Comparing Crack to Real Dat?

[alexeb91]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hey everyone!

First time posting, but I am preparing for my DAT in about two weeks and have been taking the CRACK DAT practice tests.

For the Natural Sciences, I have been scoring typically 19s and above in all sections (22 highest in Gen Chem). In Math, I scored 19,20,21 respectively on three tests I took. RC is easy for me and I have yet to take any PAT tests.

My main question is if I should use these scores as being slightly representative of what I could expect to achieve on the actual test.

Any comments would be GREATLY appreciated!

 

[qnzbabi91]

For the sciences, crack is useless. For math, it is helpful. I scored between 24-30 and got a 27 on the real DAT. FOR reading, I did much better on real DAT. For PAT, I scored the same as my average on Crack. Good luck!

 

[alexeb91]

Thanks! What would you say about Achiever?

 

[pancakes20]

Definitely get started on the PAT tests. The PAT section isn't something you can memorize, its a skill that takes time to learn. I found achiever useful for the PAT and Reading section even though these sections were much harder in Achiever than the real DAT.

 

[qnzbabi91]

Achiever is much harder, but better practice for the sciences than crack. The math ques that show up on the ada 2009 practice test (test 5 i beleive has the reflection that some people get). I scored 21 on Achiever consistently for everything and 19s for PAT. The math I did much lower on Achiever, like 19 vs 27 on the real one. The DAT is much easier so don't worry. I know where you are because I felt the same way, but the test is doable just don't spend more than a min on anyone math problem without marking it. Best of luck!