Why the big drop of UCSF's GPA/DAT for 2008 entering students?

[Upenn08]

---

Members don't see this ad.

2008 UCSF DENTAL ADMISSIONS STATISTICS
(as of August 22, 2008)
Class Size: 88
Total Number of Applications: 1764

GENDER​

Applicants
Enrolled​

Female​

820
34​

Male​

944
54​

AVERAGES

Cumulative GPA:

3.36
Science GPA:
3.40
ACA:
20
PAT:
20​

Well, this is a big drop from the 2007 entering class , where the DAT AA was 21.6, and GPA 3.7!! Anyone knows why? Were the applicants pool weaker in general in 2008?

 

[chober]

I think that UCSF came under new dean a while back and the emphasis shifted from statistics to a more well-rounded student.

 

[supraman]

I think that UCSF came under new dean a while back and the emphasis shifted from statistics to a more well-rounded student.

Must be a new smart dean then

 

[chober]

I'll let you know soon....I hope I'm really round.....rotund, robust, etc.

 

[UCSF2012]

Well, this is a big drop from the 2007 entering class , where the DAT AA was 21.6, and GPA 3.7!! Anyone knows why? Were the applicants pool weaker in general in 2008?

Because the numbers were either misreported or miscalculated. We were given several sets of numbers, and we don't know which is accurate. The DAT was rounded down from 20.7, largely because rounding up is suspicious. The GPA's a wonder, because we were told 3.5-3.6, but 3.3 was published. I don't think the secretary in charge or whoever handled this task knows how to use a calculator.

FYI, lots of schools experienced a dip in the DAT. Columbia's dropped by the same margin, 0.9.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

Quite possibly the DAT got harder and people started scoring lower.

 

[Contach]

Must be a new smart dean then

I'd say that too if I had low stats.

 

[achilles2]

I'd say that too if I had low stats.

lol!!!!


maybe people overrate UCSF???

or maybe the stats are off

you'll know when they crunch the numbers after its all said and done 👍

 

[chober]

Because the numbers were either misreported or miscalculated. We were given several sets of numbers, and we don't know which is accurate. The DAT was rounded down from 20.7, largely because rounding up is suspicious. The GPA's a wonder, because we were told 3.5-3.6, but 3.3 was published. I don't think the secretary in charge or whoever handled this task knows how to use a calculator.

FYI, lots of schools experienced a dip in the DAT. Columbia's dropped by the same margin, 0.9.

Maybe that's what dental schools get for putting QR at the bottom of the list for consideration?

 

[prydA]

I'd say that too if I had low stats.

lol, chill bro

 

[UCSF2012]

Our DAT may have dropped, but our PAT shot up. Comes in handy when you have to carve out 4 degree angles that shouldn't be greater than 5-6 degrees.

 

[doc3232]

Average DAT score in this thread is very high...I hope to join you guys in a few days.

 

[DrDDSman]

I'd say that too if I had low stats.

That's a pretty ass thing to say

 

[full]

I noticed that and was shocked.

I saw some thread with gpas for all the dental scools in a list and ucsf had like a 3.7 average, then i looked at their website and saw what you did ~3.4

When I saw that the average was so low, I actually was strongly considering holding off this year even if I get any acceptances ( I just submitted my application) and then applying next year since UCSF would be cheaper (ca resident)...but if they're average goes back to 3.7 then it will be challenging since my gpa is 3.60

 

[WhyNOT111]

I'd say that too if I had low stats.

wow

 

[supraman]

I'd say that too if I had low stats.

the low scores that still got me more interviews than you?

 

[doc toothache]

2008 UCSF DENTAL ADMISSIONS STATISTICS
(as of August 22, 2008)

Since the deadline for UCSF was Oct. 1, it may be a bit premature to write the obituary based on the Aug info.

 

[UCSF2012]

Since the deadline for UCSF was Oct. 1, it may be a bit premature to write the obituary based on the Aug info.

That actually clarifies the discrepancy. The class statistic was 20.x/3.3 as of Aug. As of the starting date in October, it became 20.7/3.5x.

 

[iJackTeeth]

Since the deadline for UCSF was Oct. 1, it may be a bit premature to write the obituary based on the Aug info.

thats the entering class of 2008 statistics, meaning the 2007 cycle (not for this cycle)

That actually clarifies the discrepancy. The class statistic was 20.x/3.3 as of Aug. As of the starting date in October, it became 20.7/3.5x.

that doesn't make sense? by august they have the class full

lets say a few people pulled out in august and they were replaced by those with better stats by the start of school in october, would the class statistics go up that much?

 

[UCSF2012]

thats the entering class of 2008 statistics, meaning the 2007 cycle (not for this cycle)



that doesn't make sense? by august they have the class full

lets say a few people pulled out in august and they were replaced by those with better stats by the start of school in october, would the class statistics go up that much?

Move a few 4.0's or 4.33's off the waitlist and the difference of .1x GPA can easily be achieved. (Remember the highest AADSAS GPA is 4.33) We don't know if the DAT changed significantly, because the number was rounded down to begin with. Statistics can easily be changed. The school was just going for a high DAT/PAT combo. That's not easy to come by.

The numbers we were given was 20.7/3.5 (I think 3.51 or 3.56) during orientation. You guys try figure out the discrepancy. It's all a guess at this point.

 

[Jessi4eve]

That's a pretty ass thing to say

Yeah, the truth always hurts, and sounds like "a pretty ass thing". Isn't it logical to get happy when you have lower stats, and hear about a new dean who is not looking into stats that much? I bet supraman is happy for that, and anyone with lower scores would be, and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Doc Ock]

I GUARANTEE you that your patients will not ask you what your DAT score was or your GPA was. Now maybe the size of your genitalia....

 

[iJackTeeth]

I GUARANTEE you that your patients will not ask you what your DAT score was or your GPA was. Now maybe the size of your genitalia....

I don't know about you, but I definitely ask for PAT and RC scores before I let dentists work on me

 

[UCSF2012]

What does the new dean have anything to do with this? The "new dean" is the same person as the interim dean for last year. If anything at all, I'd say we've increased the importance of spatial reasoning ability. Only a handful of schools have their PAT in the 20's.

 

[UCSF2012]

I don't know about you, but I definitely ask for PAT and RC scores before I let dentists work on me

Shopping for a dentist is partly on a trial and error basis. We get work done and learn years later whether that dentist is any good. My brother's filling failed after a mere two years, and when I examined it, the prep was improperly cut. Wrong form. Improper retention and resistance form, etc.

 

[Danny289]

Shopping for a dentist is partly on a trial and error basis. We get work done and learn years later whether that dentist is any good. My brother's filling failed after a mere two years, and when I examined it, the prep was improperly cut. Wrong form. Improper retention and resistance form, etc.

well said, Afarin 👍

 

[pinkypinky2013]

Who will ask dentist's grade before he helped you to fix the teeth.....🙄 GPA and DAT are not the most important thing

 

[DrDDSman]

Yeah, the truth always hurts, and sounds like "a pretty ass thing". Isn't it logical to get happy when you have lower stats, and hear about a new dean who is not looking into stats that much? I bet supraman is happy for that, and anyone with lower scores would be, and there is nothing wrong with that.

I agree with you, but I just meant that Contach's post was a little insulting toward Supraman

 

[supraman]

I agree with you, but I just meant that Contach's post was a little insulting toward Supraman

Lol, I couldn't care less, especially it coming from a Canadian. My DATs are still above average

 

[WhyNOT111]

Lol, I couldn't care less, especially it coming from a Canadian. My DATs are still above average

what is the average DAT these days??

so many numbers out there, I wonder what the average really is?????

Thanks

 

[supraman]

like 18 AA.

 

[WhyNOT111]

seriously?? wow. good to hear.
then why does everyone I talk to has 20+???

hmm

 

[MissionDental]

seriously?? wow. good to hear.
then why does everyone I talk to has 20+???

hmm

18 AA is probably the average for all DAT takers, and not the matriculated average...

 

[WhyNOT111]

18 AA is probably the average for all DAT takers, and not the matriculated average...

do you know what the average matriculation average is???