Yet another 3rd LOR - psychology

[spiny22]

I'm applying to developmental psych phd programs and I've run into what seems to be a common problem: no idea who to ask for my third LOR. The first two are fairly obvious. One is my senior thesis sponsor; she's very familiar with my research skills, very supportive, and extremely well known and respected in the field. The second is an adjunct professor I took an honors class with; he's become a sort of mentor, is very familiar with my writing, and I know he thinks quite highly of me.

 

So then there's the third. While I've developed great relationships with the two mentioned profs, most of my other professors barely got to know me.  Because I switched to psych relatively late (junior year) I had to catch up with a lot of lecture classes, so my opportunities to get close to profs have been slim. I have three main choices:

 

1) Former neuroscience prof who is also director of the senior thesis program. I got an A-, which is good for his class, but did no writing in the class. However, he will have the opportunity to become familiar with my writing because he must approve thesis drafts. The problem is I'm just getting started and don't know if I'll be able to submit my intro draft sooner that it's due (somewhat late in the semester).

 

2) Former social psych prof who got to know me by name. I got an A in his class and submitted papers, but the TA graded them. Of course I could show him the papers when I asked for the LOR.

 

3) Research methods prof who I did not get to know, but for whose class I wrote considerably more intensive papers. Again, the TA graded them.

 

I know my third LOR will be considerably weaker than the first two, so I'd also appreciate any insight into how much the strength of the first two can counteract that weakness.

[Loric]

People who actually know you and can talk about you personally will always sound better when they scribble out the letter than people who barely know you from Adam.

 

Make no mistake - they are not just pontificating into the air. You are supposed to be giving them a little listing of how/what/why that they need to emphasize and exactly what picture they're trying to paint for this particular program. If they know who you are, they will be better at filling in the blanks convincingly. If they don't, it'll be pretty bad. Just because they're smart doesn't mean they can actually write. Writing what you know is always easier than faking it. People can tell. Admissions people are.. wait for it.. people.

[spiny22]

That should have been obvious to me. My third choice doesn't make a lot of sense. So should I just go for who knows me best over the other factors? Sounds like that's maybe the most important thing.

[Loric]

Well, some folks insist going for a PhD, etc.. over others is the best move. I think those people are incredibly closed minded and bought into the academic institution far too fully and are going to have a very odd wake up call in the real world..

 

Someone who can write intelligently and convincingly about your strengths in a manner that makes you look good, if not great, is the person who should be writing your letter.

[spiny22]

I've heard both, that you should go for someone who knows you and can write a really good letter, and that the person's status is important. When I think about who knows me best and could write a really good letter, the obvious choice is a grad student I've worked closely with on research. However I've heard that letters from grad students are sometimes more or less ignored by admissions committees. I do think this person could write a really good letter though so I'm kind of pulled both ways.

[Loric]

Well, as a grad student, do they teach any classes at the school? If so, they're pretty much immediately faculty/staff. There's always ways to reframe things.