Dat done! (9/15/2009)

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

SupahShyGuy

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Hey all! Boy oh boy. I didn't do as well as I wanted. Don't mind the QR score, I intentionally screwed that part and went worse.. But my test was 10 AM this morning. I'll have a detailed breakdown later. But finally a nice improvement from my first DAT score in Aug of 2008!

DAT (Aug 2008) ____________ DAT (Sept 15, 2009)
BIO: 16 ------------------------- BIO: 19 (+3!)
GC: 18 -------------------------- GC: 20 (+2!)
OC: 17 -------------------------- OC: 23 (+6!)
RC: 20 -------------------------- RC: 20
PAT: 22 ------------------------- PAT: 22
QR: 16 -------------------------- QR: 15 (-1)
TS: 17 -------------------------- TS: 21 (+4)
AA: 17 -------------------------- AA: 19 (+2)

I'm trying to use the two scores to show an upward trend. But i'm not too happy about my science scores. I was shooting for a TS of 22+ but alas, I am very grateful. I'm applying LLUSD, UCSF, USC, Tufts, NYU and WESTU. My top school of choice of would Loma Linda University though and I spoke with them. The director of admissions said that if any score was supposed to be low, it should be the QR section so I'm happy but I still feel crappy even if I planned on it. Oh well. At least its over. I can't do this again...
 
Last edited:
It was about equivalent to TopScore PAT. I recommend CDP for practice because you really get the hang of the PAT by the end of the test regime.
 
yea i have the 5 test CDP which i finished averaging about 22-23 on them

also did achiever and average about 19-20

while on topscore i avg 24-25.... i was thinking that topscore was too easy? because all their hole punches are so simplistic with 3 folds MAX
 
oh dude. hole punching was pretty basic, CDP was WAYY harder than DAT holepunch. CDP >>> DAT

Angles are about the same.
TFE in CDP were just a bit harder than the actual DAT. Same goes for pattern folding.
Aperture Passing on the DAT was a little harder than CDP.

And cubes were whatever too. At least in the actual DAT, there are no illusions as there are in CDP
 
oh dude. hole punching was pretty basic, CDP was WAYY harder than DAT holepunch. CDP >>> DAT

Angles are about the same.
TFE in CDP were just a bit harder than the actual DAT. Same goes for pattern folding.
Aperture Passing on the DAT was a little harder than CDP.

And cubes were whatever too. At least in the actual DAT, there are no illusions as there are in CDP

The biggest problem with CDP is the apature passing. Its way too easy on CDP compared to every other source (Topscore, Kaplan, Achiever, and most importanly, real DAT). Everything else is basically right on.
 
This is the problem with CDP holepunching - it takes tooo long to finish..and thus screwing up the timing leading me to run out of time by the end.
 
here is a quick tip for hole punching kaplan dat have good practice problems that are similiar to the actual test i thought out of the 15 problems two of them i havent seen from kaplan.. and you are right crack the pat the hole punch is hard and take a long time but it is also a good reivew.... (watch the explaination on the folding they give after you answer the problems
 
This is the problem with CDP holepunching - it takes tooo long to finish..and thus screwing up the timing leading me to run out of time by the end.

weird... hole punching is always one of the easiest sections. The hardest is the folding. by the time i get to folding, i have about 15 minutes left, which is plenty of time for those 15 problems. i break each section up into 10 minute intervals, and make sure by the time i get to cube counting i have at least 20 minutes left, this way i gain a couple more minutes so i have more than 10 minutes for folding, which is by far the hardest section. I usually lose a couple minutes on TFE, but i make up for it in angles.
 
weird... hole punching is always one of the easiest sections. The hardest is the folding. by the time i get to folding, i have about 15 minutes left, which is plenty of time for those 15 problems. i break each section up into 10 minute intervals, and make sure by the time i get to cube counting i have at least 20 minutes left, this way i gain a couple more minutes so i have more than 10 minutes for folding, which is by far the hardest section. I usually lose a couple minutes on TFE, but i make up for it in angles.

If you compare it to kaplans holepunching...its more challenging because the patterns are more similar and you cant just count the holes to eliminate 1 or more answer choices (in CDP). I found pattern folding hardest in beginning, and now its quite easy for me, though dice are annoying.
 
Is the DAT holepunching any easier?? CDP is so hard I hope they don't have that many multi holes and complicated ones on the real thing!
 
This is the problem with CDP holepunching - it takes tooo long to finish..and thus screwing up the timing leading me to run out of time by the end.

I agree chrono. CDP holepunching is overly difficult. It could transfer some of that difficulty into the aperture (keyholes?) passing. I think the hole punching and the pattern folding took me the longest to finish (second up there is the angles cause I can't decide sometimes!)
 
I liked to use the grids on the eraser boards they gave us to and make 4 x 4 squares to simulate the paper folding. then by means of visualizing the symmetry. Its all about symmetry when there are diagonal, horizontal, or vertical folds. I hate the half-circle punches. I have had the tendency to be thrown off by those.
 
so basically the real DAT is pretty similar to topscore in terms of difficulty, easier than CDP (with exception of keyholes), and WAY easier than achiever?
 
Hey you said TFE seems a bit easier on DAT than CDP?? I recall a bunch of people saying otherwise so I got really worried haha. Did you use line counting or just straight up 3d visualization?

Thanks 🙂
 
Hey you said TFE seems a bit easier on DAT than CDP?? I recall a bunch of people saying otherwise so I got really worried haha. Did you use line counting or just straight up 3d visualization?

Thanks 🙂

First off, use 3D visualization and don't look at the answer choices. When you have a mental image of the third view, see which one aligns best. I then employ line counting to verify. Know that every edge = 1 line and cylinders from the top are circle but square from the side.

With solid lines, try to picture if the objects are coming out at you or going into the paper. You can verify this with the 2nd view or answer choice (going into = dashed lines; coming out = solid lines)

best of luck! =]
 
First off, use 3D visualization and don't look at the answer choices. When you have a mental image of the third view, see which one aligns best. I then employ line counting to verify. Know that every edge = 1 line and cylinders from the top are circle but square from the side.

With solid lines, try to picture if the objects are coming out at you or going into the paper. You can verify this with the 2nd view or answer choice (going into = dashed lines; coming out = solid lines)

best of luck! =]

I visualize it first, and use the lines to verify too. but i dont spend the time to get the answer first before looking at the choices. i look at all the answers quickly first, so you get an idea of what its even supposed to look like, then i eliminate answers until i find the right one. sometimes i need to eliminate the other 3 to get the right ansewrs, sometimes i recognize the right answer after just the first elimination. I always get a perfect score in this section, but then again it might just be me.
 
Top