Worthy, Quality LORs?

[Shawnpremed]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Would these be worthy LORs:

1. For MD's I've researched with:
If I DON'T get a LOR from the MD PIs that don't know me well, will adcoms question why I didn't ask for letters from these MD's I also worked with? (only 1 of 3 knew me)
Timeline:
i) 6 months research with a UC SOM faulty; Data entry, pipetting in tubes, deliveries (v. little patient contact), minimal interaction with PI and his PhD researcher (no need- my work was brainless)- I DON'T feel this Dr. cared much for me for the 6 months.

ii) 1 yr ER Dr. (UC faculty); Some data collection & analysis, no writing/acknowledgements yet... Doesn't hate me. I'd expect an avg LOR.

iii) 1yr+ (cont. to 2 yrs) with another UC faculty - Best Dr. I've researched/published with. guaranteed LOR.


2. From Volunteer work in ER:
If I volunteered 2yrs in the ER, am I expected to get a LOR?


3. Clinical Shadowing (Sep. from my ER work):
If I only shadowed an MD (non-research) for 2 yrs, showed interest in his field and talked to his patients, would a LOR be helpful? He's nice, and knows me 2nd most personally of all clin. supervisors. If not, how can I improve this?

I don't know if I need LORs from all. Any feedback helps, especially adcoms!

Thanks

 

[Shawnpremed]

^^
To the post below,

OP = Yesterday, 09:46 PM

 

[236116]

1. depends on school reqs. one from your PI is a good bet.

 

[talbo]

1. For MD's I've researched with:
If I DON'T get a LOR from the MD PIs that don't know me well, will adcoms question why I didn't ask for letters from these MD's I also worked with? (only 1 of 3 knew me)

In regards to this question, how long did you research with these PIs? If you put all 3 of them down in 3 separate activities and the durations were all pretty long, then schools like UCI would want to see it as they usually say its a flag if u dont have a rec from someone who you've been working for a while. Even though u dont know the PI that well, you must've worked under a post doc or someone else perhaps who is under the MDs. Get them to write you a letter and ask the prof to co-sign it? Good luck

 

[Shawnpremed]

In regards to this question, how long did you research with these PIs? If you put all 3 of them down in 3 separate activities and the durations were all pretty long, then schools like UCI would want to see it as they usually say its a flag if u dont have a rec from someone who you've been working for a while. Even though u dont know the PI that well, you must've worked under a post doc or someone else perhaps who is under the MDs. Get them to write you a letter and ask the prof to co-sign it? Good luck

Thanks for your feedback. I'm avoiding certain Drs. b/c I feel I didn't do meaningful work (would a LOR about my excellent data entry and sense of responsibility make me a good Dr?), and also b/c they don't seem to care.

Here's some more info, also posted above:
3 Drs:
i) 6 months research with UC Med faulty; Data entry, tube pipetting, deliveries, v. little patient contact, little contact with PI & his PhD researcher (no need- work was brainless)- I DON'T feel this Dr. cared much for me for the 6 months.

ii) 1 yr ER Dr. (UC faculty); Some data collection & analysis, no writing/acknowledgements yet... Doesn't hate me, but I'd expect an avg LOR.

iii) 1yr+ (cont. to 2 yrs) w/ another UC faculty - Best Dr. I've researched/published with, and mutual friend. Guaranteed great LOR.

Any thoughts from anyone?

 

[236116]

Just do Doc 3. Adcoms understand that most ugrad research is pipette monkeying. If the LOR writer is taking time to talk you up, they must think you're worth the time.

 

[Shawnpremed]

Thanks for your help.

How about a LOR from my shadowed MD (knows me & my interest in his field) vs. LOR from ER MD in ii) who I did some work for over 1 yr, and doesn't really know me?

Is it really consensus that LORs from shadowed MD's you didn't actually work for are useless, even if the MD knows you?

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thanks for your help.

How about a LOR from my shadowed MD (knows me & my interest in his field) vs. LOR from ER MD in ii) who I did some work for over 1 yr, and doesn't really know me?

Is it really consensus that LORs from shadowed MD's you didn't actually work for are useless, even if the MD knows you?

I'd rather get the LOR from someone who knows you over someone who doesn't every single time. That's the whole point of the LORs- to get people who know you to comment on their opinion of your potential to be a good doctor; mindless babling from someone who doesn't know you, no matter what your position with them is or how "big of a deal" that person is does you no good. So I'd go with the shadowing MD. Same thing with reseach- get the one from the person who can write good stuff about you; a letter that says, "he was quite capable at using a pipette" will do you no good.

Remember, more LORs=/=better. I seriously doubt there is ever a need for someone to send in 6-7+ LORs; at a certain point, I have to imagine that they start either getting mediocre because the writers don't all know you very well or they start getting repetitive. Going with the "bare bones" 2 science+1 non-science (+1 doc if you have one that got to know you well) (+1 research, if that applies and doesn't overlap with the 2 science ones) is absolutely fine.

 

[Shawnpremed]

Sounds good, thanks.

I was just worried as Talbo brought up, that Adcoms may ask why I didn't get LORs from the other TWO PI's, and see that as some red flag
i.e. I was a poor lab assistant, didn't get along with PI, etc.

I hope adcoms give me some benefit of the doubt.