Dat>gpa

[dds_sdc]

---

Members don't see this ad.

is it just me.. or is the DAT score more important than your GPA. ive seen ppl who have 3.6+gpas get rejected bcoz of their below 20 on any section of the DAT. ... and people with below 3.0 gpa but with 20+ DAT scores getting in..

so.. would it be safe to say that DAT score is more important than GPA?
(i know theres more factors that play into gettin accpeted i.e. EC activities)
but it just seems like DAT is the most important thing

 

[4thQtrDreams]

...get rejected bcoz of their below 20 on any section of the DAT. ...

a bit of an exaggeration, no??

 

[r0entgen]

is it just me.. or is the DAT score more important than your GPA. ive seen ppl who have 3.6+gpas get rejected bcoz of their below 20 on any section of the DAT. ... and people with below 3.0 gpa but with 20+ DAT scores getting in..

so.. would it be safe to say that DAT score is more important than GPA?
(i know theres more factors that play into gettin accpeted i.e. EC activities)
but it just seems like DAT is the most important thing

depends on the school. i've likewise seen certain individuals with 3.3 gpas, but 20+ on all sections of DAT get rejected by penn pre-interview.

 

[dr.rex]

it depends on a lot more than DAT and GPA...so comparing those two can only give you arough idea about where you stand....you need good LORs, personal statement, and ECs

 

[1992Corolla]

This is one that depends on the school and applicant. Nebraska likes the high GPA and an average gpa, according to the stats. UoP likes both. Howard or Meherry could care less about either.😀

 

[INFNITE]

definitely depends on the school. Columbia wouldn't accept anyone with less than a 21

 

[4thQtrDreams]

my point earlier was that i think you can get below 20 in a particular section so long as your AA and TS are in the 20's

 

[Old School]

I don't think that one is more important than the other, in most cases. The schools will evaluate the person based on the collective information that they have.

For example, they may likely look more favorably on students who have a GPA of 3.2 and DAT of 20, if the student has a degree in chemistry, becuase it's likely that this student has more BCP hours, vs. a student with a GPA of 3.8 and DAT of 18 if they have a degree in Art History.

No offense to the Art History major, but I'm fairly certain that they are going to have less BCP hours which are looked at more closely than the overall GPA. The dental school doesn't care if you can excel in Hungarian Hat Making, they want to know you can handle Biochemistry.

 

[Old School]

Columbia wouldn't accept anyone with less than a 21

Wrong.

 

[INFNITE]

let me rephrase it, Columbia wouldn't normally accept anyone less than a 21 unless they have outstanding extra curriculars or GPAs. the overwhelming majority of people accepted at Columbia have a 21 or higher and the average DAT score is somewhere near 22.5 which is I believe the 2nd highest in the country.

 

[AlphaQUp]

let me rephrase it, Columbia wouldn't normally accept anyone less than a 21 unless they have outstanding extra curriculars or GPAs. the overwhelming majority of people accepted at Columbia have a 21 or higher and the average DAT score is somewhere near 22.5 which is I believe the 2nd highest in the country.

Wrong again. Taken directly from Columbia's website:

"The mean DAT score of the class entering in 2004 is 21, (the national average is roughly 17), however the range varies from year to year."

 

[INFNITE]

that's from 2004. Haven't you noticed the upward trend in dental schools over the past couple of years? I know for a FACT that the class of 2010 has an average DAT of over 22 (and there people in my class with 23's and 24's), and the class of 2011 will likely be even higher than that (see predents.com). And do you really think the national average is still a 17 at this point? It's probably between 18 and 19 for this application process.

 

[Revelde]

that's from 2004. Haven't you noticed the upward trend in dental schools over the past couple of years? I know for a FACT that the class of 2010 has an average DAT of over 22 (and there people in my class with 23's and 24's), and the class of 2011 will likely be even higher than that (see predents.com). And do you really think the national average is still a 17 at this point? It's probably between 18 and 19 for this application process.

I second that

 

[toothfairy85]

I would say the average for people taking the test is around a 17, and those getting accepted is around a 19.

 

[armorshell]

I think it depends on the school which is weighted more. After all is said and done, I'd much rather have a high gpa AND dat

 

[dds_sdc]

so its pretty much depends on the school..

what about umdnj?
predents.com make it seem like theyre more after the DAT scores. i could be wrong.

 

[IndianaAsh]

I had a GPA of 3.28 according to AASDAS (3.14 with +/-), 3.16 BCP (2.74 with +/-), got 20/20/24 on DAT with Bio and Quant. Reas. both 18's, had minimal extra curriculars and 65 hours of shadowing, and most schools said I wasn't very competitive. IU said my personal statement was outstanding (still didn't get me in) and I'm sure that my LoRs were all pretty good. I applied to 6 schools, interviewed at 2 and was only accepted at 1. It's a tough crowd. I thought my DAT scores would be my ticket, but apparently that's not the case anymore. IU told me I needed to raise my BCP to a 3.2 by taking a master's program at IU, and work to get ALL my scores up to a 19. I'd suggest joining lots of clubs in undergrad, having a decent gpa and DAT scores, and doing lots of shadowing.

 

[naivegrl124]

I don't how many times this has been emphasized but It really depends on the school. Like many of you said, GPA in Biochemistry vs. Art History is a completely different view but whatever the case, I think GPA has more weight because GPA shows commitment and dedication of hard work while the DAT is a test that one can really study for and do well on it. DAT shows your potential to do well while GPA shows how hard you work to maintain that potential- a better estimate of what you will do in classrooms. So if you constantly strive to work hard than the DAT just reassures the ADCOM of your GPA ( another way of leveling out the playing field of different undergraduate colleges) but then this system not perfect.

 

[muz]

I don't how many times this has been emphasized but It really depends on the school. Like many of you said, GPA in Biochemistry vs. Art History is a completely different view but whatever the case, I think GPA has more weight because GPA shows commitment and dedication of hard work while the DAT is a test that one can really study for and do well on it. DAT shows your potential to do well while GPA shows how hard you work to maintain that potential- a better estimate of what you will do in classrooms. So if you constantly strive to work hard than the DAT just reassures the ADCOM of your GPA ( another way of leveling out the playing field of different undergraduate colleges) but then this system not perfect.

Very Valid pt. naivegrl but i still would like to disagree
I feel that standardized scores are EXTREMELY important...yeah they may not be fair and yeah they may not be a true reflection of intelligence...BUT they put all of us on a level playing field. A student that has a 3.9 GPA in Art History could be an extremely intelligent person but that fact that he.she is an art history major would not "reflect" intelligence in the sense of a dental school admissions committee. You also must factor in the quality of the school not just the major or curriculum. We all have heard about the GPA inflation at Harvard. Yeah they all goto a great school, but does their GPA really reflect the "hard work" they put into getting that GPA?

I feel that SAT's/Act's/DAT's whatever...allow an admissions committee to evaluate a person and another person on a level playing field. Yeah its not perfect and a person can study their butt off to do well, but at the end of the day, its easier to evaluate based on that than the school attented, the GPA, and the degree earned.

do ya "agree to disagree"

--muz--

 

[Japin]

I think the DAT is fairer and more accurate than SAT for schools to consider their respective students. The former dwells on sciences, PAT, RCT, and maths, a combination of stuffs that will predict candidates future successes in dental school, whereas the latter is solely on RCT, maths, and written English where one may need not be good in arts or sciences in high school course work and still flourish on the standardized test.

 

[supraman]

I agree with the person who said that DAT levels off the competition. Many different schools teach subjects and amount of material and the speed at which they are taught at different rates, so some person at school A may have an easier and more clear teacher than a notorious teacher known to make a subject difficult at school B and do worse. I think that the DAT is a good way to choose a student as long as gpa is above a 3.0 because it really indicates if the student put forth the effort to study for it. Many may argue its just a test anyone can study for from the kaplan books, etc, well I would like to see you score 22+ on all sections...

 

[dds_sdc]

I agree with the person who said that DAT levels off the competition. Many different schools teach subjects and amount of material and the speed at which they are taught at different rates, so some person at school A may have an easier and more clear teacher than a notorious teacher known to make a subject difficult at school B and do worse. I think that the DAT is a good way to choose a student as long as gpa is above a 3.0 because it really indicates if the student put forth the effort to study for it. Many may argue its just a test anyone can study for from the kaplan books, etc, well I would like to see you score 22+ on all sections...

good point. my o.chem professor was just ridiculous with her grading.