It happened, I got a bad letter of rec

[crazypsychstudent]

---

Members do not see this ad.

g

 

[erg923]

I swear, I am paranoid and irrational sometimes for good reason... People on here told me, "Don't worry, if someone agrees to write you a STRONG letter, they won't write a bad one." Well, it happened to me. This professor literally just messed with my entire future. What happened was, I asked her to write me one, and she agreed. She even had me make a spreadsheet for her with the schools and my interest in them. In the meantime, I got two really strong letters from Professors (she is an Assistant Professor, so I'm hoping her letter carries less wait). One of the letters was so strong that it said I was the best undergraduate she had ever seen (she's been teaching over 30 years) and that I'm comparable to a seasoned professional researcher. However, I asked an Ajunct professor for a letter just in case one of them forgot to send it out. I'm glad I did, because the Assistant Professor emailed me and told me to come pick up the letter because the instructions said I was supposed to put it in my packet. However, since I already had three letters, and I wasn't going to mail hers, I opened it because I had a bad feeling. Even though she was nice and agreed to write a strong one, my GUT feeling told me to read it. I went into the bathroom with my friend, who has also witnessed my interactions with this professor for the past two years, and opened it. The first thing on the form I see is that she circled "No" to something. The question she circled no for was "Would you accept this applicant for a doctorate?" To me, that was extremely bad. Her letter did say I am capable of being a successful doctoral student, researcher, and clinician, but she made two negative comments. One of them talked about my research experience and said "but it was clear who the leader was". Of course I wasn't the leader, I was the SECOND investigator! However, I put in the same amount of work as the first investigator, I just always let her give the input on what she wanted to do to the professor since it was HER study and I was simply helping her. And then she goes out of her way to say I'm over-committed, which is funny because I've completed everything I have started and she had no basis for this claim. She also says that I have a low GPA, which shocked me the most because everyone has told me anything above a 3.5 is high. I have a 3.6, which I know is not low because it's good enough for the Honor's Program! Gah. I felt so betrayed, and yes I did tell my other two letter writers what happened. They weren't even mad at me for reading it, they told me how sorry they were and that I may just have to apply to different programs next year that didn't read her letter. But they were still hopeful I could get in because she contradicted a lot of her claims in the letter. So my question is, how bad is this letter if they have three other really strong letters?

Regarding the highlighted portion: That would instantly make me suspicious, and I would likely discount a letter that said such. I mean, "comparable to seasoned professional researcher?!" come on...

I think letters should be largley positive, but ALL positives at this stage would just be silly. Of course you have things to to learn, both academcially and intepersonally. 21 and 22 years are just that, 21 and 22. How one articulates the weakness this is what can turn it into a "bad" letter.

 

[bostongal109]

I'm a little confused- you said you had 3 other people writing LORs so you didn't use this one. Did you have her mail some out directly before you noticed?

 

[PsychBiker]

I think you may be overreacting a bit here. This professor is allowed to have subjective opinions - I assume.

If she was running a doctoral program, she would have the right to say that she would not accept you in her program; she does say you would be a good student and researcher, however. In her eyes, a 3.6 GPA might be low - again, that's her opinion. You helped with the research, but someone else was the first investigator. She sees you as over-committed, which might mean that she thinks your push yourself too hard and not that you don't finish what you start.

My point is that she is giving her opinion (which is what she is suppose to do) and, please tell me, did she knowingly say anything that is objectively untrue?

This LOR alone does not seem like it would ruin your chances. Beyond that, it is doubtful that one LOR with a few critical comments will hurt you. To me, it seems like she is being honest and that's important.

 

[crazypsychstudent]

I'm a little confused- you said you had 3 other people writing LORs so you didn't use this one. Did you have her mail some out directly before you noticed?

Yes. I gave her a folder with the forms and envelopes and in the meantime asked someone else just in case.

 

[crazypsychstudent]

So the consensus is that the letter will not hurt my app?

 

[psychgirl77]

I think you may be overreacting a bit here. This professor is allowed to have subjective opinions - I assume.

If she was running a doctoral program, she would have the right to say that she would not accept you in her program; she does say you would be a good student and researcher, however. In her eyes, a 3.6 GPA might be low - again, that's her opinion. You helped with the research, but someone else was the first investigator. She sees you as over-committed, which might mean that she thinks your push yourself too hard and not that you don't finish what you start.

My point is that she is giving her opinion (which is what she is suppose to do) and, please tell me, did she knowingly say anything that is objectively untrue?

This LOR alone does not seem like it would ruin your chances. Beyond that, it is doubtful that one LOR with a few critical comments will hurt you. To me, it seems like she is being honest and that's important.

I disagree with the bolded portion. Because the vast majority of LORs are positive, receiving a negative one is likely to hurt the OP's chances. I'm sorry that this happened to you, OP. Hopefully your other letters make up for it, and if you find you do not gain entrance to a program this year, try again next year. I doubt professors will remember you received a negative letter in the past if you reapply.

As an aside, opening a LOR seems fairly unethical, given you likely waived your right to open it, and the professor didn't give you permission to read it. I am surprised your other letters writers did not find that to be a problem.

 

[erg923]

So the consensus is that the letter will not hurt my app?

Depends on how exactly it was worded, as well as what else was said to balance it out.

As I said, I expect undergrad letters to subtly articulate areas for growth and improvment. What she said doesn't sound particuarly factually untrue, and LORs will and should have an opnion element within them.

 

[bcliff]

Talking about your problems with a specific letter/letter writer with other referees seems like a big red flag to me - Why would they risk writing you a letter again (maybe you'll need more next year?) now that they know you open sealed mail addressed to other people (like psychgirl said) and essentially gossip about letter writers with other faculty. I also agree with psychgirl that subtle negativity in an LOR may be a polite way of hinting at bigger problems or issues a professor has with an applicant. I also would refrain from suggesting assistant professors have less pull than associate professors or other types of faculty - My primary mentor in UG (PI of the largest civilian study of PTSD) was an assistant professor at a top medical school, and I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest he had less influence than other professors in the department.

I'm not sure which programs you're applying to, but with clinical PhD programs' average acceptance rates being between 5-15%, I think a negative letter may be enough to tip the scales out of your favor (but I'm not familiar with the rest of your application/CV, so this may be untrue). If you don't get in this year and do decide to reapply next year, be careful not to focus all of your attention on this one letter. It may be easier to blame the results of a sub-par letter for not getting into grad school, when the real reason may be more systemic to your application as a whole.

 

[crazypsychstudent]

Talking about your problems with a specific letter/letter writer with other referees seems like a big red flag to me - Why would they risk writing you a letter again (maybe you'll need more next year?) now that they know you open sealed mail addressed to other people (like psychgirl said) and essentially gossip about letter writers with other faculty. I also agree with psychgirl that subtle negativity in an LOR may be a polite way of hinting at bigger problems or issues a professor has with an applicant. I also would refrain from suggesting assistant professors have less pull than associate professors or other types of faculty - My primary mentor in UG (PI of the largest civilian study of PTSD) was an assistant professor at a top medical school, and I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest he had less influence than other professors in the department.

I'm not sure which programs you're applying to, but with clinical PhD programs average acceptance rates between 5-15%, I think a negative letter may be enough to tip the scales out of your favor (but I'm not familiar with the rest of your application/CV, so this may be untrue). If you don't get in this year and do decide to reapply next year, be careful not to focus all of your attention on this one letter. It may be easier to blame the results of a sub-par letter for not getting into grad school, when the real reason may be more systemic to your application as a whole.

I'm applying to PsyD programs and some have a 30-40% acceptance rate.

 

[bcliff]

I'm applying to PsyD programs and some have a 30-40% acceptance rate.

 

[PsychBiker]

In my experience, unless its a top-tier PsyD, having good stats will generally be enough to get you in. That is, of course, assuming that you are not a unsociable and mean-spirited during your interview. I still think one LOR probably won't ruin everything for you.

Adding to the concern of others, you really shouldn't be opening letters unless you have a good reason to. By the way, a bad feeling is not a good reason. Its fairly unethical, by that I mean deceitful - I will assume you knew opening the letter wasn't right. Regardless, telling your other writers that you did such a thing shows immaturity and a lack of integrity. That said, I would have also opened it as well, but I sure would not have told anyone about it - and definitely not faculty.

Anyways, good luck! Enjoy the debt - I know I am. =)

 

[Suenya]

Regarding the highlighted portion: That would instantly make me suspicious, and I would likely discount a letter that said such. I mean, "comparable to seasoned professional researcher?!" come on...

I think letters should be largley positive, but ALL positives at this stage would just be silly. Of course you have things to to learn, both academcially and intepersonally. 21 and 22 years are just that, 21 and 22. How one articulates the weakness this is what can turn it into a "bad" letter.

I've seen one of my LOR writers' letters for another of his former RAs (he asked me to make sure there weren't any mistakes and had her permission). We all are very strong candidates because of how he selects RAs to begin with (normally strong grades, very high test scores, and obviously a lot of research experience under him and prior), and he wrote her as super strong LOR with no negatives and high accolades. While he might be slightly overenthusiastic in his description of her positives, they are certainly all true.

I suspect my LOR looks very similar (with obvious differences based on what we've done and our personal experiences and personalities) in terms of how enthusiastically positive it is. Should I be worried that programs will view this negatively? (He's a major researcher and a full professor at a prestigious medical school). It's not quite as over the top as "equivalent to a seasoned researcher" but it is likely full of very, very high praise.

 

[MCParent]

Opening the letter was unethical, but IMO so was agreeing to write a "strong letter" (if that was what was asked for). Letter stuff like that has lead to lawsuits in the business world. I show my letter writees their letters to avoid things like this. Ugly situation all around, but as others said unlikely to impact apps at those kinds of programs IMO.

 

[hopeful8]

I've seen one of my LOR writers' letters for another of his former RAs (he asked me to make sure there weren't any mistakes and had her permission). We all are very strong candidates because of how he selects RAs to begin with (normally strong grades, very high test scores, and obviously a lot of research experience under him and prior), and he wrote her as super strong LOR with no negatives and high accolades. While he might be slightly overenthusiastic in his description of her positives, they are certainly all true.

I suspect my LOR looks very similar (with obvious differences based on what we've done and our personal experiences and personalities) in terms of how enthusiastically positive it is. Should I be worried that programs will view this negatively? (He's a major researcher and a full professor at a prestigious medical school). It's not quite as over the top as "equivalent to a seasoned researcher" but it is likely full of very, very high praise.

I have never been in a position of evaluating applicants/LORs (so you can take my comments with a grain of salt), but based on secondhand knowledge, I have heard that negative LORs are rare (although, now that I read the OP's post, perhaps it is more common than I realize). Some faculty/post-docs have told me that more often, they can clearly distinguish good LORs from great LORs. The good letters are positive but relatively generic, and essentially code for: "meh, this person is fine". The great letters are the ones with the glowing endorsements. It sounds like you might get a great letter, which is awesome 🙂 Of course, these endorsements should still be realistic relative to your level of training--which is why readers might be suspicious of an LOR describing an undergraduate student as "equivalent to a seasoned researcher." I recently read a LOR from a letter writer (with his permission) that was extremely complimentary while still appropriately representing the applicant's status as a trainee (e.g., "Applicant has excellent clinical formulation skills for a student clinician"; talked about areas in which the applicant grew and excelled over time). So, bottom line: if you think your LOR writer is going to write something very positive yet still honest/accurate about you, then congrats!

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Not sure if it is too late, but I know some Psy.D. programs (such as Nova Southeastern) allow you to update your application file up until the January 8th deadline. Things like essays, CV, LOR, etc. can easily be updated during this time frame. If this is the case for any of your programs you have applied to, you can simply request that they remove the LOR written by "X" from your file to replace the third letter with person "Y."

This allows you to at least present your best work to the committee. I made some punctuation errors in my original essay; having noticed this, I corrected them and sent it back to admissions via the graduate admissions email they instructed me to send all documents to.

 

[cara susanna]

Opening the letter was unethical, but IMO so was agreeing to write a "strong letter" (if that was what was asked for). Letter stuff like that has lead to lawsuits in the business world. I show my letter writees thier letters to avoid things like this. Ugly situation all around, but as others said unlikely to impact apps at those kinds of programs IMO.

Yeah, especially if the letter writer checked that he or she would not admit this applicant into a doctoral program. That goes far beyond developmentally-appropriate concerns, IMO.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Yeah, especially if the letter writer checked that he or she would not admit this applicant into a doctoral program. That goes far beyond developmentally-appropriate concerns, IMO.

To be fair, I believe the writer indicated that she wouldn't accept the applicant herself, not that she doesn't think the applicant should be admitted to any program, as she then goes on to say that the student is capable of being a successful doctoral student. It's slightly an issue of semantics, but I could see how writers might interpret and answer the two questions differently.

I could also be wrong, as I of course haven't seen the question itself.

 

[marathonman51213]

This could be interpreted many different ways. It sounds like you're applying to mostly PsyD programs. Is this letter writer at a PhD program? As these programs look for different qualities/traits in applicants, perhaps this letter writer was simply saying that you wouldn't be a good fit for his/her program because you are applying to PsyD programs and desire more clinical work than what his/her program could offer.

 

[aly cat]

For better or for worse, I have an anecdote about this. A faculty member told me that though they directly told the student they could not provide a strong letter, the student insisted. They said that they stated in bold print that they would not recommend the student to be accepted to a graduate program. Allegedly, the student was accepted to a couple of professional school programs.

 

[smalltownpsych]

If you are operating at the level of a seasoned researcher, it makes no sense to not be applying to funded PhD programs. Also, I agree that you shouldn't be opening up private communications not addressed to you.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

For better or for worse, I have an anecdote about this. A faculty member told me that though they directly told the student they could not provide a strong letter, the student insisted.

Good on the faculty member for being honest, though I'd have declined to write a letter. The student may not have understood the negative impact a lukewarm to unflattering letter can have on an application, though the faculty member probably should have declined in the best interest of the student.

 

[clip.clop]

1) You'd be surprised how often this type of thing happens to all types and skill-levels of applicants. I managed a lab in a previous life, and I've seen much, much worse.
2) Based on what you shared, it doesn't sound like a bad assessment--just not a super strong recommendation. There is a difference.
3) Based on the behavior you've reported, it sounds like her letter could've rightly been worse. For christ's sake...you may as well send a memo to all of your mentors and the schools to which you're applying containing the words "My word means nothing! You can't trust me!" I really doubt the other mentors agree with your behavior or position--sounds like they were just acknowledging your frustration.
4) Your best route is to use this as a learning experience, because that's what it should be. You obviously have a lot to learn. You've been given the opportunity to do so by this experience. Seize it. You'll eventually regret it if you don't.
5) FWIW, once you realize that not all profs are gods, and not all profs see each other that way or even like each other all the time, you'll see that this isn't as big of a deal as what could happen. Say you applied to work with someone that thinks this prof who wrote the letter is a hack...you could be just fine. Remember, the weird thing about humans (including people smart enough to be professors) is that they all pretend to respect one another when, in reality, it doesn't really work that way.

 

[crazypsychstudent]

This could be interpreted many different ways. It sounds like you're applying to mostly PsyD programs. Is this letter writer at a PhD program? As these programs look for different qualities/traits in applicants, perhaps this letter writer was simply saying that you wouldn't be a good fit for his/her program because you are applying to PsyD programs and desire more clinical work than what his/her program could offer.

Haha, no. We only have master's programs at my school.

 

[G Costanza]

No one asked me but I tend to think it's unethical to open a sealed letter not meant for you. You will be faced with more difficult decisions in this field going forward. I hope you see how that could be problematic.

I also think it's ridiculous/borderline unethical to agree to write a letter of recommendation and then not recommend the student. I would be really upset.

 

[WisNeuro]

Let's not make assumptions based on hearsay. We only have one side of the story. I do,however, agree with the people saying that the letter should not have been opened. Unless it's agreed upon that it would be shared, that is a no-no. If a student of mine approached me after opening a sealed letter, good or bad inside, I would rescind any recommendation I had for that student. There are many more ambiguous situations you will face in terms of your professional and ethical conduct, not a good way to start out.

 

[crazypsychstudent]

Well I'm getting interviews so I guess the letter wasn't that bad!