Advice needed on LORs

[BrightandClear]

Hi all, I'm hoping some of you will have advice on what to do about my current LOR situation. I'm applying MSTP this cycle, I graduated from undergrad in 2009 and spend one year working before starting a masters in public health this past fall (will graduate this coming summer). These are the letters I have currently:

1. Current research mentor, PI of my current lab and my thesis adviser
2. Research mentor from undergrad, also a science faculty letter
3. Science faculty from undergrad
4. Science faculty from undergrad
5. Adviser from undergrad
6. PI from research experience during undergrad (worked for 1.5 years on a large patient outcomes study, did not do any independent work)
7. Faculty from a course I took this spring for my masters, will also be an adviser on my thesis committee over the coming year

So, here is my conundrum, seven letters seems like a lot. Especially when some MSTPs websites reference having no more than six. However, some programs specify you must included letters from all your PIs.

Letters 1 and 2 I will definitely include.

I'm hesitant to throw out any of letters 3-5 because I have a very low GPA, and these letters speak to that. The two faculty letters are from professors who had me in multiple courses and wrote extremely supportive letters. The adviser letter explains some extenuating circumstances during my undergrad (death of an immediate family member, etc.).

I'm not sure if letter 6 counts as from a research mentor and needs to be included? I did not do any independent work, but did progress in the experience (promoted from an assistant to study coordinator) and I do include it in my AMCAS activities and mention in it my essay. So, not sure if I should include it?

The MSTP director for my in-state school highly recommended I get a letter from my current coursework, so that is where letter 7 comes from (it also speaks to my research experience).

So, not sure what to do. Send them all? Throw something out? Help...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[bd4727]

Hi all, I'm hoping some of you will have advice on what to do about my current LOR situation. I'm applying MSTP this cycle, I graduated from undergrad in 2009 and spend one year working before starting a masters in public health this past fall (will graduate this coming summer). These are the letters I have currently:

1. Current research mentor, PI of my current lab and my thesis adviser
2. Research mentor from undergrad, also a science faculty letter
3. Science faculty from undergrad
4. Science faculty from undergrad
5. Adviser from undergrad
6. PI from research experience during undergrad (worked for 1.5 years on a large patient outcomes study, did not do any independent work)
7. Faculty from a course I took this spring for my masters, will also be an adviser on my thesis committee over the coming year

So, here is my conundrum, seven letters seems like a lot. Especially when some MSTPs websites reference having no more than six. However, some programs specify you must included letters from all your PIs.

Letters 1 and 2 I will definitely include.

I'm hesitant to throw out any of letters 3-5 because I have a very low GPA, and these letters speak to that. The two faculty letters are from professors who had me in multiple courses and wrote extremely supportive letters. The adviser letter explains some extenuating circumstances during my undergrad (death of an immediate family member, etc.).

I'm not sure if letter 6 counts as from a research mentor and needs to be included? I did not do any independent work, but did progress in the experience (promoted from an assistant to study coordinator) and I do include it in my AMCAS activities and mention in it my essay. So, not sure if I should include it?

The MSTP director for my in-state school highly recommended I get a letter from my current coursework, so that is where letter 7 comes from (it also speaks to my research experience).

So, not sure what to do. Send them all? Throw something out? Help...

It may be best to have someone who you are close with but has served less of an active role in your research (perhaps #5 your advisor) write a letter that is a composite of the other peoples. Then you can send in 3 (2 from your PI and one from this composite) that will be your core LORs, and you can also add in the other letters if you want.

I think that no one is going to read through all 7 very thoroughly, so this may be a good option so that you can include all of the info that you want. Also, for MSTP I have not seen many "science faculty from undergrad" letters, which I am assuming are just Professors you took 1-2 courses with? I know you said that you need someone to address your low GPA, but I don't really think these letters would add all that much.

 

[Silverfalcon]

Unless schools prohibit you from doing it, I wouldn't take any out. It's a tough decision here. Normally, I would say definitely toss out 1 science faculty letter (I think all you need is two), but it may be different here.

Is your adviser from undergrad in humanities? I hope so... If it's a science faculty, then you have 4 letters of recommendation from science faculty.

 

[BrightandClear]

I think that no one is going to read through all 7 very thoroughly

This is exactly what I'm afraid of...

Is your adviser from undergrad in humanities? I hope so... If it's a science faculty, then you have 4 letters of recommendation from science faculty.

Neither, just my undergrad adviser (staff not faculty at my undergrad institution). My application has a couple of big red flags in it (specifically my transcripts), my adviser suggested she write a letter to add some context to what looks like a mess on paper. My school doesn't have a process for committee or composite letters, but I could ask my adviser if she could fold some of the other letters into her own...

Thanks so much for the suggestions so far!

 

[Silverfalcon]

This is exactly what I'm afraid of...



Neither, just my undergrad adviser (staff not faculty at my undergrad institution). My application has a couple of big red flags in it (specifically my transcripts), my adviser suggested she write a letter to add some context to what looks like a mess on paper. My school doesn't have a process for committee or composite letters, but I could ask my adviser if she could fold some of the other letters into her own...

Thanks so much for the suggestions so far!

I'm just not sure if you would need that many letters to amend your apps. I don't know what the "big red flags" are though. I would suggest to get a non-science faculty LOR if you can though. It's obviously not required by any means since you are not on committee letter.

 

[BrightandClear]

I'm just not sure if you would need that many letters to amend your apps. I don't know what the "big red flags" are though. I would suggest to get a non-science faculty LOR if you can though. It's obviously not required by any means since you are not on committee letter.

Letter 7 from the list in the first post is a social science professor.

 

[Silverfalcon]

Letter 7 from the list in the first post is a social science professor.

Gotcha.

Here's the best solution for you: email couple of schools that you have as "top choices." Tell them that you really want to use these letters, and ask if they wouldn't mind. My guess is, unless schools feel really busy, they wouldn't really care. I mean, they make you pay secondaries... extra few letters shouldn't be too much of a burden.

 

[BrightandClear]

Any other thoughts on this?

 

[delirium81]

I think that no one is going to read through all 7 very thoroughly, so this may be a good option so that you can include all of the info that you want.

I can't speak for all committees everywhere or anything, but when I read over apps, I consider the LORs to be the single most important aspect (other than GPA and MCAT) and always read them carefully. The most weight is definitely put on letters from PIs, so I would still include the letter from your undergrad PI even though it's not independent work. I might suggest using the letter from that PI as a substitute for another science faculty member. I don't really see why you would need 3. Can your undergrad PI also speak to your extenuating circumstances?

 

[BrightandClear]

I can't speak for all committees everywhere or anything, but when I read over apps, I consider the LORs to be the single most important aspect (other than GPA and MCAT) and always read them carefully. The most weight is definitely put on letters from PIs, so I would still include the letter from your undergrad PI even though it's not independent work. I might suggest using the letter from that PI as a substitute for another science faculty member. I don't really see why you would need 3. Can your undergrad PI also speak to your extenuating circumstances?

Thank you for your thoughts!

I asked my adviser (she has seen the letters, I have not) about this recently. My UG PI does speak to my academic track record, as you mention. However, my adviser also said that all three letters "make a unique contribution to your application"... I do agree that three is a lot though, so I'll inquire again about leaving one out.

 

[Neuronix]

I applied with nine letters. I don't think seven is a particularly big deal. I had many interview comments that my letters were extremely strong, not overly burdensome as some would suggest. I think that's the key here: apply with strong letters and leave any that are not glowing out. It sounds like you're doing the right things--having your advisor read them and sort them. If your advisor can't come up with a letter that should be cut, I just wouldn't cut it.

If you really want to take one out, I agree with everyone that three science profs is a bit redundant. Research letters are the important things for MD/PhD programs. Otherwise, the advisor letter is sort of +/- necessary. I'd like to know more detail about exactly why your transcript is "a mess". My style is not to try to explain away things in letters/essays unless they really need to be explained. Let these things come up in interviews. Don't draw attention to your negatives, because honestly they are often not noticed and not as big a deal as some would think.

 

[BrightandClear]

I applied with nine letters. I don't think seven is a particularly big deal. I had many interview comments that my letters were extremely strong, not overly burdensome as some would suggest. I think that's the key here: apply with strong letters and leave any that are not glowing out. It sounds like you're doing the right things--having your advisor read them and sort them. If your advisor can't come up with a letter that should be cut, I just wouldn't cut it.

I'd like to know more detail about exactly why your transcript is "a mess". My style is not to try to explain away things in letters/essays unless they really need to be explained. Let these things come up in interviews. Don't draw attention to your negatives, because honestly they are often not noticed and not as big a deal as some would think.

Unfortunately, my low GPA draws attention on its own.

The transcript "mess" is difficult to explain fully in this setting. The biggest issue is the length of time it took to finish my BS, and that AMCAS lumps the last years into one line of the table, effectively clouding the extent of my upward trend. .:sigh:.

The strong showing of letters from science professor who taught me is largely based on advice from meetings with the directors of my in-state school MD and MSTP programs. I guess I also figured overkill was better than not enough.

Thank you for your comments, I've waiting to here back from my adviser regarding leaving out one science letter. If she says they are all truly unique and glowing, I'll leave them in.