Are recommendation letters even important

[bettth]

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?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ismet]

They are absolutely important.

A bad letter is an instant tank to an app.

A lackluster letter (writer is indifferent, doesn't have much to say, letter is short or generic or lacks any enthusiasm) is negative points to an app.

Several letters where the writers rave about the applicant and provide specific examples of how great they are (aka well above your run of the mill positive letter) can certainly boost an application.

 

[GrapesofRath]

People never talk about them because they aren't directly involved in writing them. It's an incredibly overlooked process. But every year look at AAMC surveys of what ADCOMs report as most important; after MCAT/GPA recommendation letters are as high as anything you'll find. For the surveys done for most important factors post intervew, the LORs every year get the second highest rating after your rating from your interviewers of you.

So yes, every indication you have out there is they matter a lot. And as was said above, another thing youll always hear on here is how much of a big difference between an LOR that can actually make a difference and one that simply doesn't hurt you. It's much more than just "oh as long as they dont say anything bad and the letter isnt a red flag I'm good".

 

[Goro]

A gestalt of outstanding LORs has sometimes moved a borderline candidate up from wait list to accept at my school.

Poor LORs will sink an app.

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?

 

[Glandzburg]

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?

Spoiler

They wouldn't.

 

[Ismet]

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?

Spoiler

They wouldn't.

Spoiler: Woah

I never knew there was a spoiler function. New favorite thing.

 

[Dr Tony T. Chopper]

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.

 

[BluMist]

Spoiler: ...

and you call yourself an admin...

Spoiler: Woah

I never knew there was a spoiler function. New favorite thing.

 

[Meeehai]

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?

Well a lot of times applicants don't get to view what was actually written about them in the letters, so it's difficult to assess whether or not they had a significant impact on their acceptance/rejection.

 

[Avicenna]

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

 

[Shirafune]

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

If you put in the time to really get to know your letter writers (or at the very least give them substance to write with), it's probably not the exaggerated bull you make it out to be. Great letters mean you have put in the time to talk with your letter writers about your future aspirations, worked with them on a handful of assignments/projects, and didn't come off as a total jerk.

Exalting the virtues of an applicant without giving equally powerful examples is poor writing. Seasoned letter writers should know what makes a great LOR, perhaps excluding some senile emeritus faculty.

 

[piii]

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.

 

[Dr Tony T. Chopper]

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?

 

[Ismet]

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

The LORs that tend to affect an applicant one way or the other show something that isn't seen in the app or interviews. Case in point - if the person has major issues working with others in that this problem shows up in multiple letters (not uncommon), that's something that's difficult to pick up otherwise in an application.

Adcom members are not stupid. Yes, the standard run of the mill positive strong letter is overly flowery. But the extremely strong letters are the ones where the writer gives specific examples of the qualities we look for, and good letter writers who know you well will know how to do that.

Most of the time, letters just confirm what they already think from the application. But letters can provide extremely valuable insight into the applicant.

Sorry you're so bitter. I suggest getting to know your clinical faculty well in med school because you'll be doing this all over again for residency.

 

[thatwouldbeanarchy]

I can only speak for my own experience but in one of my interviews (where I later got accepted!), my interviewer actually commented on how positive my LOR from my PI was and how highly she spoke of me. So yeah, it does seem like they read them and that they matter to some extent! But as a nontrad, I'm sure that my LORs from science profs were nowhere near as strong as my LORs from PIs/work supervisors that I've known and worked closely with for years. I did a DIY postbacc at a school that I have almost no connection to beyond going to class. I think it's much less realistic to expect people in my situation to have formed close relationships with science profs. But anyway, just my .02. In short, LORs may seem like a BS hoop to jump through but they do kind of matter.

 

[Glandzburg]

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 salty

 

[neurotroph]

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.

 

[Dr Tony T. Chopper]

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?

 

[neurotroph]

Hey just curious, did adcoms ever drill you on specifics for any of your pubs?

I don't have any pubs. But out of all my interviews, there's only one interviewer who I would say really aggressively drilled me on the specifics of my research project. Obviously others asked specifics, but they were more casual questions.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

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?

I had a very strong rec letter written by a physician who was very influential within his field, and I think it helped me a lot. I had interviewers at several schools (including a couple I had no business interviewing at) bring up his letter and ask how I was able to make such a good impression on the guy.

Of course it's not just that it's a strong letter, but a strong letter with good context since I'd worked with the doctor a lot over 2 years.

I don't think this is the norm though

 

[deleted731525]

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.

TBH, I think they are just filler for law school apps. I had LOR from professors who barely remember me and got in everywhere my numbers said I would.

 

[dreamadream]

They are sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo important

 

[Lawpy]

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?

Of course they are. @mimelim even wrote an essay on it

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/letters-of-recommendation.985472/

 

[Avicenna]

Wow salty

Didnt have great letter writers, did you?

 

[Lucca]

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.

 

[Law2Doc]

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

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.

 

[Pagan FutureDoc]

Letters are very important even if most of them don't have a huge impact on admissions.
Most letters will be good or better but not stellar. This is what adcoms will expect and won't harm or help an applicant.

Poor letters show that the applicant has poor judgment (asking someone who won't give them a good rec is not smart) and can show character flaws (late to class a lot, could have worked harder)

Stellar letters can help a marginal or average applicant really stand out.

 

[Avicenna]

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..

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?

 

[GrapesofRath]

https://aamc-orange.global.ssl.fast...5b5844a/mcatstudentselectionguide.pdf#page=12

There's no clear cut, easy cut and dry answer to some sweeping question like this, nor will there ever be or should there be. But the link above can give you an idea of how little a 20 minute interview, AAMC MCAT score report and transcript can tell you about what admissions committees are interested in.

 

[Long Way to Go]

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?

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?

 

[Long Way to Go]

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 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.

 

[El-Rami]

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.

I agree with you for the most part, but to be honest it's not something you necessarily have a lot of control over. No matter how good you are, no matter how hard you try to foster good relationships (and indeed you'll build good ones if you try), there will be some elements that you can't control. Letter writers are human, too, and you may find that they wait until the last minute to get the letter in. During applications, I had a problem where someone waited until the last minute and ended up missing the deadline to submit their letter. They contacted me and asked if it was too late and were very apologetic. Fortunately, I had a feeling this would happen and already had another person submit a letter. People get really busy with their own work. Some people are good at making time for this kind of stuff despite a busy schedule while others are not. Either way, people will typically prioritize their own affairs above yours no matter who you are. That's why you find someone you know will write a good letter, but even then you need to keep in contact with them to make sure they don't forget. I also think some people just don't give a damn. One person I worked with for a long time offer me one (at the time I was planning to apply in a year or so), but never followed through because he never responded. You are at the mercy of others. (It's also good to develop good/positive relationships with everyone you meet and not 100% count on a few people to write you LORs even if you have no doubt they will write "extremely" strong LORs.)

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.

 

[Meeehai]

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.

Your actual name is El-Rami? Sick.

 

[Law2Doc]

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.

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.

 

[Law2Doc]

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?

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.

 

[Dr Tony T. Chopper]

This post is a nugget of gold for many tunnel visioned premeds.

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.

 

[Long Way to Go]

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.

So I picked a school basically at random, and I found this from the Medical College of Wisconsin:

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.

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.

 

[Law2Doc]

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.

Two words -- office hours.
Just because they are a "classroom" professor doesn't mean they must only know you as someone who filled up a seat.

 

[Ismet]

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?

Just to name a few....maturity, compassion, teamwork, demonstrating leadership (not just listing on AMCAS that you were VP of some club), cultural competence, going above and beyond the call of duty for something...

There are many people who can "turn it on" for interviews and have the best interpersonal skills in that setting, but then when you see the letter from someone who has observed the applicant working in a team, it turns out they are a horrible team player/arrogant/inappropriate/etc. And oh has that happened. The ones where the interviews are grossly incongruent with the letters are the scary ones.

 

[Straw Hat]

My friend used letters from classes he got C's in. His interviewer said never in all his time has he seen someone do that and have the letter writer have such great things to say about the applicant and that they were pretty impressed. It significantly boosted his app according to him.

 

[Styrene]

My interviewers all commented on my letters. I knew my professors well. I am having dinner soon with one of my letter writers at his house in celebration of my getting into med school. For me, being personable and mature went a very long way in this process. Just be yourself with professors and try to take the same one for a few different classes.

 

[medic86]

Spoiler: Woah

I never knew there was a spoiler function. New favorite thing.

Spoiler: STAR WARS MOVIE SPOILER LOL

Lol, you clicked me.

 

[BluMist]

Spoiler: STAR WARS MOVIE SPOILER LOL

Lol, you clicked me.

 

[Lawpy]

@Gingy approves your gif

 

[Gingy]

@Gingy approves your gif

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.