How was the Canadian DAT?

[flying nimbus855]

---

Members don't see this ad.

For those who wrote the Canadian DAT today, how was it in terms of difficulty of specific sections. what did you find easy, what did you find hard, what caught you off guard? planning on writing the next one. thank you!

 

[asdf99]

you'll get more responses on premed101

 

[kiram]

Reading comprehension :'(

 

[zugz]

Preface: already did aDAT, 25AA, 22 PAT.

MDT: easy. Soap were pink, softer to carve less crumbling. Shape views are same as the MDT pattern they provide. I botched the corner of my flute. GG Alberta.

Biology: random questions were random. Generally easy, very broad. Lots of animal phyla stuff? Screwed up question about organisms at surface of water - I swear it was not on Feralis.

G-Chem: I did all 300+ DAT destroyer questions twice. This section was a joke comparatively. No complex math, no complex theoretical questions. Fun times.

PAT: keyholes(aperture): way easier than my American DAT. Easier than DAT boot camp.

TFE very simple shapes, line counting works for some questions. Hole punching: no where near as crazy as DAT boot camp. Less complex folds.

Angles: insane. Brain just did not understand the angles today. Felt like they were within 2 degree difference. Harder than boot camp and my American DAT. I hope my score on other section will save me.

Pattern folding: not bad. The more difficult folding cubes and shapes was able to do by POE as the other ones had an obvious defect.

Reading comp: I work in a research lab and the first Q was on a technique I am extremely familiar with. Overall, everything straight forward. Lots of search and destroy. Had 10 min to spare. Not too many inference questions.

Good luck to all my fellow cDAT test takers.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Juggernaut604]

Preface: already did aDAT, 25AA, 22 PAT.

MDT: easy. Soap were pink, softer to carve less crumbling. Shape views are same as the MDT pattern they provide. I botched the corner of my flute. GG Alberta.

Biology: random questions were random. Generally easy, very broad. Lots of animal phyla stuff? Screwed up question about organisms at surface of water - I swear it was not on Feralis.

G-Chem: I did all 300+ DAT destroyer questions twice. This section was a joke comparatively. No complex math, no complex theoretical questions. Fun times.

PAT: keyholes(aperture): way easier than my American DAT. Easier than DAT boot camp.

TFE very simple shapes, line counting works for some questions. Hole punching: no where near as crazy as DAT boot camp. Less complex folds.

Angles: insane. Brain just did not understand the angles today. Felt like they were within 2 degree difference. Harder than boot camp and my American DAT. I hope my score on other section will save me.

Pattern folding: not bad. The more difficult folding cubes and shapes was able to do by POE as the other ones had an obvious defect.

Reading comp: I work in a research lab and the first Q was on a technique I am extremely familiar with. Overall, everything straight forward. Lots of search and destroy. Had 10 min to spare. Not too many inference questions.

Good luck to all my fellow cDAT test takers.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your aDAT scores are already awesome; why would you retake the exam??

I found it to be pretty difficult overall. I liked the reading passages, but am certain to have made mistakes and only finished as time was coming to an end. Good luck to everyone who wrote the exam!

P.S. I feel you on that bio question.

 

[aspdent1]

I found it pretty fair, except I struggled with RC. I have to diagree with zugz: search and distroy would not have helped me. Lots of questions relating mutplie paragraphs.

 

[Juggernaut604]

I found it pretty fair, except I struggled with RC. I have to diagree with zugz: search and distroy would not have helped me. Lots of questions relating mutplie paragraphs.

Yes, I would agree with you. I found that, for a fair share of questions, S&D was effective; however, there were also a number of questions where it was less useful. Regardless, try not to worry and be happy you're done!

 

[zugz]

@Juggernaught604

I took the cDAT so I could have a crack at Alberta. To be completely honest, it was a chance to do even better. It was important for me because I lacked direction and drifted through undergrad and received a 75% average at UBC - so I had to offset that somehow. I'm curious, is the class average nowadays still set to 65%? Converting to American GPA was killer - AADSAS said it was 3.2 🙁

@aspdent1

I don't know if we all received the same test. But I found other than one or two inference questions like "is this expository/argumentative/cynical/etc?", I could find the word for word answers for almost all the other questions. My strat was to read the whole passage first (4-5 minutes), making mental note/highlighting on paper the main points for each paragraph, then went back later to find the right info.

I do agree some S&D lines were somewhat buried, and I had to scan the entire passage sometimes just to find it. I had to be careful since I work in a mol. biol. lab, and in my practice exams I tend to bring in outside knowledge. But could have helped since I knew the content for 2/3 passages.

 

[asdf99]

@Juggernaught604

I took the cDAT so I could have a crack at Alberta. To be completely honest, it was a chance to do even better. It was important for me because I lacked direction and drifted through undergrad and received a 75% average at UBC - so I had to offset that somehow. I'm curious, is the class average nowadays still set to 65%? Converting to American GPA was killer - AADSAS said it was 3.2 🙁

@aspdent1

I don't know if we all received the same test. But I found other than one or two inference questions like "is this expository/argumentative/cynical/etc?", I could find the word for word answers for almost all the other questions. My strat was to read the whole passage first (4-5 minutes), making mental note/highlighting on paper the main points for each paragraph, then went back later to find the right info.

I do agree some S&D lines were somewhat buried, and I had to scan the entire passage sometimes just to find it. I had to be careful since I work in a mol. biol. lab, and in my practice exams I tend to bring in outside knowledge. But could have helped since I knew the content for 2/3 passages.

Depends on the program at UBC. UBC psych courses I heard (haven't taken them) set the average to 65%. I chose an easy major (not going to say just for privacy haha) and the averages are as high as they want them to be

 

[love me ortiz me]

@Juggernaught604

I took the cDAT so I could have a crack at Alberta. To be completely honest, it was a chance to do even better. It was important for me because I lacked direction and drifted through undergrad and received a 75% average at UBC - so I had to offset that somehow. I'm curious, is the class average nowadays still set to 65%? Converting to American GPA was killer - AADSAS said it was 3.2 🙁

@aspdent1

I don't know if we all received the same test. But I found other than one or two inference questions like "is this expository/argumentative/cynical/etc?", I could find the word for word answers for almost all the other questions. My strat was to read the whole passage first (4-5 minutes), making mental note/highlighting on paper the main points for each paragraph, then went back later to find the right info.

I do agree some S&D lines were somewhat buried, and I had to scan the entire passage sometimes just to find it. I had to be careful since I work in a mol. biol. lab, and in my practice exams I tend to bring in outside knowledge. But could have helped since I knew the content for 2/3 passages.

OH my god i did not know the interference questions, hopefully those dont affect me too much. I felt crunched for time for PAT and RC