Just Saw my LoR...

[TheAdmin]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello!

I received a letter of recommendation from a volunteer coordinator and I have a few questions.

The body of the letter is about 450-500 words, is that long enough? In the letter, she basically described what her roles are, what I did with specific examples and what qualities I have. The examples that she used demonstrates my leadership and communication capabilities and looks very favorably on me. This is only 1 page, and I've heard people getting 3-4 page LoR... I have actually gotten a 3 page LoR from a prof, so I am slightly worried

Also, she said "I am quiet in nature but assertive when she needs to be" I am not liking the "quiet" part, but she does say that I am a leader, good at speaking in public, etc. Is this alright?

This is the first time actually seeing a LoR from someone... so I'm not sure how to evaluate this letter. Thank you!

 

[loljkttyl]

I think 1-2 pages is fine; 3 is actually kind of long unless it was double-spaced. I am not liking the 'quiet" part at all. It would be better if she said respectful instead.

 

[MilkmanAl]

I'd say anything over a page is probably longer than usual. I mean, if the writer has something incredible to say about you, I can't see why a 2-ish pager hurt, but you're increasing the "get on with it" factor substantially. Adcoms have more to do than read your life story.

In any event, this sounds like a mediocre letter, all around. It's from someone who presumably doesn't know you terribly well, and "...has this quality, but..." statements are never good things to see in your LoR's. I'd probably omit it unless the rest rest of it is just outstanding.

 

[TheAdmin]

I'd say anything over a page is probably longer than usual. I mean, if the writer has something incredible to say about you, I can't see why a 2-ish pager hurt, but you're increasing the "get on with it" factor substantially. Adcoms have more to do than read your life story.

In any event, this sounds like a mediocre letter, all around. It's from someone who presumably doesn't know you terribly well, and "...has this quality, but..." statements are never good things to see in your LoR's. I'd probably omit it unless the rest rest of it is just outstanding.

Hi there. So the "quiet in nature" is a huge minus? Other than that part, she only says great things about me using examples and end off by saying that id be a great candidate and will be a great doctor in the future.

What do you need in a superb LoR? I personally thought that this was a great LoR content wise. Also she does know me quite well because I've been working with her for 2 years. thanks!

 

[wagmanager]

I guess this what our society has come to. Quietness is now equated with weakness. I don't see how being quiet is a flaw unless she phrased it wrongly.In my opinion a lot of people just talk too much in order to cme across as assertive and forget that in a multitude of words there is usually a lot of fluff

 

[noshie]

I'd say anything over a page is probably longer than usual. I mean, if the writer has something incredible to say about you, I can't see why a 2-ish pager hurt, but you're increasing the "get on with it" factor substantially. Adcoms have more to do than read your life story.

In any event, this sounds like a mediocre letter, all around. It's from someone who presumably doesn't know you terribly well, and "...has this quality, but..." statements are never good things to see in your LoR's. I'd probably omit it unless the rest rest of it is just outstanding.

Agreed. The physician that wrote my letter got his secretary to shorten it from 3 pages to 1 because he has worked on adcoms before and said that anything over 1 page is annoying.

 

[Musclemass]

I don't see how being quiet is a flaw...

It's certainly not a strength. Most doctors provide their services with actions AND words. Someone with a quiet nature will be less effective. You don't have to like it, that's how human nature is. The opposite of quiet in this context is not being verbose or overly talkative as you suggest, but rather being well spoken. That's a desirable trait no matter what.

OP- is the comment inaccurate? If not, take it as a prod to do something about it.

 

[cfx]

I guess this what our society has come to. Quietness is now equated with weakness. I don't see how being quiet is a flaw unless she phrased it wrongly.In my opinion a lot of people just talk too much in order to cme across as assertive and forget that in a multitude of words there is usually a lot of fluff

I was thinking the same thing when I read the post. What is wrong with the OP being "quiet"? They're a volunteer, and in no position to be running around asserting themselves in conversations that aren't their business or that they have no place offering opinions on. Obviously, if quietness goes to the extreme that you do not respond to others when asked questions, or cannot relate to others in social situations...not good. I don't think the letter implies that, though. There are always a few gunner volunteers at the hospital I volunteer at who cling to any doctor or nurse in sight, continuously talking at them and following them around without any indication that the staff wanted them to do so. To me, a volunteer who quietly goes about their work and is highly productive and helpful as a result is far more effective.

For what it's worth, adcoms more than likely just skim through the letters basically looking for things that pop out at them--no fine-tooth combs used. I'm sure they'd rather see a 1/2 page letter that concisely gets to the point than a 3 page letter full of verbiage and fluff that they have to slog through.

 

[eablackwell]

I agree, 1 page is perfectly reasonable. My boss & 1 of my profs asked me to approve their letters (though I told them they did not have to show me). Both wrote 1 page LORs.

I also agree with this sounding like a weak letter (unless you left something amazing out in the post). My letters made me want to worship the ground my writers walked on, LOL.

There's nothing wrong with being quiet, but I think it's the way the sentence reads. It came across as a little negative when I read the line but I don't think your writer meant for it to be that way. If she goes on to talk about how awesome you are I wouldn't worry about it at all.

 

[BlueElmo]

The letter sounds pretty good, a standard LOR.

 

[TheAdmin]

Hello! Thank you guys for your responses

So I guess the consensus is that the letter is good at best?

I feel like she wrote me a great letter because before she talked about the "quiet" part, she said I am a leader and a collaborator. I held a leadership position at the volunteer center and she also said i am certainly the most effective leader in the time she's worked at X.

The fact that she said I am a leader/collaborator/creative/comfortable speaking in front of many people + with peers/contributes meaningfully in discussion shows that I am not just "quiet in nature," right? Or does the quiet part overshadow everything else that she said?

Thank you all!

PS: I'd say that I am not really "quiet in nature," although I am not too talkative either... Not really sure why she said this. I am definitely not shy... lol

 

[GoLytely]

OP- is the comment inaccurate? If not, take it as a prod to do something about it.

Hells yea! Work on becoming loud, obnoxious and lacking of self awareness!

Seriously, there's nothing wrong with it. The strong, silent type is traditionally the coolest character in the story. Some people will hold it against you if they misinterpret it as shyness, but at least you won't make yourself look like an idiot by talking too much.

 

[flip26]

First, no adcom gives a **** what your volunteer coordinator has to say about you.

Worse, what she had to say is mediocre at best. A backhanded compliment...don't use this letter.

 

[Musclemass]

Some people will hold it against you ...

I think you're agreeing with me? From your other comments, perhaps you have the same issue?

OP- If this is how you are, it's how you are. I agree that the comment was certainly not added as a compliment. Might other letter writers make the same comment? It could be you can't avoid having this assessment mentioned in your letters if it's a common impression people have of you.

I say it's better to address the issue, learn to be comfortable being a bit more expressive. You'll make a better impression at your interviews and beyond. Let the others rationalize their shortcoming while you improve yours.

 

[cfx]

First, no adcom gives a **** what your volunteer coordinator has to say about you.

Worse, what she had to say is mediocre at best. A backhanded compliment...don't use this letter.

I really don't see it as a backhanded compliment. What motive could the writer possibly have for doing that? I read it as more of a neutral comment. In fact, she probably even intended it as a compliment. But I guess it's all subjective in how the reader perceives it...

 

[rHinO1]

Hello!

I received a letter of recommendation from a volunteer coordinator and I have a few questions.

The body of the letter is about 450-500 words, is that long enough? In the letter, she basically described what her roles are, what I did with specific examples and what qualities I have. The examples that she used demonstrates my leadership and communication capabilities and looks very favorably on me. This is only 1 page, and I've heard people getting 3-4 page LoR... I have actually gotten a 3 page LoR from a prof, so I am slightly worried

Also, she said "I am quiet in nature but assertive when she needs to be" I am not liking the "quiet" part, but she does say that I am a leader, good at speaking in public, etc. Is this alright?

This is the first time actually seeing a LoR from someone... so I'm not sure how to evaluate this letter. Thank you!

I think that a letter should be long enough to discuss why the writer thinks you would be a good doctor and succeed in medical school. This should easily be done in a page. If a letter is longer than 1 page then it better be because you are so amazing the writer has a ton of substantial things he is compelled to mention. If it is longer than a page and full of fluff and non-pertinent information then what ever support the letter provides you will be lost.

I think that saying you are "quiet in nature" sounds like you are easy going or mellow. I think "quiet in nature" is different than "she is a quiet person." Your writer probably could have used a better choice of words, but I think you are far to concerned with this. I think quiet in nature but assertive when necessary sounds like a good thing (at worst neutral). You said she also included a lot of other really nice things about you so I wouldn't hesitate to use the letter.

 

[DbDan]

First, no adcom gives a **** what your volunteer coordinator has to say about you.

Worse, what she had to say is mediocre at best. A backhanded compliment...don't use this letter.

I completely disagree with this but thats just my opinion. Having a solid LOR from a volunteer coordinator in a clinical setting will demonstrate your passion for actually volunteering and show it was not simply something to bolster your application. Every advisor/professor/adcom I've talked to has said it is definitely good thing to have a good LOR from your relevant volunteer activities.

To the OP, honestly, I see very few people in here being able to thoroughly judge the letter without reading the entire thing. Personally, I feel like "quiet in nature" does not equate to shy or a large negative, she also qualified it by saying that you are assertive when the situation calls for it. IMO at worst this is a neutral comment and if everything else in the letter is positive I would for sure use it. If you have doubts, have someone objective read it and see what they say. I showed my dad letters (he was a college professor at one point) and if he said it made him proud to read things like that written about me I used it and if he said it was just good I didn't

 

[klmnop]

Are you deciding whether or not to use it? Or why else are you asking how to evaluate it... cause I'm assuming you don't have the capability to change it...

Anyway, in general letters should have no negatives.... like job interviews. ie if you give the adcoms no negatives to begin with, then they have none to think about.

"Quiet" is fine i think because the writer countered with "assertive".
Poor choice of one word, maybe.
Application killer, don't count on it.
Its better than saying "aggressive" and "loud".

 

[duress]

I suppose if the letter said "she's quiet all the time and never engages everyone" I would see that as a 'burn immediately'. While I do see your concern OP, it almost feels now like we're mandating an exact personality someone will need to have to apply. Quite a few doctors I know are "quiet in nature, but assertive when they need to be" so I don't really understand why, in principle, it's detrimental, though I suppose anyone can interpret anything any way they want.

Just curious, but if you have a good relationship with the coordinator, and she knows you have read it (presumably for feedback), maybe you could kindly ask her to remove that line?

 

[lord_jeebus]

Most LORs, even the best ones, are one page long. Greater than two, and there better be a juicy story or no one's going to read it.

I wouldn't worry about the "quiet" thing because it is qualified by "assertive when she needs to be" which is an important quality for a physician.

 

[drizzt3117]

I think the letter sounds fine. I wouldn't mind med students being more quiet, personally 😉

 

[flip26]

I completely disagree with this but thats just my opinion. Having a solid LOR from a volunteer coordinator in a clinical setting will demonstrate your passion for actually volunteering and show it was not simply something to bolster your application. Every advisor/professor/adcom I've talked to has said it is definitely good thing to have a good LOR from your relevant volunteer activities.

To the OP, honestly, I see very few people in here being able to thoroughly judge the letter without reading the entire thing. Personally, I feel like "quiet in nature" does not equate to shy or a large negative, she also qualified it by saying that you are assertive when the situation calls for it. IMO at worst this is a neutral comment and if everything else in the letter is positive I would for sure use it. If you have doubts, have someone objective read it and see what they say. I showed my dad letters (he was a college professor at one point) and if he said it made him proud to read things like that written about me I used it and if he said it was just good I didn't

Baloney.

Get 2 sci, one non-sci, and if you have it, a letter from a research activity supervisor, and that is all you ever need.

Letters from volunteer coordinators, physicians you have shadowed, etc., are as close to superfluous as you can get.

Once you apply you will discover that most schools either tell you exactly what they want (2 sci, one non-sci, or a committee letter in lieu) or they will put a cap on the number of letters at 2 or 3. Schools do NOT want 5 or 6 letters...in other words, the superfluous ones should not be used.

There were a bunch of schools I sent only 2 letters to...and any letters used should absolutely glow - I got to read one of my letters, and the prof had me walking on water with stuff like "finest student in my 25 year career" and such...a volunteer coordinator who offers a backhanded compliment? Toss it...

 

[z31]

Hey flip, what if the OP isn't interested in research, or doesn't have a research supervisor who knows him well?

I'm curious about if you considered that possibility, or ignored it so that you could be as caustic as possible.

 

[z31]

You said that your LOR writer otherwise spoke highly of you and supported her assessment with specific examples. That's good. Unless you expect that you will have other letters that unambiguously speak highly of you AND give reasons behind their assessment, just send it in. Being "quiet" will not prevent you from getting a secondary or interview.

It's better than a LOR that says "best student ever" and "walks on water". Anyone can say that about anyone.

 

[muhali3]

"quiet" is ok since she qualified it with "assertive when she needs to be". This shows that you aren't shy but rather introverted/reserved and that is perfectly fine.

 

[bamtuba]

Baloney.

Get 2 sci, one non-sci, and if you have it, a letter from a research activity supervisor, and that is all you ever need.

Letters from volunteer coordinators, physicians you have shadowed, etc., are as close to superfluous as you can get.

I would disagree with this if the letter you get is amazing.

I agree that you should have 2 academic and the committee since most schools require this, but there is nothing wrong with including letters from people who a)know you VERY well and b) have a background that qualifies said person to compare you to other people going through what you seek to do (such as a physician who happens to be the director of a residency program or has ties to a school in which you are interested).

Also, don't be afraid of getting letters from those that aren't tenured, PhD, etc. especially if the letter will be amazing and the person has enough experience to adequately compare you to other students that have come before.

Most schools won't know who the big names are at your university anyhow in most cases, so they rarely care.

As far as being "quiet," it will be read differenly by different people. Just like here on SDN there will be those that like it, hate it, and don't care one way or another.

I don't think the letter sounds bad, but if this is a common theme throughout your LORs then I would think about ditching it. But that's just me.

 

[flip26]

Hey flip, what if the OP isn't interested in research, or doesn't have a research supervisor who knows him well?

I'm curious about if you considered that possibility, or ignored it so that you could be as caustic as possible.

I am curious, too. Have you actually gone through a cycle? Furthermore, do you know how to read? Go back and read what I wrote.

All that is needed in this game are 2 sci and one non-sci prof letters, plus a committee letter if your school has one. For those people who have a major research experience, some schools will actually require that letter. A few schools require that one of the prof letters comes from a prof in your major, so kill two birds here and get one.

The vol coordinator letters are superfluous, and in the case of the OP who has actually read the tepid letter, it is a bad idea to use it. That letter will add NOTHING to his app, and could easily be misconstrued as a warning that he is not assertive enough to be a med student.

When you actually go through a cycle, you will find out that most schools cap the number of letters they will accept at 3, so these extra letters are useless. Quite a few schools only require 2 letters.

 

[MilkmanAl]

I think a lot of you are missing a key point: Any LOR that isn't amazing is neutral, at best. Slightly positive overall=terrible by comparison. You can't come off as above average in your letters and expect to have any success.

 

[flip26]

I would disagree with this if the letter you get is amazing.

Well, for the OP, this is not the case.

Plus - it is not very common that applicants get to read these letters, so most of the time you don't really know if the letter is "amazing" or not.

 

[starkcrazy]

sounds like the letter writer isn't familiar with the medical school admission process and what it takes to write an outstanding LOR

the whole "quiet in nature but blah blah blah" sounds like something that would be overheard among friends. it's not phrased in the appropriate way for a letter. i think this person doesn't have much experience writing LORs and shouldnt have agreed to write in the first place.

my two cents. scrap her letter and find someone else who's willing to spend more time on it and wants to see you get into medical school.

 

[flip26]

I think a lot of you are missing a key point: Any LOR that isn't amazing is neutral, at best. Slightly positive overall=terrible by comparison. You can't come off as above average in your letters and expect to have any success.

sounds like the letter writer isn't familiar with the medical school admission process and what it takes to write an outstanding LOR

the whole "quiet in nature but blah blah blah" sounds like something that would be overheard among friends. it's not phrased in the appropriate way for a letter. i think this person doesn't have much experience writing LORs and shouldnt have agreed to write in the first place.

my two cents. scrap her letter and find someone else who's willing to spend more time on it and wants to see you get into medical school.

Amen times 2...

Your letters should glow. You should get letters from profs who know you well and know how to write a great letter.

 

[Hifey]

First, no adcom gives a **** what your volunteer coordinator has to say about you.

Worse, what she had to say is mediocre at best. A backhanded compliment...don't use this letter.

I would agree with the bolded IF the OP hadn't mentioned that they held a leadership position within the volunteer organization. I think coordinating stuff like volunteer programs takes a lot more work than merely being an officer of a club. I would know. Otherwise, a letter from someone who barely knows you who you've met only a couple of times is indeed superfluous (although isn't that what lot of people get from professors 🙄 )


I wouldn't call "quiet by nature" a backhanded compliment either. If the words shy or quiet were used, I'd be concerned but quiet at nature ( to me at least) suggests calm, collected, and efficient without causing a big production every time something needs to be done. If the rest of the letter is amazing use it. If the sentence you told us was the best part, chuck it.

Oh, and I can't imagine adcoms even read the letter that closely before interviewing. I bet tons of them have perfected the art of skimming 🙂

 

[rHinO1]

Well, for the OP, this is not the case.

Plus - it is not very common that applicants get to read these letters, so most of the time you don't really know if the letter is "amazing" or not.

Did you somehow get to read the letter? If not then you are evaluating the letter based on 1 sentence that 50% of us think is ok and the other half seem to think is negative. Like you yourself said, most of us never get to read these letters so I find it interesting so many people spout off this "walk on water" junk like they know every letter they submitted was amazing.

The one part that I agree with you about is that most schools seem to want 2 sci, 1 non-sci, and a research letter if available. Anything else is just extra, but it is fine to submit a 5th letter from a volunteer position if allowed and the experience was significant.

 

[Jihad]

Um.. whatever happened to not seeing your letters of recommendation before submitting?. Does this mean you will notify AMCAS that you have seen your letter or are you going to lie? If you are going to be honest I would pick a different letter because med schools put more faith in letters that you say that you have not seen before submission.

 

[pharaoh88]

From what I have read thus far, I would ditch it. In my opinion, an average LOR will be entirely positive and somewhat specific. A great LOR will say flattering, specific things about who you are as a person. Use the opportunity to read this letter to your advantage and drop the letter. It sounds just below average at best.

 

[pharaoh88]

Um.. whatever happened to not seeing your letters of recommendation before submitting?. Does this mean you will notify AMCAS that you have seen your letter or are you going to lie? If you are going to be honest I would pick a different letter because med schools put more faith in letters that you say that you have not seen before submission.

There is nothing that needs to be indicated on AMCAS for this. On the application you indicate that you waived your legal right to see the letter. This by no means prohibits your letter writer from choosing to show you what he or she wrote.

 

[klmnop]

Um.. whatever happened to not seeing your letters of recommendation before submitting?. Does this mean you will notify AMCAS that you have seen your letter or are you going to lie? If you are going to be honest I would pick a different letter because med schools put more faith in letters that you say that you have not seen before submission.

The legal right has to do with the school showing you the letter upon request. The letter writer is allowed to do whatever they wish up until submission.

 

[z31]

My reading skills are all right, flip. Enough to notice that you've re-phrased your post with a convenient addition: "For those people who have a major research experience," and substituted a meek "superfluous" for "as close to superfluous as you can get." I'm sure that's how you meant to say it the first time around.

One of my LORs was written by a non-professor who gave examples of the dedicated leadership I had taken of the extracurricular that she supervised. I only found out because one of my interviewers said it was one of the strongest recs he'd read. I think I would have done just as well this cycle if the writer said "She has a quiet nature." I recommended to the OP that if the letter says strong things with specific examples, the adcom should hear them, unless she has other letters to send that do the same and do so less ambiguously.

 

[flip26]

My reading skills are all right, flip. Enough to notice that you've re-phrased your post with a convenient addition: "For those people who have a major research experience," and substituted a meek "superfluous" for "as close to superfluous as you can get." I'm sure that's how you meant to say it the first time around.

One of my LORs was written by a non-professor who gave examples of the dedicated leadership I had taken of the extracurricular that she supervised. I only found out because one of my interviewers said it was one of the strongest recs he'd read. I think I would have done just as well this cycle if the writer said "She has a quiet nature." I recommended to the OP that if the letter says strong things with specific examples, the adcom should hear them, unless she has other letters to send that do the same and do so less ambiguously.

Rephrased with an addition after the first time? You mean I edited my post after you lodged your weak sauce complaint? Umm, no. Those qualifiers were in the post you quoted where I mentioned them, from the gitgo, and in previous posts as well.

Learn how to read or you will have a tough time in med school, chief. The point that I and others are making, repeatedly for those of you with reading comprehension problems, is that if you know a letter has as you describe it an "ambiguous" tone that could be viewed negatively, and it is one of the unnecessary or as I call them superfluous letters (not a prof letter or research advisor), then the OP should dump it.

The fact that you had a "strong" letter from an activity supervisor is completely irrelevant to this thread. The OP does not, and thus should not use it.

Conversely, if the OP had written to say he had a vol activity letter that glowed and had him walking on water, I am fairly certain the consensus opinion would have been to use the letter, with the caveat that many schools limit the number of letters, or specifically prescribe the letters they want to see, and he may not be able to use it at every school.

 

[rHinO1]

Rephrased with an addition after the first time? You mean I edited my post after you lodged your weak sauce complaint? Umm, no. Those qualifiers were in the post you quoted where I mentioned them, from the gitgo, and in previous posts as well.

Learn how to read or you will have a tough time in med school, chief. The point that I and others are making, repeatedly for those of you with reading comprehension problems, is that if you know a letter has as you describe it an "ambiguous" tone that could be viewed negatively, and it is one of the unnecessary or as I call them superfluous letters (not a prof letter or research advisor), then the OP should dump it.

The fact that you had a "strong" letter from an activity supervisor is completely irrelevant to this thread. The OP does not, and thus should not use it.

Conversely, if the OP had written to say he had a vol activity letter that glowed and had him walking on water, I am fairly certain the consensus opinion would have been to use the letter, with the caveat that many schools limit the number of letters, or specifically prescribe the letters they want to see, and he may not be able to use it at every school.

In your opinion.

for every one of your posts in this thread:

 

[flip26]

In your opinion.

Umm, that is all that any of us has, an opinion.

And your point is?

 

[rHinO1]

Hello!

I received a letter of recommendation from a volunteer coordinator and I have a few questions.

The body of the letter is about 450-500 words, is that long enough? In the letter, she basically described what her roles are, what I did with specific examples and what qualities I have. The examples that she used demonstrates my leadership and communication capabilities and looks very favorably on me. This is only 1 page, and I've heard people getting 3-4 page LoR... I have actually gotten a 3 page LoR from a prof, so I am slightly worried

Also, she said "I am quiet in nature but assertive when she needs to be" I am not liking the "quiet" part, but she does say that I am a leader, good at speaking in public, etc. Is this alright?

This is the first time actually seeing a LoR from someone... so I'm not sure how to evaluate this letter. Thank you!

This is coming from the only person who actually read the letter. Perhaps his/her volunteer commitment was more significant than yours was and when applying you have to use what you've got. Maybe they don't have a research PI or work supervisor to ask, so using the volunteer coordinator letter as a 4th/5th letter is fine when it is possible to submit such a letter. Quiet by nature but assertive when necessary is a nice balance.

First, no adcom gives a **** what your volunteer coordinator has to say about you.

Worse, what she had to say is mediocre at best. A backhanded compliment...don't use this letter.

I am curious, too. Have you actually gone through a cycle? Furthermore, do you know how to read? Go back and read what I wrote.

All that is needed in this game are 2 sci and one non-sci prof letters, plus a committee letter if your school has one. For those people who have a major research experience, some schools will actually require that letter. A few schools require that one of the prof letters comes from a prof in your major, so kill two birds here and get one.

The vol coordinator letters are superfluous, and in the case of the OP who has actually read the tepid letter, it is a bad idea to use it. That letter will add NOTHING to his app, and could easily be misconstrued as a warning that he is not assertive enough to be a med student.

When you actually go through a cycle, you will find out that most schools cap the number of letters they will accept at 3, so these extra letters are useless. Quite a few schools only require 2 letters.

Well, for the OP, this is not the case.

Plus - it is not very common that applicants get to read these letters, so most of the time you don't really know if the letter is "amazing" or not.

Rephrased with an addition after the first time? You mean I edited my post after you lodged your weak sauce complaint? Umm, no. Those qualifiers were in the post you quoted where I mentioned them, from the gitgo, and in previous posts as well.

Learn how to read or you will have a tough time in med school, chief. The point that I and others are making, repeatedly for those of you with reading comprehension problems, is that if you know a letter has as you describe it an "ambiguous" tone that could be viewed negatively, and it is one of the unnecessary or as I call them superfluous letters (not a prof letter or research advisor), then the OP should dump it.

The fact that you had a "strong" letter from an activity supervisor is completely irrelevant to this thread. The OP does not, and thus should not use it.

Conversely, if the OP had written to say he had a vol activity letter that glowed and had him walking on water, I am fairly certain the consensus opinion would have been to use the letter, with the caveat that many schools limit the number of letters, or specifically prescribe the letters they want to see, and he may not be able to use it at every school.

You repeatedly insist that this letter is weak, when you have never even read the letter. hmmm..... sounds like you're kind of overly opinionated about something you have never even seen. People need to go with the best group of letters from what is available to them. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion of what negative qualities are. . . but after reading your berating posts I wish you were a little more "quiet by nature."

 

[z31]

The fact that you had a "strong" letter from an activity supervisor is completely irrelevant to this thread. The OP does not, and thus should not use it.

You said that nobody "gives a ****" about volunteer coordinator LORs. I said that I had had a similar LOR, and that it seemed to make a difference. Small differences can be important at the higher levels of competition. Therefore, relevant.

I think that you are deliberately misconstruing things so that you can be as outraged as possible. The argument here is not that the letter is neutral, and therefore the OP should use it as filler, but whether there are gems in the letter that are worth reading despite this hiccup. To me, the rest of the letter sounds worth keeping. You can insist on your POV, and imply that there is some sort of obvious consensus that agrees with you. But in fact others have thought the 'quiet' comment neutral, positive, or inconsequential enough that the rest of the letter will be beneficial if -- read carefully this time -- if he has no better letters.

I might even need to explain this in more detail because this point doesn't seem to be making it to you through your fits of fury. It is in fact possible that he does not have letters that say he 'walks on water' (!). Before you say "Baloney! If you can't get good letters, clearly nobody gives a *** about you! Also, you can't read!", it can be difficult for people to get LORs when they don't have long-term and direct interaction with faculty. This can easily happen for people who don't do research or dedicate themselves to activities without faculty oversight. Their required letters may not cover the strongest parts of their application. The OP feels that the rest of the letter has in fact done so.

No one is arguing against the obvious logic that if he already has 3 letters that cover the strongest parts of his application, he should submit this one. Hope that doesn't ruin your day!

 

[ghost08]

I think it's a good rec letter. The letter would be better if there's stuff about being around patients and how you interact with them.

I think "quiet, but assertive when you need to be" is a positive trait.

 

[flip26]

You said that nobody "gives a ****" about volunteer coordinator LORs. I said that I had had a similar LOR, and that it seemed to make a difference. Small differences can be important at the higher levels of competition. Therefore, relevant.

I think that you are deliberately misconstruing things so that you can be as outraged as possible. The argument here is not that the letter is neutral, and therefore the OP should use it as filler, but whether there are gems in the letter that are worth reading despite this hiccup. To me, the rest of the letter sounds worth keeping. You can insist on your POV, and imply that there is some sort of obvious consensus that agrees with you. But in fact others have thought the 'quiet' comment neutral, positive, or inconsequential enough that the rest of the letter will be beneficial if -- read carefully this time -- if he has no better letters.

I might even need to explain this in more detail because this point doesn't seem to be making it to you through your fits of fury. It is in fact possible that he does not have letters that say he 'walks on water' (!). Before you say "Baloney! If you can't get good letters, clearly nobody gives a *** about you! Also, you can't read!", it can be difficult for people to get LORs when they don't have long-term and direct interaction with faculty. This can easily happen for people who don't do research or dedicate themselves to activities without faculty oversight. Their required letters may not cover the strongest parts of their application. The OP feels that the rest of the letter has in fact done so.

No one is arguing against the obvious logic that if he already has 3 letters that cover the strongest parts of his application, he should submit this one. Hope that doesn't ruin your day!

He already knows this letter is tepid. It is a vol coordinator letter, not exactly a required or even desired letter - it would never be an acceptable substitute for a required letter anyway. Therefore, I would not use it, and I have attempted to explain my reasoning - you take issue with my reasoning - let's just let it go at that.

He should focus on getting prof letters from the 2 sci, one non-sci, and/or a committee letter. Chances are he will never know exactly what is in those, but if he chooses his writers well, he should be more confident in their content than in the letter he has actually read.

I would NEVER use a letter like the one he described. Never. But I also only asked for letters from writers with whom I had a longstanding relationship, and this is important: people who are experienced at writing these letters. The one letter I did get to read was phenomenal, a "walks on water" letter. The other two writers told me that they were pleased to write "strong" letters of recommendation for me - I didn't ask them, they volunteered that.

Can't beat that...and proof is in the pudding.

 

[BrainBuff]

I feel that it is extremely important to ask the writer if he could write a "strong LOR on my behalf ? I am applying to......"

If the individual feels that he does not know you well enough to do so, he will tell you.... If he says yes, then you should have no problem...

 

[z31]

[get recs from] people who are experienced at writing these letters.

^yes, agree that the importance of this is often underestimated.

 

[vickpick]

I think the "quiet" was added intentionally to show the readers that okay, this is an evaluation of the person.. not just the positives.. I think the writer added a minor negative as felt like she had to add one, but not a major one.

 

[flip26]

I think the "quiet" was added intentionally to show the readers that okay, this is an evaluation of the person.. not just the positives.. I think the writer added a minor negative as felt like she had to add one, but not a major one.

And that is the problem with asking someone who doesn't understand the purpose of this letter...positives should not be balanced with negatives - you want LORs that glow...

 

[klmnop]

And that is the problem with asking someone who doesn't understand the purpose of this letter...positives should not be balanced with negatives - you want LORs that glow...

agreed, common misconception: it is not a letter of evaluation, but a letter of recommendation and thus the writer should write it only if they feel they have enough positives to point out