- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 41
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 4,651
- Other Health Professions Student


i NEVER hear anyone talk about how recommendation letters are crucial for acceptance. anyone have any stories where their rec letter saved them or boosted their app? or any opinions/thoughts in general?
Yes. Adcoms are busy people. Why would they waste your time, your LOR writer's time, and their own time with something that is not important?
They wouldn't.

I never knew there was a spoiler function. New favorite thing.
i NEVER hear anyone talk about how recommendation letters are crucial for acceptance. anyone have any stories where their rec letter saved them or boosted their app? or any opinions/thoughts in general?
Such a bull**** part of the app cycle, for so many reasons, but since adcoms are unable to form their own opinion of you through an interview (along with the 4 yrs worth of stats and achievements you bring in) and need to base their opinion of you on an excessively exaggerated, highly subjective paragraph in which your prof/PI/doc you shadowed who kind of knows you makes you out to be Jesus, its just part of the game you gotta play
Someone seems bitter... LORs are an established form of professional evaluation in pretty much every field.Such a bull**** part of the app cycle, for so many reasons, but since adcoms are unable to form their own opinion of you through an interview (along with the 4 yrs worth of stats and achievements you bring in) and need to base their opinion of you on an excessively exaggerated, highly subjective paragraph in which your prof/PI/doc you shadowed who kind of knows you makes you out to be Jesus, its just part of the game you gotta play
Didnt have great letter writers, did you?Such a bull**** part of the app cycle, for so many reasons, but since adcoms are unable to form their own opinion of you through an interview (along with the 4 yrs worth of stats and achievements you bring in) and need to base their opinion of you on an excessively exaggerated, highly subjective paragraph in which your prof/PI/doc you shadowed who kind of knows you makes you out to be Jesus, its just part of the game you gotta play
Such a bull**** part of the app cycle, for so many reasons, but since adcoms are unable to form their own opinion of you through an interview (along with the 4 yrs worth of stats and achievements you bring in) and need to base their opinion of you on an excessively exaggerated, highly subjective paragraph in which your prof/PI/doc you shadowed who kind of knows you makes you out to be Jesus, its just part of the game you gotta play
Wow saltySuch a bull**** part of the app cycle, for so many reasons, but since adcoms are unable to form their own opinion of you through an interview (along with the 4 yrs worth of stats and achievements you bring in) and need to base their opinion of you on an excessively exaggerated, highly subjective paragraph in which your prof/PI/doc you shadowed who kind of knows you makes you out to be Jesus, its just part of the game you gotta play
Hey just curious, did adcoms ever drill you on specifics for any of your pubs?Multiple interviewers have brought up things that were written in my letters, so I'd say they were very important for my cycle. These were research letters though, which hold a lot of weight in MD/PhD admissions.
Hey just curious, did adcoms ever drill you on specifics for any of your pubs?
i NEVER hear anyone talk about how recommendation letters are crucial for acceptance. anyone have any stories where their rec letter saved them or boosted their app? or any opinions/thoughts in general?
This is one of those threads you will come back to as a grand parent and say, "look how silly I used to be!" And your grand kids chortle with you next to a warm fireplace.
Yes, LORs are quintessential in virtually anything you apply for that asks for them, not just med school.
i NEVER hear anyone talk about how recommendation letters are crucial for acceptance. anyone have any stories where their rec letter saved them or boosted their app? or any opinions/thoughts in general?
Wow salty
Didnt have great letter writers, did you?
In my experience the people who lament that things should be based only on stats and a 20 minute interview are those that aren't bringing enough of the actually important things to the table. If you are a star, getting a good LOR would be a cinch. Schools don't want someone who can only come off as presentable just for a few minutes on interview day. The practice of medicine requires much more face time. Adcoms want someone who people thought was great even after getting to know them for a while. Which is why LORs from people who know and have worked with you are useful. Frankly the guy who couldn't get much of an LOR in four years of college is a big big red flag, regardless of his top GPA and that he seemed presentable for a few minutes on interview day. In a career, how you score on tests is going to matter less. We want people we can work with over time. So yes there's some "playing the game" you have to do. But the people med school actually "wants" are the ones who don't really view this as a chore.Such a bull**** part of the app cycle, for so many reasons, but since adcoms are unable to form their own opinion of you through an interview (along with the 4 yrs worth of stats and achievements you bring in) and need to base their opinion of you on an excessively exaggerated, highly subjective paragraph in which your prof/PI/doc you shadowed who kind of knows you makes you out to be Jesus, its just part of the game you gotta play
people who lament that things should be based only on stats and a 20 minute interview are those that aren't bringing enough of the actually important things to the table..
How do you think that schools actually determine whether you have good interpersonal skills and whether you're not just bull****ting your way through your AMCAS activities?What are these "actual important things"? Besides the already incredible standards for stats and interpersonal skills leadership and involvement, what else are the admissons committee looking for?
I absolutely agree. But I think this point of view contrasts so interestingly with school requirements that allow you to use LORs from faculty who know you from a lecture context. Not everywhere has this policy, and you can obviously get away with not doing this if you have a Committee letter, but those who don't are really at a disadvantage.In my experience the people who lament that things should be based only on stats and a 20 minute interview are those that aren't bringing enough of the actually important things to the table. If you are a star, getting a good LOR would be a cinch. Schools don't want someone who can only come off as presentable just for a few minutes on interview day. The practice of medicine requires much more face time. Adcoms want someone who people thought was great even after getting to know them for a while. Which is why LORs from people who know and have worked with you are useful. Frankly the guy who couldn't get much of an LOR in four years of college is a big big red flag, regardless of his top GPA and that he seemed presentable for a few minutes on interview day. In a career, how you score on tests is going to matter less. We want people we can work with over time. So yes there's some "playing the game" you have to do. But the people med school actually "wants" are the ones who don't really view this as a chore.
I think most undergrads feel that LORs are out of their control and they just look for the professor they actually went to office hours for or something. However, I'd say it is one of the app factors you have the most control over since you can always choose who you interact with, how much effort you put in, building a relationship etc. Taking a class with a small number of people and working in a lab are probably the best ways to obtain a meaningful LOR and one that you may not even have to ask for. Two of my professors have told me after a semester on separate occasions "don't ask me for a LOR, just tell me where to send it" and those were both very small classes (~12 students). Meanwhile, a lot of my friends who only took the most trafficked (often because they are easier or major-sequence) courses are panicking now that they are in 2nd semester of third year and have no idea who to ask for letters.
Also, I am a bit confused about what people have defined as a really strong LOR. Someone whom I worked with for a long time wrote me one and discussed all the traits they thought would make me a good physician and elaborated on them. However, I don't recall the letter saying something like "on such-and-such El-Rami did ___ which I thought was really awesome." It was more like "on numerous occasions El-Rami displayed ____ in these types of situations." Is that the kind of stuff that's being looked for in letters? I'm sure many writers can come up with really specific examples but try to not go into too much detail for the sake of being concise. They also may not remember every single thing very well.
It doesn't really "contrast" with this. They "allow" you to use such letters, but I promise you the letter from a professor who actually knows you outside of the "this guy got an A" lecture context counts for more.I absolutely agree. But I think this point of view contrasts so interestingly with school requirements that allow you to use LORs from faculty who know you from a lecture context. Not everywhere has this policy, and you can obviously get away with not doing this if you have a Committee letter, but those who don't are really at a disadvantage.
Right, that's my point. Plenty of people can hold it together for a 20 minute interview -- that's a bit of a snapshot on interpersonal skills. But if you have that plus a letter from a guy who saw this applicant over the course of several years, that's much better evidence that it wasn't just a rare lucid interlude.How do you think that schools actually determine whether you have good interpersonal skills and whether you're not just bull****ting your way through your AMCAS activities?
In my experience the people who lament that things should be based only on stats and a 20 minute interview are those that aren't bringing enough of the actually important things to the table. If you are a star, getting a good LOR would be a cinch. Schools don't want someone who can only come off as presentable just for a few minutes on interview day. The practice of medicine requires much more face time. Adcoms want someone who people thought was great even after getting to know them for a while. Which is why LORs from people who know and have worked with you are useful. Frankly the guy who couldn't get much of an LOR in four years of college is a big big red flag, regardless of his top GPA and that he seemed presentable for a few minutes on interview day. In a career, how you score on tests is going to matter less. We want people we can work with over time. So yes there's some "playing the game" you have to do. But the people med school actually "wants" are the ones who don't really view this as a chore.
So I picked a school basically at random, and I found this from the Medical College of Wisconsin:It doesn't really "contrast" with this. They "allow" you to use such letters, but I promise you the letter from a professor who actually knows you outside of the "this guy got an A" lecture context counts for more.
Which letters am I required to send?
UNDERGRAD LETTERS – You will select one of the following options:
- Premedical Advisory Committee Letter: If your school has a Premed Committee that generates a cumulative letter. This is generally a single letter, but may have other letters attached.
- Undergraduate institution packet of letters: If your undergraduate institution has a service that compiles all your letters and forwards them together with a cover letter.
- Two separate letters from classroom professors: If your undergraduate institution has neither a Premed Committee or a Service, you will need to supply us with two letters from classroom professors, one of which must have taught you Biology, Chemistry or Physics.
So I picked a school basically at random, and I found this from the Medical College of Wisconsin...
I have no idea how how open to negotiation they are with these requirements, but they at least seem to have a preference from faculty who have known you in a lecture setting. I agree with you that a faculty member who knows you is more likely to something useful to say, but there are so many different ways to get to know faculty that it's interesting that so many schools, at least publicly, state their preference for professors who you know in a classroom context for very particular subjects.
What are these "actual important things"? Besides the already incredible standards for stats and interpersonal skills leadership and involvement, what else are the admissons committee looking for?
I never knew there was a spoiler function. New favorite thing.
Though my avatar is more flattering...I've been self-conscious about my lower extremity crumbs since the Lord Farquaad incident. That was not my best moment.@Gingy approves your gif