How do you know the Content or Strength of LoR's?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

NonTradJp

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
259
Reaction score
101
This is probably a simple question. If you waive your rights to see LoR's, how do you know the content and strength of the LoR's. I hear a lot of people rate their LoR's as okay or strong or very strong. Sure you can know your letter writer well but until you actually see it you won't know what it says or even how strong it is.

In the working world I've had job applications where the LoR's are not secret and I can see which are strong or not. One director I worked under really appreciated and supported me. However, he wrote a very bland letter and I only realized after he wrote it and saw it. Else I would not have known.

Edit: The director actually intended to write a strong letter. It just did not turn out so.
 
Last edited:
This is probably a simple question. If you waive your rights to see LoR's, how do you know the content and strength of the LoR's. I hear a lot of people rate their LoR's as okay or strong or very strong. Sure you can know your letter writer well but until you actually see it you won't know what it says or even how strong it is.

In the working world I've had job applications where the LoR's are not secret and I can see which are strong or not. One director I worked under really appreciated and supported me. However, he wrote a very bland letter and I only realized after he wrote it and saw it. Else I would not have known.
You don't, which is why most people just nod politely and go "OK" when someone says "I have 4 excellent LORs". People tend to assume the best of their LOR writers.
 
This is probably a simple question. If you waive your rights to see LoR's, how do you know the content and strength of the LoR's. I hear a lot of people rate their LoR's as okay or strong or very strong. Sure you can know your letter writer well but until you actually see it you won't know what it says or even how strong it is.

In the working world I've had job applications where the LoR's are not secret and I can see which are strong or not. One director I worked under really appreciated and supported me. However, he wrote a very bland letter and I only realized after he wrote it and saw it. Else I would not have known.
Some letter writers share a copy of their LOR with the applicant, which is their prerogative. Other applicants receive comments about their letters from an advisor with access to them. A few more might get comments from an interviewer.
 
As others said, you can't tell. In general, this is mitigated by having someone who knows you to some degree and is invested in your success write you a letter. This isn't always possible, but that should really be the goal. The best letters don't just comment on your academic performance. Your general academic performance can be surmised through your transcript and MCAT, so if you're a 4.0/40 applicant, it isn't all that helpful to get a letter from a professor that says "John Doe is a bright, hard-working student." Instead, what's more helpful is if that individual can both comment on your performance while also speaking to more personal qualities in the context of how they know you. For example, a professor that describes you as intelligent, inquisitive, an asset to have in a course, and someone willing to engage in discussions is much more helpful than the previous statement. That starts to get at who an applicant is as a person, which is really what we care about in letters.

Just yesterday at our committee meeting we had an applicant that had a letter that was no more than 5 sentences. I tend to give applicants the benefit of the doubt and would assume - or hope - that they wouldn't get a letter from someone that wrote such an uninspiring and unhelpful letter. Even then, though, that ends up harming you because we, as a committee, have missed out on the opportunity to get a sense of who you are.

Again, there's no way to guarantee this. All you can do is mitigate risk and hope for the best. Get people that know you on somewhat of a personal level and that actually care about you succeeding in the future. Those people tend to write great letters.
 
I've normally asked for LOR from previous employers and professors and I always first ask if what they write would be positive. If they say yes then I ask them to give me a copy just so I have one in the wing in case I need one at a later date.

Obviously it is up to the one writing the letter what they will put in it about you and whether or not they give you a copy. If they ask why the question and copy you can say something like "I'm pooling letters from different professors/employers and I want to pick the best ones that'll improve my chances the most."
 
My advisor shared the general strength of each when I asked about the strength of the letters that had been collected. It was vague and without much context.

My bosses gave me the letter after they submitted it... even asked if I wanted them to add anything else.

Some letter writers ask you to write your own recommendation as a first draft and then they edit it for content and voice.
 
Last edited:
I've normally asked for LOR from previous employers and professors and I always first ask if what they write would be positive. If they say yes then I ask them to give me a copy just so I have one in the wing in case I need one at a later date.

Obviously it is up to the one writing the letter what they will put in it about you and whether or not they give you a copy. If they ask why the question and copy you can say something like "I'm pooling letters from different professors/employers and I want to pick the best ones that'll improve my chances the most."

This violates the spirit of waiving your right to see the letter. It's one thing to ask after it's been written (even this is a bit shady), but to tell them that you would like a copy before they've written it might color the letter-writer's process. The purpose of waiving your write to view the letter is so that the writer feels free to write frankly.

As far as wanting to "pick the best ones", your role in this process is to choose the letter writers, not the letters.

Lastly, using a medical school recommendation letter for something else is simply impossible. The content should be specific to medical school and mention medical school in it. In other words, there is no possibility of using that recommendation later, and you are deceiving them into giving you the letter so you can read it.

From what you've described (and as I understand it), it sounds like what you are doing is unethical. Please explain if I've misinterpreted things.
 
Last edited:
This violates the spirit of waiving your right to see the letter. It's one thing to ask after it's been written (even this is a bit shady), but to tell them that you would like a copy before they've written it might color the letter-writer's process. The purpose of waiving your write to view the letter is so that the writer feels free to write frankly.

As far as wanting to "pick the best ones", your role in this process is to choose the letter writers, not the letters.

Lastly, using a medical school recommendation letter for something else is simply impossible. The content should be specific to medical school and mention medical school in it. In other words, there is no possibility of using that recommendation later, and you are deceiving them into giving you the letter so you can read it.

From what you've described (and as I understand it), it sounds like what you are doing is unethical. Please explain if I've misinterpreted things.


No one is obligated or required to waive the right to see a letter written about them by a faculty member to a third party. Federal law requires that a student (or the parents in the case of a minor) have access to a student's file unless the student/parents have waived that right as is often done in the case of a letter of recommendation. But the default is that you have the right to see the letter.

Some pre-med committees do exactly what you are protesting (and which I abhor) which is going through all the letters written on behalf of a student and picking the best ones or selectively quoting from them without appending all of the letters in their entirety. Other schools will make a point of noting that they are appending all of the supporting letters with the committee letter to assure us, the adcom, that nothing is being glossed over.

Sometimes an advisor or even an interviewer will have pity on you and give you a clue that a letter is a problem by saying something like, "You might want to get a letter from someone other than Professor Pettipants if you end up reapplying."
 
I see. I guess there is a bit more involved in LoR's than I realized and that reading them you need to make your own assessment carefully.

For me, I used the words "excellent" and "personal" when I requested LoR's from my medical school application writers. Each one said yes. I offer to be interviewed by them and being open to questions if they want to know anything else about my life they don't already know. One said that she normally requires a student's resume and a letter of intention of what they are applying for and desire in the process, but she won't need anything from me. However, since we knew that this was in private and I would never see the letter, every time we catch up none of my writers ever mention to me about the LoR's. I trust my letter writers are on my side. At the same time I will never know the content or how strong the letter actually is.
 
. At the same time I will never know the content or how strong the letter actually is.

This is correct. Like you I believe that most people are not jerks and will write, at minimum, a positive letter when asked.
 
If you have applied for any national awards and received them, it is a good bet that those recs are stellar.
 
I know that many writers ask for a resume and/or personal statement before writing the LOR but frankly, the letters that result are usually worthless to the committee. We know your accomplishments because we see them in your application. We know the story you want to tell because we see your personal statement. To have the letter writer rehash what you have done and why you want to be a physician not based on personal observation but based on your application materials.

A LOR should be based on what your LOR writer has observed (seen and heard through interactions with you) and nothing else. Essays and papers you've submitted as class assignments, yes. Personal statements: no. Interviews and classroom discussions: yes. Mission trips and athletic events: yes if the writer went on the trip with you or is a coach.
 
This is why I always advise people to ask their potential writers "Do you know me well enough to write a good LOR for my med school application?"


Please note that bad LORs are RARE! I see maybe one an interview cycle.


I see. I guess there is a bit more involved in LoR's than I realized and that reading them you need to make your own assessment carefully.

For me, I used the words "excellent" and "personal" when I requested LoR's from my medical school application writers. Each one said yes. I offer to be interviewed by them and being open to questions if they want to know anything else about my life they don't already know. One said that she normally requires a student's resume and a letter of intention of what they are applying for and desire in the process, but she won't need anything from me. However, since we knew that this was in private and I would never see the letter, every time we catch up none of my writers ever mention to me about the LoR's. I trust my letter writers are on my side. At the same time I will never know the content or how strong the letter actually is.
 
The fact that someone could ever write a bad letter of recommendation makes zero sense to me. Why write one at all?

It's supposed to be a letter of recommendation, not libel.
 
The fact that someone could ever write a bad letter of recommendation makes zero sense to me. Why write one at all? It's supposed to be a letter of recommendation, not libel.

Because while they are called "letters of recommendation" they are actually, "letters of evaluation".

In my opinion, the primary obligation of the letter writer is to the medical school ( or, if you prefer, to the truth) , not to the student.

Not all letters will be positive. That's why you should be very careful to watch for any sign of reluctance on the part of anyone you ask to write a letter. If they say they are busy, or don't know you well enough, or make any other excuse, don't push it. They might be trying to tell you something: that the only letter they are comfortable writing for you is a negative one.

Other letter writers might feel strongly that certain applicants should NOT be a doctor. They might look forward to the opportunity to let the schools know about an applicant's character flaws. They are not being jerks if they write a negative letter for someone they think is a sociopath.

By the way, a negative letter often won't come right out and say negative things. It might just be vague. I don't deal much with letters of recommendation. I'm sure others can give better examples than I can, but a letter might read "Applicant was in my class and got an A+. He is very eager to go to medical school. He has a very interesting personality. I will be interested in seeing how his career unfolds". A skilled writer can do much better than that in composing a letter that might look positive or neutral to the casual observer, but will be screaming "Run for your lives" if read by an experienced evaluator.
 
Because while they are called "letters of recommendation" they I'm sure others can give better examples than I can, but a letter might read "Applicant was in my class and got an A+. He is very eager to go to medical school. He has a very interesting personality. I will be interested in seeing how his career unfolds". A skilled writer can do much better than that in composing a letter that might look positive or neutral to the casual observer, but will be screaming "Run for your lives" if read by an experienced evaluator.

Hmm, I thought that was really neutral and could potentially be positive as in interesting = unique and potential?
 
Well...AMERICAN LOR's that are neutral often equals negative. LORs from the UK, for instance, are much more realistic, frank, less exaggerated, etc because it is their way of writing LORs.
 
Neutral often equals negative in the world of LORs. Most LORs proclaim the applicant to be the best thing since sliced bread.

I always thought I discovered slice bread until I came to America and saw it everywhere! And sadly the slices here were always neater than when I tried as a child.
 
Hmm, I thought that was really neutral and could potentially be positive as in interesting = unique and potential?

Applicant was in my class and got an A+. He is very eager to go to medical school. He has a very interesting personality. I will be interested in seeing how his career unfolds".

Well, maybe it wasn't the best example. But here's why I would expect a school to read what I wrote as being extremely negative:

First, I just related his grade and the fact that he attended. I didn't say that he was a good student, or that I liked him. Then, I didn't say that he will be a great doctor, or should get into medical school. I just wrote that he wants to go to med school. I would hope that an astute reader would notice the difference and understand my intentions. Next, I wrote that he was interesting ( not good, not smart, not intelligent, but interesting. As in, peculiar, strange. ) No, it doesn't necessarily have to be understood as a negative, but in that context, in the absence of anything really positive, I would understand it as a carefully chosen negative, or at least neutral descriptor, which in this context is at best "damning with faint praise". Finally, I didn't say " I expect him to be a great doctor, to have an illustrious career". I wrote, "I will watch his career unfold with interest". Meaning, "watch out". It doesn't have to be read as ominously as I described it, to be sure, but it certainly said nothing positive, which again, in and of itself should be a warning. But there's ample opportunity for that letter to be read as a warning, but not one that the student could object to, if they read it.

If the school reads that letter and doesn't understand what I was trying to say, they deserve what they get.
 
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/letters-of-recommendation.985472/

Summary of thoughts on LOR

#1 Most pre-meds have zero clue whether a letter is strong or not, even if they have it in front of them.
#2 LOR are about other people bragging about you, not regurgitating your accomplishments.
#3 If someone needs a personal statement or CV to write a letter, it is a bad sign. Maybe as background information + quick interview specific toward writing the letter it can help, but for the most part, what you look for in a LOR is not something found in a CV.
 
I find requiring letters from science professors to be sort of a shortsighted policy. Most of the time they don't say much more than what the transcript says. My best letters were from PIs and people I worked with for years, or from professors with which I had small classes.
 
Actually a pretty important distinction. Rhodes/Marshall Scholarships for instance have explicitly told recommenders in the past to use less exaggeration so that truly stellar students can be distinguished.
 
Well...AMERICAN LOR's that are neutral often equals negative. LORs from the UK, for instance, are much more realistic, frank, less exaggerated, etc because it is their way of writing LORs.

Actually a pretty important distinction. Rhodes/Marshall Scholarships for instance have explicitly told recommenders in the past to use less exaggeration so that truly stellar students can be distinguished.

I don't know about you, but I've actually read quite a few LOR from the UK as well as maybe a dozen other countries (as well as a couple hundred US based LOR) and then had chance to match the LOR against applicants at both the medical school level as well as residency level. There is no perceptible difference. I would caution you to not make generalizations about thousands of people based on the instructions of a couple of scholarships which #1 are routinely ignored and #2 are relatively few in number compared to the volume of LOR written.
 
I only knew that my letters were strong for sure after going to multiple interviews and having most interviewers say "wow you have really great letters" and would pull anecdotes from certain letters.

What can you do to feel as confident about your letters as possible? Remain humble at all times, treat everyone around you with respect, don't grade-grub (When I asked a professor for a letter he asked if I ever asked to be "rounded up", he keeps track of everyone who does that), be friendly (professional of course), and take the time to be a PERSON in the writers' lives rather than just a student/volunteer/etc.
 
I know mine are strong, but I only found out after the interviews. I had two interviewers specifically talk about the LORs, saying that had really good things to say about me. One of them even mentioned some specific good things that were in my LORs.

Some people do know that their letters are strong before the interviews because of reasons mentioned above. I've had a friend tell me that a professor of his asked him to write the draft (this wasn't for med school, though; I think it was a summer research program, but it can happen in med school). Some professors may willingly show the student the letter, without the student asking (at least, I think I've heard this). However, I'm pretty sure this is rare and, for the most part, most people won't know what's in their LORs before their interviews.
 
I only knew that my letters were strong for sure after going to multiple interviews and having most interviewers say "wow you have really great letters" and would pull anecdotes from certain letters.

^^^ Exactly my case
 
You don't really, but there's a couple ways to get somewhat of an idea, I think.

- The professor is experienced in academia (and therefore probably knows the conventions of a good rec letter), likes you, and wants you to succeed. Usually it's easy to tell if they like you, because professors who think well of your abilities/future prospects will usually tell you so.
- The professor's previous mentees have done very well, and the professor likes you as much as those students.
- You've asked a professor for a rec letter before for other competitive awards/internships/grants/etc, and you got whatever you applied for.
- Another student tells you they've read that professor's letters and they write very detailed, informative letters. Of course, YMMV based on the other student's perceptive abilities.
- Someone who's read your rec letters comments to you that they were very strong. Happens sometimes in pre-med committee interviews, and med school interviews as well.
 
(a) This site caters to 99% US pre-meds and medical students. It goes without saying that we are talking about LORs from US professors, for application to US medical schools. If you wish to discuss British LORs, I'd recommend the appropriate international sub-forum.

(b) I would echo @mimelim 's thoughts.

Just throwing what I've heard out there...doesn't mean I need to go to the international forum. What I posted is not really something that would be any more useful to international students over American students.
 
I don't know about you, but I've actually read quite a few LOR from the UK as well as maybe a dozen other countries (as well as a couple hundred US based LOR) and then had chance to match the LOR against applicants at both the medical school level as well as residency level. There is no perceptible difference. I would caution you to not make generalizations about thousands of people based on the instructions of a couple of scholarships which #1 are routinely ignored and #2 are relatively few in number compared to the volume of LOR written.

That's interesting.
 
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/letters-of-recommendation.985472/

Summary of thoughts on LOR

#1 Most pre-meds have zero clue whether a letter is strong or not, even if they have it in front of them.
#2 LOR are about other people bragging about you, not regurgitating your accomplishments.
#3 If someone needs a personal statement or CV to write a letter, it is a bad sign. Maybe as background information + quick interview specific toward writing the letter it can help, but for the most part, what you look for in a LOR is not something found in a CV.

Mimelin, I just read your opening post on your thread. Pretty awesome. Gives me a lot good things to think about in terms of my past letter writers for work and my current letter writers for med school applications.

About your statement #1 above, seems to apply to secondary responses too. Until you get real feedback from an experience reader, you may not know the true quality of your essays.
 
Hmm...well darn guess I overestimated the strength of my LORs.

I had a professor (I think he wrote my "weakest" LOR) who had a rep of writing good letters but only to people who he wanted to. Many people ask him and he either goes "Meh" or "No" (happened to some of my friends). However for me and a few others who also had their letters from him, he said "I'm pretty sure I can write you a strong letter for med school" after an hour-long interview with him . I guess I should note I took 2 classes & semi-TA'd a class with him....

Ah well, I did ask all of my writers if they were comfortable writing me a strong personal LOR for medical school and they all said "yes"
 
about waiving rights-- i was told that it was absolutely necessary by my advisor for the letters to be taken seriously.. is that true in the eyes of ADCOMs?
 
about waiving rights-- i was told that it was absolutely necessary by my advisor for the letters to be taken seriously.. is that true in the eyes of ADCOMs?
Yes. If you know what is in the letter then the letter loses its luster.
 
Top