Too many LORs?

[dragon mouse]

I didn't see any newer threads in the non-trad forum about this. I graduated a few years ago and have done a bunch of stuff since, so I have 4 new letters in addition to the 4 I had coming out of college. I'm getting the sense that 8 is way too many so I wanted to see what you guys think is best... All letters are going to be included with my committee packet, which might satisfy the "3-5 letters OR health committee packet" requirement that schools have? Also I was told that my committee letter speaks to science.

Currently I have:
1. Science prof/faculty advisor/thesis advisor
2. Psych/neuro prof, took 3 classes
3. Med anthro prof
4. EC supervisor

Then, after college:
5. Clinical research PI (MD)
6. Science teacher who was my teaching coworker - foreign
7. Lab & clinic PI (MMed, PhD) - foreign
8. EC colleague (same cause as the EC in #4, but it's different work with different people obviously - perhaps shows continuity?)

My school's premed advisor suggested that if I want to reduce letters, I could drop #2 because although it's strong, psych/neuro is considered by some schools to be non-science, meaning they'd see that I have excess non-sci, and the med anthro one provides a stronger/more diverse angle than psych. Anyway.

I was thinking I could drop #6 and/or #8 (as far as I know, #8 hasn't been submitted yet--different can of worms) to get to a more reasonable number of LORs, but then I wouldn't have LORs to show for my non-med/sci activities since graduating, and they've been a significant part of my life.

What do you think?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

Just pick those from people who you feel knew you the best.

I didn't see any newer threads in the non-trad forum about this. I graduated a few years ago and have done a bunch of stuff since, so I have 4 new letters in addition to the 4 I had coming out of college. I'm getting the sense that 8 is way too many so I wanted to see what you guys think is best... All letters are going to be included with my committee packet, which might satisfy the "3-5 letters OR health committee packet" requirement that schools have? Also I was told that my committee letter speaks to science.

Currently I have:
1. Science prof/faculty advisor/thesis advisor
2. Psych/neuro prof, took 3 classes
3. Med anthro prof
4. EC supervisor

Then, after college:
5. Clinical research PI (MD)
6. Science teacher who was my teaching coworker - foreign
7. Lab & clinic PI (MMed, PhD) - foreign
8. EC colleague (same cause as the EC in #4, but it's different work with different people obviously - perhaps shows continuity?)

My school's premed advisor suggested that if I want to reduce letters, I could drop #2 because although it's strong, psych/neuro is considered by some schools to be non-science, meaning they'd see that I have excess non-sci, and the med anthro one provides a stronger/more diverse angle than psych. Anyway.

I was thinking I could drop #6 and/or #8 (as far as I know, #8 hasn't been submitted yet--different can of worms) to get to a more reasonable number of LORs, but then I wouldn't have LORs to show for my non-med/sci activities since graduating, and they've been a significant part of my life.

What do you think?

 

[dragon mouse]

Just pick those from people who you feel knew you the best.

The thing is, I wouldn't have asked them to write me a letter if I didn't think they knew me very well. At the same time, it could be argued that the older letters don't talk about the person I am *now*, but I think that's neither here nor there. Obviously I can't go back and take classes in undergrad again for the sake of recency, but I believe they want letters from professors to know how I perform in a classroom, right?

Even if I were able to rank people in terms of how well they knew me, what's the golden number?

 

[Linguistic SLP]

I would consider recency and relevance. Obviously you know the individuals best and how well their letters reflect you. Since you're applying to a school I would chose letters from science teachers first (in order of most recent and/or most outstanding recommendation) followed by supervisors, coworkers etc (also considering recency, try for the most recent) whose expertise is relevant to the program you're applying to. I hope that helps!