Quantcast

Just took my Achiever Test #2

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

toothhornet88

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
378
Reaction score
27

Members don't see this ad.
I just want your guys insight by approximately how many points more did people score on the real DAT compared to their achiever test scores? Cuz man looking at my scores I'm VERY discouraged:(. My DAT is on the 16 th by the way.

Achiever Test 1:
PA 18
QR 21
RC 15
Bio 16
GC 18
OC 16
TS 17
AA 17

Achiever Test 2:
PA 18
QR 20
RC 16
Bio 16
GC 18
OC 17
TS 17
AA 17
 
Last edited:

PooyaH

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
804
Reaction score
0
You're fine man. Everyone has been saying Achiever is way harder than the DAT. And usually everyone scores 3, 4 points higher than Achiever on their DATs.
 

mh0000

Full Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
Guys I really need some advice on my scores!

I only did the science, PAT and only read the passages of RC (didn't really answer the questions), so I will give you my best opinion.

I got 17, 18, 18 on my achiever PAT and a 23 on the real thing. Every aspect except pattern folding was much simpler on the real thing. Pattern folding I felt was comparable to achiever, but with better graphics and slightly fewer shaded figures.

My scores on the sciences went up a few points on the real thing from my achiever scores, but I really can't say that achiever was representative of the sciences on the DAT. The calculations were much simpler on GC (not too many to begin with), more conceptually based than achiever too. The OC section only had very, very basic reactions. I can't remember achiever's OC questions to be honest, but I got a few spectroscopy questions on the real test that I don't remember achiever testing on. They were still pretty basic. Bio had many more application type questions where you have to understand the underlying concept. Such as "if drug X inhibits the formation of Y, then how would you expect it to affect Z." If I recall correctly, most of achiever's bio questions were fact recollection, which only composed maybe 40-50% of my DAT bio section. They weren't as obscure as achiever, but probably on par with some of destroyer's questions. Don't worry about achiever's RC, it is complete junk in my opinion. I only read the passages to make sure my timing some reasonable, and never answered the questions. YOu will be surprised how much simpler the real RC is compared to achiever. I didn't study for QR so I can't provide info there, sorry.
 

toothhornet88

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
378
Reaction score
27
I only did the science, PAT and only read the passages of RC (didn't really answer the questions), so I will give you my best opinion.

I got 17, 18, 18 on my achiever PAT and a 23 on the real thing. Every aspect except pattern folding was much simpler on the real thing. Pattern folding I felt was comparable to achiever, but with better graphics and slightly fewer shaded figures.

My scores on the sciences went up a few points on the real thing from my achiever scores, but I really can't say that achiever was representative of the sciences on the DAT. The calculations were much simpler on GC (not too many to begin with), more conceptually based than achiever too. The OC section only had very, very basic reactions. I can't remember achiever's OC questions to be honest, but I got a few spectroscopy questions on the real test that I don't remember achiever testing on. They were still pretty basic. Bio had many more application type questions where you have to understand the underlying concept. Such as "if drug X inhibits the formation of Y, then how would you expect it to affect Z." If I recall correctly, most of achiever's bio questions were fact recollection, which only composed maybe 40-50% of my DAT bio section. They weren't as obscure as achiever, but probably on par with some of destroyer's questions. Don't worry about achiever's RC, it is complete junk in my opinion. I only read the passages to make sure my timing some reasonable, and never answered the questions. YOu will be surprised how much simpler the real RC is compared to achiever. I didn't study for QR so I can't provide info there, sorry.

Thank you. That's good to know! I feel much better
 

marquito

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2011
Messages
52
Reaction score
1
I just took achiever test 1 and got similar scores as you. I'm also worried about the RC (I got a 15 as well).
 

cluckyducky

Full Member
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
0
I just want your guys insight by approximately how many points more did people score on the real DAT compared to their achiever test scores? Cuz man looking at my scores I'm VERY discouraged:(. My DAT is on the 16 th by the way.

Achiever Test 1:
PA 18
QR 21
RC 15
Bio 16
GC 18
OC 16
TS 17
AA 17

Achiever Test 2:
PA 18
QR 20
RC 16
Bio 16
GC 18
OC 17
TS 17
AA 17

Yeah I also got pretty similar scores, but am really bombing bio for some reason. :scared: ARGH! IDK what to do. But it seems that the general consensus on SDN is that you score about 2 points higher in each section on the real DAT versus the DAT Achiever. Looks like you're ready enough for a 18+ score at the very least.
 
Top