Bad LOR

[vetkid]

---

Members don't see this ad.

OK. I received a copy ( I didn't ask, she just emailed it to me...). It says good stuff, could be better though. THe only thing is she wrote in the beginning that she was sorry it was late and something about the school I am applying to. THe school she mentioned isn't the main school I am applying to, actually it is #4 on my list (she knew that too). Does it look bad with her saying sorry the LOR is late? Makes me want to cry because she is my only Vet LOR and I know the vet portion counts for more? I think she thought it was late because it has been 2+ months and I sent her an email asking about it?

Will this hurt me? I know it can't be good...

 

[lenmaca]

THe only thing is she wrote in the beginning that she was sorry it was late and something about the school I am applying to.

Maybe she added this bit of information in her e-mail to you and did not include it in the eLOR she submitted.

 

[tpad40]

I'm sorry to hear that!!

That stinks! Unfortunately, LORs are kind of out of your control and school's know that. The thing to remember is that your LOR's only count for a small portion of your application - they are interested in the big picture. They will clearly notice that the vet, unlike some of your professors, probably doesn't write too many recs and hopefully won't worry too much! If the rest of the LOR was positive, I'd say relax 🙂

At least she submitted it, I'm still waiting (eek!!).

 

[CurrySpice]

Maybe she added this bit of information in her e-mail to you and did not include it in the eLOR she submitted.

I would bet this too. Nothing you can do about it anymore, just relax and if you don't get in, well, you don't get in. Work for a different vet next time.

 

[DreamComeTrue09]

Did she submit it yet? Perhaps she sent you a copy to see if you approve before she submits it. If she did submit it, then there's nothing you can do. However, just remember it is one LOR, you have two others and Im sure they are good. In fact, the vet made herself look bad saying that she was sorry it was late...so do you think the admissions committee would weigh whether you get in or not, so heavily on a LOR that starts out saying "Im sorry this is late," probably not, so don't worry. Just think, some students who are applying haven't had any experience working with vets and you have...that counts more than the recommendation itself I would think ....so dont worry =) not your fault

 

[david594]

Just think, some students who are applying haven't had any experience working with vets and you have...that counts more than the recommendation itself I would think ....so dont worry =) not your fault

How do you figure that one? Everyone applying is going to have atleast some minimal experience with a vet. Its about the more core of a requirement theres is, and everything makes that clear. So don't think you have a leg up on anyone because you have worked with a vet.

 

[DreamComeTrue09]

Actually David, all of the veterinary schools whom have visited my college have stated that there are a large number of students whom have 4.0's or 3.9's who are well qualified academically, however, have zero veterinary experience. Those applictants are advised to take the 1 year in between application cycles to work with a veterinarian. If you take a look at the statistics of applicants ( perhaps 900 applicants ) and see that maybe 200 were qualified...obviously those other 700 applicants were either not qualified academically, had zero or little animal experience etc. ANYONE can apply, and believe me ALOT of people DO apply whom DO NOT have veterinary experience! So in reality we really arent competing against them since they have zero experience so their application is thrown out, but in saying that my statement is incorrect you are also incorrect in your statement saying everyone who applying is going to have veterinary experience.

 

[VAgirl]

Actually David, all of the veterinary schools whom have visited my college have stated that there are a large number of students whom have 4.0's or 3.9's who are well qualified academically, however, have zero veterinary experience. Those applictants are advised to take the 1 year in between application cycles to work with a veterinarian. If you take a look at the statistics of applicants ( perhaps 900 applicants ) and see that maybe 200 were qualified...obviously those other 700 applicants were either not qualified academically, had zero or little animal experience etc. ANYONE can apply, and believe me ALOT of people DO apply whom DO NOT have veterinary experience! So in reality we really arent competing against them since they have zero experience so their application is thrown out, but in saying that my statement is incorrect you are also incorrect in your statement saying everyone who applying is going to have veterinary experience.

I have to agree with David here. Of all the numbers I've seen, I've only ever seen the # of overall applicants reduced by maybe 50 unqualified candidates at the most, from pools of nearly 1,000. So, no, the overwhelming majority of applicants are qualified.

(I can't find the sources I'm thinking of with the exact numbers right now, but will look later if I remember. If you're convinced we're wrong, go ahead and cite your sources.)

 

[ri23]

Actually David, all of the veterinary schools whom have visited my college have stated that there are a large number of students whom have 4.0's or 3.9's who are well qualified academically, however, have zero veterinary experience. Those applictants are advised to take the 1 year in between application cycles to work with a veterinarian. If you take a look at the statistics of applicants ( perhaps 900 applicants ) and see that maybe 200 were qualified...obviously those other 700 applicants were either not qualified academically, had zero or little animal experience etc. ANYONE can apply, and believe me ALOT of people DO apply whom DO NOT have veterinary experience! So in reality we really arent competing against them since they have zero experience so their application is thrown out, but in saying that my statement is incorrect you are also incorrect in your statement saying everyone who applying is going to have veterinary experience.

In the states, most (not all) veterinary schools do require some amount of veterinary experience and a letter of rec from at least one veterinarian.

As for the LOR, is the only thing about it that is bad the late issue? A so-so or negative LOR can really hurt you, but I don't think the sentence you mentioned would make a huge deal. When asking for LOR's it is always best to phrase the question "Would you be able to write me a strong letter or recommendation?" Most LORs are pretty positive and therefore don't really make a candidate stand out. A really exemplary letter will certainly make a candidate stand out, but more often a so-so, or negative letter makes a huge difference.

 

[VAgirl]

I have to agree with David here. Of all the numbers I've seen, I've only ever seen the # of overall applicants reduced by maybe 50 unqualified candidates at the most, from pools of nearly 1,000. So, no, the overwhelming majority of applicants are qualified.

(I can't find the sources I'm thinking of with the exact numbers right now, but will look later if I remember. If you're convinced we're wrong, go ahead and cite your sources.)

Posting to add data to support my previous point (quoted above)...

I threw out my VMSAR, sadly, which has all of this information on each school, so if someone else has that and feels like it, (s)he could post the relevant data. But for VMRCVM, I was able to find it online: http://www.vetmed.vt.edu/acad/dvm/stats.pdf
For the 2008-2009 application cycle, of 835 applicants to VMRCVM, 783 were deemed to be qualified.

I know just that one example doesn't seem like a strong support for my point. But the data is there, I just don't have it at my fingertips anymore.

 

[david594]

Actually David, all of the veterinary schools whom have visited my college have stated that there are a large number of students whom have 4.0's or 3.9's who are well qualified academically, however, have zero veterinary experience. Those applictants are advised to take the 1 year in between application cycles to work with a veterinarian. If you take a look at the statistics of applicants ( perhaps 900 applicants ) and see that maybe 200 were qualified...obviously those other 700 applicants were either not qualified academically, had zero or little animal experience etc. ANYONE can apply, and believe me ALOT of people DO apply whom DO NOT have veterinary experience! So in reality we really arent competing against them since they have zero experience so their application is thrown out, but in saying that my statement is incorrect you are also incorrect in your statement saying everyone who applying is going to have veterinary experience.

Your semantics are all wrong. You need to remember that some applications are "academically qualified" and yet not academically qualified at the same time. UC Davis says you need a 2.5 cumulative GPA and a 2.5 in the required sciences. But if you are an OOS applicant there with a 2.51, technically you are "academically qualified" to not have your applications automatically trashed, but when you get rejected and you ask why, they will tell you that you are not academically qualified and you should work on improving that GPA.

If you look at the requirements for schools, they all say they require some level of veterinary or animal experience. Anyone who applys without experience is just throwing there money in the wind. And I would agree, we are by no means "competing" with them.

And again on the semantics, I am applying with no "animal experience". I have >2000 hours direct "veterinary experience", as I work 40 hours a week as a tech, but no "animal experience".

 

[LucyLoo]

Posting to add data to support my previous point (quoted above)...

I threw out my VMSAR, sadly, which has all of this information on each school, so if someone else has that and feels like it, (s)he could post the relevant data. But for VMRCVM, I was able to find it online: http://www.vetmed.vt.edu/acad/dvm/stats.pdf
For the 2008-2009 application cycle, of 835 applicants to VMRCVM, 783 were deemed to be qualified.

I know just that one example doesn't seem like a strong support for my point. But the data is there, I just don't have it at my fingertips anymore.

The problem with those stats is they only speak to the academics that david was talking about and don't take into account the animal experience DreamComeTrue09 was referencing.

 

[VAgirl]

The problem with those stats is they only speak to the academics that david was talking about and don't take into account the animal experience DreamComeTrue09 was referencing.

Does anyone really know how many applicants the adcoms truly feel are competitive, though? I think it'd be awfully presumptuous to think we could actually know this number, IMO. And I personally find it hard to believe that 75% (the 700/900 #s that DreamComeTrue was using) of applicants are just not competitive.

 

[LucyLoo]

Does anyone really know how many applicants the adcoms truly feel are competitive, though? I think it'd be awfully presumptuous to think we could actually know this number, IMO. And I personally find it hard to believe that 75% (the 700/900 #s that DreamComeTrue was using) of applicants are just not competitive.

I agree with you on that because no matter what stats you look at they will never contain the big picture. It's all kind of a guessing game. And yes, I thought 75% was a little high as well.

 

[FlyOnTheWall]

Does anyone really know how many applicants the adcoms truly feel are competitive, though? I think it'd be awfully presumptuous to think we could actually know this number, IMO. And I personally find it hard to believe that 75% (the 700/900 #s that DreamComeTrue was using) of applicants are just not competitive.

It's a lot higher. The biggest frustration of serving on this committee is saying "no" to so many amazing people.

 

[FlyOnTheWall]

OK. I received a copy ( I didn't ask, she just emailed it to me...). It says good stuff, could be better though. THe only thing is she wrote in the beginning that she was sorry it was late and something about the school I am applying to. THe school she mentioned isn't the main school I am applying to, actually it is #4 on my list (she knew that too). Does it look bad with her saying sorry the LOR is late? Makes me want to cry because she is my only Vet LOR and I know the vet portion counts for more? I think she thought it was late because it has been 2+ months and I sent her an email asking about it?

Will this hurt me? I know it can't be good...

It's vet experience and that helps. By aplogizing for being late and then only mentioning one school this letter writer loses a lot of cred (a ding on her.. not on you). So many LORs are written poorly. When I'm reading them and advising applicants I will be blunt about finding a new letter writer. When you ask them.. don't just ask for a letter.. ask for a glowing letter. I know it's late for this cycle so I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Few apps are made or broken on the LOR.

 

[vetkid]

It's vet experience and that helps. By aplogizing for being late and then only mentioning one school this letter writer loses a lot of cred (a ding on her.. not on you). So many LORs are written poorly. When I'm reading them and advising applicants I will be blunt about finding a new letter writer. When you ask them.. don't just ask for a letter.. ask for a glowing letter. I know it's late for this cycle so I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Few apps are made or broken on the LOR.

Thanks for the help. I asked this person because I know pretty well, and because they know me and I have worked the most with them in the 3 vet clinic. She told me she would write a great letter, and that she would give me a copy. Now I wish I hadn't seen it. She isn't the best writer. Deleting the paragraph about the one school and being late, it is a good letter. It is just odd she wrote that.

Anyway, already losing sleep about it. But I know I have one super great letter from a scientists I worked for 5+ years who really knows how to write...so hopefully that helps.