Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Hi all!
I'm using my school's committee letter system. I need to have three recommendation letters from my professors. I already have two (biology and organic chemistry). I was a TA for organic chemistry, and I worked my butt off in biology. I am having trouble picking my third. Below are the summaries of my two options.
1. My neurodevelopment professor.
Pros: Part of my major (neuroscience). It's a 400-level class. It's a small class and I've met with her in her office a lot already. She sent me an email once complimenting one of my essay assignments. The class includes presentations/discussions, which can be helpful for her to know me more.
Cons: It would be a third science, which would make my committee packet too science-heavy perhaps?
2. My communications professor.
Pros: It'd be non-science, so it would balance out the other two. I am taking it as an "Honors by Contract" course which means I work with the professor on a project for the class (I'm doing it on communication in film); however, I realized that he is not very involved in the project.
Cons: It's an intro-level class. It's a larger class so it is harder for me to speak up. It's mainly lecture-based. Most students take it as an elective only.
Who do you think I should pick? If I pick one, I could ask the other one to write a supplemental letter, outside of the committee packet, if I end up building a good relationship with him/her. Is it really necessary to have "two science, one non-science" to appear well-rounded, or will that appear more in leadership/ECs? Is it okay to have three science writers?
The deadline to let the committee know who we're picking is this week, which is why I have to decide in advance.
Thank you for your insight. I appreciate any advice you can offer!
I'm using my school's committee letter system. I need to have three recommendation letters from my professors. I already have two (biology and organic chemistry). I was a TA for organic chemistry, and I worked my butt off in biology. I am having trouble picking my third. Below are the summaries of my two options.
1. My neurodevelopment professor.
Pros: Part of my major (neuroscience). It's a 400-level class. It's a small class and I've met with her in her office a lot already. She sent me an email once complimenting one of my essay assignments. The class includes presentations/discussions, which can be helpful for her to know me more.
Cons: It would be a third science, which would make my committee packet too science-heavy perhaps?
2. My communications professor.
Pros: It'd be non-science, so it would balance out the other two. I am taking it as an "Honors by Contract" course which means I work with the professor on a project for the class (I'm doing it on communication in film); however, I realized that he is not very involved in the project.
Cons: It's an intro-level class. It's a larger class so it is harder for me to speak up. It's mainly lecture-based. Most students take it as an elective only.
Who do you think I should pick? If I pick one, I could ask the other one to write a supplemental letter, outside of the committee packet, if I end up building a good relationship with him/her. Is it really necessary to have "two science, one non-science" to appear well-rounded, or will that appear more in leadership/ECs? Is it okay to have three science writers?
The deadline to let the committee know who we're picking is this week, which is why I have to decide in advance.
Thank you for your insight. I appreciate any advice you can offer!
