- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 1
I know I haven't posted that much here, but this forum has been a big help to me as I studied. So I want to give a breakdown of my test and how I prepared - hopefully this will help future applicants.
Usually before tests I don't get nervous. But the night before my test I couldn't sleep - I probably didn't fall asleep until 2:30 AM. Fortunately my test wasn't until 1:30 PM so I could sleep in. On test day, I was still nervous, so I went for a jog – nothing too strenuous, but enough to help me calm down and focus. Here's how it turned out:
PAT: 23
QR: 21
RC: 20
Bio: 20
GC: 22
OC: 27
TS: 22
AA: 22
Yes, those smileys are next to my 2 lowest scores. But going into the test, those were the 2 sections that I was most nervous about. I thought I might score higher on the PAT and QR, but I'm just so happy to get the 20 in Bio and RC! Overall, I'm thrilled with my results!
Here are my practice test scores (Topscore in bold):
ADA test (before studying),Kaplan BB paper,Topscore 1,Kaplan BB CD,Topscore 2,Topscore 3,ADA (retaken day before the test)
Bio: 18,18,20,17,17,18,22
GC: 21,18,20,19,19,19,28
OC: 28,23,21,28,28,19,28
PAT: 21,22,23,24,23,25,25
RC: 20,18,19,18,21,20,25
QR: 21,21,21,29,20,25,25
Crack DAT PAT (10 pack): 21,23,23,21,26,28,25,23,25,26
Crack DAT Reading (5 pack): 21,21,22,20,21
I took the ADA test before I started studying anything, and then retook it the day before my test to gauge my progress (and to boost my confidence after Topscore). I studied about a month full-time for the DAT, with lots of 14 hour days. Also, I just completed my bio and orgo courses in May – having those fresh in my mind was a big help.
Here's what I thought of each section on the real DAT:
Bio: Nothing too detailed, but lots of different subjects were covered.
GC: there weren't many problems where you had to actually do the arithmetic, so it didn't take as much time as some of my practice tests. Unless the point of the problem was to specifically calculate the molecular weight, they would just give you the molecular weight of the compound for you to use toward the real purpose of the problem
OC: nothing unexpected, but this is my best subject, and I didn't spend anywhere near as much time studying it as I did the other sciences. I knew these reactions cold before I even started studying for DAT – the few additional things I learned from Destroyer while studying for the DAT didn't really help on the test.
PAT: While studying, I'm probably the only person who didn't think Crack DAT PAT was harder than Topscore. So maybe I'm weird! On CDP, usually the only questions I would get wrong were the angle questions, and I found their keyhole questions especially easy. On Topscore, I would get some of the keyhole problems wrong as well as the angles. For the orthographic projections, line counting works really well on CDP, but not on Topscore or the real thing. On the DAT, there were some tough keyhole, orthographic, and folding questions, and folding questions are usually really easy for me. Angles are always tough for me, but on the real test, POE worked better than on CDP. Also, for the hole punches, there was a different kind of fold that I hadn't seen in any of the practice material. I had to stare at one of these questions for a really long time to figure out what was going on, but once I understood it, it wasn't hard, just unexpected.
RC: I got the floating bridges/epidemiology/spinal cord passages. I had a tough time with the floating bridges, but the other 2 were much easier for me. I used the method of reading the passage and writing down 1-4 words to summarize each paragraph. I would also try to answer some/all of the questions while I was still reading. If I could summarize the main idea of a paragraph without reading all the details, and I didn't see any questions about that paragraph, I would just read the first sentence and move on to the next paragraph. The floating bridges passage was hard for me to understand, and the questions were weird – I started getting stressed because there were a few questions where I just had to guess without really understanding it, and it took me about 22 minutes. But the next 2 were much easier for me, and I finished in time. Before taking the test, I tried a few different methods, including search & destroy, before settling on my method.
QR: There were 2 questions that I wasn't sure how to approach, and I thought they would take a long time, so I randomly guessed and moved on so as to not run out of time. It was similar to Topscore, maybe slightly harder. I find that the key to doing well on QR is doing long division, addition, etc. as infrequently as possible – try to either factor or estimate whenever you can. Often there is a shortcut, if you can find it. But on the actual test, there were more questions where I didn't see the shortcut, and I had to do the arithmetic. On one question I saw the shortcut after I did out all the arithmetic – I could have saved a minute or 2! I finished this section with only 10 seconds left, and didn't have a chance to go back to the 2 that I randomly guessed on.
Here are the study materials I used:
Kaplan BB: I read the book but I didn't get much out of it – I don't learn well from just reading something, I need problems, lots of problems. The 2 practice tests were good
DAT Destroyer: I learned a lot from this, highly recommended. Great resource for science and math. After each problem, I would read the solution and try to understand it before moving on. I would also make flash cards for any concept that I had trouble with. I kept a stack of flash cards in my pocket at all times, and would go through them whenever I had a spare minute: riding the subway, cooking dinner, before I go to bed, between sets at the gym, etc. I was definitely the only person in the gym with flashcards! I also made flashcards from Kaplan and Topscore, but most came from Destroyer. I only went though the book once, but if you consider the flashcards, there were some problems that I probably did 20 times. DAT Destroyer was by far the best study material I had for QR – on my DAT there were 2 QR questions in particular where Destroyer's formulas saved me.
CD PAT: excellent, highly recommended. The first couple times I used this program, I would get a couple wrong on each section, but after about 5 practice tests, I got to the point where I could get everything right except the angles (I would get 2-6 angle questions wrong). I do feel that the keyhole and orthographic questions could be more challenging, but the cube counting, paper folding, and angles were great.
CD Reading: less than ideal, but still helpful – I needed help for this section, and I didn't know what else to study. It helped me read/skim faster and helped me get better at summarizing each paragraph, even if it wasn't that close to what the real test was like
Kaplan subject tests: the first QR test was EXTREMELY discouraging for me. But doing it without a time limit was helpful, as were the science tests. I didn't get around to doing all of them
Kaplan flash cards: these were helpful at reinforcing concepts, I really liked these
Barrons DAT: it was very good at explaining strategies for PAT and RC, otherwise too many errors to be useful
Schaum's Biology: It's a good book, but it didn't really help me. Again, I'm not good at reading lots of info and remembering it, I need problems and flash cards.
Cliffs Bio: I accidentally bought the regular Cliffs Bio instead of Cliffs AP Bio. The regular Bio book is not detailed enough to be useful.
Princeton Review Hyperlearning MCAT Biological Sciences: good resource for looking up Bio concepts I didn't understand. I like it better than Schaum's because it's easier to read
Princeton Review MCAT Hyperlearning Science Workbook: At the beginning of my studies, I did all the freestanding questions for Bio, GC, and OC. I can't really remember anything from it, but I think it was good practice
Campbell's Biology textbook: I used this to look up bio words I'd never heard of
TopScore Pro: I thought these tests were hard, but it was great practice.
I'm selling my test prep materials on ebay, if anyone's interested:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220449269161
One other thing I did that I found helpful for studying was I went to Staples and bought an 8.5 X 11 whiteboard and the fattest dry-erase marker they sold. I used this for all my scratchwork and practice tests. On the real test, the sharpie-sized markers they gave me seemed pretty good compared to the giganto-markers I'd been using (whereas if I'd been accustomed to pencils, I'm sure the sharpie would have been annoying)
Oh yeah, my non-science GPA is 3.75 and science GPA is 3.97. Pretty much every science class I took was in the last year as a postbac (career change), and I was extra motivated to do really well in these classes. My shadowing is good, and my EC/volunteering is ok, probably not as good as some other applicants. If anyone has suggestions on which schools I should apply to, I'd appreciate it.
Wow, this post is longer that I planned. If anyone is still reading and has questions about how I studied, ask away. Thanks again to everyone on this forum for guiding me toward good study materials, and for posting tips and explanations.
Usually before tests I don't get nervous. But the night before my test I couldn't sleep - I probably didn't fall asleep until 2:30 AM. Fortunately my test wasn't until 1:30 PM so I could sleep in. On test day, I was still nervous, so I went for a jog – nothing too strenuous, but enough to help me calm down and focus. Here's how it turned out:
PAT: 23
QR: 21
RC: 20
Bio: 20
GC: 22
OC: 27
TS: 22
AA: 22
Yes, those smileys are next to my 2 lowest scores. But going into the test, those were the 2 sections that I was most nervous about. I thought I might score higher on the PAT and QR, but I'm just so happy to get the 20 in Bio and RC! Overall, I'm thrilled with my results!
Here are my practice test scores (Topscore in bold):
ADA test (before studying),Kaplan BB paper,Topscore 1,Kaplan BB CD,Topscore 2,Topscore 3,ADA (retaken day before the test)
Bio: 18,18,20,17,17,18,22
GC: 21,18,20,19,19,19,28
OC: 28,23,21,28,28,19,28
PAT: 21,22,23,24,23,25,25
RC: 20,18,19,18,21,20,25
QR: 21,21,21,29,20,25,25
Crack DAT PAT (10 pack): 21,23,23,21,26,28,25,23,25,26
Crack DAT Reading (5 pack): 21,21,22,20,21
I took the ADA test before I started studying anything, and then retook it the day before my test to gauge my progress (and to boost my confidence after Topscore). I studied about a month full-time for the DAT, with lots of 14 hour days. Also, I just completed my bio and orgo courses in May – having those fresh in my mind was a big help.
Here's what I thought of each section on the real DAT:
Bio: Nothing too detailed, but lots of different subjects were covered.
GC: there weren't many problems where you had to actually do the arithmetic, so it didn't take as much time as some of my practice tests. Unless the point of the problem was to specifically calculate the molecular weight, they would just give you the molecular weight of the compound for you to use toward the real purpose of the problem
OC: nothing unexpected, but this is my best subject, and I didn't spend anywhere near as much time studying it as I did the other sciences. I knew these reactions cold before I even started studying for DAT – the few additional things I learned from Destroyer while studying for the DAT didn't really help on the test.
PAT: While studying, I'm probably the only person who didn't think Crack DAT PAT was harder than Topscore. So maybe I'm weird! On CDP, usually the only questions I would get wrong were the angle questions, and I found their keyhole questions especially easy. On Topscore, I would get some of the keyhole problems wrong as well as the angles. For the orthographic projections, line counting works really well on CDP, but not on Topscore or the real thing. On the DAT, there were some tough keyhole, orthographic, and folding questions, and folding questions are usually really easy for me. Angles are always tough for me, but on the real test, POE worked better than on CDP. Also, for the hole punches, there was a different kind of fold that I hadn't seen in any of the practice material. I had to stare at one of these questions for a really long time to figure out what was going on, but once I understood it, it wasn't hard, just unexpected.
RC: I got the floating bridges/epidemiology/spinal cord passages. I had a tough time with the floating bridges, but the other 2 were much easier for me. I used the method of reading the passage and writing down 1-4 words to summarize each paragraph. I would also try to answer some/all of the questions while I was still reading. If I could summarize the main idea of a paragraph without reading all the details, and I didn't see any questions about that paragraph, I would just read the first sentence and move on to the next paragraph. The floating bridges passage was hard for me to understand, and the questions were weird – I started getting stressed because there were a few questions where I just had to guess without really understanding it, and it took me about 22 minutes. But the next 2 were much easier for me, and I finished in time. Before taking the test, I tried a few different methods, including search & destroy, before settling on my method.
QR: There were 2 questions that I wasn't sure how to approach, and I thought they would take a long time, so I randomly guessed and moved on so as to not run out of time. It was similar to Topscore, maybe slightly harder. I find that the key to doing well on QR is doing long division, addition, etc. as infrequently as possible – try to either factor or estimate whenever you can. Often there is a shortcut, if you can find it. But on the actual test, there were more questions where I didn't see the shortcut, and I had to do the arithmetic. On one question I saw the shortcut after I did out all the arithmetic – I could have saved a minute or 2! I finished this section with only 10 seconds left, and didn't have a chance to go back to the 2 that I randomly guessed on.
Here are the study materials I used:
Kaplan BB: I read the book but I didn't get much out of it – I don't learn well from just reading something, I need problems, lots of problems. The 2 practice tests were good
DAT Destroyer: I learned a lot from this, highly recommended. Great resource for science and math. After each problem, I would read the solution and try to understand it before moving on. I would also make flash cards for any concept that I had trouble with. I kept a stack of flash cards in my pocket at all times, and would go through them whenever I had a spare minute: riding the subway, cooking dinner, before I go to bed, between sets at the gym, etc. I was definitely the only person in the gym with flashcards! I also made flashcards from Kaplan and Topscore, but most came from Destroyer. I only went though the book once, but if you consider the flashcards, there were some problems that I probably did 20 times. DAT Destroyer was by far the best study material I had for QR – on my DAT there were 2 QR questions in particular where Destroyer's formulas saved me.
CD PAT: excellent, highly recommended. The first couple times I used this program, I would get a couple wrong on each section, but after about 5 practice tests, I got to the point where I could get everything right except the angles (I would get 2-6 angle questions wrong). I do feel that the keyhole and orthographic questions could be more challenging, but the cube counting, paper folding, and angles were great.
CD Reading: less than ideal, but still helpful – I needed help for this section, and I didn't know what else to study. It helped me read/skim faster and helped me get better at summarizing each paragraph, even if it wasn't that close to what the real test was like
Kaplan subject tests: the first QR test was EXTREMELY discouraging for me. But doing it without a time limit was helpful, as were the science tests. I didn't get around to doing all of them
Kaplan flash cards: these were helpful at reinforcing concepts, I really liked these
Barrons DAT: it was very good at explaining strategies for PAT and RC, otherwise too many errors to be useful
Schaum's Biology: It's a good book, but it didn't really help me. Again, I'm not good at reading lots of info and remembering it, I need problems and flash cards.
Cliffs Bio: I accidentally bought the regular Cliffs Bio instead of Cliffs AP Bio. The regular Bio book is not detailed enough to be useful.
Princeton Review Hyperlearning MCAT Biological Sciences: good resource for looking up Bio concepts I didn't understand. I like it better than Schaum's because it's easier to read
Princeton Review MCAT Hyperlearning Science Workbook: At the beginning of my studies, I did all the freestanding questions for Bio, GC, and OC. I can't really remember anything from it, but I think it was good practice
Campbell's Biology textbook: I used this to look up bio words I'd never heard of
TopScore Pro: I thought these tests were hard, but it was great practice.
I'm selling my test prep materials on ebay, if anyone's interested:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220449269161
One other thing I did that I found helpful for studying was I went to Staples and bought an 8.5 X 11 whiteboard and the fattest dry-erase marker they sold. I used this for all my scratchwork and practice tests. On the real test, the sharpie-sized markers they gave me seemed pretty good compared to the giganto-markers I'd been using (whereas if I'd been accustomed to pencils, I'm sure the sharpie would have been annoying)
Oh yeah, my non-science GPA is 3.75 and science GPA is 3.97. Pretty much every science class I took was in the last year as a postbac (career change), and I was extra motivated to do really well in these classes. My shadowing is good, and my EC/volunteering is ok, probably not as good as some other applicants. If anyone has suggestions on which schools I should apply to, I'd appreciate it.
Wow, this post is longer that I planned. If anyone is still reading and has questions about how I studied, ask away. Thanks again to everyone on this forum for guiding me toward good study materials, and for posting tips and explanations.
