Whos in a better position?

[Dent010]

---

Members do not see this ad.

If a person have a 3.3 but has a 21/21/21 are they in better standing than a person with a 4.0 but has an 18/18/18? Or would the opposites balance each other out? Just curious as to what people think....

 

[nitrolegs]

If a person have a 3.3 but has a 21/21/21 are they in better standing than a person with a 4.0 but has an 18/18/18? Or would the opposites balance each other out? Just curious as to what people think....

between the two, i think would rather be the 4.0 person. i think a high gpa is a better indicator of academic performance/work ethic than a high test score. although i hear a lot of schools favor high DAT over gpa.

 

[vlct0ria]

I agree about the high GPA...you work hard for 4 years to earn a competitive GPA, and I think (or I would hope) that counts for a lot more than one day of testing.

 

[sajjy]

between the two, i think would rather be the 4.0 person. i think a high gpa is a better indicator of academic performance/work ethic than a high test score. although i hear a lot of schools favor high DAT over gpa.

Looking at the 2007 and 2008 application cycles, the average gpa for most of the schools in the US has gone up. Whereas the average DAT has not changed much or has gone down with few exceptions like Columbia, Stony Brook and UCLA.
So, schools emphasize more on GPA than DAT, given you are an all rounder applicant.

 

[alanan84]

I'd take the higher DAT score. GPA to me is just an ambiguous number. How do you quantify how rigorous an applicant's academic background is? It all depends on what professors they've had, how much time they've had available to put into classes, etc.

 

[Dent010]

I'd take the higher DAT score. GPA to me is just an ambiguous number. How do you quantify how rigorous an applicant's academic background is? It all depends on what professors they've had, how much time they've had available to put into classes, etc.

i can understand your opinion, but what if the person slacked through his classes and only put in serious effort when studying for the DAT? does that make him a more acceptable applicant?

 

[sajjy]

I'd take the higher DAT score. GPA to me is just an ambiguous number. How do you quantify how rigorous an applicant's academic background is? It all depends on what professors they've had, how much time they've had available to put into classes, etc.

No two DAT exams are exactly the same. So, you cannot compare that either. But at least an A in a class still shows you were the best amongst the group.

But like i said, you have to be an all round applicant in either case.

 

[doc3232]

I think it depends on the rigor of the school.
At a very difficult school, I would think the 4.0 has more value. But in that case...why would a person who can manage straight A's not get an amazing DAT score.

 

[longhornpride]

I spoke with an adcom and he said that the DAT evens the playing field. If you have a 4.0 and only score an 18... they're going to question difficulty of your classes and your school.

He gave me an example... he said in his eyes, a 3.5 or 3.6 at UT-Austin is just as good as a 4.0 at let's say Texas State. And a 3.3 at Rice is just as good as a 3.6 at UT-Austin.

In my opinion, I'd rather have the 3.3 from a competitive school and the 21/21/21 than a 4.0 from an easy school and with an 18/18/18.

With that said, I think both stats are good enough to get you into dental school.

 

[liriano]

I would vote for the DAT. The GPA is a good indicator of hard work, but a 4.0 with a major in French (no disrespect to French majors) and a 3.2 in Biomedical Engineering are NOT the same, and that has to be taken into account (which makes the GPA sort of ambiguous). The DAT is a standardized test that tests the basic tools that are emphasized in dental school. It provides a measurement on not only how well you know the basic sciences, but it also determines how well your institution prepared you (so you can compare core science grades with DAT science section scores), how motivated and channeled you can be in order to meet requirements set, and how well you would do on the NBDE (technically). My two cents!

 

[sajjy]

I would vote for the DAT. The GPA is a good indicator of hard work, but a 4.0 with a major in French (no disrespect to French majors) and a 3.2 in Biomedical Engineering are NOT the same, and that has to be taken into account (which makes the GPA sort of ambiguous). The DAT is a standardized test that tests the basic tools that are emphasized in dental school. It provides a measurement on not only how well you know the basic sciences, but it also determines how well your institution prepared you (so you can compare core science grades with DAT science section scores), how motivated and channeled you can be in order to meet requirements set, and how well you would do on the NBDE (technically). My two cents!

Very true which i forgot to mention.

Although we can only guess and no one knows what ADCOMS will like. Applicants with high gpa will favor high gpa whereas high DAT applicants will favor high DAT scores.

 

[peerless218]

If a person have a 3.3 but has a 21/21/21 are they in better standing than a person with a 4.0 but has an 18/18/18? Or would the opposites balance each other out? Just curious as to what people think....

hey hey a gears of war 2 fan!!! Tried the dark corner mappack yet?

 

[DrReo]

I'd take the higher DAT score. GPA to me is just an ambiguous number. How do you quantify how rigorous an applicant's academic background is? It all depends on what professors they've had, how much time they've had available to put into classes, etc.

You are right, the preparation for one 4.5 hour exam is significantly more important than one's work ethic throughout the previous 3 years

 

[BiomajorPreDent]

I would vote for the DAT. The GPA is a good indicator of hard work, but a 4.0 with a major in French (no disrespect to French majors) and a 3.2 in Biomedical Engineering are NOT the same, and that has to be taken into account (which makes the GPA sort of ambiguous). The DAT is a standardized test that tests the basic tools that are emphasized in dental school. It provides a measurement on not only how well you know the basic sciences, but it also determines how well your institution prepared you (so you can compare core science grades with DAT science section scores), how motivated and channeled you can be in order to meet requirements set, and how well you would do on the NBDE (technically). My two cents!

I would vote with the person with the higher DAT

How do you know the 4.0 didnt major in basket-weaving?

You get my point, the DAT seems to be the "great equalizer" of sorts

 

[vlct0ria]

I understand the DAT argument in that in "equalizes" people from different schools and different majors...but at the same time, adcoms aren't idiots and they aren't going to ignore the fact that the Ivies are harder than most state schools, or the fact that biochem is a more difficult major than most others, etc. And since many pre-dents have similar science-related majors, comparing GPAs is not that bad of a system.

So I guess I should change my choice from the 4.0, 18/18/18 student to "more information needed". What are their majors, what undergrads did they attend? If all these factors are nearly equivalent, the GPA wins out because it is a better judge of work ethic.

 

[BiomajorPreDent]

Yea, all other factors being equal, its also possible that the 4.0 is just a bad standardized test taker.

 

[Leebo]

Yea, all other factors being equal, its also possible that the 4.0 is just a bad standardized test taker.

Which is something that should certainly be taken into consideration.

 

[NAVY DDS 2010]

Yea, all other factors being equal, its also possible that the 4.0 is just a bad standardized test taker.

Plus, a person can be having a bad day. Something major could be going on in a person's life during the time of the exam and their concetration might not be fully on the exam.

 

[preOMFS]

I hope its the 3.3 and 21's for my sake!!!

I got my fingers crossed all summer hoping that some adcoms will see that I royally screwed myself the first two years of college (although completely my fault) but I regrouped my last two years and dominated the DAT.

 

[uncbestyet]

At first glance, I would choose the 4.0 GPA. But after marinating on it a minute .... its hard to understand how someone could basically ace every test in thier college career, but not perform the same for a standardized test. There are practice exams that mimic the real DAT very close. There is also the opportunity to take the DAT multiple times to rule out a bad day.

In addition, dental schools have the board exams ... what will they think of someone that does bad on a standardized test then? I think some folks can memorize info for a semester, but have no deeper understanding of the material. I think the DAT does a good job of testing the overall knowledge of the material retained after 1-2 years (since the courses covered on the DAT are basically taken within a year of taking the DAT).

That being said, I am sure I will be railed for being a low GPA applicant and taking the stance I have. Same as above, the high GPA folks sided with the 4.0 GPA.

All in all, I think the DAT is an "equalizer" as stated above. I think that a person who has performed well, GPA wise, over that last few years (2 years) and has a stellar DAT should be on an equal playing field with someone who performed well over 4 years and recently performed poorly on the DAT. That should be when the intangibles come into play (ECs and interview) -- then the ADCOMS pick who they think will be the best dentist.

 

[BiomajorPreDent]

Yep, I agree entirely, thats why its really difficult to compare applicants without knowing all the facts.

Also, the thing about the Boards is..all you have to do is pass them. The DAT you HAVE to do well in. I would estimate that a "passing" grade on the DAT would be the equivalent of getting a 17 or maybe an 18, as the 17 is the national average.

 

[preOMFS]

One other thing: People can grow and mature a lot in five or so years, especially if you take a year off after college to step into the real world. For me, the best thing that happened to me was getting married. Now my wife and I are talking about having a baby! I could barely take care of myself 4 years ago...

 

[alanan84]

You are right, the preparation for one 4.5 hour exam is significantly more important than one's work ethic throughout the previous 3 years

You are right, the person who's world revolves around their grades, who can afford to spend 6 hours a day studying for one subject because they're living off their daddy's dime, and still can't manage a 19AA will definitely be a better DS and dentist than the student who has busted it working 2 jobs to support a family, maintained a solid 3.4, and rocked the DAT.

 

[liriano]

Plus, a person can be having a bad day. Something major could be going on in a person's life during the time of the exam and their concetration might not be fully on the exam.

I can see your point of view....but I disagree. If you have a 4.0, you should know how to be prepared for an exam THIS BIG. Stuff happens (suppose a loved one died the night before or something) but I can't see a 4.0 student not being able to step up to take arguably the biggest exam of his/her life.

 

[vlct0ria]

You are right, the person who's world revolves around their grades, who can afford to spend 6 hours a day studying for one subject because they're living off their daddy's dime, and still can't manage a 19AA will definitely be a better DS and dentist than the student who has busted it working 2 jobs to support a family, maintained a solid 3.4, and rocked the DAT.

I think you're making some really broad generalizations about people with good GPAs...I sure as heck don't spend 6 hours a day studying, nor do I live off daddy's dime. Hopefully I can manage more than a 19 too!

 

[NAVY DDS 2010]

I can see your point of view....but I disagree. If you have a 4.0, you should know how to be prepared for an exam THIS BIG. Stuff happens (suppose a loved one died the night before or something) but I can't see a 4.0 student not being able to step up to take arguably the biggest exam of his/her life.

You have obviously not had many major things occur in your life. There are plenty of things that can cause you to lose your concentration. You have every right to disagree, but until you are placed in a situation where this occurs to you, you will obviously not understand how this can happen to someone. You can be a person who has retained all the info you learned in college, but it doesn't mena you can't run into situations where you cannot concentrate and cannot recall all info or you mix info up and start making errors due to second guessing yourself. What you view as the biggest exam in one's life turns ends up taking second place in one's mind because of the situation that person in dealing with.

examples:

-A close family member being diagnosed with cancer recently

-A spouse losing a job and you don't know how you are going to make put food on the table, pay the rent, etc.

-A recent death of a loved one/friend

-A major person health issue

-You could get sick (flu) the night before the exam

-A major break up with a spouse/fiance/BF/GF

You may think that people should be able to overcome these things for the exam, but every person is different. You may have a heart of stone and can turn your emotions on and off at any time. Not everyone is that way. The only exam I came close to failing in undergrad came 3 days after the loss of a good high school friend to drunk driving and 2 days after I had to deal with my mother having surgery for a rare for of cancer.

Almost two years ago, my very close friend here in d-school was brutally murdered by her husband. I can tell you that had I had to take my boards then, I would have failed. I was NUMB for over a week. I couldn't concentrate. Eventually, it settled down and life got back to normal, but for a short time it was a very traumatic experience for our class - especially those of us who witnessed the murder.

On top of that, two months later I had a major life changing event happen. Over a 5 month period, I developed uncontrollable tremors which forced me to withdraw from medical school because I couldn't control my hands and legs. On the same day that I withdrew from school, we found out that my mother-in-law was found dead in her house. She had been in the house dead for 15 days (fom the evidence we found). There is no way in hell that if this had happened a week, two weeks a month before taking the DAT or NBDE that I would have done well. I had a 3.95 sGPA in undergrad. I still wouldn't have recalled all that info. You just don't know until you experience these life situations! For those who are interested, a treatment was found and I am back in school. 🙂



Disagree all you want. But until you have had to deal with a situation where it is next to impossible for YOU to devote your full concentration to, you cannot speak for the rest of us that have. I am fortunate that this has never happened to me during a major exam like the SAT, DAT or NBDE. But I do know based on exams that I have taken that I wouldn't have performed as well as I could during normal situations.

 

[denner]

At first glance, I would choose the 4.0 GPA. But after marinating on it a minute .... its hard to understand how someone could basically ace every test in thier college career, but not perform the same for a standardized test. There are practice exams that mimic the real DAT very close. There is also the opportunity to take the DAT multiple times to rule out a bad day.

In addition, dental schools have the board exams ... what will they think of someone that does bad on a standardized test then? I think some folks can memorize info for a semester, but have no deeper understanding of the material. I think the DAT does a good job of testing the overall knowledge of the material retained after 1-2 years (since the courses covered on the DAT are basically taken within a year of taking the DAT).

That being said, I am sure I will be railed for being a low GPA applicant and taking the stance I have. Same as above, the high GPA folks sided with the 4.0 GPA.

All in all, I think the DAT is an "equalizer" as stated above. I think that a person who has performed well, GPA wise, over that last few years (2 years) and has a stellar DAT should be on an equal playing field with someone who performed well over 4 years and recently performed poorly on the DAT. That should be when the intangibles come into play (ECs and interview) -- then the ADCOMS pick who they think will be the best dentist.

I think the bolded part above is the best reasoning that I can think of about why a school would prefer a high DAT over a high GPA and liriano mentioned it as well. They want to make sure you show up on game day. And of course there are always other circumstances like Navy mentioned that could affect that, which could possibly be explained away in an interview. I'm just saying that may be the best argument for why they would (if they do) prefer a high DAT over a high GPA. You can look at a school like Nebraska which obviously puts a higher value on GPA as compared to somewhere like UoP which places a really high importance on DAT scores (or so I hear). My guess is those preferences probably stem from good or bad experiences they have had in the past with students that fulfill that criteria of higher DAT/lower GPA and lower DAT/higher GPA, so I'm sure that it will vary a little from school to school.

 

[Zubnaya Feya]

GPA is more important without any questions asked. Comparing at least 4 years of hard work vs at most 2-3 months of studying for a 4-hour test is like comparing FC Barcelona to FC Sounders.

 

[dcsk8element]

If you have high GPA and have a low DAT, it just shows you can't perform when it matters, and that no matter how hard you work, you just don't have the talent, you can say well that one day i had some horrible thing happened to me the night before or blah blah blah, well you can take the DAT multiple times, are you going to have an excuse each time you take it? If so i guess you can have excuses everyday you perform on a patient.

If you have a low GPA, it shows you haven't put in the work, but if you at least have a high DAT it shows you AT LEAST have potential if you get your ***** in gear.

 

[denner]

If you have high GPA and have a low DAT, it just shows you can't perform when it matters, and that no matter how hard you work, you just don't have the talent, you can say well that one day i had some horrible thing happened to me the night before or blah blah blah, well you can take the DAT multiple times, are you going to have an excuse each time you take it? If so i guess you can have excuses everyday you perform on a patient.

If you have a low GPA, it shows you haven't put in the work, but if you at least have a high DAT it shows you AT LEAST havepotentialif you get your ***** in gear.

What about the hundreds of tests you took in undergrad, if they have a high GPA then it would seem they showed up when it mattered for 4 years wouldn't it?

I think the reason why the debate is so strong is because we realize, as do the schools, just how important it is to do well on both. One shows your dedication to excellence, one shows your ability to display that excellence when called upon to do so and be able to deal with that pressure. This really isn't that difficult to understand why they are both so important to admissions and why in the end it really is a numbers game (that is based off these two scores).

 

[kurymode]

everything is about your numbers, so i would say we have to be good in both....but i think highe gpa is better since it is 4yr process...

 

[CrazyTeeth]

Plus, a person can be having a bad day. Something major could be going on in a person's life during the time of the exam and their concetration might not be fully on the exam.

Not to take sides or anything, but if you're having a BAD DAY or going through a CRISIS in your life, You always have the option to RESCHEDULE or even void your scores at the end of the exam. If you know it's going to be an exam that affects your life, maybe you shouldn't take it when you're not going perform at your best?

 

[GiTsticker]

GPA = your performance before
DAT = your performance now

A low GPA may or may not indicate slacker status. Basically a GPA tells a story.
The DAT score answers the yes or no question, can you perform?

I'd say of the choices I'd go with a high DAT and low GPA but with an increasing trend over the years. Like I said, it tells the story of your improvement and the DAT score is the exclamation point at the end.

 

[dcsk8element]

What about the hundreds of tests you took in undergrad, if they have a high GPA then it would seem they showed up when it mattered for 4 years wouldn't it?

I think the reason why the debate is so strong is because we realize, as do the schools, just how important it is to do well on both. One shows your dedication to excellence, one shows your ability to display that excellence when called upon to do so and be able to deal with that pressure. This really isn't that difficult to understand why they are both so important to admissions and why in the end it really is a numbers game (that is based off these two scores).

well once again that's the difference b/w DAT and regular tests you take at your college, DAT is standardized, the tests you took are not standardized and the results can vary, c'mon guys we all went to undergrad, there are ways of taking advantage of sources for all classes, which make them NOT standardized like the DAT, if you knew some kid that had all these old exam versus if you didn't, or if you straight up cheat on your tests...etc. Those things doesn't come into play on the DAT that's why it's standardized, I defintely agree that both stats are important, I'm saying that if you got a 4.0 student getting 17s 18s and 17s again, that makes your GPA very questionable, but the kid with the 21's and 22's you know at least he's got the potential to perform if he's in a level playing field.

 

[CrazyTeeth]

well once again that's the difference b/w DAT and regular tests you take at your college, DAT is standardized, the tests you took are not standardized and the results can vary, c'mon guys we all went to undergrad, there are ways of taking advantage of sources for all classes, which make them NOT standardized like the DAT, if you knew some kid that had all these old exam versus if you didn't, or if you straight up cheat on your tests...etc. Those things doesn't come into play on the DAT that's why it's standardized, I defintely agree that both stats are important, I'm saying that if you got a 4.0 student getting 17s 18s and 17s again, that makes your GPA very questionable, but the kid with the 21's and 22's you know at least he's got the potential to perform if he's in a level playing field.

I've been a graduate TA for several biology labs these past 4 years. To be honest with you, I've known TA's that gave extra credit when they were specifically instructed not to, by the Course Coordinator. I've known TA's that do not actually grade papers, but instead gave out better scores so students don't complain. I've even known Professors who give give out such easy exams so they would get great reviews from students at the end of the quarter. I've had students who very carefully and specifically CHOOSE their instructors based on how easy they are or if they have past exams from those instructors.

Not to discredit those who worked hard to earned 4.0 GPA's, but from the numerous students that I've encountered... I believe that if you truly earned your GPA, your Standardized Exam scores should be reflective of your GPA.

 

[NAVY DDS 2010]

Not to take sides or anything, but if you're having a BAD DAY or going through a CRISIS in your life, You always have the option to RESCHEDULE or even void your scores at the end of the exam. If you know it's going to be an exam that affects your life, maybe you shouldn't take it when you're not going perform at your best?

When is it convenient to reschedule around a crisis if you are around application time or if you don't have that option like taking the NBDE? That said, let's take the crisis part out of it. You can still be sick. You can still be SOOOOOOO stressed over the exam that you can't concentrate and perfom to a level that you really could. It does happen. People have test anxiety all the time. If you don't believe me, talk to psychologists. They will confirm this! People do have off days. One exam doesn't necessarily measure ones knowledge level. Plus, test taking isn't always about how much you know as it is about knowing how to take an exam.

I did well on the DAT. I wasn't the best, but I am not going to complain about my stats 3.85 gpa/ 3.85 spga/ and 21-23 on all sections of DAT. So, my arguement about test taking isn't because I am trying to defend my inability to do well on the exams. I just know from expereience and from others I know who know their info who have been in the situations I have described. People can have bad days.

My arguement doesn't have any weight on my belief on what I feel should be looked at more - GPA or DAT score. That I am keeping to myself. I am just defending the DAT score and how people are perceiving it.

 

[longhornpride]

You can't really compare GPAs if two applicants went to different schools. Over the last 3 years, I've taken classes at two different instate universities. At one of them, I slept during class... maybe studied an hour before tests and had a 3.8 gpa. At the other university, I took great notes, started studying atleast a week ahead of time, worked my butt off, and I struggled to make Bs. I ended up with a 3.3 at the other university.

This just goes to show you that a person with a 3.3 can be a harder worker and can be smarter than a person with a 4.0.

 

[sajjy]

You can't really compare GPAs if two applicants went to different schools. Over the last 3 years, I've taken classes at two different instate universities. At one of them, I slept during class... maybe studied an hour before tests and had a 3.8 gpa. At the other university, I took great notes, started studying atleast a week ahead of time, worked my butt off, and I struggled to make Bs. I ended up with a 3.3 at the other university.

This just goes to show you that a person with a 3.3 can be a harder worker and can be smarter than a person with a 4.0.

...

 

[kponenation]

I believe both GPA and DAT are important. It's hard to just say one is better than the other.
I have an above average GPA and so-so DAT score. I was scoring 2~3 points higher on my computer practice softwares (e.g. TopScore and achiever) but insomnia got me on the test day. Well anyway, I seriously considered retaking the test (especially after seeing 22,23 or even 24's people made) but I think it will be too late. So I'm hoping that d schools will look at the combination of everything I sent them to consider me a solid candidate.

4.0 with 18 or 3.2 with 22? I would pick 4.0 with 22!!!

 

[preOMFS]

GPA = your performance before
DAT = your performance now

A low GPA may or may not indicate slacker status. Basically a GPA tells a story.
The DAT score answers the yes or no question, can you perform?

I'd say of the choices I'd go with a high DAT and low GPA but with an increasing trend over the years. Like I said, it tells the story of your improvement and the DAT score is the exclamation point at the end.

Can you be on the adcom??

 

[flampard]

Think of DAT as the world cup, and your GPA is nice only compared to other students in your school. When u take the Dat you are competeing with all the other dental applicants! meanwhile ur gpa is the indicator of how much of a kiss ass someone really is!!

 

[NAVY DDS 2010]

GPA = your performance before
DAT = your performance now

A low GPA may or may not indicate slacker status. Basically a GPA tells a story.
The DAT score answers the yes or no question, can you perform?

I'd say of the choices I'd go with a high DAT and low GPA but with an increasing trend over the years. Like I said, it tells the story of your improvement and the DAT score is the exclamation point at the end.

Disagree partially here. GPA is performance from time 'A to ....'. The DAT is performance at time 'X'. For a majority of applicants, their GPA performance is not complete by the time the DAT has been taken. Therefore, there is still some time to do a little better or a whole hell of a lot worse after the DAT is taken. The DAT only shows how well they were ableto perform and recall info on a given day. It is not necessarily a final exclamation point. It is just a standardized test to see how well people were able to recall info on a given day.

 

[Dent010]

You are right, the person who's world revolves around their grades, who can afford to spend 6 hours a day studying for one subject because they're living off their daddy's dime, and still can't manage a 19AA will definitely be a better DS and dentist than the student who has busted it working 2 jobs to support a family, maintained a solid 3.4, and rocked the DAT.

Personally i think that almost too close minded an opinion. I worked a minimum of 30 hours week paying for every bit o my education and spent countless nights up til 1 or later studying to do well. Flat out it takes commitment to be successful. That's not to say you can't respect the man who score a lower gpa but has had to be a family man at the same time.

 

[peerless218]

4.0 + 18DAT V.S 3.3 +21DAT applicants

Honestly, some applicants just dug too big of holes for themselves during the 1st or even MAYBE 2nd year in college. By the time they're dedicated and focus on doing dental, it really is hard for them to recover to a 3.5 and above. So let say an applicant has like a 2.2 GPA and failed 3-4 classes during his first 2 years and worked his butt off to a 3.3 by acing school with consecutive performances of a 3.8 and above rest of the way.

Ok so even though that student is doing well for the last 2- 3 years and pulled his undergrad GPA up to a 3.7ish; but because of him repeating couple classes, his GPA was dropped by AADSAS back down to a 3.3. Would you say that student is not worthy of comparison to someone with a 4.0 and 18 DAT on the equal playing field?? I wouldn't think so. GPA in 4-5 years is just a number. 4-5 years is a very long time, sometimes sXXt happens in life and you can't really do anything about it.

I think DAT is a much better measure of a person's work ethic. It measures where you're at this moment!!! I really think besides the reading comp being a little unfair sometimes, all other sections are fine!!!! If you think about it though...is reading comp unfair? Yes people like me who bitxx about getting the piano passage and how difficult it is; keep in mind, we're suppose to READ and understand the passages on the DAT, but most people (including me) just use the cheap way of getting a solid score by doing search and destroy. I don't think that measures anything about our reading abilities. I root for the higher DAT score!!!!!

 

[alanan84]

I think you're making some really broad generalizations about people with good GPAs...I sure as heck don't spend 6 hours a day studying, nor do I live off daddy's dime. Hopefully I can manage more than a 19 too!

Sure I'm making a broad generalization, that's what we're doing in this thread...

I was commenting on another poster who said that the 4.0 person has a greater work ethic then that of someone with a lower GPA. My point is that's not always the case.

There are so many variables that go into a GPA that imo are hard to quantify:

-The level of difficulty of the undergrad institution
-The level of difficulty of the major chosen (which doesn't always follow the trend of undergrad institution prestige. For example, an accounting degree at school A may be more difficult than an accounting degree from school B even though school B is more prestigious)
-The professors chosen (how does an adcom know how difficult your Biochem class was?)
-Outside responsibilities (job, family, church, volunteer activities, caring for loved ones, etc.)

I'm sure there are more, this is just what came off the top of my head. Just my opinion guys. Keep in mind, my opinion doesn't matter, I'm not an adcom.

 

[Dent010]

hey hey a gears of war 2 fan!!! Tried the dark corner mappack yet?

lol! I have not yet! But man do i waste too much time playing gears... i think i would have scored a point higher on my DAT if gears of war didn't exist.

 

[ucla2134]

I would pick 3.6 with a 22 over 3.6 with an 18 😀

From my experience, the major events that happen in your life can really affect how well you do on the DAT. I went through the horrible break up with my ex of 4 years 1 week before my first test. I got an 18 AA on my first test.

But i believe that i should not blame my sh&&ty ex bf for my poor performance on the DAT. But i believe that break up somehow correlate to my poor performance on my first DAT.

And hell yes, i would pick a student with 3.4+ from UCLA, BERKELEY who major in sciences with a 20 AA over a student with 3.2 from Cal State with a 20 AA. You guys just don't know how competitive science classes at UCLA. The science sections on DAT is a joke compare to science classes that i take at UCLA.

 

[UCB05]

In the 2008 Sugar Bowl, 10-2 Georgia (SEC) killed undefeated Hawaii 41-10. A year later, Undefeated Utah (Mountain West) beat 12-1 Alabama (SEC) 31-17 in the Sugar Bowl. Common denominator is a level playing field. Adcoms are aware which schools and majors are harder to maintain a "good" gpa at. Maybe that is the reason some DS request highschool GPA and SAT/Achievement scores.

 

[denner]

And hell yes, i would pick a student with 3.4+ from UCLA, BERKELEY who major in sciences with a 20 AA over a student with 3.2 fromCal State with a 20 AA. You guys just don't know how competitive science classes at UCLA. The science sections on DAT is a joke compare to science classes that i take at UCLA.

The science sections on the DAT are a joke compared to any science classes that we take in undergrad. Classes are specific, the DAT is broad and general. The difficulty of the actual questions on it are for the most part very simple, and what makes it hard for people is the wide range of topics covered, not the material.

Now I am not gonna argue that all my classes were as hard as those at UCLA, because I doubt they were (except for cell bio, at least at my school 😀), I'm just saying that that reasoning for why your classes were harder doesn't work too well. I'm not trying to be combative, I'm just saying that basing difficulty of your classes on how difficult the DAT is doesn't work.

 

[Zubnaya Feya]

2 applicants who graduated from the same school, with the same major, same rigor of courses, same everything. One had 4.0 18/18/18, another one had 3.3 21/21/21.

The 4.0 applicant will have an advantage over the 3.3 applicant. Seriously, there is no arguing about that. The question assumed equivalent schools, majors, and everything else (right, op?). My GPA and DAT are high and there is no second thought for me on this argument.