Do you ever wish you could see your letter?

[Mal83]

It's rare, but it does happen. I've seen Deans write recommendations on how the student isn't good enough for the program he is applying. I've seen people say, "I don't know this person well enough to comment," and nothing else. I have a feeling this only happens when people ask for recommendations from complete strangers, or people who really don't like them. I don't think it is from professors or employers that they have a good relationship with.

Yikes, that's crazy that a dean would agree to write the recommendation and then say something like that...it seems warped to me. If you can't drudge up something decent to say then you should decline to do it in the first place.

[Helpplease123]

It's usually recommended that you waive your right to see the letters because it shows that 1) you have good relationships with your writers and trust them to submit strong letters, and 2) you didn't review a less-than-ideal letter and either switch writers or ask your writer to make it stronger (though supposedly some writers will let you see their letter even if you waive your right, but I've personally never had a writer show their letter to me).

I don't know how much of a difference it will generally make in the decision process. Presumably ad comms give waived letters more weight for the reasons above, but I don't know if or to what degree they discount unwaived ones.

So personally I would only choose to not waive the right if I had concerns about a letter writer. Ideally I wouldn't have to resort to a questionable writer in the first place, but I know sometimes it is unavoidable for various reasons.

I had no idea that would be interpretation - I didn't really give it any thought at the time. I have submitted a lot of the applications like that though, should I contact admissions and ask for it to be changed? I am not hugely interested in reading them, just thought I may want to if I didn't get in but i certainly don't want to if it will hurt my application chances...

[Pitangus]

I had no idea that would be interpretation - I didn't really give it any thought at the time. I have submitted a lot of the applications like that though, should I contact admissions and ask for it to be changed? I am not hugely interested in reading them, just thought I may want to if I didn't get in but i certainly don't want to if it will hurt my application chances...

This is just the general consensus I've seen online and heard from both high school college counselors and a scholarship advisor at my undergrad, but I don't know whether it is the result of speculation about how letters are viewed or someone on an ad comm has actually shared their thoughts on it.

Either way I think it's just standard practice to waive the right, unless, as I said before, you have a reason beforehand to want to read the letters. Someone can correct me if I am mistaken.

EDIT - here is one of the topics I was referring to:

BDav do you have any thoughts/observations regarding waived vs. not waived letters?

Edited January 2, 2012 by Pitangus

[BDav]

You only see your letters if you get accepted, and you probably will only get accepted with good recommendations (or not having bad ones), it's probably not worth worrying about.

if you don't get accepted, you still don't get to see the letters, so it doesn't help you there.

[Note: I don't know how it works at every university, this is just what I read in the disclaimer of one.]

I've been told that the reason for this is that they don't want lawsuits against recommenders because people who are denied think it is their fault they didn't get accepted.

From the WashU Application:

Quote

Note: Waiving your right to view your letters of recommendation will allow recommenders to be more candid. The waive / do not waive option applies only to applicants who are admitted and enrolled. In the event you are not admitted, you will not have access to the letters of recommendation. For more information on this policy, please see our Guide for Applying to Graduate Study.

[Helpplease123]

This is just the general consensus I've seen online and heard from both high school college counselors and a scholarship advisor at my undergrad, but I don't know whether it is the result of speculation about how letters are viewed or someone on an ad comm has actually shared their thoughts on it.

Either way I think it's just standard practice to waive the right, unless, as I said before, you have a reason beforehand to want to read the letters. Someone can correct me if I am mistaken.

EDIT - here is one of the topics I was referring to:

BDav do you have any thoughts/observations regarding waived vs. not waived letters?

As the applications and recommendations have been submitted I can't change it to waive the rights - so should I email the schools and tell them I made a mistake and ask them to change it, or is it now too late to undo any damage? I have three not submitted apps but one recommender has already submitted so I can't amend theirs, for the two that haven't I can change to waive the rights but I guess it will look even worse to have two waived and one not?

[BDav]

If there is tech support contact info on your application, send them an email or give them a call. They can probably fix it, or at the least, erase them and let you resubmit their names. If that doesn't work, let your recommenders know that you did it by accident.

Edited January 2, 2012 by BDav

[Pitangus]

It seems that not waiving your right won't help you if you're rejected from a school and *may* hurt you during the review process depending on how the ad comm feels about unwaived letters.

So I suppose you might as well try and make the contact, as BDav suggests. Again I don't know how important the waiver is, but if you can get it changed it would be one less thing to worry about, since really I don't think there's any disadvantage to waiving the right.

[Helpplease123]

Thanks! One application let me waive even though the recommendations are submitted and I emailed the other places - wish i'd thought to check this beforehand!

[Pitangus]

Thanks! One application let me waive even though the recommendations are submitted and I emailed the other places - wish i'd thought to check this beforehand!

Good to hear. And don't feel bad about not thinking anything of it beforehand: it's a standard practice if people have told you about it, but not necessarily an obvious one if they haven't! I'm not sure what I would have thought about the waivers if I did not have advisors telling me to always put "yes"...

[Helpplease123]

Good to hear. And don't feel bad about not thinking anything of it beforehand: it's a standard practice if people have told you about it, but not necessarily an obvious one if they haven't! I'm not sure what I would have thought about the waivers if I did not have advisors telling me to always put "yes"...

Thanks! I'm English and I don't think we have the same system here but none of my recommenders mentioned it - I just emailed one, who is American, to apologise as I imagine the English ones won't have thought anything of it (and were professional).

I just re-read your post though and saw that you said contact technical support but on the technical support page it said for changes to applications to contact admissions but now i'm worried i've made another mistake by involving the admissions office. argh!! Could annoying the wrong people affect my chances?!

[Pitangus]

I think BDav mentioned who to contact. But to try to answer your question anyway: I had to email a department because they were missing the transcript for a transfer course I took at another school, and the person who responded was a graduate secretary who was very nice and helpful. I think it is often administrative assistants who handle these requests rather than the ad comm themselves, so even if they get annoyed (which doesn't seem common) I doubt they will try to get you rejected or anything!

Also, my apologies to everyone else for continuing to derail the thread somewhat!

[isobel_a]

I'm curious about mine. They can't be terrible, since I've been invited to interviews. I had a truly "close" mentor-student relationship with one out of three writers; when I approached the other two, I subtly suggested why I was asking them, specifically. For example, I told one professor whom I'd had for upper division courses within my major that I was looking for a letter writer who could vouch for my academic abilities, since I already had writers who would vouch for my research ability and intellectual potential. I don't think it's in bad taste to do this- if you don't, even the most well-intentioned writer may flounder or write a very vague letter, not knowing why you've chosen them. If you got an A on a project, and think it reflected your best work, remind them. You want to make it as easy as possible for your recommenders to write on your behalf (in academia or the workplace).

If my recommenders followed my suggestions, then I think I hit the trifecta; they vouched for my research skills, my academic integrity, and my intellectual prowess.

Honestly, I'd imagine that LoRs are only used as a "red flag" check, and not given a terrible amount of weight, anyway. While glowing recs from respected academics might help an otherwise mediocre applicant, mediocre recs won't hurt an otherwise solid applicant. Only terrible "red flag" letters will keep someone out. Remember: it's usually in the best interest of the school to get their students admitted to as many prestigious programs as possible. For this reason, grad programs understand that letters are generally inflated. The GRE is the only truly standardized portion of the application, which is why it's the only portion that's used as a strict cutoff (and is often weighted more heavily in admissions algorithms). Solid GRE scores and GPA get you past the first cut, while solid LoRs and SoPs get you an interview.

That's my theory anyway. Anyone have conflicting intel?

Edited January 2, 2012 by isobel_a

[emmm]

Well, I would just wonder if mediocre letters might hurt more than you think. As you said, most letters are inflated, so a mediocre letter could mean the writer really thinks you're bad. Or the letter writer could be ignorant of the process or just not much of a writer in general. That's why it's so important to choose your LOR writers really carefully.

[Chrysanthemum]

Honestly, I'd imagine that LoRs are only used as a "red flag" check, and not given a terrible amount of weight, anyway. While glowing recs from respected academics might help an otherwise mediocre applicant, mediocre recs won't hurt an otherwise solid applicant. Only terrible "red flag" letters will keep someone out. Remember: it's usually in the best interest of the school to get their students admitted to as many prestigious programs as possible. For this reason, grad programs understand that letters are generally inflated. The GRE is the only truly standardized portion of the application, which is why it's the only portion that's used as a strict cutoff (and is often weighted more heavily in admissions algorithms). Solid GRE scores and GPA get you past the first cut, while solid LoRs and SoPs get you an interview.

That's my theory anyway. Anyone have conflicting intel?

I agree with most of what you said, but I think it varies from program to program. I'm going for a Master's in Speech-Language Pathology, and one of the schools I visited said they look at the application like this:

GPA: 25-30%

GRE: 25-30%

LoR: 25-30%

SoP: 5-10%

Experience: 5%

The department head explained to me that LoRs have become really important because they'll receive lots of applications with 3.9/4.0 GPAs and then the LoRs will rank the student in the top 50%, which shows there must be some serious grade inflation, and it was also important to the program that their students develop relationships with faculty, so some past history of that is a good indicator.

So hopefully my GRE and LoR will make up for my mediocre GPA.

[SomedaySLP]

I agree with most of what you said, but I think it varies from program to program. I'm going for a Master's in Speech-Language Pathology, and one of the schools I visited said they look at the application like this:

GPA: 25-30%

GRE: 25-30%

LoR: 25-30%

SoP: 5-10%

Experience: 5%

The department head explained to me that LoRs have become really important because they'll receive lots of applications with 3.9/4.0 GPAs and then the LoRs will rank the student in the top 50%, which shows there must be some serious grade inflation, and it was also important to the program that their students develop relationships with faculty, so some past history of that is a good indicator.

So hopefully my GRE and LoR will make up for my mediocre GPA.

Ha, I got the same talk at Vandy (I'm going for SLP as well!)

I agree. I've also heard that this year a lot of schools are putting more weight on SoPs and LoRs and less on the GRE this year in particular, due to the recent revision. That's just what I've heard in SLP though, not sure how true that is across programs.

[lalabooks]

I am hoping for the latter to be correct; more emphasis placed on LoRs and SoP. My GRE scores are terrible :-( Some of the schools I spoke to said they do not place weight on a particular component rather they take a holistic view of the candidate. I hope that is true, although when receiving 700 applicants I don't know how it can be..

[Chrysanthemum]

Ha, I got the same talk at Vandy (I'm going for SLP as well!)

I agree. I've also heard that this year a lot of schools are putting more weight on SoPs and LoRs and less on the GRE this year in particular, due to the recent revision. That's just what I've heard in SLP though, not sure how true that is across programs.

Haha I loved Vandy's program, but I get the impression there's about a million of us applying for 30 spots at Vandy.

The recent revision definitely could make a difference in how they look at GREs. I saw on one school's website that they required a 1000 on the old GRE, and a combined score of 150 on the new. lol I'm pretty sure that's not possible...maybe they meant average?

I would love to see my recs, but I trust my profs to write a strong letter for me. Now that everything's in I just want it to be March.

[Loimographia]

I've always heard that SOP, Writing Sample and LORs are the most important aspects of the application, and that GRE's are mostly used as a minimum bar to pass (i.e., all apps with below a certain mark are tossed out, but otherwise it's essentially irrelevant in terms of acceptance. It is, however, heavily used in funding/fellowship decisions, as I understand). I'm not sure about the role of GPA, to be honest, but I do still hope that it's more important than GRE but not as important as, say, your writing sample. I think it's dangerous to assume that LORs will be discounted because they're all so complementary these days, because I think there's elements of inflation/weakness in all aspects of an application: GPAs are heavily inflated, some people just don't test well for the GRE, or had a fluke good/bad exam, CVs can overstate achievements or contributions (I know of at least one pre-med student who listed a lab on his resume -- he had been kicked out of the lab due to incompetence. But how's an adcom to know that?).

OT: I would LOVE see my LORs. I totally understand the whole "reading the compliments would be awkward" attitude, and take compliments rather poorly myself. But in this whole process of feeling hopelessly certain to be rejected, I could really use the ego boost. One of my professors told me I should just give up on one of my schools, because I had a snowballs chance in hell of getting in. When I received honors with my dept, my professor sent me a copy of his recommendation he'd written about me to the dept. Now, sometimes when I feel like I must be complete idiot for ever thinking I might be qualified to go to grad school, I pull out the letter and say "oh yeah, here's someone who actually thinks I can produce intelligent stuff. Maybe someone else will, too!" That and hey, I'm just the curious type; If somethings kept a secret from me, I'm going to want to know!

[super swank]

yes, I would want to see them, but here's why:

I didn't apply for everything all at once. The first thing I applied for was the Fulbright, and my letters were due by mid-September. For grad school, my LORs still aren't due, so if the original Fulbright LORs were not-so-great, who wouldn't want to know so they could get different ones?

As for the last ones I turn in and don't plan on asking for any more... yeah, it doesn't really matter.

[CanuckBoy]

My professor actually told me my odds to get into one of the schools was not good because his reference letter may not be strong enough for it. Sometimes it is better not to know... keeps the hope alive...

[coffeeplease]

In theory I'd want to see them, but when I actually had the opportunity a few years ago I chickened out. I couldn't stand the thought that there might be a negative and/or ambivalent letter in an application I'd sweated so much.

[Andreamia]

The school I applied to last year does not take scores from the GRE so they rely very heavily on LOR. The first year I applied to their grad school I chose not to waive my rights so I could read my letters. It's not that I didn't hold confidence in my recommenders. It just doesn't feel right "waiving my rights" to anything that involves my future. I felt I deserved to know what they wrote or didn't write. The two from my professors were quite good and I was very happy with them. However, I later realized that my third letter from my employer (I work in a hospital setting) may have hurt my chances a little. While it was a very good letter they are looking for recommenders who know the field and can vouch for your true potential as an slp. I had known my two instructors quite well through class, clinic and working at a camp for children with autism. Unfortunately for me though, I'm not a very good brown noser and didn't know the rest of my professors very well to ask for my third letter this year. Instead, I job shadowed an SLP in the hospital setting who I had previously known through an acquaintance. It was a good decision and I'm confident she wrote me a nice letter this year. When you shadow for 8 hours a day a few days a week on your own with the SLP I feel like they get to know you more on a personal level (much more so than some of the instructors). I know job shadowing seems like something you do at the beginning of your undergrad, not at the end.. but I think it really helped me with this and there are so many areas of the profession I haven't had the liberty to see yet. Also, it's another extra perk to add to your application.

This is my second year applying and this time I chose to waive my rights. I honestly don't feel like it would have made a difference last year as one instructors on the review committee told me it wouldn't have. However, I'm applying to more schools this year and I can't say all other universities would feel the same way about waiving rights. My two instructors basically informed me they would be using the same letters, so I know they will be very good. I hope changing my recommender on my third letter will make the difference!

[zillie]

I would not want to see my LORs.

When I was in high school, a teacher wrote me a strong letter for college admissions. She sealed it and I took it home, intending to mail it the next day. Unfortunately, my mother opened the letter, read it, and was angry because my teacher had complimented me on overcoming a disadvantaged background and remaining a strong student. This caused problems as my mother and the teacher argued about the content of the letter, making me feel too uncomfortable (because of my mother's behavior) to approach the teacher again.

My point: You never know what a letter might say. I believe most recommenders want to help you and they will emphasize your qualities in the best way they can think of. However, it might be difficult to read a letter and based on your reaction (which might be unpredictable), feel comfortable with your recommenders in the future, no matter their positive intentions.

Edited January 15, 2012 by zillie

[Airwick]

I decided to waive my rights to the letters -- it was an easy decision. Fortunately, I was able to read them because my recommenders all sent me attached copies haha

[felicidad]

I would not want to see my LORs.

When I was in high school, a teacher wrote me a strong letter for college admissions. She sealed it and I took it home, intending to mail it the next day. Unfortunately, my mother opened the letter, read it, and was angry because my teacher had complimented me on overcoming a disadvantaged background and remaining a strong student. This caused problems as my mother and the teacher argued about the content of the letter, making me feel too uncomfortable (because of my mother's behavior) to approach the teacher again.

My point: You never know what a letter might say. I believe most recommenders want to help you and they will emphasize your qualities in the best way they can think of. However, it might be difficult to read a letter and based on your reaction (which might be unpredictable), feel comfortable with your recommenders in the future, no matter their positive intentions.

This reminds me of my own high school recommendation experiences. I asked my 12th grade English teacher to write me a recommendation and she gladly agreed. However, over the course of the application process, she discouraged me from applying to any competitive colleges - without having access to my resume, my GPA, or my SAT scores which were extremely high. I was too naive to understand why my favorite teacher, in whose class I had earned an A+, did not have confidence that I would be admitted to even a mid-tier school.

I got the picture when she gave me my recommendation letter to read over and she said that I was destined to be the next "Oprah." In her opinion, I was nothing more than a precocious black girl who was unlikely to measure up to the demands of a rigorous college program but who would certainly reach my full potential (as an African-American).

I showed my parents the letter and cried. My parents who were born in the 60s told me to suck it up. In the end, I sent the letter but if I recall, I asked the teacher to remove the bit about Oprah. Oh, and I got into a top 5 university.

The other girl who went to that university with me had a similar experience. She was white, but poor (although that's not relevant to the following anecdote). She asked for a recommendation from our eleventh grade English teacher, as did I. When she didn't end up applying to Harvard, she broke the cardinal rule and looked at the recommendation he had written. It was four mediocre lines long.

After the experience with my 12th grade English teacher, I only trusted one of my teachers, so I ended up sending a different set of recommendations to all of the schools I applied to. Luckily, I also decided not to apply to Harvard and therefore didn't send that teacher's recommendation. I have a feeling it was the exact same letter. A lot of students asked him to write their letters to Ivies and no one but the two of us, who didn't send his letter, got into one. I've always wondered if he was the reason why....