Interesting letter of recommendation question

[M3dhop3ful]

Hey All

I was wondering if I can use a professor from the department of Pharmacology as my non-science reference. I realize it is considered a health science and not a science.

He has taught me, but in a course which may be classified as a science (it was cardiovascular science course, but it was not just physiology - there were some aspects of anatomy and pharmacology). The course is considered a life science course, and has the course code of "lisc".
Given that it may be classified as a science course by amcas, would this prof qualify for my non-science reference based on the class me taught me or based on the department he belongs to?

Any advice is greatly appreciated

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[SarsMO]

I'm going to go with: that's a science letter.

 

[beachblonde]

I'm going to go with: that's a science letter.

+1

When they say "non-science," they're looking to make sure you took a history/English/government/etc course. Pharmacology is most definitely science.

 

[M3dhop3ful]

+1

When they say "non-science," they're looking to make sure you took a history/English/government/etc course. Pharmacology is most definitely science.

Then would a statistics course be considered a non-science? Because a friend of mine told me it falls under "science".

Its not that I haven't taken such courses - I have. There were also 500 other people at the time who took the course. I just don't know any of the profs very well.

 

[beachblonde]

I think that using the BCPM classification for sciences vs. non-science is best: if it's biology, chem, physics, or math, then it's "science." I may be wrong, but given that's the AMCAS classification, it's probably safe to assume med schools will use it as well.

We all have the same problems with getting LORs: class sizes, absent-minded profs, etc. You just have to go out of your way to make sure you can get the right letters.

 

[M3dhop3ful]

I think that using the BCPM classification for sciences vs. non-science is best: if it's biology, chem, physics, or math, then it's "science." I may be wrong, but given that's the AMCAS classification, it's probably safe to assume med schools will use it as well.

We all have the same problems with getting LORs: class sizes, absent-minded profs, etc. You just have to go out of your way to make sure you can get the right letters.

Yeah I think many people are going to end up experiencing the same problem regarding large class sizes.

According to your logic, which is the same logic I was employing, Pharmacology and pharmacy are listed under health sciences, which is not bio, chem, math, or physics. The marks for those classes are not counted in the BCMP GPA. I think the best thing is to call the schools and inquire individually.

 

[talbo]

Yeah I think many people are going to end up experiencing the same problem regarding large class sizes.

According to your logic, which is the same logic I was employing, Pharmacology and pharmacy are listed under health sciences, which is not bio, chem, math, or physics. The marks for those classes are not counted in the BCMP GPA. I think the best thing is to call the schools and inquire individually.

I think it depends on the content of the class, one of my friend is a biotech major but they are required to take an ethics/philosophy course regarding biotechnology and the class consists of papers, essays, research paper, and none of it is science, even the exams are all essay questions. he asked the schools if it can count as non-science and they said yes even though the class was administered by a biotech professor and the course was named something along the lines biotechnology and society or something.

 

[EpiPEN]

Think of it like this. If you were on admissons commitee, and you wanted a non-science letter to see how well rounded the applicants are, and some applicant brings out that statistic or pharmacology letter and tells you it's non-science. What would you think of the applicant? Dunno about you but I'd get a little suspicious of why the applicant couldn't provide what I had originally wanted...

 

[M3dhop3ful]

Think of it like this. If you were on admissons commitee, and you wanted a non-science letter to see how well rounded the applicants are, and some applicant brings out that statistic or pharmacology letter and tells you it's non-science. What would you think of the applicant? Dunno about you but I'd get a little suspicious of why the applicant couldn't provide what I had originally wanted...

because the profs don't know you at all and as a result, these reference letters won't be able to say more than what my transcript says is all?
As soon as I call up the schools, i will post here.

 

[beachblonde]

Yeah I think many people are going to end up experiencing the same problem regarding large class sizes.

According to your logic, which is the same logic I was employing, Pharmacology and pharmacy are listed under health sciences, which is not bio, chem, math, or physics. The marks for those classes are not counted in the BCMP GPA. I think the best thing is to call the schools and inquire individually.

Yes, it's not true BCPM, but I'll have to concur with EpiPEN on this one.

Think of LORs as tools to show what kind of student you are and what talents you have. Do you really want to limit yourself so severely by using so many science-y letters?

 

[junkct]

maybe a stupid question, but what about a letter from a prof who taught a public health class (in the Urban Studies dept.) Is that considered a social science? It would suffice for the non-science rec letter?

Also, about engineering courses.. could they satisfy a science letter?

 

[mdmarty]

I don't think schools really care if you have a non-sci LOR, even if they do explicitly state they want a non-sci LOR. I have 5 LORs (2 research PIs, 1 computer science prof, 1 bio prof who I TAed for, 1 MD who I shadowed) and I have gotten interviews to schools that want a non-sci LOR .

 

[capn jazz]

Can someone tell me why pharmacology is not a science? Isn't it the study of how drugs affect organisms? As in: this drug blocks the beta adrenergic receptor blah blah blah. How is that NOT science?