Software engineer non-trad - Which letter or recommendation to use? Old boss vs. Shadowing Doctor?

[Vistian]

I'm a non-trad student. Former software engineer for 18 years. URM. 517 MCAT. 3.3 sGPA (old bad grades). 4.0 Post-Bacc. over 42 credits (shiny new!).

Decided to go into medicine.

I have six LOR writers. One Post-Bacc committee (academic). One research (physician). Two from most-meaningful clinical experiences (1 physician + 1 hospice volunteer coordinator). One from doctor I shadowed. One from former software-engineering boss who is now a Director.

Some schools only want five LOR.

How do I decide between the two for the final spot? Shadow doctor or software-engineering boss?

I have been shadowing the orthopedic surgeon on and off for the past 4 years and he has mentored me throughout this process. Really wants to see me succeed.

I have known software-engineering boss for 3 years and he has seen me do some damn wizardry with software projects and timelines, gaining company recognition from the top brass. Was very happy to write a letter and he is now a Director.

Any advice? Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[chilly_md]

Letters from physicians you have shadowed are usually of little value to most MD schools. So, I would recommend not including that one.

 

[Vistian]

Letters from physicians you have shadowed are usually of little value to most MD schools. So, I would recommend not including that one.

Good point. Thanks!

 

[jamaica jan sun princess]

Unless I'm missing something, a post bacc committee letter is all you need.

 

[Vistian]

Unless I'm missing something, a post bacc committee letter is all you need.

I mean, schools actively encourage you to send more letters than just a committee letter. They want to hear from your research PI, physicians who have worked clinically with you, etc.. Nowhere have I read that just a post-bacc committee letter is sufficient in this competitive process.

 

[gyngyn]

I mean, schools actively encourage you to send more letters than just a committee letter. They want to hear from your research PI, physicians who have worked clinically with you, etc.. Nowhere have I read that just a post-bacc committee letter is sufficient in this competitive process.

Many, (if not most) schools would prefer to only get a committee letter. If you check the MSAR, you may notice that some schools specifically ask that you not send additional individual letters if you have a committee letter.
MSTP's will need to see research letters for MD/PhD applicants.
There are only a handful of MD schools that request a "clinical" letter.
Sending a boatload of letters does little to improve candidacy.

 

[Vistian]

Many, (if not most) schools would prefer to only get a committee letter. If you check the MSAR, you may notice that some schools specifically ask that you not send additional individual letters if you have a committee letter.
MSTP's will need to see research letters for MD/PhD applicants.
There are only a handful of MD schools that request a "clinical" letter.
Sending a boatload of letters does little to improve candidacy.

I honestly haven't seen much of what you're saying, but I do believe you.

I have read the MSAR (and school websites) and my interpretation of schools, like Pitt, say "The committee letter should be buttressed with individual letters of recommendation."

UCLA says, "If your pre-health advisory office provides a committee letter, this letter will fulfill one letter requirement."

UC San Diego says, "A single "Committee Letter" can be submitted in lieu of the minimum of 3 letters. Letters from faculty who have worked more closely with the student tend to be more helpful to the committee. It is helpful if 1-2 letters come from individuals who have supervised the applicant in an activity designated by the applicant as "most meaningful" on their AMCAS application."

I know there are lots of MD schools out there, but for the schools I have applied to, I am not seeing anyone say what you suggest. I truly appreciate your responses, though, but I'm just not seeing it.

 

[Vistian]

Many, (if not most) schools would prefer to only get a committee letter. If you check the MSAR, you may notice that some schools specifically ask that you not send additional individual letters if you have a committee letter.
MSTP's will need to see research letters for MD/PhD applicants.
There are only a handful of MD schools that request a "clinical" letter.
Sending a boatload of letters does little to improve candidacy.

To continue:

Stanford says, "Pre-medical committee evaluations/letters are not required. However, if submitted, only the individual letters contained within the pre-medical committee packet will count towards the number of letters of recommendation."

UC Davis says, "3-6 LORs allowed; at least one from a physician or clinician recommended."

As you can see, most of these schools want more than a committee letter if you have it.

 

[chilly_md]

In general, it is better not to send more letters. After a certain point, they do not add anything significant and your reader will thank you if you avoid submitting too many.

 

[Vistian]

In general, it is better not to send more letters. After a certain point, they do not add anything significant and your reader will thank you if you avoid submitting too many.

Understood. Boy, that will have me thinking then about how to balance out what to send and what to hold back. My committee letter is just a composite of 4 letters drafted by my pre-health advisor, so there are no other letters, just the one they wrote with quotes and such from all 4. I don't really think that is sufficient in and of itself, seeing as I'm VERY non-trad (hence my question above). I think, at the very bare bones:

• My committee letter
• My research PI/physician
• My biggest hour/most meaningful clinical physician

After that, maybe I'll ease up on the gas pedal going forward.

Thanks for the advice and insight!