Couldn't have done well without this website, so I wanted to give my take in hopes it can help others. I took my DAT at the end of January and figured I'd finally share my experience.
Scores
24 AA
26 TS
25 Bio
23 GC
30 OC
20 PAT
21 RC
19 QR
Background
I'm a senior who will be applying this upcoming cycle. I have a pretty good GPA with a 3.95, and I wanted to be sure I had a good DAT score to back it up. I studied bio, GC, and OC a little bit over my fall semester and then studied hard the three weeks of winter break and 2 weeks of the first semester. This was great because I had long term retention and I didn't really feel stressed for time while studying over winter break. However, studying for the first two weeks of class was less than ideal. This was also when I studied the most. Probably studied 5 hours a day during this time. I probably only studied 2-3 over winter break (yeah not smart), and maybe 3 hours a week over the fall semester (sometimes 0 hours if I was busy with school). After it was over, catching up wasn't fun. I had a biochemistry test the day after my dat so I couldn't even take a break. I had to teach myself 2.5 weeks of biochem in a day which was horrible. I didn't sleep that night. I figured I'd rather have a killer DAT score and get a +B or -A in a class than get all A's but have a lower DAT score. I feel like I made the right call.
Materials
Bootcamp: This is a must for every section. My practice scores from here almost matched my real scores identically. If there is one material you need it is this. Bio explanations are great, but only read bolded words. Rest is too in depth.
Cliff's Notes: This is such an amazing comprehensive review of Bio. The best on the market by far. Just about every question I had from bio came from here.
Chad's Videos: Amazing comprehensive review of GC and OC. Take notes once and then just review them. This guy has a gift at teaching. Again, amazing.
Feralli's Notes: Don't really recommend, except for physiology where Cliff's is weak. It's way too detailed. Cliff's is a much better option. If you have time, maybe skim it, but don't waste your time learning the tiny details. Bio on the actual DAT is very broad, at least mine was.
DAT Destroyer: GC and OC are really good sections to practice here. They will really show you what you need to work on. Even though they are more challenging, I think it's worth it for these two sections. They really helped me hammer home details I hadn't quite gotten down yet. Better to be over prepared if anything, and you can finish them in a week realistically. Bio is way too specific though, and I don't even recommend using it.
DAT Math Destroyer: This is the most representative of the QR section by far. On my QR, there were so many questions that seemed to come from here verbatim. If you want a 20+ on QR, this is a must.
Section Breakdown
Bio (25): Coming in I thought I had mastered this section. I heard how hard bio was on the DAT, so I started studying in July for it. I read Cliff's in July, and then I read Ferralli's notes constantly over the fall semester whenever I had time. To be honest, I became a Ferralli's notes poet. I could recite that thing front to back. I don't even want to know how many hours I put in to studying it. In the end, it wasn't worth it. Not a single question on the real DAT did I ever think "Wow that came straight from ferralli's". Moreover, I had DAT destroyer bio completely memorized as well. with their in depth explanation. This was ridiculously in depth and beyond the scope of the real thing. The real DAT was crazily broad. I was stunned. Hardly any -if any- in depth questions at all and it seemed some of them were kinda ambiguous. Plus, just about every question could have been answered by just using Cliff's. If I could redo it, I would have just used Cliff's and BC. With BC's explanations, only read the bolded words. Again, no need to read the fine details in my opinion. Quite honestly, I wish I would have allocated most of my time studying bio to sections I was weaker on, like PAT. Still, I'm not complaining with a 25.
GC (23): Answered every single question with absolute confidence. Thought I got a 30 after taking it. Would seriously love to know what I missed. This was MUCH easier than BC. I'm assuming the curve was pretty harsh though. I can't imagine I missed more than 2 questions. To study, I watched Chad's once in July and took great notes. Then, during the semester, I'd review them constantly. I never did the quizzes, but I heard they are good. I also did destroyer 4 times over winter break. This was very much calculation based. The real thing had almost no hard calculations and anything involving a lot of numbers was simply set up for you in fraction form. Still, destroyer helped me figure out what areas I was weak on and I am very grateful for it. BC was amazing too and I did every individual test three times. If you do BC and destroyer, you'll be almost guaranteed a 20+ here.
OC (30): Was not expecting this score. Came in thinking this would be my weakest section. In fact, the only B I ever got in a class was organic 1. For studying, pretty much same as GC. I also want to add the road maps from destroyer are amazing. Additionally, on the actual thing, there wasn't a reagent that wasn't from Chad's. In fact, every question could have been answered using Chad's. The real thing was MUCH easier than BC, like GC. I assume the scale was probably killer here. I was almost laughing the questions seemed so easy.
Science overall: I'd spent the most time studying science and clearly it paid off. On the real thing, I finished with 45 minutes left, not kidding. I triple checked all of my answers because of this and even found 4 dumb mistakes I made initially. This is why BC and destroyer are so good. I was so use to hard problems that the real science DAT seemed like a joke in comparison. I was stunned while taking it how easy it seemed. I also want to add that I think studying science over the semester was a great strategy. I hated the idea of cramming, so being able to mostly focus on practice problems like destroyer and BC over break was awesome and I think helped tremendously.
PAT (20): I only used BC. It was pretty amazing and the questions were extremely representative. I'd say BC tests 1-5 were the best. All in all, I should have done better here. It didn't really feel like I was in the right mindset while taking this. I think this stems from me not taking any full length practice tests. This did feel easier than BC too. I think had I gotten use to mental fatigue I could have killed this section. I know a 20 isn't horrible, though.
RC (21): I pretty much just used BC practice tests. Didn't do any daily readings or anything. Maybe this was a mistake, but I don't really know. BC was way harder. There were maybe two tone questions on the actual and they were gimmes. Coming in, I was going to use a strategy of reading every 4 paragraphs and then answering the questions. That worked well for me on BC. I'd even gotten a 23 on a BC test using this. The real thing was entirely search and destroyable, surprisingly. In fact, I exclusively used search and destroy on the real thing. For some reason, I had a bit of a panic attack the first five minutes. It was bad. I thought I was gonna get like a 15 initially. I took a few deep breaths, gathered my composure, and just started doing search and destroy. It worked. I was amazed. Just about every question was in order too. I bombed the first passage because I panicked. I'm sure this is where I missed most of my questions. Had I used search and destroy from the beginning, I bet I would have gotten a 23+.
QR (19): Coming in, I felt I was going to kill QR. I had gotten a 25 BC QR the week before so I felt prepared. I'd also had destroyer tests 1-10 down completely. On the actual, I just felt kind of fatigued. For some reason, I knew how to do the problems as they came almost straight from Destroyer but for some reason could not get the right answers. It was weird. I think I was mostly just tired. Had I taken this in a better mindset I know I could have done much better. People have also been saying Trig is no longer on the DAT but I did have one trig problem and at least one geometry problem that I can recall. Hopefully my low QR score won't hurt me. I heard no one really cares about it. I hope that's true.
BC Averages
BC Actual
Bio: 25 25 (+0)
GC: 23 23 (+0)
OC: 22 30 (+8)
PAT: 20. 20 (+0)
RC: 21 21 (+0)
QR: 22 19 (-3)
Clearly, BC was a fantastic indicator of my score. While it is harder than the actual, I think it's scale makes up for it. To tell if you're ready, definitely see how your BC scores stack up. This program is simply amazing. I'll say again, BC is harder but I think this prepares you greatly for the actual as it will seem much easier in comparison- though I think the scale on the real thing is appreciably harsher on the actual.
Final Thoughts
I feel like I could have done much better on PAT, RC, and QR, but with a 24 AA and 26 TS it's hard to complain. My biggest regret is not taking any full length practice tests. I was NOT prepared for the mental fatigue. I think that's what got me near the end of the test. Every BC test I took was just an individual section. You absolutely should take BC tests 1-5 in test taking conditions. I really wish I would have.
Finally, I had a lot of fun studying for this test, especially science. Just work hard, and I honestly think anyone can do well. Hope this helps and good luck to everyone!
View attachment 229500
