I have read mimelin and Med Ed's posts on letters of recommendations, but I am wondering what a strong science letter would have. A science professor of mine has agreed to write me a letter, and he has asked me to tell him what I want him to include in it. I've thought of including specific examples that showcase my scientific inquiry, understanding of theories, and ability to evaluate studies. Any other ideas? Thanks!
What makes a strong SCIENCE LOR/letter?
- Thread starter baylafan
- Start date
Thanks gonnif. Any other resources or thoughts that you all have would be helpful.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 127
- Reaction score
- 123
I'd day your content ideas are great but IMO what makes a letter strong or weak comes from how genuine the letter comes across. All science letter will highlight the applicants intellect, its the delivery that makes the difference. ...though I do not sit on an admissions committee so take it with a grain of salt.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 127
- Reaction score
- 123
What are you trying to say? that you're the premed equivalent of John Nash...?
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2017
- Messages
- 1,108
- Reaction score
- 1,671
Ask him to include in what % you’d fall into wrt students he’s taught. “Jimmy is in the top 10% of students I’ve taught in my career”
— advice I’ve received for mil specific LOR, have a feeling the advice carries ocer
D
deleted938090
If you wanted to see John Nash's full application...
https://webspace.princeton.edu/users/mudd/Digitization/AC105/AC105_Nash_John_Forbes_1950.pdf
EDIT: Page 30 for his undergrad LOR for Princeton, first few pages for his undergrad transcript
Just to show that grades aren't everything
EDIT2: Page 49-50 to why you don't talk in a demanding tone
https://webspace.princeton.edu/users/mudd/Digitization/AC105/AC105_Nash_John_Forbes_1950.pdf
EDIT: Page 30 for his undergrad LOR for Princeton, first few pages for his undergrad transcript
Just to show that grades aren't everything
EDIT2: Page 49-50 to why you don't talk in a demanding tone
Last edited by a moderator:
Guess I'll just send this to my professor haha.
Make sure to replace "mathematical genius" to "medical genius", Ha!
Interesting that Nash waited until grad school to take ODE and PDE, as well as algebraic topology.
Math oriented undergrads these days take those at their four year institutions.
How did you know to find this where you did?
D
deleted938090
?? P.36 he took ODE in Carnegie Mellon
Algebraic topology is rightfully in the domain of grad school and the PDE he took at Princeton likely covers far more advanced topics than a typical undergrad PDE.
Not to mention he was 19 when he finished undergrad with a bachelors and a masters and finished his PhD in 2 years at 21-22...
I doubt many math oriented undergrads will be taking courses at the grad school level in the undergrad (even some of my colleagues who are Putnam fellows aren’t taking graduate classes at that age he was), and certainly not at most 4 year colleges. A course titled differential equations or algebraic topology can cover a wide variety of classes and says nothing about the difficulty: it’s like a course called “inorganic chemistry” where the scope covers a range of competencies.
Algebraic topology is rightfully in the domain of grad school and the PDE he took at Princeton likely covers far more advanced topics than a typical undergrad PDE.
Not to mention he was 19 when he finished undergrad with a bachelors and a masters and finished his PhD in 2 years at 21-22...
I doubt many math oriented undergrads will be taking courses at the grad school level in the undergrad (even some of my colleagues who are Putnam fellows aren’t taking graduate classes at that age he was), and certainly not at most 4 year colleges. A course titled differential equations or algebraic topology can cover a wide variety of classes and says nothing about the difficulty: it’s like a course called “inorganic chemistry” where the scope covers a range of competencies.
