Sending an updated letter of recommendation

[mcbnerd]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have asked for an updated letter of recommendation from a community service leader. Compared to when the previous letter was written, we have developed a closer relationship and I feel would have more, better things to say. My question is should I send the letter through email to admissions? Even though it may breach confidentiality? Or should I have the writer send it?

 

[DC206R]

I would have the writer send it.

 

[Hungryh1pp09]

I used Interfolio.

 

[doc toothache]

I have asked for an updated letter of recommendation from a community service leader. Compared to when the previous letter was written, we have developed a closer relationship and I feel would have more, better things to say. My question is should I send the letter through email to admissions? Even though it may breach confidentiality? Or should I have the writer send it?

Adcoms are more interested in ascertaining that an applicant is not a potential dropout than what a good guy/gal he/she is.

 

[schmoob]

Adcoms are more interested in ascertaining that an applicant is not a potential dropout than what a good guy/gal he/she is.

I disagree.

The fierce competition for a seat in dental school is very clear. There are many applicants. I firmly believe that there are many more academically qualified applicants than seats. So how do adcoms decide? If it was simply a quantitative rack-n-stack, the application process would not be so detailed, nor would the interview process.

I believe that if what you're saying is true, then life for admissions officer would be much easier, since all they would need to do is rank applicants by GPA/DAT, then simply call them on the phone so they can verify they can speak a sentence, and just start offering seats down the list.

 

[doc toothache]

I disagree.

The fierce competition for a seat in dental school is very clear. There are many applicants. I firmly believe that there are many more academically qualified applicants than seats. So how do adcoms decide? If it was simply a quantitative rack-n-stack, the application process would not be so detailed, nor would the interview process.
I believe that if what you're saying is true, then life for admissions officer would be much easier, since all they would need to do is rank applicants by GPA/DAT, then simply call them on the phone so they can verify they can speak a sentence, and just start offering seats down the list.

There is no evidence to suggest that the "competition" is "fierce" as you claim. "Many" is not a quantifiable number. Sharing a six pack with a "community service leader" is not likely to be on adcom's priority list.

 

[schmoob]

There is no evidence to suggest that the "competition" is "fierce" as you suggest

"Competition:" the demand for a seat in dental school is greater than the supply. Because admission cannot be purchased, there are certain criteria that are looked for in applicants by different schools. Some value diversity, while others emphasize dedication to community. Some schools may place more emphasis on GPA, while others value the DAT more. Other schools may place considerable weight on applicant ethnic background, while others may seek applicants of particular religious denominations that align with the vision of the school.
*Note: for that last comment, I am not looking for a debate on anything involving opinions on ethnic/religious preference during the admissions process. I have seen some of those threads from previous years, and I do not want this discussion to become ugly.

There is no evidence to suggest that the "competition" is "fierce" as you claim. "

I do believe that "competition is fierce". This of course is subjective. Our opinions as to what quantitavely defines a particular adjective seems to differ. But because applicant to admission ratio is not 1:1, by definition competition DOES exist.

"Many" is not a quantifiable number.

You are correct, "many" is not a quantifiable number. On that thought:

Adcoms are more interested in ascertaining that an applicant is not a potential dropout than what a good guy/gal he/she is.

If you want to pick apart vocabulary, "more" is not quantifiable either. If you want specifics and numbers, I encourage you to lead by example by supporting your arguments with "evidence" that are comparable to your expectations.

Sharing a six pack with a "community service leader" is not likely to be on adcom's priority list.

A 4.0 and 29AA may not do the trick if the applicant has history of academic dishonesty, DUI's, and a number of other misdemeanors on their record. In the opinion of an adcom, this applicant will likely not have any issues with the academic demand of the curriculum; but they may not see this applicant as a "good guy/gal."

 

[doc toothache]

Swoosh.