What is the role of LORs in application process?

[Hain Adam]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I've always thought that LORs are the least important part of an application because most people get really good letters anyways. A lot of times those letters are not very reliable. Some professors write really good letters for most of their students, claiming that those students are in the top 5% of their students, and some professors will not be as lenient. What do you guys think? Nowadays most schools provide a LOR form that goes along with the letter and in those forms the professors are expected to compare this student to the rest of their students in different skills and accomplishments. A lot of professors tend to overrate their students in letters because they get along with them really well. The LORs seem like they are indication of how well the student established a relationship with the professor. Any thoughts?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I completely disagree. LOR are probably one of the most important part of the application. These letters speak to your ability to be successful in graduate school, and it is professional courtesy to be honest about the applicant, and your name i attached to it....so it better be reflective of the applicant.

If they try and snow the people reading it, it would be noticable and it won't serve the applicant well. Long after I was accepted and relocated I found out that one of my LOR people talked about the C+ I received in one of his classes (my only one in Psych!), and how I chose to take his seminar and I did much better (A). I think his honesty about my grade and subsequent work was more meaningful than, "I've had T4C in X of my classes and he is the greatest student I've ever taught....ever!!!" When I was thinking of people to ask for a LOR, I was a little concerned about what he'd write because I dropped him as my mentor and chose someone else in the dept I fit with better, but I knew that he knew me well and I hoped he would write honestly about our work together. From what I was told, it was an honest letter that talked about my strength and also areas that I could work on. So when people are looking for LORs, I alway tell them to choose people that know you well, and not just someone you think that would write you a 'nice' letter.....which may or may not be as meaningful and personal.

-t

 

[toroharo]

I think LOR are the most important component of your application after one has met the objective cut-offs. While many professors try to be positive, readers can generally tell if they are being 'standard' or if they truly want to recommend you.

 

[JockNerd]

Well, LORs are consistently rated as one of the most important things in an application by training directors, so I'd say they're super-mega-important.

 

[Hain Adam]

I still don't understand how important they can be since 90% of the people tend to get really good letters from their letter writers. I've never heard of anyone get a negative or even neutral letter. Most letters are either very positive or positive at least.

 

[moondreamer9989]

I don't think it's necessarily about having a bad letter or having neutral content. I think it's more about what they DON'T say. A fantastic letter will include many components speaking to many different abilities and how you've demonstrated them; however, a poor letter will have a positive tone but only focus on maybe only one or two attributes. Not to include having red alert signals such as...."Despite emotional problems so and so has really...."

 

[EquestriAnn]

I have also heard that LOR are one of the most important things, once you've made cut-offs, far more important than GPA or GRE scores. I think there is a big difference between a "good" letter and a "great" letter, and people are looking for the latter since most people have the former. Also, if that letter happens to be from someone the reader knows or someone everybody knows, it is quite helpful. If I get into grad school, I'm fairly confident that it will be primarily due to my LORs.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Here are some things to look for.

1. How much did the LOR talk about the person as opposed to what they did(re-hashing a CV)?
2. Were they direct supervisors or just a random professor?
3. Did they do meaningful things to support the LOR, or is it just someone saying they are a 'good' candidate?
4. What was not said?
5. Did they list areas of strength and also areas of future growth?

-t

 

[joshie6891]

Here's a question for those who have already gone through the process and are in grad school: What was the relationship between you and your letter recommenders/ how did you know your recommenders? Did you have trouble choosing?

 

[CheetahGirl]

Along with your personal statement, LORs bring you to life. GREs and GPAs do not. All of these components drive the school to invite you to an interview. Along the line of everyone else's comments, there is a difference between good letters and great letters. Great letters attest to your potential in the field. I always think it's a good idea to find people who are doing what you want to do and establish relationships with them. I was fortunate enough to develop strong bonds with professors, colleagues, and former bosses. I had 4 LORs from PhD/PsyD in clinical psychology (my end goal) and one from an MD (former boss who attested to my clinical experience). I also recommend finding more than required: just in case one letter doesn't show up in time, then your application is not held back for review. 😉

 

[Ollie123]

Pretty much what T4C said. Its not about showing how good you are, its about explaining HOW you are good. Some letters will say "This person got an A in my class. They worked in my lab and it never caught fire" (and believe me, you'd be amazed at the number of folks who get LORs like this from profs who barely know them). Others will describe specific strengths of the applicant that you might not be able to gather from a CV. For example, mine mentioned my computer geekiness I'm sure and the fact that I ended up being a sort of in-house tech support for everyone I worked for - I'm sure that factored into my acceptance here, but it isn't something that would likely be found anywhere else on my application.

Plus a lot of it is also about how you get along with the person. Its easy to tell a LOR from someone who a professor just "liked" because they didn't cause trouble in class, versus a LOR from someone a professor considers a true colleague. Whether or not a person is pleasant to work with (as demonstrated by outside trusted sources saying they are) can often be the deciding admissions factor.