DAT Breakdown 23TS/24AA/19PA

[doeordie]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I took the DAT today, 6/5/17. I actually didn't know my DAT was today; I thought it was actually 6/15 until 10 minutes before the exam this morning when a reminder on my phone popped up. I had only gotten like 3 hours of sleep too because I had an argument with the girlfriend and stayed up to like 5am playing video games while halfheartedly doing some Destroyer bio problems. I also experienced some painful hemorrhoids during the exam.

These are my results:

PA: 19
QR: 25
RC: 25
Bio: 22
GC: 22
Orgo:24
TS: 23
AA: 24

For preparation, I used Crack The DAT, DAT Bootcamp, a Princeton Review book, DAT Destroyer, and a bit of Kaplan, CliffNotes, and McGraw-Hill (McGraw-Hill was mainly used as comic relief).

Bootcamp (8/10):

I took two full-length tests--tests 5 and 4.

I felt that Bootcamp was pretty representative of the actual exam.

Bootcamp PAT however felt way, way off from the actual exam. My exam had several "rocks." My exam's TFE section was also basically impossible. The angle-ranking, hole-punching, and pattern folding sections were pretty comparable.

Everything else: QR, RC, Bio, Chem, were all pretty representative of the real exam.

Test 5: 16PA/19QR/22RC/24Bio/24GC/21Orgo
Test 4: 18PA/23QR/24RC/19Bio/24GC/22Orgo

Crack The DAT (0/10):

Test 1: 17PA/19QR/20RC/18Bio/23GC/23Orgo

This software is a joke; don't buy it unless you have a few hundred burning a hole in your wallet. Keyholes on Crack are nothing like the real thing. TFE is egregious as all I did was line-count and get decent scores. Hole-punching, angle ranking, and pattern folding were alright, but it's kind of hard to mess those up.

QR, RC, Bio, and Chem are all better covered in Bootcamp. If you just need extra practice questions, Crack The DAT might be okay, but by no means make it your primary resource.

Crack The DAT also doesn't have the highlight feature. It also doesn't allow you to cross out answer choices. Not only is the software outdated, but so is the content. There were no quantitative comparison questions in the QR section.

Princeton Review book (7/10)

This was actually a decent resource for some sections. Bio: I liked the review. The review of bio was pretty well-written, and I liked how "interactive" the text was--there were little footnotes scattered throughout the bio review section that would quiz you on things you had just read. It was different, and nice, to not have a page of questions after a section, but rather to have questions embedded in the text. The book did misspell "absorbant" like 5 times on one page, and there appears to have been an editing error with a paragraph missing, but whatever.

Did not use the QR section much. Bootcamp is all you need, unless you really forgot your math.

The chem section was alright.

Did not use the RC section.

The PAT section is like a dozen or so pages total, and it gives you a quick and dirty run-down of the PAT section. Good as an introduction to PAT, but you're going to want more practice. Use Bootcamp, as that's probably the best you can get.

This book's content is also pretty outdated in several areas, and I doubt they're updating the book anytime soon. No mention of highlighting or crossing out. No quantitative comparison questions in the QR section. And no coverage of statement/reason questions in the RC section.

DAT Destroyer (8/10):

I used did some of the orgo questions and about half of the bio questions. The orgo review was alright. The bio review was pretty decent; saw some very similar questions on my test. Yes it's detailed. But yes, within each question is a gold mine of information that you'll want to know. The DAT biology section does emphasize breadth over depth. It's almost like a trivia section. Destroyer gives you a good idea of the breadth of the DAT bio section. There are a bunch of typos--what's a "specie?"--and the phrasing of the questions and answers can be somewhat stilted and awkward at times, but overall, it's a valuable resource.

I did not look at the GC or the QR sections of Destroyer.

Kaplan and Cliffnotes are okay supplemental materials in my opinion to get an idea of the test in general, or to refresh yourself on biology. I only got the McGraw-Hill book because it was at the local library and I wanted to laugh at something during my study breaks.

I have been half-seriously studying for the test since January--basically crack a book open and play video games and try to do a few problems now and then. So don't ask me about study strategies. I can tell you that Bootcamp is alright. It's not the holy grail that some people make it out to be. DAT Destroyer is also essential for the sciences. The big name books like Princeton Review and Kaplan are good for getting a grip on the exam in general, but if you want to get 20s+ ... you probably want to use BC and Destroyer.

 

[Bingwen]

Despite all of the issues you did great!! Good luck on the application process!

 

[dentalstar100]

wow you're a genius.

gonna double check my test date just to make sure lol

 

[Dentistry's lover]

Nice Scores!
Did you have any trig or geometry questions on ur DAT?
People who took the DAT after May has not seen any trig or geometry questions. Looking for your confirmation. how comparable was the reading section to Bootcamp?

 

[Lalibila]

Great score! I'm interested in knowing about the QR section as well. Was there any trig and how many quantitative comparison questions?

 

[mahveen]

was the gen chem and orgo section more conceptual problems or math
and what method did you use for the reading section

 

[doeordie]

was the gen chem and orgo section more conceptual problems or math
and what method did you use for the reading section

Gen chem was a mix of conceptual and math. The math wasn't overly difficult. Orgo was conceptual.

Reading: I never read the passage beforehand. I read the question and skim the passage for the answer. Finished reading with like 20 minutes to spare this way.

 

[doeordie]

Nice Scores!
Did you have any trig or geometry questions on ur DAT?
People who took the DAT after May has not seen any trig or geometry questions. Looking for your confirmation. how comparable was the reading section to Bootcamp?

Great score! I'm interested in knowing about the QR section as well. Was there any trig and how many quantitative comparison questions?

Yes, plenty of trig and geo questions, along with several quantitative comparisons.

 

[keep learning]

Great score! How many paragraphs in each passage in RC section? Were all of them associated with sciences?

 

[doeordie]

Great score! How many paragraphs in each passage in RC section? Were all of them associated with sciences?

Don't remember.

 

[averageasian]

amazing scores! I'm glad you woke up on time

 

[Allthingsteeth]

I took the DAT today, 6/5/17. I actually didn't know my DAT was today; I thought it was actually 6/15 until 10 minutes before the exam this morning when a reminder on my phone popped up. I had only gotten like 3 hours of sleep too because I had an argument with the girlfriend and stayed up to like 5am playing video games while halfheartedly doing some Destroyer bio problems. I also experienced some painful hemorrhoids during the exam, and I'm fairly sure my proctor was transsexual--when I checked in, her name was Anne, but when I checked out, his name was James.

These are my results:

PA: 19
QR: 25
RC: 25
Bio: 22
GC: 22
Orgo:24
TS: 23
AA: 24

For preparation, I used Crack The DAT, DAT Bootcamp, a Princeton Review book, DAT Destroyer, and a bit of Kaplan, CliffNotes, and McGraw-Hill (McGraw-Hill was mainly used as comic relief).

Bootcamp (8/10):

I took two full-length tests--tests 5 and 4.

I felt that Bootcamp was pretty representative of the actual exam.

Bootcamp PAT however felt way, way off from the actual exam. My exam had several "rocks." My exam's TFE section was also basically impossible. The angle-ranking, hole-punching, and pattern folding sections were pretty comparable.

Everything else: QR, RC, Bio, Chem, were all pretty representative of the real exam.

Test 5: 16PA/19QR/22RC/24Bio/24GC/21Orgo
Test 4: 18PA/23QR/24RC/19Bio/24GC/22Orgo

Crack The DAT (0/10):

Test 1: 17PA/19QR/20RC/18Bio/23GC/23Orgo

This software is a joke; don't buy it unless you have a few hundred burning a hole in your wallet. Keyholes on Crack are nothing like the real thing. TFE is egregious as all I did was line-count and get decent scores. Hole-punching, angle ranking, and pattern folding were alright, but it's kind of hard to mess those up.

QR, RC, Bio, and Chem are all better covered in Bootcamp. If you just need extra practice questions, Crack The DAT might be okay, but by no means make it your primary resource.

Crack The DAT also doesn't have the highlight feature. It also doesn't allow you to cross out answer choices. Not only is the software outdated, but so is the content. There were no quantitative comparison questions in the QR section.

Princeton Review book (7/10)

This was actually a decent resource for some sections. Bio: I liked the review. The review of bio was pretty well-written, and I liked how "interactive" the text was--there were little footnotes scattered throughout the bio review section that would quiz you on things you had just read. It was different, and nice, to not have a page of questions after a section, but rather to have questions embedded in the text. The book did misspell "absorbant" like 5 times on one page, and there appears to have been an editing error with a paragraph missing, but whatever.

Did not use the QR section much. Bootcamp is all you need, unless you really forgot your math.

The chem section was alright.

Did not use the RC section.

The PAT section is like a dozen or so pages total, and it gives you a quick and dirty run-down of the PAT section. Good as an introduction to PAT, but you're going to want more practice. Use Bootcamp, as that's probably the best you can get.

This book's content is also pretty outdated in several areas, and I doubt they're updating the book anytime soon. No mention of highlighting or crossing out. No quantitative comparison questions in the QR section. And no coverage of statement/reason questions in the RC section.

DAT Destroyer (8/10):

I used did some of the orgo questions and about half of the bio questions. The orgo review was alright. The bio review was pretty decent; saw some very similar questions on my test. Yes it's detailed. But yes, within each question is a gold mine of information that you'll want to know. The DAT biology section does emphasize breadth over depth. It's almost like a trivia section. Destroyer gives you a good idea of the breadth of the DAT bio section. There are a bunch of typos--what's a "specie?"--and the phrasing of the questions and answers can be somewhat stilted and awkward at times, but overall, it's a valuable resource.

It's also ridiculously overpriced, but I guess it's a good introduction to being a dentist--overcharge for valuable services.

I did not look at the GC or the QR sections of Destroyer.

Kaplan and Cliffnotes are okay supplemental materials in my opinion to get an idea of the test in general, or to refresh yourself on biology. I only got the McGraw-Hill book because it was at the local library and I wanted to laugh at something during my study breaks.

I have been half-seriously studying for the test since January--basically crack a book open and play video games and try to do a few problems now and then. So don't ask me about study strategies. I can tell you that Bootcamp is alright. It's not the holy grail that some people make it out to be. DAT Destroyer is also essential for the sciences. The big name books like Princeton Review and Kaplan are good for getting a grip on the exam in general, but if you want to get 20s+ ... you probably want to use BC and Destroyer.

How straightforward were the biology questions on the DAT? Were they association questions or just recollection of information....I have currently gone over cliffs like 5 times, supplementing kaplan now, and destroyer. Incredibly nervous that the questions are going to be either as in depth or harder.

 

[GoodThang987]

10/10 for you!

 

[NotThirstYbutHUNGRY]

THE DESTROYER HAS MANY MISTAKES. IT'S WRITTEN VERY AWKWARD. WHEN I WAS READING THE SOLUTIONS I THOUGHT THIS IS TRICKERY. I DO NOT RECOMMEND THE DESTROYER TO ANYONE ESPECIALLY THEIR OUTDATED, OVERPRICED MATH BOOK. STICK WITH BOOTCAMP IF YOU WANT TO BE EXPOSED TO THE CORRECT TYPE OF MATH PROBLEMS. BC IS ALL YOU NEED.

 

[doeordie]

THE DESTROYER HAS MANY MISTAKES. IT'S WRITTEN VERY AWKWARD. WHEN I WAS READING THE SOLUTIONS I THOUGHT THIS IS TRICKERY. I DO NOT RECOMMEND THE DESTROYER TO ANYONE ESPECIALLY THEIR OUTDATED, OVERPRICED MATH BOOK. STICK WITH BOOTCAMP IF YOU WANT TO BE EXPOSED TO THE CORRECT TYPE OF MATH PROBLEMS. BC IS ALL YOU NEED.

Yea I have to agree with you; there's an appalling number of typos for a book that gets "updated" every year with like 2-3 questions. I don't understand what the big deal is with fixing a few typos on questions that have been in the book for 10+ years. The phrasing is a bit awkward too at times. Overall though, it's a pretty good resource for its content, if not its presentation.

 

[NotThirstYbutHUNGRY]

Yea I have to agree with you; there's an appalling number of typos for a book that gets "updated" every year with like 2-3 questions. I don't understand what the big deal is with fixing a few typos on questions that have been in the book for 10+ years. The phrasing is a bit awkward too at times. Overall though, it's a pretty good resource for its content, if not its presentation.

It's SUPER IMPORTANT to NOT have any mistakes or students will pick the wrong answers on their test. The content is ok, the reason I say that because bio is bio, chem is chem, and orgo is orgo. You can get that anywhere else for cheaper and with the convenience of not having to carry a book all the time. 😱

 

[UNCafDDS]

I am concerned that others are saying that Destroyer has "many mistakes." Is there a consolidated list of the errors / corrections? Which Destroyer has mistakes? DAT or Math or both? Thanks.

I'd like to avoid learning incorrect answers.

 

[NotThirstYbutHUNGRY]

I am concerned that others are saying that Destroyer has "many mistakes." Is there a consolidated list of the errors / corrections? Which Destroyer has mistakes? DAT or Math or both? Thanks.

I'd like to avoid learning incorrect answers.

Well that math is worthless imo, don't bother! The questions have changed.

 

[doeordie]

I am concerned that others are saying that Destroyer has "many mistakes." Is there a consolidated list of the errors / corrections? Which Destroyer has mistakes? DAT or Math or both? Thanks.

I'd like to avoid learning incorrect answers.

It has many more than a few typos. I didn't see anything factually incorrect, but there are some typos in the explanations which are more annoying than anything. I only really used the chemistry and bio parts of Destroyer. I just scanned over the QR section and it seems pretty useless--the questions are ridiculously hard and there are no quantitative comparison questions.

Well that math is worthless imo, don't bother! The questions have changed.

Yep, no QR comparison questions in destroyer is a glaring omission.

 

[DMikes]

Congrats!

 

[Bingwen]

It has many more than a few typos. I didn't see anything factually incorrect, but there are some typos in the explanations which are more annoying than anything. I only really used the chemistry and bio parts of Destroyer. I just scanned over the QR section and it seems pretty useless--the questions are ridiculously hard and there are no quantitative comparison questions.



Yep, no QR comparison questions in destroyer is a glaring omission.

I think this years destroyer was written before that change happened. Thus I would expect next years version to include them. I would be very disappointed if they didn't.

 

[DAT Destroyer]

I think this years destroyer was written before that change happened. Thus I would expect next years version to include them. I would be very disappointed if they didn't.

You are correct, we are working on problems now and we are not 100 percent convinced that the ADA is not in testing phase..I work with many more students that do not post on SDN and know without a doubt versions still vary greatly. While some students have not seen any QR comparison and others have seen a few. Trig and Geo are still on most test versions, so it can't be ignored. The change just occurred in the last few weeks, our 2017 book was released in December. I do follow the ADA closely and the talk of change started almost 8 years ago. Our opinion is that these problems are in a testing stage.

To tackle QR comparison type problems you still must have sharp math skills and with that you should not have a problem.

Nancy

 

[doeordie]

I think this years destroyer was written before that change happened. Thus I would expect next years version to include them. I would be very disappointed if they didn't.

Ah yes, a 2017 book written in 2016 with outdated information while DAT Bootcamp has the relevant, updated information (such as comparison questions). Another valuable lesson for my future general dentistry practice: upsell services and it's never your fault--it's the insurance company's fault.

 

[Queen Beach]

:/

Ah yes, a 2017 book written in 2016 with outdated information while DAT Bootcamp has the relevant, updated information (such as comparison questions). Another valuable lesson for my future general dentistry practice: upsell services and it's never your fault--it's the insurance company's fault.