Any "cons" with the "2-week turnaround" for secondaries?

[Espressso]

A lot of people on these forums indicate that the *general rule of thumb with secondaries is to get them turned in within 2 weeks after receiving them.

Obviously, this seems to be a good thing to keep in mind and stick to. I'm just curious as to if there's any downside of this? Is it better to get them in sooner than 2 weeks? Has anyone had issues with proofreading their secondaries in order to get them turned in as soon as possible?

Apologies if this post is convoluted or perceived as silly. I'm really just interested in seeing how well the "2 week" rule worked for others in the past.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[neekzg]

For me, the 2 week rule was only useful so that I had a schedule to go by and didn't become overwhelmed. I personally only had one person read one of my secondaries to a specific program, but other than that I didn't have anyone proofread them because it would have been troublesome to coordinate. However, if you can find someone experienced willing to proofread, I would recommend it.

You will find that secondaries vary in length, and your energy and time should be devoted accordingly to the schools that you care about the most (and hopefully have a decent shot at). There are many many secondaries that will ask you to regurgitate some variation of a prompt you have already written for other schools. If I were you, I would draft the important ones (ex: what can you contribute to the diversity of our incoming class, what have you learned from an experience you have failed/endured adversity) and have someone critique those.

The main "con" with the 2-week rule is that some people will hastily submit a secondary without giving it their absolute best effort simply because they think earlier is always better. While you do want to get those in as soon as you can, a well thought-out secondary will add greatly to your application and increase your chances at an interview.