For those who already took the DAT:

[AlvaDentistry]

Could you compare the following practice materials with the real DAT (for EACH section - bio, Gc, Oc, Pat, Rc) in terms of difficulty, length, and overall experience using it.
Please include which one is the closest to the real DAT and the reason why you think so.

1. DAT Bootcamp
2. Destroyer
3. Cliff or Ferralis notes
4. Kaplan
5. Chad videos/Quizzes
6. Topscore
7. Any other materials you used and helped you to prepare for the DAT.

Thank you

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[matty675]

1. DAT Bootcamp is right on the money for everything except for QR.
2. Destroyer WAY harder in every area.
3. Cliff or Ferralis notes- Cliff's is excellent, Ferralis was too condensed for my taste.
4. Kaplan- NO, NO, NO
5. Chad videos/Quizzes- watch ALL of his videos except for Bio. His quizzes are very representative.
6. Topscore- didn't use it.

 

[AlvaDentistry]

Why not DAT bootcamp for QR?

 

[matty675]

Ari provides a disclaimer at the beginning of the QR section stating that it is designed to be more challenging- and that it is. The DAT QR is a walk in the park as long as you don't allow the mental fatigue get the best of you.

 

[gras10]

I only used 1, 2, 3, and 5, so i can't comment on the others, but heres what I've got for you...

1. Bootcamps is definitely the best money i spent studying for the DAT. Most representative material, while still challenging you to keep on learning. Like Matty said, the QR is way difficult, because its hard to digest all the problems in the given time, but the actual math will most definitely help you to learn. It was the only thing i used for QR. I got 19-21 on all the QR practice and ended up with a 23 on the real thing. (I've always been strong in math though)

2.Destroyer is overkill by a lot. It may help you learn a few of the more advanced topics but nothing that i stricly learned from the book was on my test. A few concepts were reinforced by going through it, but in all honesty it didn't help me all that much. If you have the extra time and money it couldn't hurt, but i don't think it would hurt to pass on it either.

3. I used both, and they are essential to the bio section. 80-90% of my test was covered in Feralis notes, and the other 10-20 was covered in more detail in the book. Just make sure you get the 3rd ed. not 4th as they cut a ton of useful information out of it.

5. Chads is a must for the chemistry's. He will cover everything you need to know. If you can watch all of his videos 2-3 times over (watch in fast play after taking notes the first time) you'll be golden for the chem sections. Its all i used for OC and GC and i scored well.

Feel free to check out my breakdown for other tips, but i covered most of it here.

Good luck!!!

 

[tooth knockn]

Could you compare the following practice materials with the real DAT (for EACH section - bio, Gc, Oc, Pat, Rc) in terms of difficulty, length, and overall experience using it.
Please include which one is the closest to the real DAT and the reason why you think so.

1. DAT Bootcamp
2. Destroyer
3. Cliff or Ferralis notes
4. Kaplan
5. Chad videos/Quizzes
6. Topscore

Thank you

Nice thread OP.....

When I take my DAT i will post here too.

but i am not using top score, why?...... because 1-5 are highly recommended based on two years of research, I would also add Barron AP for bio, and also like a #7 for recommended videos , such as craig savage on youtube and Khan academy both for bio,

 

[AlvaDentistry]

Yes! Feel free to add more resources guys. I will edit the post with the resources you want to hear from

 

[DDS_inyaface]

Could you compare the following practice materials with the real DAT (for EACH section - bio, Gc, Oc, Pat, Rc) in terms of difficulty, length, and overall experience using it.
Please include which one is the closest to the real DAT and the reason why you think so.

1. DAT Bootcamp
2. Destroyer
3. Cliff or Ferralis notes
4. Kaplan
5. Chad videos/Quizzes
6. Topscore
7. Any other materials you used and helped you to prepare for the DAT.

Thank you

1. Bootcamp was pretty much a very good representation. I felt that the QR was slightly and I mean slightly harder but it was excellent practice for EVERY subject and i highly recommend getting bootcamp. its worth it especially for timing
2. destroyer: while i feel like it was overkill for OC and GC i still recommend it for practice! bio to me was not overkill in destroyer I actually had similar questions in complexity, however it is very long and you will feel like crap but i don't think i would have done as good without it
3. didn't use ferralis but cliffs was an excellent review and start before doing practice problems
5. YOU MUST GET CHAD. maybe it was just me because I have a poor chem background but I'm sorry the man covered it all dang near. his videos are more useful than the quizzes which tests what he talks about in the vids but you must get him (unless your a chem genius) and take GOOD notes. I made flashcards for ochem which helped me get rxns down quicker and flashcards for GC which helped me get laws/concepts down quicker
didn't use anything else but crack dat pat which was excellent for practicing PAT i started out making 15's and made a 20 on the real thing, i felt the 10 test edition was enough

 

[shaidester]

1. Bootcamp was pretty much a very good representation. I felt that the QR was slightly and I mean slightly harder but it was excellent practice for EVERY subject and i highly recommend getting bootcamp. its worth it especially for timing
2. destroyer: while i feel like it was overkill for OC and GC i still recommend it for practice! bio to me was not overkill in destroyer I actually had similar questions in complexity, however it is very long and you will feel like crap but i don't think i would have done as good without it
3. didn't use ferralis but cliffs was an excellent review and start before doing practice problems
5. YOU MUST GET CHAD. maybe it was just me because I have a poor chem background but I'm sorry the man covered it all dang near. his videos are more useful than the quizzes which tests what he talks about in the vids but you must get him (unless your a chem genius) and take GOOD notes. I made flashcards for ochem which helped me get rxns down quicker and flashcards for GC which helped me get laws/concepts down quicker
didn't use anything else but crack dat pat which was excellent for practicing PAT i started out making 15's and made a 20 on the real thing, i felt the 10 test edition was enough

Do you remember your CDP scores for most of your tests?

 

[DDS_inyaface]

Do you remember your CDP scores for most of your tests?

yes i bought the ten test edition: 15.16.16.18.18.19.20.19.21.20 the first time i went through it and then I started again and got 21. 20. 19.. then i started doing bootcamp and got 17.18.18. i think

 

[discensdentibus]

I am surprised qvault bio is not on the line. It is your list, though; @tooth knockn qvault bio didn't make your 2 year research list?

 

[tooth knockn]

i don't like the word "qvualt"- BOOTCAMP overall seems good thus far based on use, and reviews....... and the name is good.

 

[TheDanger]

Can someone compare Math Destroyer to Bootcamp QR? I want to be well prepared so I don't mind if the material I'm practicing with is slightly more difficult than the real thing. Any advice?

 

[shaidester]

Bootcamp's QR is way harder than Math Destroyer and very unrealistic to what you will see on the exam.

 

[TheDanger]

Bootcamp's QR is way harder than Math Destroyer and very unrealistic to what you will see on the exam.

Gotcha. So it wouldn't even be worth it exposing myself to such difficult material?

 

[shaidester]

I don't think there is a point really. I attempted the first test, but I felt like I skipped over 15 questions when I got to question 25 so yeah... I just closed the webpage at that point.

The general feedback from everyone here is that math destroyer > all other sources.

 

[Soleus715]

1. DAT Bootcamp: 8/10 good practice but some sections are way too easy or way too hard
2. Destroyer: 0/10 don't even bother, this made me lose points more than anything
3. Cliff or Ferralis notes: Very good, 10/10 I also used barrons which I recommend. In both of these, please do not memorize everything in the plants/taxonomy sections (things such as plasmodial slime molds)
4. Kaplan: 0/10 other resources do it better
5. Chad videos/Quizzes: 10/10 covers everything you need to know to get 20+ but if your goal is higher, you need more resources or get really lucky on questions (GC/OC)
6. Topscore: N/A didnt use
7. CDP: 8/10 Very helpful but it favors using a few set of rules so many questions start looking similar

In my honest opinion, you only need Chads, Cliffs/Barrons, and the ADA practice tests in order to score a 20+. Add CDP or Math Destroyer if you need help with those sections. RC is literally a skill you need to develop over time/practice of reading difficult material and trying to understand it as quickly as possible.

 

[shaidester]

1. DAT Bootcamp: 8/10 good practice but some sections are way too easy or way too hard
2. Destroyer: 0/10 don't even bother, this made me lose points more than anything
3. Cliff or Ferralis notes: Very good, 10/10 I also used barrons which I recommend. In both of these, please do not memorize everything in the plants/taxonomy sections (things such as plasmodial slime molds)
4. Kaplan: 0/10 other resources do it better
5. Chad videos/Quizzes: 10/10 covers everything you need to know to get 20+ but if your goal is higher, you need more resources or get really lucky on questions (GC/OC)
6. Topscore: N/A didnt use
7. CDP: 8/10 Very helpful but it favors using a few set of rules so many questions start looking similar

In my honest opinion, you only need Chads, Cliffs/Barrons, and the ADA practice tests in order to score a 20+. Add CDP or Math Destroyer if you need help with those sections. RC is literally a skill you need to develop over time/practice of reading difficult material and trying to understand it as quickly as possible.

Huh which sections of Bootcamp would you consider way too easy? The general consensus here is that bootcamp is a tad bit harder than the real thing or about representative of the true thing.

 

[TheDanger]

I don't think there is a point really. I attempted the first test, but I felt like I skipped over 15 questions when I got to question 25 so yeah... I just closed the webpage at that point.

The general feedback from everyone here is that math destroyer > all other sources.

Thanks! I've gone through 6 tests in the Destroyer and was wondering if I should continue and do the rest timed or if I should switch over to Bootcamp. Looks like I'll stick with Destroyer!

2. Destroyer: 0/10 don't even bother, this made me lose points more than anything

Can you elaborate?

 

[shaidester]

I did the first 5 tests along with QR destroyer.

 

[Soleus715]

Sorry about the late reply. Been gone from working so much.

I thought that the Destroyer had a good amount of relevant questions but all of them were already covered on other sources (chads, barrons, cliffs, bootcamp, etc). The real problem is that there were many questions that were way too specific and out of the scope of the DAT. I actually made a word doc listing all of the information from Destroyer not found in any other source I've used. Not a SINGLE piece of info exclusive to the Destroyer was on the exam (stuff like Dieckmann Condensation, Double dehydrodehalogenation E2, and diazomethane's structure and rxn with an alkene). And I spent a good deal of time trying to understand all of them.

Bootcamp's GC and OC sections were too easy for me. I scored 4-6 points higher than the actual test on each practice test. But in retrospect, I think I got some really insane questions on GC/OC on my DAT.
Bio had a lot of random questions but so did the actual DAT so I won't judge it. Bio is just really random, some DAT questions I got were not covered in anything I used or could have used.
PAT was very helpful and similar to the DAT.
RC felt really difficult compared to the actual DAT. I got 8 points higher on the actual DAT than I did on the RC practice test averages.
QR was a bit more difficult than the actual test but I think that this helped me with utilizing my time wisely.

I also realized that some sections on Cliffs and Barrons were way too detailed. Please don't spend all your time memorizing the stuff from Kingdom Protista or the Plants section. Actually just skim it and never look back.

 

[tooth knockn]

Sorry about the late reply. Been gone from working so much.

I thought that the Destroyer had a good amount of relevant questions but all of them were already covered on other sources (chads, barrons, cliffs, bootcamp, etc). The real problem is that there were many questions that were way too specific and out of the scope of the DAT. I actually made a word doc listing all of the information from Destroyer not found in any other source I've used. Not a SINGLE piece of info exclusive to the Destroyer was on the exam (stuff like Dieckmann Condensation, Double dehydrodehalogenation E2, and diazomethane's structure and rxn with an alkene). And I spent a good deal of time trying to understand all of them.

Bootcamp's GC and OC sections were too easy for me. I scored 4-6 points higher than the actual test on each practice test. But in retrospect, I think I got some really insane questions on GC/OC on my DAT.
Bio had a lot of random questions but so did the actual DAT so I won't judge it. Bio is just really random, some DAT questions I got were not covered in anything I used or could have used.
PAT was very helpful and similar to the DAT.
RC felt really difficult compared to the actual DAT. I got 8 points higher on the actual DAT than I did on the RC practice test averages.
QR was a bit more difficult than the actual test but I think that this helped me with utilizing my time wisely.

I also realized that some sections on Cliffs and Barrons were way too detailed. Please don't spend all your time memorizing the stuff from Kingdom Protista or the Plants section. Actually just skim it and never look back.

Interesting

 

[tooth knockn]

Did you post a DAT breakdown?

 

[WilliamC93]

I'll say what I can.

4: My primary resource was Kaplan, which I notice gets a lot of crap on these forums. I personally found Kaplan very, very helpful as they give you the book, live discussions, 6 full tests, and many, many more subject tests and workshops. That being said, I didn't find the live classes too helpful and it is definitely not quite the money's worth. I'd give it a $600-$700 value. So if you want/have the money to spend, I would go for it. There is no doubt in my mind that you can get just as good preparation from other resources for half the cost.

2: A couple of weeks before my test date I got DAT destroyer because I wanted a different perspective of potential test questions, and I'm glad I did. Destroyer was definitely helpful, especially for the Bio section. It is important to know that many of these questions are much harder than what you will find on the real test so don't let it destroy your confidence. What I did was do 10-20 questions at a time, look at the answer description, and wikipedia the (many) terms or subjects that were not clearly explained (you learn a LOT this way).

1:I only did the free tests of DAT bootcamp, and it gave me a good look at what the quantitative reasoning section looked like on my real test.

One other resource I recommend strictly for PAT is Crack DAT PAT. It really is quite similar to the real test (harder in some sections such as hole-punch). Kaplan sucked in this area.

I should probably start procrastinating and study for my damn test tomorrow. Good luck!