenty of errors, but it does not diminish the importance of the information the Guide provides.
 
FYI it looks like you've got the oGPA and sGPA columns switched. Nice work otherwise, doc, you're the man! Also is the modified SA formula "sGPA x AA/30 + oGPA"?

EDIT: Nevermind, I see the formula in the spreadsheet (I was looking on my phone before)
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised at how high NYU's AA is. I remembered back in 2009 when I got into their BS/DDS program they required an 18 :p.
 
Avg DAT scores seem to be going up.
Nice work....If more predents looked at these it would save them a lot of questions and uncertainty.
 
Why is it that UOP has such high DAT and relatively low GPA? Just curious if anyone has an insight.
 
Why is it that UOP has such high DAT and relatively low GPA? Just curious if anyone has an insight.

They value DAT performance? I've always grouped them into the 'DAT schools'.
 
Why is it that UOP has such high DAT and relatively low GPA? Just curious if anyone has an insight.

I believe they want students who test well above all else, so that you'll be able to handle boards with the accelerated curriculum.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
oh dear... buffalo went down significantly..... =/ theres no way that NYU>>>buffalo
 
FYI it looks like you've got the oGPA and sGPA columns switched. Nice work otherwise, doc, you're the man! Also is the modified SA formula "sGPA x AA/30 + oGPA"?

EDIT: Nevermind, I see the formula in the spreadsheet (I was looking on my phone before)

Has this been confirmed as a fact or a guess?


nvm.. just saw he edited the excel sheet!
 
oh dear... buffalo went down significantly..... =/ theres no way that NYU>>>buffalo

Why would the applicant data be any indicator of the quality of education of the school? This list should not be taken as a metric for comparing which schools are "better than others." For example, my school lets in about 1/4 OOS students and internationals who have significantly lower stats than the average in-state student. This does 2 things: 1) Increases revenue via OOS tuition 2) lowers overall average GPA/DAT.

Regardless, in dental school some people who had 4.0's in college are at the bottom of the class and some people who had 3.0's are at the top. Really just seems to be how much you study and how well you memorize for the didactics...
 
Why would the applicant data be any indicator of the quality of education of the school? This list should not be taken as a metric for comparing which schools are "better than others." For example, my school lets in about 1/4 OOS students and internationals who have significantly lower stats than the average in-state student. This does 2 things: 1) Increases revenue via OOS tuition 2) lowers overall average GPA/DAT.

Regardless, in dental school some people who had 4.0's in college are at the bottom of the class and some people who had 3.0's are at the top. Really just seems to be how much you study and how well you memorize for the didactics...

I don't like how some groups think they can predict the prospective performance of a student in dental school based their past undergraduate history. A 4.0 student might have only maintained a 4.0 in order to get into a dental school and become a GP. There's little incentive for such a student to "gun" for every single arbitrary point on an exam in order to be top in their class when all they really need is a healthy understanding of the material.

I like what this Canadian study has to say, "Conscientiousness is comprised of traits such as organization, persistence, and purposefulness...Conscientiousness predicted academic or clinical performance or both in every year of dental training." There're not enough studies in this subject but I think this factor is very promising. (Full disclosure - I do not have time to read the entire article at the moment. I definitely will after I finish this paper. Senioritis...)

http://www.jdentaled.org/content/71/5/664.full.pdf+html

I would rather accept a student who had a poor academic history but is now goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized (how a person with such a poor academic history suddenly becomes this way is beyond me) over a student with the opposite condition.
 
I would rather accept a student who had a poor academic history but is now goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized (how a person with such a poor academic history suddenly becomes this way is beyond me) over a student with the opposite condition.

'effort' didn't come to mind?
 
I'm surprised at how high NYU's AA is. I remembered back in 2009 when I got into their BS/DDS program they required an 18 :p.

Memories have a way of fooling us. In 2009 the mean AA was 20.
 
Memories have a way of fooling us. In 2009 the mean AA was 20.

Well if you read my post, you'd see I was talking about their BS/DDS combined program which in 2009 stated that an 18AA was needed ;). However over the years its was increased to an AA of 20.
 
'effort' didn't come to mind?

Effort into variable [x] alone doesn't change world-views and value systems, where x is probably school work. Even if you undergo certain experiences and read certain philosophies, it's still up to you to accept and assimilate it. How can you explain how someone suddenly changes their value system of wanting to accomplish the least work necessary and avoid personal challenges to one that devalues those things with something as ambiguous as just effort?
 
Note:The ADEA book is fabulous (and thank you doc for posting its information here), but apparently some of the information has to be taken with a grain of salt. The average GPAs of SUNY Buffalo were confirmed to be erroneous in this year's addition - the real averages were around a 3.6, just like in the 2012 edition. If there's one error, there could be more? Something to consider.

Unless we are looking at two different versions of the Guide, the o-gpa for Buffalo is listed at 3.67 and s-gpa at 3.60. Where's the error?
 
Unless we are looking at two different versions of the Guide, the o-gpa for Buffalo is listed at 3.67 and s-gpa at 3.60. Where's the error?

The 2013 guide has the oGPA and sGPA for Buffalo listed at 3.28 and 3.11, respectively.

http://i48.tinypic.com/n3lso.jpg <--- image was massive when I embedded it.
 
Yeah. Doc, where do you see them listed as 3.6 and 3.67? The 2013 guide doesn't say that, and your spread sheet also has what's in the guide. Here's a smaller image.

f1jzpg.jpg
 
They value DAT performance? I've always grouped them into the 'DAT schools'.

What are other such "DAT schools" if you don't mind me asking? Just curious :p
 
Yeah. Doc, where do you see them listed as 3.6 and 3.67? The 2013 guide doesn't say that, and your spread sheet also has what's in the guide. Here's a smaller image.

With hyperopia, it was a case of inability to see the proper line.
 
Effort into variable [x] alone doesn't change world-views and value systems, where x is probably school work. Even if you undergo certain experiences and read certain philosophies, it's still up to you to accept and assimilate it. How can you explain how someone suddenly changes their value system of wanting to accomplish the least work necessary and avoid personal challenges to one that devalues those things with something as ambiguous as just effort?

what you are saying makes absolutely no sense...so in your mind, a person can't sufficiently justify making positive life changes? Effort is not ambiguous. We all know what effort means. Don't need to be snide and think "effort" is now some esoteric, unfathomable concept. "Effort" is plain and simple, very unambiguous. Just cus an individual has a poor academic history (low GPA) doesn't mean there's a problem with their value system or work ethic or sacrificing themselves. Is there a problem with prioritizing what's really important, probably. Some people in undergrad do something called having fun, I hope this isn't ambigious to you, and some people just go alittle too gung ho and lose sight of academic history. To blatantly assume they only want to perform the least work necessary makes you sound like a d-bag.

Most people have good values and morals. Whether or not those morals are directed towards the same activities you deem fit is yo' problem. But people can take those lessons and use them to there advantage when they do get serious about school. Seriously, your comment is so nonsensical. Our f*ckin human race is filled with stories of people turning over a new leaf and making changes, and even those cases when changes go as deep to effect their value system.
 
what you are saying makes absolutely no sense...so in your mind, a person can't sufficiently justify making positive life changes? Effort is not ambiguous. We all know what effort means. Don't need to be snide and think "effort" is now some esoteric, unfathomable concept. "Effort" is plain and simple, very unambiguous. Just cus an individual has a poor academic history (low GPA) doesn't mean there's a problem with their value system or work ethic or sacrificing themselves. Is there a problem with prioritizing what's really important, probably. Some people in undergrad do something called having fun, I hope this isn't ambigious to you, and some people just go alittle too gung ho and lose sight of academic history. To blatantly assume they only want to perform the least work necessary makes you sound like a d-bag.

Most people have good values and morals. Whether or not those morals are directed towards the same activities you deem fit is yo' problem. But people can take those lessons and use them to there advantage when they do get serious about school. Seriously, your comment is so nonsensical. Our f*ckin human race is filled with stories of people turning over a new leaf and making changes, and even those cases when changes go as deep to effect their value system.

Putting in more time to studying does not necessarily mean you are challenge-driven and enjoy accomplishing personal, internal goals. It could mean you are only after a means to an end, where the end product is an external material object like money or some arbitrary letter grade. If you talk to most PI and academics, I assure you that their motivations are not the same as that of some Joe schmo who wants a good paying career with as few working hours possible and that's it. If that's hard for you to understand, tell me exactly what confuses you. You cannot suddenly change someone's value of once wanting to buy as many fancy shoes, nice car, or big house to one that values internalized achievements significantly more at the flick of a switch.

"Fun" is absolutely relative. Believe it or not, some people actually enjoy participating in scholastic and research activities purely for curiosity sake. Your version of "fun" or entertainment does not necessarily have to be the same as mine or anyone else's. They are by no means social recluses. In fact, you cannot survive a career in science without communication and relationships with one another.
 
By the way, I don't think there are right morals or right value system. You can argue this point all you want from whatever stance you want, whether that be religious or philosophical. However, there are certain value systems that are better conducive to advancing the field of science through research. I explained what I think those are.

If what you say is true then congratulations because you just solved humanity's existential problem by formulating a path to becoming Nietzsche's Ubermensch.

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~pj97/Nietzsche.htm
 
Putting in more time to studying does not necessarily mean you are challenge-driven and enjoy accomplishing personal, internal goals. It could mean you are only after a means to an end, where the end product is an external material object like money or some arbitrary letter grade. If you talk to most PI and academics, I assure you that their motivations are not the same as that of some Joe schmo who wants a good paying career with as few working hours possible and that's it. If that's hard for you to understand, tell me exactly what confuses you. You cannot suddenly change someone's value of once wanting to buy as many fancy shoes, nice car, or big house to one that values internalized achievements significantly more at the flick of a switch.

"Fun" is absolutely relative. Believe it or not, some people actually enjoy participating in scholastic and research activities purely for curiosity sake. Your version of "fun" or entertainment does not necessarily have to be the same as mine or anyone else's. They are by no means social recluses. In fact, you cannot survive a career in science without communication and relationships with one another.

dude. First of all, i would hope someone who does a PhD program does go into it for the right reasons and that there motivations would be different than some Joe Schmo who has no interest in research. But for you to assume that Joe Schmo only wants a good paying career and wants to work as few hours as possible and thats it is very naive, and, although I don't know you, makes you sound very immature. Just cus someone doesn't choose a career path you deem exceptional doesn't mean they aren't just as challenge-driven and enjoy accomplishing personal, internal goals.

Second, its not about suddenly changing your value system. The values were always there, but just weren't being utilized. People are idiots, everyone knows what tehy should or shouldn't do. People know soda is bad for them; that junk food will clog your arteries; that you should drink alot of water every day and eat lots of fruits and veggies. If they suddenly do change, in your mind, that action is inexplanable. And to your case you just gave, which is different from the previous one, after the financial crisis there are numerous stories of materialistic Wall-Streeters and similar individuals realizing what really matters to them and began living a more modest life. An internal achievement can mean alot and for you to look from the outside and assume someone is value-driven is really, once again, naive.

Third, fun is relative, but you are missing my point about "fun." For your previous post that individuals with low GPAs who turn-it-around cannot have changed their values doesn't hold any weight. Maybe those low GPAs were caused by people partying too much, or playing too WOW too much (two examples of different kinds of "fun"). People do grow out of that phase and start prioritizing what really matters to them based on whatever values they have.

Side Note: Having done and completed a Master's Thesis in basic science research I agree with you that communication and relationships are key in science, but that is completely different from whether an individual is fun to go grab a drink with or whatever. I find research fun, but there are also other things in life worth looking forward to. I'm sure you have interests. And, not sure your research background, but please, there are some researchers who have lost their passion and are just twiddling there thumbs day in and day out.
 
dude. First of all, i would hope someone who does a PhD program does go into it for the right reasons and that there motivations would be different than some Joe Schmo who has no interest in research. But for you to assume that Joe Schmo only wants a good paying career and wants to work as few hours as possible and thats it is very naive, and, although I don't know you, makes you sound very immature. Just cus someone doesn't choose a career path you deem exceptional doesn't mean they aren't just as challenge-driven and enjoy accomplishing personal, internal goals.

There are obviously more than two categories of people. I think it's naive to think someone would even have such a narrow view of people in this day and age and on this forum. I'm sure there are plenty of people with all sorts of different values and beliefs and not one of them is superior to the other. I'm sorry but you haven't convinced me to retract my statement. I didn't respond to the rest of your post because quite honestly, they were random in relation to what was being discussed about instantly changing one's worldview with just effort. Good luck!
 
If what you say is true then congratulations because you just solved humanity's existential problem by formulating a path to becoming Nietzsche's Ubermensch.

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~pj97/Nietzsche.htm

nice you quoting Nietzsche. I won't link anything cus i'm kinda getting over this, but from my days as a Philosophy Major here are some books you should check up on. Keep in mind, philosophical texts are the idea's of someone else and while the "overman" might be a quandary for Nietzsche, Jean-Paul Sartre would prolly be just find with how Nietzsche described the "lastman". All that aside, on the topic of self-improvement, you should probably read:
Plato's Republic, specifically the Allegory of the Caves
Seneca, on the Will and the Self
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, specifically on Virtue Ethics
 
How can you explain how someone suddenly changes their value system of wanting to accomplish the least work necessary and avoid personal challenges to one that devalues those things with something as ambiguous as just effort?

It could mean you are only after a means to an end, where the end product is an external material object like money or some arbitrary letter grade. You cannot suddenly change someone's value of once wanting to buy as many fancy shoes, nice car, or big house to one that values internalized achievements significantly more at the flick of a switch.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but it seems like you're suggesting that anyone with a history of poor academic performance that has since turned their grades around has done this purely to acquire material wealth.
 
Correct me if I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but it seems like you're suggesting that anyone with a history of poor academic performance that has since turned their grades around has done this purely to acquire material wealth.

Not at all. I wouldn't overgeneralize. But that can definitely be an instance for some people, not entirely inclusive to dentistry either. Specifically with dentistry, many people enjoy doing dentistry and seeing their business grow and many other people do not think dentistry would have been worth it for them had they not been well-compensated (check out DentalTown). I am specifically talking about whether people can consciously add value or devalue the external and internal things of this world and totally change their world-view, including its impact on curiosity and innate drive to just want to know things, at a drop of the dime.
 
I am specifically talking about whether people can consciously add value or devalue the external and internal things of this world and totally change their world-view, including its impact on curiosity and innate drive to just want to know things, at a drop of the dime.

I'm sure ferneezy was just being facetious by explaining a 180&#8304; turn-around in academic performance with "effort" alone; that's obviously overly simplistic. But I don't think you can extrapolate one's values or philosophical beliefs from grades alone - even intrinsically motivated students, if put under certain circumstances, will suffer in school. Beliefs are maleable and change gradually, based on day-to-day experiences. In the light of a significant experience, drastic changes like the ones you are describing I think are possible. At the drop of a dime? Probably not. After deep reflection? I think so, yeah. I like where your head is at, you're clearly a curious guy who likes to question the world in which we live. I took your initial post as being far more judgmental than I think it was intended.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure ferneezy was just being facetious by explaining a 180&#8304; turn-around in academic performance with "effort" alone; that's obviously overly simplistic. But I don't think you can extrapolate one's values or philosophical beliefs from grades alone - even intrinsically motivated students, if put under certain circumstances, will suffer in school. Beliefs are maleable and change gradually, based on day-to-day experiences. In the light of a significant experience, drastic changes like the ones you are describing I think are possible. At the drop of a dime? Probably not. After deep reflection? I think so, yeah.

I don't think we should be discussing this if there weren't a purpose in doing so. In the broad context of the lack of students in science, tech., engineering, and math fields, the problem isn't just the lack of students in these fields but also the lack of both (1) students who ultimately become professionals and consumers of research and (2) students who want to pursue a less financially rewarding field in research/academics. The societal norm in the U.S. is for people to become consumers and accumulators of wealth. If there weren't a change in world-view or philosophy, there would be no incentive or way of devaluing the importance of money in order to make these research/academic fields attractive and worthwhile. All research-based fields can only progress forward if there are active students with inquiring, creative minds and who have an intense curiosity to know (intrinsic motivation). Apply this to dental schools and many other fields and I think we can notice a culture of "tell me just what I need to know and nothing more."

If the development of an inquisitive mind and an appreciation of progress relied only on the individual's effort, then schools, professors, and researchers as might as well lay passive. There is always an outside force that directs and sparks an innate curiosity within students. I think this also is a process that takes time.

"Understanding the role and importance of research and scholarship in dental education and practice requires an appreciation of dentistry as a learned profession. A foundational attribute for the members of such a profession has to be sheer intellectual curiosity&#8212;a trait as important for the clinician as for the scientist. That improved patient care results from technical advances made possible through research is not seriously disputed by anyone. What is less apparent, however, is the role for research in the education of dentists and in the broader life of dental schools. Accosting this matter requires a distinction to be made between research and scholarship: while all research qualifies as scholarship, not all scholarship qualifies as research. Though the exact role of research in the educational process is open to debate, the importance of scholarship is not. An education colored by research is one way of achieving the intellectual rigor necessary for the professional. The key is cultivating in students a taste for complexity, for problems, and for problem solving. All dental schools without exception need to help students acquire this taste. In doing so, they will generate a few scientists; but, more importantly, they will create out of every graduate a man or woman of science. Only by becoming a person of science is there any hope that the practitioner will be able to acquire and assimilate new knowledge and to adapt to the changes in practice and in the profession that the future requires."
 

Attachments

  • The Role and Importance of Research and Scholarship in Dental Education and Practice.pdf
    63.4 KB · Views: 87
Last edited:
Hi Doc, what does the last set of columns mean? There was %interview, %accept etc....is that the percentage that accepted the interview if offered it? and the percentage accepted offer if given the letter?
Thanks
 
I'm sure ferneezy was just being facetious by explaining a 180&#8304; turn-around in academic performance with "effort" alone

somewhat, yes. because:

I don't think you can extrapolate one's values or philosophical beliefs from grades alone

the post i replied to sat on the premise that one's (poor) academic performance was because they were not "goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized".

that's just silly.
 
I don't like how some groups think they can predict the prospective performance of a student in dental school based their past undergraduate history. A 4.0 student might have only maintained a 4.0 in order to get into a dental school and become a GP. There's little incentive for such a student to "gun" for every single arbitrary point on an exam in order to be top in their class when all they really need is a healthy understanding of the material.

I like what this Canadian study has to say, "Conscientiousness is comprised of traits such as organization, persistence, and purposefulness...Conscientiousness predicted academic or clinical performance or both in every year of dental training." There're not enough studies in this subject but I think this factor is very promising. (Full disclosure - I do not have time to read the entire article at the moment. I definitely will after I finish this paper. Senioritis...)

http://www.jdentaled.org/content/71/5/664.full.pdf+html

I would rather accept a student who had a poor academic history but is now goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized (how a person with such a poor academic history suddenly becomes this way is beyond me) over a student with the opposite condition.

the post i replied to sat on the premise that one's (poor) academic performance was because they were not "goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized".

that's just silly.

27105750.jpg


Where exactly did I say that poor academic histories were always due to the person not being "goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized"?

Good luck finding something that I never said.

i-dont-always-herp-but-when-i-do-i-derp-thumb.jpg


^I'm kidding. I'm sure you just misinterpreted one of my convoluted posts.
 
Where exactly did I say that poor academic histories were always due to the person not being "goal-oriented, challenge-oriented, intrinsically motivated, determined/hard-working, curious, and organized"?

Good luck finding something that I never said.

now you're just moving the goalposts. anyone with a modicum of reading comprehension saw the implication you made. you were called out.

deal-with-it-eccbc87e4b5ce2fe28308fd9f2a7baf3-2339.gif
 
Sleep matters more than all of this crap which is why I skipped it all and just came on here to say, thank you, doc!

(although I do generally enjoy banter, it must be the pre-April 1st jitters!)
 
Are the GPAs on that sheet the calculated GPAs where an A+ is a 4.3?
 
Top