LORs from writers without PhDs?

[selbstzweck]

Hi to all of you in this insane time. I hope everyone is hanging in there, especially those trying to figure out how to prepare to start next semester amidst all of this.

I’m applying to PhDs in the fall and I’m beginning to get my materials together. I have a question about recommenders that I’m concerned about, and would be curious to hear others’ thoughts.

I’m graduating from an MFA program this semester, and I’m in the fortunate position to have letters of rec from two famous, well-regarded writer-critics. However, neither of them have PhDs, nor do they do academic research, per se; nonetheless, they’re names anyone on an ad comm will know. They are concerned that their LORs will only go so far, given that the letters need to show readiness to do PhD-level research, from people who do such research, and that I need another letter that will endorse that. First, I think that's true that I'll need someone with a doctorate, but I’m wondering if letters from two people without PhDs might in fact count against me, and if that third letter will need to overcome more skepticism as a result. Do people have any thoughts on that?

Second, I’m trying to decide who should fill this gap. I have undergrad literature professors who I know would gladly write a letter of rec, but I’m also 6 years out of undergrad at this point. Would it be wise to choose one of them, given that? I have a literature professor from my MFA program who has a PhD; I could turn to him instead, but he knows me less well, and is primarily known as an artist, rather than an academic. I’m worried that using his letter would be another question mark. But I also worry that a letter from a professor I haven’t worked with in 6 years might be equally concerning, albeit for different reasons.

Would also just be curious to hear if others have questions/concerns/thoughts re: their choices of recommenders!

[caeiro]

I might be speaking from a place of survivor's bias, but this didn't seem to work against me this cycle. (For what it's worth, I'm pursuing a doctorate in Romance Languages and Literatures -- not English, Rhetoric or Comp Lit.)  I had two letters from accomplished poets whose creative work engaged critically with the broad research topics I want to pursue. I was fortunate to have developed a close relationship with a well-known professor in my field during undergrad who was more than able to credibly fill in anything the other letters possibly could have lacked. 

I do think if you go this route, my advice is to ask your two "uncredentialed" letter writers to speak to your intellectual appetites and aptitudes beyond the context of your creative writing, to the extent that they can do so honestly. Or to at least identify the academic strands in the work you've shown them. 

Remember: there aren't hard and fast rules in graduate admissions, and anyone who tells you that any aspect of your dossier will be automatically disqualifying very rarely knows what they're talking about. I'd like to think your strongest case for admission is your most honest one. 
 

[politics 'n prose]

I’m also an MFA grad who applied successfully to PhDs: Two of my recommenders were fiction/nonfiction writers of moderate renown (definitely not household names) with MFAs, and my third recommender was an undergrad Lit professor who has a PhD but hasn’t worked with me in over 6 years (though we’ve stayed in touch, and he did hook me up with a summer teaching gig at my undergrad about four years ago). With the caveat that one of the schools I was accepted to was my MFA institution, so the adcom there was familiar with my two non-PhD’d recommenders, I don’t think it hurt me at all. (Also, I was rejected by the institution where one of my MFA-holding recommenders now teaches, so I put little stock in the importance of an institutional “in,” as it were.) 

I’ll also add that I had initially intended to use two recommenders from undergrad, but was advised by my MFA recommender to use an instructor who had worked with me more recently, even if it wasn’t in a Lit classroom. I’m not sure if that’s indicative of some actual and widespread bias against using undergrad profs when you could use grad profs instead, but it is the advice I received and chose to follow, and it worked out for me, so I figured I’d mention it.

In short, though, if your recommenders can speak to your work ethic, collegiality, and intellectual curiosity, I think you’ll be golden—it shouldn’t matter what credentials they hold (or don’t hold), as long as they know your person and your work well enough to speak about it compellingly. 

Edited April 29, 2020 by politics 'n prose

[cruel optimism]

I've heard from several adcomm members at various schools (not the one I'll be attending though) that they tend not to place so much weight on LORs since these testimonials are so often uniformly complimentary — after all, students wouldn't request an LOR from someone whom we don't think will write us a strong letter. Besides, as professors who write plenty of these letters themselves, they understand not just how tedious the process can be, but also the predilection for some faculty members to turn in standard, form letters replete with empty praise (in which case, the shortcomings of these letters don't really reflect on the applicants themselves). For this reason, the only LORs that adcomms usually take note of, at least in early rounds of selection anyway, are those that are overwhelmingly negative or positive, because these are the ones that mark the applicant as either a red-flag or someone to watch. Beyond that, unless your letter writer's name holds such credibility (i.e. they've studied/worked/are friends with/taught someone on the adcomm, or they're just that renowned in their fields but they're also not known for dishing out compliments), and unless the strength of their letter is consistent with your SOP/WS, I don't think this particular component of your application holds that much weight in the final admissions decision. Don’t worry too much about it.

With all that said, you might want to play it safer by having two PhD-holders write your LORs instead of one, seeing as places like Duke still "prefer to have academic references representing your major field." Specifically, Duke (English, not Lit though) states quite explicitly that "The Graduate School requires at least two letters from specialists in your field of study (for this purpose, that means English professors). One of these letters in your field should be from someone who knows your work well, and one (if possible the same letter) from someone who works in the historical field, or on the same main focus of interest, that you are claiming as a special interest in your application. If possible, avoid requesting all your letters from part-time, untenured, or emeritus professors, as letters from tenured scholars (or equivalent) actively engaged in mid- to senior career generally carry the most weight. If there is more than one professor outside the field of English who you'd like to write for you, then consider submitting four letters rather than the minimum three. The same would apply if you're currently working in a job related to your future career (say, teaching or publishing) and would like to submit a letter from your boss in addition to your academic letters."

To be clear, I don't know if this is a hard and fast rule, and I'm not sure if you'll be applying to Duke at all, but the "at least two strong, academic references" thing seems to also be the general, unspoken consensus amongst most GC-ers — with some exceptions, of course. I'm also not sure who your potential letter writers are and what sort of critical work they do (they may not do academic research, but do they engage rigorously with academic texts/perspectives/trends in their work?), so it remains quite uncertain how their recommendations might be viewed by adcomms. My best advice will probably be to contact the grad admissions assistant or the DGS of the programs to which you're applying to ask about their LOR requirements. 

Edited April 29, 2020 by cruel optimism