Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Hi guys!! I just wanted to submit a detailed breakdown because over the last month or so, the others have been really, really helpful. I studied intensely for about 10-12 hours daily in the month of August.
Scores:
PA: 19
QR: 24
RC: 23
Bio: 21
GC: 26
OC: 24
TS: 23
AA: 24
Bio (21): Schaum's Biology, DATQVault, DAT Destroyer, Cliffnotes AP Biology, Cliffnotes Human Anatomy and Physiology (unncessary for my version of the test, but really everything you need to know about human physiology contained in one readable book), Powerpoint slides (Chp. 18-21) for Campbell's
The section wasn't as random as rumored. Most of the questions were direct recall and the first twenty or so questions were quite basic. However, there were a number of questions from 20-40 however that had I studied for maybe another two months, I probably would have still missed. The aforementioned recommendation of covering Chps 18-21 (Molecular Biology, electrophoresis, Sanger sequencing, etc.) meticulously is a sound one. There were also some questions directly, if not word for word, from either DAT Destroyer or DATQVault; I highly recommend both! I went over all 10 benchmark tests and Destroyer 4x.
GC (26): Princeton Review AP Chemistry, 1001 Questions for MCAT Chemistry, Examcracker's MCAT Chemistry Review, DAT Destroyer
The section was very basic (probably to compensate for a trickier OC section). Calculations were minimal or extremely simple. The Destroyer covered pretty much all material necessary. I actually heard about Chad's too late; otherwise, I would definitely have checked out his videos. AP Chemistry questions are also great practice. I went over Destroyer 4x.
OC (24): 1001 Questions for MCAT Organic Chemistry, Schaum's Easy Outlines for Organic Chemistry, DAT Destroyer
The section was trickier than anticipated. Several questions were quite specific in terms of how addition of reagents changed stereochemistry. I would recommend knowing all your carboxylic derivatives well (from esters to nitriles). The lab questions (NMR) were quite simple. The 1001 Questions for MCAT Orgo is a wonderful source for questions; I would recommend just working a couple from sections you're struggling with (their lab section questions are excellent for those with qualms about curveball lab questions on the DAT). I went over the Destroyer 4x; it does cover all the concepts, just make sure you're aware of certain details like stereochemistries of reductions and additions, though I just may have had a relatively difficult section.
RC (23): Kaplan Blue Book
I didn't prepare much for this section aside from looking over Kaplan's reading sections. I personally read the passage while doing questions simultaneously, so I can't comment on the potential success of S&D, though I do think it would have worked quite well. I did look at Achiever's RC and it was vomit-inducing: the real DAT is considerably easier than the latter. Kaplan's sections were quite accurate, if not a little harder.
QR (24): Math Destroyer
Just do Math Destroyer! Questions were almost identical. I unfortunately did run out of time but this was after I completed the section, leaving two questions blank. Questions #30-40 were basic compared to the opening questions. Conversions were basic and know your trig! I did the Destroyer 2x but I felt rusty going into the test; I would suggest doing several tests as near to test day as possible to refresh. The final two tests in the Destroyer are considerably more difficult, but as another poster suggested, tests 11 and 12 are good practice because the questions I initially excluded were quite similar in level.
PA (19): Crack DAT PAT (10 tests), DAT Achiever
I'm not exactly qualified to make recommendations here, but the actual test in pattern folding and keyholes were considerably harder. Crack DAT PAT, I think, as Froggy suggested just doesn't do the actual test justice in terms of these two sections. The latter software relies heavily on shading and doesn't allow sufficient practice with odd, unshaded arrangements: I struggled with those. Keyholes are more proportion-based, as other posters have suggested. I only did the first DAT Achiever test and the keyholes (harder, yes) did reflect the actual test much more accurately. Consequently, consider other sources for the latter two sections (I have heard good things about Kaplan online materials). Cube counting, angle ranking, and hole punching were on par with Crack DAT PAT. TFE was slightly harder on the actual test but it's always been a weakness.
General notes: I drew on a variety of sources for the sciences and I think the exposure really helped, especially for the chemistries. The Kaplan blue book is good introductory material. For biology, I feel datqvault and dat destroyer were necessary sources (for my version, anyways). My PAT score may be more of commentary on my weak abilities than the flaws of CDP, so I would say take my previous advice there with caution; do take a look at the ADA 2007/09 tests and I think it's clear there are key differences in the lines of questioning. I only did the sciences on the Achiever and one PAT test: all sections were more difficult than the actual test, biology in particular, though the questions are unique and I recommend learning from them.
I just want to send a big shout out to the SDN community for all the help and I would be happy to answer any questions.
Scores:
PA: 19
QR: 24
RC: 23
Bio: 21
GC: 26
OC: 24
TS: 23
AA: 24
Bio (21): Schaum's Biology, DATQVault, DAT Destroyer, Cliffnotes AP Biology, Cliffnotes Human Anatomy and Physiology (unncessary for my version of the test, but really everything you need to know about human physiology contained in one readable book), Powerpoint slides (Chp. 18-21) for Campbell's
The section wasn't as random as rumored. Most of the questions were direct recall and the first twenty or so questions were quite basic. However, there were a number of questions from 20-40 however that had I studied for maybe another two months, I probably would have still missed. The aforementioned recommendation of covering Chps 18-21 (Molecular Biology, electrophoresis, Sanger sequencing, etc.) meticulously is a sound one. There were also some questions directly, if not word for word, from either DAT Destroyer or DATQVault; I highly recommend both! I went over all 10 benchmark tests and Destroyer 4x.
GC (26): Princeton Review AP Chemistry, 1001 Questions for MCAT Chemistry, Examcracker's MCAT Chemistry Review, DAT Destroyer
The section was very basic (probably to compensate for a trickier OC section). Calculations were minimal or extremely simple. The Destroyer covered pretty much all material necessary. I actually heard about Chad's too late; otherwise, I would definitely have checked out his videos. AP Chemistry questions are also great practice. I went over Destroyer 4x.
OC (24): 1001 Questions for MCAT Organic Chemistry, Schaum's Easy Outlines for Organic Chemistry, DAT Destroyer
The section was trickier than anticipated. Several questions were quite specific in terms of how addition of reagents changed stereochemistry. I would recommend knowing all your carboxylic derivatives well (from esters to nitriles). The lab questions (NMR) were quite simple. The 1001 Questions for MCAT Orgo is a wonderful source for questions; I would recommend just working a couple from sections you're struggling with (their lab section questions are excellent for those with qualms about curveball lab questions on the DAT). I went over the Destroyer 4x; it does cover all the concepts, just make sure you're aware of certain details like stereochemistries of reductions and additions, though I just may have had a relatively difficult section.
RC (23): Kaplan Blue Book
I didn't prepare much for this section aside from looking over Kaplan's reading sections. I personally read the passage while doing questions simultaneously, so I can't comment on the potential success of S&D, though I do think it would have worked quite well. I did look at Achiever's RC and it was vomit-inducing: the real DAT is considerably easier than the latter. Kaplan's sections were quite accurate, if not a little harder.
QR (24): Math Destroyer
Just do Math Destroyer! Questions were almost identical. I unfortunately did run out of time but this was after I completed the section, leaving two questions blank. Questions #30-40 were basic compared to the opening questions. Conversions were basic and know your trig! I did the Destroyer 2x but I felt rusty going into the test; I would suggest doing several tests as near to test day as possible to refresh. The final two tests in the Destroyer are considerably more difficult, but as another poster suggested, tests 11 and 12 are good practice because the questions I initially excluded were quite similar in level.
PA (19): Crack DAT PAT (10 tests), DAT Achiever
I'm not exactly qualified to make recommendations here, but the actual test in pattern folding and keyholes were considerably harder. Crack DAT PAT, I think, as Froggy suggested just doesn't do the actual test justice in terms of these two sections. The latter software relies heavily on shading and doesn't allow sufficient practice with odd, unshaded arrangements: I struggled with those. Keyholes are more proportion-based, as other posters have suggested. I only did the first DAT Achiever test and the keyholes (harder, yes) did reflect the actual test much more accurately. Consequently, consider other sources for the latter two sections (I have heard good things about Kaplan online materials). Cube counting, angle ranking, and hole punching were on par with Crack DAT PAT. TFE was slightly harder on the actual test but it's always been a weakness.
General notes: I drew on a variety of sources for the sciences and I think the exposure really helped, especially for the chemistries. The Kaplan blue book is good introductory material. For biology, I feel datqvault and dat destroyer were necessary sources (for my version, anyways). My PAT score may be more of commentary on my weak abilities than the flaws of CDP, so I would say take my previous advice there with caution; do take a look at the ADA 2007/09 tests and I think it's clear there are key differences in the lines of questioning. I only did the sciences on the Achiever and one PAT test: all sections were more difficult than the actual test, biology in particular, though the questions are unique and I recommend learning from them.
I just want to send a big shout out to the SDN community for all the help and I would be happy to answer any questions.
