Importing recommendation letters from previous application? (NYU)

[ak71]

Hi all,

I just realized that NYU allows to import recommendation letters from my previous application. I was wondering what you thought are on this. I already have three recommenders this year, one of them from the previous round (former supervisor), and the other two being top experts in the field who will be only reflecting on may sample and how they find it interesting, etc. I'm not sure if I should import the other two from the previous round. Here's the main problem:

One of the old letters is from a former supervisor/instructor with whom I had taken a huge load of courses (all A's), and the other one from a former instructor with whom I had taken a few courses (again all A's) and had done some paid research in a prestigious project, while I was a student. I know both former writers say nice things about me and all, and the great thing about them is that they provide unique feedback on my former performance a student/research assistant; something that isn't available in the new letters. But the problem is that they -- as is costumery -- both talk about the sample of writing that I had submitted before, which is objectively garbage compared to the one that I'm submitting now.

This is my initial thought, but I'd like to see what you think: since NYU also apparently allows to upload another sample besides my new one, I can upload the old one and add a cover page to it, saying something like this: "This sample is uploaded just to make sense of the previous letters in case they reflect on it; it does *not* represent my present philosophical skills and thoughts, and should be ignored for purposes other than making sense of the old letters. My main sample of writing is the other one." 

Would this be a good idea? Or should I just import the letters and not the old sample? Or maybe let the past go in its entirety?

I'd appreciate your help!

[Mischief]

If you are reapplying, you have surely done something in the last year that warrants your letter-writers revising their letters. If your old sample didn't get you in, then don't use it and have your letter-writers review the new sample in order that they can effectively speak to the current one. You might have done well in the past--great. What matters to an admissions committee (or so I've been told by those who've served on them) is how well you are doing now and your promise going forward, hence the common advice about only have people from your MA program write for you.

[ak71]

Thanks! But just to be sure, I think some clarification about my case is needed. From the three people who wrote letters for me last time, only one is still among the letter writers. The other two are out of the loop, and two others have been replaced with them. The one who stays in will revise their letter accordingly, to speak to my current sample, etc. The same for the other (new) two: in fact they're writing letters only based on my new sample. So all of my current letter writers will speak to my current sample. On the other hand, the old two (who are out of the loop now) knew me perfectly well as their student and/or research assistant, so I thought their positive word on me, along with the new ones, might put me in a better position. But this then faces the issue of the old content in the old letters (i.e., talking about the old sample). My thought was to submit both samples but add a cover page on the old sample to explain that that's not my main sample, but rather to make sense of the old letters.

Also, I'm doing a PhD now, and my former supervisor is my MA supervisor. (Same for the old letter writers: former instructors/supervisors.) The new letter writers aren't from my MA program but only (top) experts in the field who can very well speak to my sample. So the common advice cannot be applied to my case, unless to the extent that I can use the old letters from my MA people along with the new ones, which then gets me back to the puzzle.

[Mischief]

Hi again ak71,

Thanks for clarify, I didn't follow your point here. You are proposing to submit five letters rather than three, which is going to bump you up against NYU's suggestion that you only submit more than three in special circumstances. I don't take your situation here to be unusual, but you might ask the person in charge at NYU what the right take is on this. The general advice I've seen on this is always: pick the best letters, not the most. In your case: pick the three strongest ones, namely the ones from people who know you best and can speak most effectively to you being on track to become a great philosopher (given it's NYU, literally the next David Lewis). You will know best which three are best here, and it may be that the old ones are preferable to the new ones, but my suggestion is still that you stick with three rather than five. It may be that you've written something transformative for your writing sample--good, that should speak for itself, rather than having two topic experts weigh in on the writing sample alone.

On submitting both samples: I wouldn't. Really, I think the best case would be to ask those people to submit new ones if you think they are in the best position to write on your behalf, but if that is out of the question I would simply make a note in your file about the discrepancy rather than submitting a whole second sample. Alternatively: just the cover page, not the whole sample. Then again, this might raise questions: why didn't ak71 ask them to simply rewrite the letters? Was there a falling out? These things do come up in grad admissions, especially in cases of PhD students jumping ship (I'm doing something similar).