what does ''strong'' LOR mean?

[newlyadmit13]

hi,

I have been reading on the program requirements pages of the schools and on a lot of websites which state that ''strong'' LORs help the prospective students get in the programs. Frankly, I don't understand what ''strong'' really means. Does it mean that the professors/referees who write the letters are well-known or famous in the field, or the letters written with full of superlative adjectives?

For instance, my LORs , as my profs told me, mentions that I accomplished this and that perfectly or got A in their/this and that/ classes. So, to my referees these are enough to call the letters as a 'strong lor', however, some professors in the schools that I am applying to told me that my LORs were not strong at all. I am so confused, and when I told this to my referees, they were so upset, too. They told me that they didn't know what else, or in what way they should write their LORs anymore.

 

Maybe because my referees are not well-known? Maybe that is the reason? Please advice, I appreciate your taking the time to read and reply this.

 

good luck in your future endeavors!

Edited November 10, 2013 by newlyadmit13

[TakeruK]

It's a subjective term so it would mean different things to different people. Also, I think the style and content of LORs vary a lot between cultures and countries.

 

Maybe this will help. A strong LOR for most North American STEM programs would be a letter from a professor or equivalent who has supervised the student's research work. This person would be able to describe the student's research style, experience, and abilities honestly. The LORs would usually describe the student in relative ranking with other students that the prof has supervised in the past. So, a sentence like "Student X is very bright" is not as effective as a sentence like "Student X is very bright and I would rank him/her in the top 5% of all students who have worked in my lab", for example. In fact, some LOR forms that I have forwarded to my LOR writers to fill out asks them to rank me in several categories such as Communication skills, experience, etc. (they have to check a box that says "Best student ever mentored", "top 1%", "top 2%", "top 5%", etc.) 

 

So, a letter full of superlative adjectives is probably not super helpful. I think almost every single LOR will have tons of great things to say about the student -- after all, why agree to write the LOR unless the student is actually good, and also there are tons of qualified candidates for grad school, so every other applicant will also be "very bright" or "extremely hard working" etc. It is better if your LOR will compare you favourably to other students in the past.

 

However, a strong LOR needs to come from someone who is familiar with your abilities. Sometimes famous profs have very large labs with tons of students so they might not be able to write you a LOR that is as personal and as detailed, so the LOR might not be as strong as a lesser known prof who worked more directly with you.

 

In addition, the LOR should also address the key points that the committee is interested in and that they can't find information elsewhere. For example, a LOR that says you got an A in this/that class isn't helpful since the transcript also says the same thing. So, letters from profs who have only taught you are not as strong as letters from profs who have supervised you in your research (which is what grad schools care about). It's usually very hard to have all 3 LORs come from profs who have supervised your research, though, so sometimes you have no other choice. But the truth is that letters that explain how you "did well in a class/classes" is not very strong (but still better than nothing).

 

One exception could be a letter that explains why a certain grade is exceptional. For example, your research supervisor might have taught a grad level class and you took it. They could explain how you scored one of the highest marks despite being an undergrad competing with graduate students. Or, perhaps one of your classes had term projects where you went above and beyond the expectations and the LOR could note this. Usually, term projects in senior / grad classes are research/project based so doing well in these can help if you don't have a lot of research experience.

[clandry]

The ranking thing is a little flawed. If you could join a group that is full of exceptional students, then it may fail you. 

 

And why's this post in the GRE section? 

[newlyadmit13]

thank you all for all your comments. sorry for posting this in the wrong topic, I was not aware; it is too late out here and I have not slept for days. Sorry again.

[TakeruK]

The ranking thing is a little flawed. If you could join a group that is full of exceptional students, then it may fail you. 

 

And why's this post in the GRE section? 

 

I agree that it's not the best but it's definitely how things are done at some schools (like I said, some schools show you the form they ask the LOR writers to fill in). However, if you join a lab full of exceptional students, then this will be well known in the field that Lab X is churning out great research and people. So, being in the top 10% at a prestigious lab could be way more helpful than the best student ever at a "no-name" lab!