Canadian Dat Material

[mmithwan]

Hey guys,

 

So as I am starting to review for my Canadian DAT, I wanted to know from previous folks who have already attempted the DAT or the ones currently preparing, that what material are you using for each section?

 

Personally For Biology, I am using: Cliffs AP Biology 3rd edition with practise questions from DAT Destroyer and DAT Bootcamp

Chemistry: Chads Videos for the content and practise questions from DAT Destroyer and DAT Bootcamp

PAT: DAT Bootcamp

RC: DAT Bootcamp 

 

So let me know guys if you would add or change anything from the above list. I am personally concerned about PAT as just using one source could be risky?

 

Thanks!

[Dr.Watson]

I'd supplement that PAT with something else. You'll probably find (as I did) that Bootcamp isn't reflective of what you'll see on the test. Its almost too nice of a program, really. its too perfect, and doesnt mimic the grainy old printed exam that you're going to see on test day. It teaches you how to understand things like Keyhole, but when it comes time to write, you might be surprised at the difference. I'd throw in the cDAT manual. I also personally advocate for IQ publications. Some will disagree with me, but I think it looks most like the real test. Find used copies online if you can.

 

 I've been giving this same advice for PAT numerous times on this site. But I feel strongly enough about it that I'm lending my advice, as per my experience whenever I see someone asking about the PAT.

 

Also, brush up on stuff in bio, towards the end with Ferali's notes (free PDF I think on Bootcamp?) Its a great (but hefty) summary, which, in my opinion should only be looked at once you know whats going on with most of the relevant biology. 

 

Good luck!!

[mmithwan]

I'd supplement that PAT with something else. You'll probably find (as I did) that Bootcamp isn't reflective of what you'll see on the test. Its almost too nice of a program, really. its too perfect, and doesnt mimic the grainy old printed exam that you're going to see on test day. It teaches you how to understand things like Keyhole, but when it comes time to write, you might be surprised at the difference. I'd throw in the cDAT manual. I also personally advocate for IQ publications. Some will disagree with me, but I think it looks most like the real test. Find used copies online if you can.

 

 I've been giving this same advice for PAT numerous times on this site. But I feel strongly enough about it that I'm lending my advice, as per my experience whenever I see someone asking about the PAT.

 

Also, brush up on stuff in bio, towards the end with Ferali's notes (free PDF I think on Bootcamp?) Its a great (but hefty) summary, which, in my opinion should only be looked at once you know whats going on with most of the relevant biology. 

 

Good luck!!

Thank you so much Dr. Watson. I already bought the cDAT manual couple of months ago but I feel there are only 15 questions per section in PAT and its not going to be much help in terms of practice, don't you think?

[1994]

Can anyone comment on the differences between the real PAT and Crack Dat PAT?

[Dr.Watson]

Thank you so much Dr. Watson. I already bought the cDAT manual couple of months ago but I feel there are only 15 questions per section in PAT and its not going to be much help in terms of practice, don't you think?

 

 Sorry, mmithwan, I should have been clearer about that post, but I was in a bit of a hurry when I made it. I mostly meant as a reference for what to expect on he real test, the cDAT manual is great for that. For more questions, (and in my opinion, an idea of what the test is really like), I'd suggest IQ. I should also clarify that Bootcamp PAT is a great resource (especially because once you sign up, it comes with all the other recourses for RC and bio/chem, which are good too). I think it does facilitate learning and strengthens spatial reasoning but I feel that if you were to rely on it too heavily, it could negatively affect your score. Now, what I did was I learned all of the PAT with IQ publications and the cDAT, got to the point where I felt good about it, and then I studied with Bootcamp at the end for a couple weeks before writing. What I felt after writing the DAT, was that Bootcamp is almost too perfect of a program. Especially with regard to the keyhole questions. It affords too many luxuries, which you don't get in the real thing. If the cDAT was updated, and students were tested on computers with beautifully constructed images, then Bootcamp would be better. But the actual exam is old looking. The dotted plane lines on the keyhole questions are harder to see and the images seemed to have less depth detail than they do on the bootcamp. It threw me off a bit. But it could just have been me.  So, maybe a better suggestion coming from me would be to study all you need with Bootcamp, but perhaps finish with something else like IQ before you write the test.

[BScDMD]

Can anyone comment on the differences between the real PAT and Crack Dat PAT?

 

 

I used Crack DAT PAT and CDAT manual. I found that CDAT was great for learning and understanding the process of answering PAT questions, in terms of difficulty I think it was easier than the real PAT (I took my last DAT 3 years ago so I can't really remember.) Thing about Crack DAT PAT is that it is a computer program and not paper based, so if you've only been using that the real DAT might catch you off guard. I remember the CDAT manual was definitely easier than the real thing. I also used IQ Publications. In my opinion the only benefit it has it's that it's a physical test. The content, on the other hand, was garbage - some answers were blatantly wrong and they haven't updated since 1997. They were also really expensive for what they were. I only recommend those if you find them for free in some dumpster (probably my copies).  

[Dr.Watson]

I used Crack DAT PAT and CDAT manual. I found that CDAT was great for learning and understanding the process of answering PAT questions, in terms of difficulty I think it was easier than the real PAT (I took my last DAT 3 years ago so I can't really remember.) Thing about Crack DAT PAT is that it is a computer program and not paper based, so if you've only been using that the real DAT might catch you off guard. I remember the CDAT manual was definitely easier than the real thing. I also used IQ Publications. In my opinion the only benefit it has it's that it's a physical test. The content, on the other hand, was garbage - some answers were blatantly wrong and they haven't updated since 1997. They were also really expensive for what they were. I only recommend those if you find them for free in some dumpster (probably my copies).  

 

Hahaha. I guess i'm one of the only people endorsing the idea of studying with IQ publications. I literally bursted out laughing when I read that dumpster sentiment. For whatever reason, they worked well for me... and I got them used at a great price on Kijiji. Its all relative... and very subjective. Glad I'm not writing the DAT again, but best of luck to those who are. 

[BScDMD]

I'll agree with you on that, different methods work for different people! That's why this forum is pretty great, people can see the diversity in study strategies. There're no right or wrong answers (except for a few wrong answers in IQ Publications.... )

[Kentucky Fried Blaziken]

Either way, you should do some kind of practice for PAT, if just for the fact that if you have to read the instructions for each section you will definitely be out of time.

[Kentucky Fried Blaziken]

Can anyone comment on the differences between the real PAT and Crack Dat PAT?

CrackDAT is WAY harder than it needs to be. Althogh I ve heard that the keyholes were ridiculous this year. At least for the 2014 test CrackDAT went far above what you actually needed. Also, the angle ranking is very hard on the computer(crackDAT) ,but a total joke on paper since you can take a ruler (edge of your eraser) and just extend the lines til its easy to see.

[member_225]

CrackDAT is WAY harder than it needs to be. Althogh I ve heard that the keyholes were ridiculous this year. At least for the 2014 test CrackDAT went far above what you actually needed. Also, the angle ranking is very hard on the computer(crackDAT) ,but a total joke on paper since you can take a ruler (edge of your eraser) and just extend the lines til its easy to see.

 

You have an eraser? That's good to hear lol I thought they would just give you a pencil with an eraser on it. 

[Kentucky Fried Blaziken]

Or you know, a 2nd pencil if that doesn't work, no way they can deny that

[Dr.Watson]

They gave us each two pencils and an eraser. They're quite strict and systematic 

[Varsity]

CrackDAT is WAY harder than it needs to be. Althogh I ve heard that the keyholes were ridiculous this year. At least for the 2014 test CrackDAT went far above what you actually needed. Also, the angle ranking is very hard on the computer(crackDAT) ,but a total joke on paper since you can take a ruler (edge of your eraser) and just extend the lines til its easy to see.

I used CracktheDAT last year and I liked it because hey had alot of questions but alot of them were much easier than the real one. But my dat had these weird shapes for keyholes that were insanely hard that none of the CrackTheDAT tests had.

[Dr.Watson]

I used CracktheDAT last year and I liked it because hey had alot of questions but alot of them were much easier than the real one. But my dat had these weird shapes for keyholes that were insanely hard that none of the CrackTheDAT tests had.

 

Are you referring to the boulder type questions (last couple on the keyhole section), which look somewhat like these?: 

http://infocenter.ar...s_of_detail.png

 

If so, yeah, they're really tough and hard to find resources for

[hazemynt]

I dislike most of the RC resources tbh. They don't feel as polished or as good as MCAT CARS resources I used.

[Lebron James]

Hahaha. I guess i'm one of the only people endorsing the idea of studying with IQ publications. I literally bursted out laughing when I read that dumpster sentiment. For whatever reason, they worked well for me... and I got them used at a great price on Kijiji. Its all relative... and very subjective. Glad I'm not writing the DAT again, but best of luck to those who are.

You're not alone lol. IQ also worked well for me, but again I got them super cheap off Kijiji. I thought the difficulty level was adequate, or maybe I just wrote a relatively easy cDAT lol.

[Waves]

CDP was easier than the real thing IMO, at least for the two most recent DAT writings. 

[hazemynt]

I'm curious if anyone has tried datprimer. I think (?) It's pretty new and and it's apparently just for reading comp but they have a crazy amount of tests. I tried the first few ones for my trial and they seemed pretty legit but it also seems geared towards the american dat.

[121227123]

Hahaha. I guess i'm one of the only people endorsing the idea of studying with IQ publications. I literally bursted out laughing when I read that dumpster sentiment. For whatever reason, they worked well for me... and I got them used at a great price on Kijiji. Its all relative... and very subjective. Glad I'm not writing the DAT again, but best of luck to those who are. 

 

After doing the first 5 practice PAT tests on bootcamp and doing all of the IQ PAT tests, I'm finding IQ significantly easier. Do you have similar opinions? 

[Dr.Watson]

After doing the first 5 practice PAT tests on bootcamp and doing all of the IQ PAT tests, I'm finding IQ significantly easier. Do you have similar opinions? 

 

I don't really recall thinking it was easier. But when I look back, I think IQ was more like the real cDAT. They're visually very similar.  But by all means, keep using both and others. The more practice in general, the better! 

[mmithwan]

Would you guys say IQ publication PAT tests are similar to the real CDAT? I already have subscription DATBootcamp which is great but I am looking for paper based exam of PAT which will be more realistic representation of the exam. I was going to order IQ publication PAT but if you guys have better suggestions, please let me know! 

[Dr.Watson]

I liked IQ, but I found them for really cheap on Kijiji. That being said, I think the PAT book is less than $30. Worth it in my opinion. Add it to that DATBootcamp, and you should be sitting pretty happy. Also, the cDAT manual that you can get with registration for the DAT. Its good too.

 

Would you guys say IQ publication PAT tests are similar to the real CDAT? I already have subscription DATBootcamp which is great but I am looking for paper based exam of PAT which will be more realistic representation of the exam. I was going to order IQ publication PAT but if you guys have better suggestions, please let me know!