How do dental schools rank DAT sections in importance?

[yuppers]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just in general because I know some schools see it differently.
I would think:
1) TS
2) PAT
3) AA
4) RC
5) QR

 

[achilles2]

Depends on the school


At virtually all of my interviews they pretty much just brought up my AA...and only once my orgo scores.




From what I heard and IMO
AA>RC>>>everything else

 

[yuppers]

Depends on the school

At virtually all of my interviews they pretty much just brought up my AA...and only once my orgo scores.

From what I heard and IMO
AA>RC>>>everything else

I know it depends on the school, I just want to know in general. Why is RC so high according to you?

 

[doc3232]

Everyone has their own bias. I read the studies on the ada test and based some of my opinion off it.

IMO, the problem with AA is that it is easily affected by a single 30 (rather than a 20) on a section. It bumps up your AA 2 points.

TS is much tougher to do well on because any single bad science score will severely affect it.

The studies showed that RC was not that important compared to individual science scores, TS, or AA. But IMO, it is a good indicator of whether the test-taker can speak english fluently.
QR is completely useless IMO. This makes the AA less important because someone who scores a 30 on it or a 15 is greatly affected by it.

TS=AA>>>RC>bio=orgo=gchem>>>QR
I like this...RC is only in the front to prove test-taker is not science/math genius who barely speaks english.

 

[yuppers]

Everyone has their own bias. I read the studies on the ada test and based some of my opinion off it.

IMO, the problem with AA is that it is easily affected by a single 30 (rather than a 20) on a section. It bumps up your AA 2 points.

TS is much tougher to do well on because any single bad science score will severely affect it.

The studies showed that RC was not that important compared to individual science scores, TS, or AA. But IMO, it is a good indicator of whether the test-taker can speak english fluently.
QR is completely useless IMO. This makes the AA less important because someone who scores a 30 on it or a 15 is greatly affected by it.

TS=AA>>>RC>bio=orgo=gchem>>>QR
I like this...RC is only in the front to prove test-taker is not science/math genius who barely speaks english.

Thanks for the input. I thought the same about AA (that is, it accounts for RC and QR) and that is why I ranked it lower than the others.
However, where would you fit the PAT in your ranking.

 

[doc3232]

Thanks for the input. I thought the same about AA (that is, it accounts for RC and QR) and that is why I ranked it lower than the others.
However, where would you fit the PAT in your ranking.

Hmmm...TS=AA>>PAT>RC>bio=orgo=gchem>>>QR

 

[achilles2]

Everyone has their own bias. I read the studies on the ada test and based some of my opinion off it.

IMO, the problem with AA is that it is easily affected by a single 30 (rather than a 20) on a section. It bumps up your AA 2 points.

TS is much tougher to do well on because any single bad science score will severely affect it.

The studies showed that RC was not that important compared to individual science scores, TS, or AA. But IMO, it is a good indicator of whether the test-taker can speak english fluently.
QR is completely useless IMO. This makes the AA less important because someone who scores a 30 on it or a 15 is greatly affected by it.

TS=AA>>>RC>bio=orgo=gchem>>>QR
I like this...RC is only in the front to prove test-taker is not science/math genius who barely speaks english.

I had a 27 TS not one adcom even raised there eye about it at least not to me.

In terms of RC I've heard from a few adcoms that it holds significant weight


If you can score a 30 on a section thats a feet within itself. A 4.4 is an amazing 40 yard dash but a 4.2 is legendary. When your scoring in the upper limits it becomes a game of inches.

 

[doc3232]

I had a 27 TS not one adcom even raised there eye about it at least not to me.

In terms of RC I've heard from a few adcoms that it holds significant weight


If you can score a 30 on a section thats a feet within itself. A 4.4 is an amazing 40 yard dash but a 4.2 is legendary. When your scoring in the upper limits it becomes a game of inches.

Ok, I do agree, but you won't guess between A and B and steal two-tenths of a second. 😉

EDIT:
Oh that 27 is beautiful...so perfect. I think your TS was just too high to talk about.

 

[achilles2]

Ok, I do agree, but you won't guess between A and B and steal two-tenths of a second. 😉

EDIT:
Oh that 27 is beautiful...so perfect. I think your TS was just too high to talk about.

😀


the dude who had a 27AA had a 28TS and smoked me tho =/


I do agree with you QR never got mentioned and mine was only a 17 so I think they are very forgiving about that.

 

[yuppers]

I had a 27 TS not one adcom even raised there eye about it at least not to me.

In terms of RC I've heard from a few adcoms that it holds significant weight

So you're basically saying that RC is the most important section. I just don't see how an adcom that would favor a student with mainly 20s and a 24/25 in RC as better than one who has a 20 in RC but >20s in most of the other sections.

 

[yuppers]

Hmmm...TS=AA>>PAT>RC>bio=orgo=gchem>>>QR

Alright, I think that would make sense.

 

[yuppers]

In terms of RC I've heard from a few adcoms that it holds significant weight

Also, what would you say is a good RC score then?

 

[achilles2]

So you're basically saying that RC is the most important section. I just don't see how an adcom that would favor a student with mainly 20s and a 24/25 in RC as better than one who has a 20 in RC but >20s in most of the other sections.

No the single most important number is AA since TS is also reported for standardized data it is also prob important.

If you have a crap TS the odds of having a competitive AA are low. However, adcoms seem forgiving if you have 1 lower science section but did well on the other two. They seem forgiving if you have a low QR or PAT but I've heard in terms of RC they will not cut that much slack.

I could be totally wrong but from my interviews thats what I gathered.

Regardless try not to turn the suck meter on regarding any section.

And in terms of RC I feel if you have a 20+ you will be fine as long as your AA is competitive. Adcoms just don't like to see LOW RC scores.

Since TS isn't ONE section you can make up ground by doing well in 1 and not extremely well in the other areas. So you have a nice margin of error. Since RC is ONE section you can't afford to screw up.


The SDN votes seem to be:
PAT don't score less then 17
QR don't score less then 16
RC don't score less then 20

Remember the numbers for RC are screwed up a like 21 is like 80 something %ile, so a 18 on RC is alot worse then an 18 on any other section.

 

[PSU SHC 414]

I know it depends on the school, I just want to know in general. Why is RC so high according to you?

http://www.jdentaled.org/cgi/content/full/71/4/492

Read this paper, and you'll get an idea for why schools put so much weight into the RC section... you'll note that this statistical analysis was done using a limited population pool, but I think it's fairly representative.

Here's an excerpt from the Results section (if you don't feel like taking the time to read the paper in depth):
The results of the Pearson's correlation analysis for the first class initially revealed several significant relationships among admissions variables. First, DAT-BIO was found to be a statistically significant predictor of both DS-GPA (R=0.310) and NBDE-I scores (R=0.383), supporting the observations made by De Ball et al.11 In addition, DAT-RC scores were also significantly correlated to DS-GPA (R=0.332) and NBDE-I scores (R=0.367), but were slightly less robust than DAT-BIO in their predictive capabilities, an observation supported by Bergman et al.12 Although DAT-QA was initially predictive for NBDE-I for the first class (R=0.318), when the data from all three classes were reviewed, only DAT-BIO remained a significant predictor of NBDE-I score (R=0.304), but not DS-GPA (R=0.148).

 

[yuppers]

That is an interesting study. It is also interesting that QR is said to be an indicator, but is not viewed as that important by dental schools.

 

[eldirty]

TS=AA>>>RC>bio=orgo=gchem>>>QR

I would go with:
AA>TS>bio=orgo=gchem>>>RC>>>QR

 

[Aceofspades]

There have been many threads like this before and I always find it funny that some people think RC is more important than everything... even AA. Are you telling me that someone with a 18AA, 25RC will get preference at most schools over a 25AA, 18RC? Really????

Yes, I have seen the studies that show a correlation with RC and NDBE scores but that does not mean RC trumps everything. NDBE is going to be P/F soon enough anyway so who cares. If RC was so important the ADA would make the DAT consist of nothing except RC or weigh the RC x2 or x3 in the AA. Heck, most schools don't even report their RC scores but they do report their AA, TS, and PAT. And for the most part, a school with a 20 AA average score will most likely have similar 20 scores across the board.

 

[doc3232]

There have been many threads like this before and I always find it funny that some people think RC is more important than everything... even AA. Are you telling me that someone with a 18AA, 25RC will get preference at most schools over a 25AA, 18RC? Really????

Yes, I have seen the studies that show a correlation with RC and NDBE scores but that does not mean RC trumps everything. NDBE is going to be P/F soon enough anyway so who cares. If RC was so important the ADA would make the DAT consist of nothing except RC or weigh the RC x2 or x3 in the AA. Heck, most schools don't even report their RC scores but they do report their AA, TS, and PAT. And for the most part, a school with a 20 AA average score will most likely have similar 20 scores across the board.

No one said that. It is really hard to rank these when some scores are cumulative of others. It is actually very complicated and I think it would take a lot more work to properly rank them.
We are comparing the different arrangement of the subsections if someone had a 20AA (eg: 20RC with 18 bio or 18 RC with 20 bio).

I agree with eldirty's list as long as the RC isn't too low.

 

[eldirty]

I agree ... I think a shockingly low score in any section will raise red flags.

Aceofspades - from what i heard in several of my interviews ... the boards will not be p/f for some time and possible not ever. I dont know where everyone is getting this information about them definitely going p/f

 

[yuppers]

I would go with:
AA>TS>bio=orgo=gchem>>>RC>>>QR

Where would you put the PAT?

 

[yuppers]

Aceofspades - from what i heard in several of my interviews ... the boards will not be p/f for some time and possible not ever. I dont know where everyone is getting this information about them definitely going p/f

I agree. If it was p/f how would schools decide between students going into specialites? Only GPA and letters? Again there has to be a test that puts all students on a level playing field like the DAT.

 

[achilles2]

I agree. If it was p/f how would schools decide between students going into specialites? Only GPA and letters? Again there has to be a test that puts all students on a level playing field like the DAT.

I agree
👍

 

[lhtran07]

Nothing is confirmed, but speculation has it that if and when it does becomes pass/fail, there will be a separate test for specialty programs to decide between applicants.

I think this is the latest discussion about the p/f issue: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=599120

 

[NyCzPeter]

Ok so a higher RC correletes with a high NDBE score. Now how does a high NDBE score correlate with being a better dentist?? Unless there are studies that tie high NDBE scores with high income and patient satisfaction, all of this is useless conjecture. I would think schools want to train competent dentists not good test takers

 

[yuppers]

Nothing is confirmed, but speculation has it that if and when it does becomes pass/fail, there will be a separate test for specialty programs to decide between applicants.

Thats interesting. I wonder what their reasoning behind it would be.

 

[doc3232]

Ok so a higher RC correletes with a high NDBE score. Now how does a high NDBE score correlate with being a better dentist?? Unless there are studies that tie high NDBE scores with high income and patient satisfaction, all of this is useless conjecture. I would think schools want to train competent dentists not good test takers

There is no better predictor. gpa and letters are not the best indication of competence. Currently DAT and NBDE are all we have really.

 

[achilles2]

Ok so a higher RC correletes with a high NDBE score. Now how does a high NDBE score correlate with being a better dentist?? Unless there are studies that tie high NDBE scores with high income and patient satisfaction, all of this is useless conjecture. I would think schools want to train competent dentists not good test takers

Your point is valid but no system is perfect.

Schools are concerned with NDBE scores because STUDENTS are very concerned with them. One of the questions I heard asked at every interview is "whats this schools pass rate on the boards." Thus schools like to be able to speak highly of there pass rate and overall scores, because students value this.

 

[xylem29]

I would've thought that the AA or TS and the PAT would be the most important section - I'd think PAT is equal to or slightly more important than the science sections.

RC on the otherhand is a complete misnomer - it's got absolutley nothing to do with being able to comprehend or read english. If you have a photographic short-term memory and are a fast reader, then you'd get by with reading the passage ONCE and then answering the quetions with high accuracy without ever having to go back. That being said, you'd need to remember each fact, date, name, etc....

RC is a test of your ability to develop a good solid strategy towards this section - ie. being able to find the answers. For a test that's supposed to test your english comprehension, I found the DAT RC to be a complete joke to MCAT VR. Don't get me wrong, the DAT RC was challenging as hell - but it was more of a time contraint thing, given ample time, you'd "find" (vs reasoning/thinking toward the answer as in VR) all the answers. With MCAT VR - you could read the passage a thousand times but if you can't understand what you're reading and simultaneously can't understand what the question is asking, you'll never do well on it.

But if the studies show that the RC is best correlated with the board scores, then there must be a skill or cognitive function that this section tests for that I am failing to see - someone enlighten me on this. I'm quite interested to know.

 

[alanan84]

That is an interesting study. It is also interesting that QR is said to be an indicator, but is not viewed as that important by dental schools.

I spoke with Baylor today and they told me (which I've heard before on these forums) that dental schools have been told to expect lower QR scores because of changes they've made to it. Here is how the lady at Baylor told me they view DAT scores:

AA>TS>all other scores except for QR>QR

 

[yuppers]

I spoke with Baylor today and they told me (which I've heard before on these forums) that dental schools have been told to expect lower QR scores because of changes they've made to it. Here is how the lady at Baylor told me they view DAT scores:

AA>TS>all other scores except for QR>QR

Hey, we get some inside info. 👍
So according to most of the posts, PAT is not that important (some people even left it off their rankings). So what is the point of the PAT and why do people freak out and buy multiple programs (CDP, etc) for it?

 

[eldirty]

Where would you put the PAT?

I think PAT is considered in an entirely different ballpark

 

[NyCzPeter]

I spoke with Baylor today and they told me (which I've heard before on these forums) that dental schools have been told to expect lower QR scores because of changes they've made to it. Here is how the lady at Baylor told me they view DAT scores:

AA>TS>all other scores except for QR>QR

I frikin KNEW IT!!! My QR score was a frikin 19 and I've always been good at math... Damn that thing really was hard.

There is no better predictor. gpa and letters are not the best indication of competence. Currently DAT and NBDE are all we have really.

I gotta disagree with you here doc. I think GPA is a better indication of perhaps not competence but work ethic because no one can maintain a A/A- GPA without continued effort and dedication, and this holds true even at a low tiered university since its safe to assume that no one is born with knowledge of orgo/bio/physics etc. To be honest, I think it takes less smarts(not no smarts) but more so dedication/better work ethics to be a good dentist.

 

[doc3232]

I frikin KNEW IT!!! My QR score was a frikin 19 and I've always been good at math... Damn that thing really was hard.



I gotta disagree with you here doc. I think GPA is a better indication of perhaps not competence but work ethic because no one can maintain a A/A- GPA without continued effort and dedication, and this holds true even at a low tiered university since its safe to assume that no one is born with knowledge of orgo/bio/physics etc. To be honest, I think it takes less smarts(not no smarts) but more so dedication/better work ethics to be a good dentist.

I have a friend who only gets A+s...i don't think he would get a 18 on the DAT. He didn't study or go to class sometimes. Trust me, some gpas meaning nothing at all.

 

[achilles2]

I gotta disagree with you here doc. I think GPA is a better indication of perhaps not competence but work ethic because no one can maintain a A/A- GPA without continued effort and dedication, and this holds true even at a low tiered university since its safe to assume that no one is born with knowledge of orgo/bio/physics etc. To be honest, I think it takes less smarts(not no smarts) but more so dedication/better work ethics to be a good dentist.

on the same token it takes ability to learn and then execute under pressure.....A person who had a 4.0 GPA but a 19 on the DAT tells me something is up. If they repeat and get like a 21 then sure they may have just not prepared but if you have an outstanding GPA and a significantly lower DAT score that has to mean something.

A standardized measure is needed to compare students across the board. All programs are not the same and all teachers do not grade the same.

 

[NyCzPeter]

on the same token it takes ability to learn and then execute under pressure.....A person who had a 4.0 GPA but a 19 on the DAT tells me something is up. If they repeat and get like a 21 then sure they may have just not prepared but if you have an outstanding GPA and a significantly lower DAT score that has to mean something.

A standardized measure is needed to compare students across the board. All programs are not the same and all teachers do not grade the same.

Hey thats like me. 3.96/4.0 and a 19 Dats. well... 19.4 -_- what luck. In my own defense, I did a quick switcheroo over to dental and I only had two weeks to study for it.

However, I think anyone who spends a tremendous effort in a short amount of time say a few months can get a 20+ on the Dats. However, GPA is over a longer period of time and cannot be raised through significantly over a short period of time. As for you friend, I never go to class aswell, however I study my ass off when test time comes. But most of the time i'm just chillen which is probably the impression you got from your friend. Orgo is orgo anywhere, nobody gets an A+ by not going to class AND not studying.

 

[doc3232]

Hey thats like me. 3.96/4.0 and a 19 Dats. well... 19.4 -_- what luck. In my own defense, I did a quick switcheroo over to dental and I only had two weeks to study for it.

However, I think anyone who spends a tremendous effort in a short amount of time say a few months can get a 20+ on the Dats. However, GPA is over a longer period of time and cannot be raised through significantly over a short period of time. As for you friend, I never go to class aswell, however I study my ass off when test time comes. But most of the time i'm just chillen which is probably the impression you got from your friend. Orgo is orgo anywhere, nobody gets an A+ by not going to class AND not studying.

Maybe not at your school or my school. But his school...he really does ace EVERYTHING and he is not smart. I am just trying to show some schools are easier than others.

 

[NyCzPeter]

Maybe not at your school or my school. But his school...he really does ace EVERYTHING and he is not smart. I am just trying to show some schools are easier than others.

Seriously, I totally agree that some schools are harder than others, but my point is, you still have to study no matter how "easy" the program might be. No one is born knowing that gluteus maximus = ass. Unless one goes to Community College, I really don't see how one can ace Anatomy without studying. Maybe hes a complete idiot but anyone at a 4 year university still has to study quite a bit to ace a course like Anatomy or biochem. Unless of course he has photographic memory, in which case he would probably be pretty smart.

 

[achilles2]

Hey thats like me. 3.96/4.0 and a 19 Dats. well... 19.4 -_- what luck. In my own defense, I did a quick switcheroo over to dental and I only had two weeks to study for it.

However, I think anyone who spends a tremendous effort in a short amount of time say a few months can get a 20+ on the Dats. However, GPA is over a longer period of time and cannot be raised through significantly over a short period of time. As for you friend, I never go to class aswell, however I study my ass off when test time comes. But most of the time i'm just chillen which is probably the impression you got from your friend. Orgo is orgo anywhere, nobody gets an A+ by not going to class AND not studying.

if you can pull a 19 with 2 weeks of prep then with a few months you should pop a 20+ with no problem at all 👍

 

[dentist707]

I think it all depends on the schools...
But I had impression that most schools I interviewed look at AA heavily...
After AA, as long as the rest scores are consistant & above 17, I would say it doesn't really matter...
But I wanted the schools to weigh more on PAT but unfortunately they dont as much as I wanted...

(BTW, I got 16 on RC & got in...)

 

[yuppers]

Orgo is orgo anywhere, nobody gets an A+ by not going to class AND not studying.

Don't even remind me of that class.....

 

[yuppers]

But I wanted the schools to weigh more on PAT but unfortunately they dont as much as I wanted...

(BTW, I got 16 on RC & got in...)

Interesting, how many schools interviewed or even accepted you?
But your "16 RC and got in" might be due to other things you had going for yourself though. Although it does throw a twist in the discussion.

 

[yuppers]

Just restating my question:

So according to most of the posts, PAT is not that important. So what is the point of the PAT and why do people freak out and buy multiple programs (CDP, etc) for it?

 

[alanan84]

Just restating my question:

Bombing any section of the DAT is bad. PAT is a section that without practice could easily be bombed.

Dentists have to be able to work on teeth upside down and at weird angles so it's important for them to have that perceptual ability. I guess thats the justification for the section.

 

[dentist707]

Interesting, how many schools interviewed or even accepted you?
But your "16 RC and got in" might be due to other things you had going for yourself though. Although it does throw a twist in the discussion.

Yea, i agree w/ you...
That's why I said I had impression that schools look at mostly your AA & everything depends on the rest of your application...
I even interviewed indiana where they have RC cut off of 18...
so i guess some schools weigh on different sections on DAT but it's not very strict... They look at everything together & there is always exceptions...

BTW, I interviewed 7 schools... & after my first acceptance(Michigan) withdrew all coz it was my top choice anyway...

 

[lhtran07]

It was a good thing that QR wasn't weighed as heavily as other sections. I bombed it with a 13...hadn't touched math (algebra/word problems) in years and I didn't have time to go over it during my month of studying for the DAT.

 

[yuppers]

Dentists have to be able to work on teeth upside down and at weird angles so it's important for them to have that perceptual ability. I guess thats the justification for the section.

That's exactly why I would think that dental schools rank it somewhat higher than some of the posters. I remember reading somewhere that there is a correlation between PAT and how well people adapt to the clinically years. Anyone else hear about this??

 

[doc3232]

That's exactly why I would think that dental schools rank it somewhat higher than some of the posters. I remember reading somewhere that there is a correlation between PAT and how well people adapt to the clinically years. Anyone else hear about this??

I agree. PAT is only predictor of success in clinic during d-school. BUT AA is based on 5 sections and TS is based on 3. I feel like those are more important that PAT.

 

[yuppers]

I agree. PAT is only predictor of success in clinic during d-school. BUT AA is based on 5 sections and TS is based on 3. I feel like those are more important that PAT.

I did place TS and AA above PAT. However, I find it ironic that we are talking about the RC correlation to NBDE but not the PAT to clinic.

 

[doc3232]

I did place TS and AA above PAT. However, I find it ironic that we are talking about the RC correlation to NBDE but not the PAT to clinic.

I 100% agree. PAT is the only thing that matches with clinical.
RC did not show a great correlation from what I saw...

 

[NyCzPeter]

I 100% agree. PAT is the only thing that matches with clinical.
RC did not show a great correlation from what I saw...

Yea why is it that people always take the PAT so lightly? If I were an adcom, it would definitely be PAT=RC.

I mean, besides the PAT, there is nothing remotely practical on that exam.