Choosing which LOR to submit when there are no requirements

[Hierophant]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Is there any consensus on how to choose which letters to submit when there are no requirements other than an exact or minimum number? Should you submit what you believe to be your best letters, or provide a variety?

The vast majority of schools desire 1-2 science letters, so I am tempted to submit at least one for fear of how an adcomm might perceive no science letters. While still positive, my science letters are likely weaker and less personal than my non-science and extracurricular/work letters.

Adcomm members, if your school suddenly had no letter requirements other than a number, what would you find most helpful?

 

[MaxPlancker]

Think about:
1) The letter writers who you know best and will write you the best letters
2) An array of letters that will illustrate different aspects of you (e.g. no sense in getting 3 letters from biology professors)

Obviously, you SHOULD send at least one (probably two) academic letters or it will show a lack of judgement. I mean, cmon you're applying to med school...academics are important.

 

[21Rush12]

I would guess that Committee letter > any other, and from there I agree with maxplancker


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Hierophant]

Think about:
1) The letter writers who you know best and will write you the best letters
2) An array of letters that will illustrate different aspects of you (e.g. no sense in getting 3 letters from biology professors)

Obviously, you SHOULD send at least one (probably two) academic letters or it will show a lack of judgement. I mean, cmon you're applying to med school...academics are important.

Your two points are exactly the two ideas I'm trying to resolve, so it's reassuring that I'm at least considering the right aspects of a LOR when deciding which to submit.

If you don't mind refining your advice, what would be your opinion of submitting non-science letters (that are stronger than an applicant's science letters) and omitting any science letters? In essence, which of your two points do you believe takes precedence in this scenario?

 

[MaxPlancker]

Point #1 with the conditional of "if you don't have any science then it may show poor judgement"