fellowship application letters of rec

[cellmatrix]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi,

Most fellowships I have seen online only say they want 3 letters of reference but dont specify who they should be from specifically. Is it necessary then that the 3 should include a letter from the program director or assistant program director, and the other 2 from specialists in the field? or should you submit 3 from specialists in the field towards which we are applying?

 

[KCShaw]

Depends on who's willing to write you a good recommendation, and what fellowship field you're going into. E.g., I think it would be wise to get a dermatologist/dermpath rec if you're trying to get into a dermpath fellowship because of the serious competition, and I'd recommend getting a forensic path if you're trying to get into a forensic fellowship (particularly a decent one) because it's so different from what most pathologists do on a day to day basis. But I don't think it's -as- important to get a rec from a fellowship trained GI, or cyto, etc. -- there's simply enough day to day overlap with most residency training programs that you probably don't need to chop off a testis to find a subspecialist to write the rec for you. But if you can get one (or two), I still would -- it shows you've put in the effort to really check out the subspecialty, at the least.

Most fellowships will want to hear something from your program director; if they don't read a rec from them then they're likely to call about you. Then I would get one from another path attending you spent a lot of time with. Then the door opens up, IMO -- subspecialist in your field of interest, another subspecialty, another CP or AP attending, heck even an attending from another specialty MIGHT be a good idea depending on what you're trying to get into (certain surgeons, heme-oncs, dermatologists, etc). But any way you look at it I would probably get a rec from your program director, and probably (but not necessarily) one from your subspecialty of interest.

 

[Patho2009]

YES one should be from your program director. Also one is preferred to be from an attending relevant to your fellowship field. e.g. from a dermpathologist or a cytopathologist who trained you, if you apply to dermpath or cytopath fellowships respectively.
The third one is from anyone, but the higher the title, the better. e.g. from your department chair, pathologists with leadership (chief of service, lab director..etc), or pathologists with high academic ranks (e.g. professor).

 

[RenalMan]

Depends on who's willing to write you a good recommendation, and what fellowship field you're going into. E.g., I think it would be wise to get a dermatologist/dermpath rec if you're trying to get into a dermpath fellowship because of the serious competition, and I'd recommend getting a forensic path if you're trying to get into a forensic fellowship (particularly a decent one) because it's so different from what most pathologists do on a day to day basis. But I don't think it's -as- important to get a rec from a fellowship trained GI, or cyto, etc. -- there's simply enough day to day overlap with most residency training programs that you probably don't need to chop off a testis to find a subspecialist to write the rec for you. But if you can get one (or two), I still would -- it shows you've put in the effort to really check out the subspecialty, at the least.

Most fellowships will want to hear something from your program director; if they don't read a rec from them then they're likely to call about you. Then I would get one from another path attending you spent a lot of time with. Then the door opens up, IMO -- subspecialist in your field of interest, another subspecialty, another CP or AP attending, heck even an attending from another specialty MIGHT be a good idea depending on what you're trying to get into (certain surgeons, heme-oncs, dermatologists, etc). But any way you look at it I would probably get a rec from your program director, and probably (but not necessarily) one from your subspecialty of interest.

KC quick question -- I recently asked a forensics guy for a letter and he said they don't send them to out program directors to be on file, but rather that the programs we apply to specifically contact him as my reference and he sends it to programs directly.

Is this your experience? So my program director and an additional attending write them and they stay on file at my program, but it's different for some letters, like from forensics?

 

[pathstudent]

One has to be from pd. Two could be from people in your area of subspecialization or one from someone you did research with in any area

Yes and names matter like in everything. Having a letter from kurman means a hell of a lot more than someone from university of Wyoming or Montana or Colorado medical center

 

[KCShaw]

I've heard -some- people do that (communicate directly with the program rather than write a letter of recommendation). Programs will generally clarify what -they- want from you; if they ask for letters of recommendation, that's what you should try to get, but if they ask for references, then you only need to provide contact information of your references. Generally whoever has agreed to help with a letter/reference will work with you to give the program you're applying to what they want. Over the years I remember a few individuals who refused to write letters and give them to you, but would write a letter and send it directly to the program on your behalf (wouldn't wait for the program to ask them for it, they'd just send it around the time you sent your application). Some people do that so they feel better about being brutally honest on your letter.

But I don't recall that being forensic specific. I only applied to a few fellowship programs, but my recollection is that my references each wrote a letter and made minor changes specific to each program I was sending to. I don't remember anyone making a point of saying oh, don't bother, we'll call. Now..when it came time for jobs, that flipped around -- I don't recall anyone writing a letter, but my references were called before I was provided a contract.

Even in a specialty (pathology) which is a fairly small community, forensic pathologists are an even smaller community -- a lot of FP's know, have met, or have heard about a lot of other FP's, and almost everyone seems to attend one of the two major FP-related national meetings each year (NAME or AAFS).