Are Letters A Big DEAL?

[greenlover45]

How much of a big deal are the rec. letters? 

 

Do you guys have any theories or known facts about how they come into play when the schools review them?

[lyrehc]

Knowledgeable letters from references are a big deal.  If your letter can talk specifically about you and your strengths and weaknesses a lot of programs put weight on that.  Too often people have generic references that can't talk about the time "x student" did "y."

 

There are tons of factors, though.  Someone applying to graduate school who has been in the workforce for 25 years and doesn't have academic references is not going to be evaluated the same way as someone who has been in college for the past 5-10 years. 

[geographyrocks]

A huge deal. I was told that getting a letter from the chair of my UG department really helped.

And everything lyrehc said.

[danieleWrites]

Mine were a huge deal. They were from three professors who were familiar with my work and familiar with the part of the field in which I intend to focus my research. I provided my letter writers with writing samples (at least one from a class I had taken from them), my CV, a bio, and brief description of my research interests and reasoning. Of course, the program was small and they knew me pretty well, but having data on hand when they were composing these letters was helpful for them. The most difficult part of this for me was that the programs I applied to wanted sealed letters directly from my letter writers, so I had no access to what they wrote unless they chose to give me a copy. I never asked for a copy and I still don't know what they wrote in those letters. I honestly didn't want to know. Once the final deadline for turning these letters in had passed, I sent a thank you email to two of my letter writers; I had to wait for my third to get finished and sent in (late), and then sent a thank you. I wanted to do so before I knew anything from the schools, so that way I wouldn't be upset by the rejections I assumed I would have across the board.

Anyway, these letters gave them an expert's evaluation of my suitability for the program and whether or not I could do the work that I was proposing to do in my SOP, or do the work in grad school, period. I assume that an outside opinion of my abilities, no matter how presumably partisan, was a necessary step in considering whether or not to offer me a spot in the program and funding to go with.

[GeoDUDE!]

I'm going to go out on a limb(not really) and say that Letters of Reccomendation are only really important, in most cases, for what they don't say than they do. Do a google search; the amount of people applying and the amount of people with hyperbole in their letters grows and grows. 

 

Often the name of the letter has more weight than whats actually in the letter. Oh, your POI and LOR writer were friends in grad school, that means a lot more than anything your LOR could write down. 

 

What is really important in an application, once you get past the numbers phase, is there is a narrative of excellence:

 

"Applicant has good grades, likes research, his advisors love him, and his POI is willing to take him. Looks like hes a good fit for the program"

 

Don't focus on one part of the application, make it strong as a whole.  Willing to bet that your statement could be a much bigger deal than anything LOR could do (unless there is a special relationship or bigwig). 

[zigzag]

I think this vastly depends on your field, the school, and who wrote these letters (and what they said). Obviously you should get the best letters you can, and the best all-around application otherwise. But when talking amongst my new cohort I quickly realized that all or most of us had recommenders who were in some way connected to our new school. One had a letter from the same Prof who was advisor to our new DGS, others of us had alumni letter writers, or faculty who were friends with faculty at our Grad department, or the faculty at the grad school knew of our advisors for what they do/did/produce(d). In my case, I had one "friend of the DGS" letter writer, one "long ago alumni, got-their-PhD-there-in-the-70's" writer, and one "my-potential-advisor-admires-this-UG-prof-I-have-in-the-same-field" advisor. 

 

Obviously that's not the only reason I got in; none of my writers would have gone to bat for me if I hadn't in some way earned their highest recommendations, and the school wouldn't have accepted me if I didn't have an otherwise great application. But I won't pretend like having great writers, or well-connected (even if by happenstance) writers wasn't a huge help to me, or anyone else in my program. So I wouldn't write them off as "not-really" important. It might be less the content, however (if it is positive) than who wrote it. I know one of my writers offered to call/email her friends about my application. This may be a more humanities thing, but a really strong letter writer can go to bat for your acceptance before your application even hits the committee tables. Or it may just be an exceptionally good and happens to be connected to someone at the school you're applying to thing. I know mine did, and I also know that my (now) grad advisor explicitly told me if one of my letter writers ever wanted to lecture at my new campus, to tell her that my new advisor would orchestrate the whole thing because she'd love to meet/talk to them and saw them give a talk once. 

 

This significantly helped me when I was otherwise coming from a decidedly non-elite public school with strong professors (but a weaker grad program). I was also told by a different visiting prof (with a grain of salt and some tongue-in-cheek humor) that the currency of academia amounts to: publications, connections, and academic ego.

 

FWIW: I gave my writers two thank yous. One just for writing letters -- small potted succulents ordered from Etsy. It was like $15 for three plants so about $5 each. They were small and desk-worthy, plus low maintenance. Then upon acceptance (and my formal enrollment/acceptance of the offer) I bought stationary from the new grad school and wrote them handwritten thank yous. 

 

Don't stress out, but do try to do the best you can, and even ask if your writers have any connections to schools you're interested in. 

Edited September 7, 2014 by zigzag

[TakeruK]

In my opinion, LORs are one of the most important parts of your application. In my field, the #1 desired attribute in new grad students is their current ability to perform research and their potential for future research production. This is gauged best in two ways: actual research experience (in the form of your CV and your publications) and testimony about your research work from your advisors (in the form of LORs). 

[starofdawn]

I was rejected from a school because my letters of recommendation weren't strong enough (they said that, among with one other reason). I don't blame them for that, I agree my letters were among the weakest part of my application - but you answer your question, yes, LORs are important.

Edited September 7, 2014 by starofdawn

[rising_star]

Letters are insanely important. Those reading your application trust their peers to be able to evaluate your ability to succeed in grad school, so they take the letters quite seriously. When I applied to PhD programs, there were phone calls between POIs at schools I applied to and one of my letter writers. I know because I was told about them. They called this letter writer because they knew the person personally and professionally. So yea, letters matter. Make sure yours are strong. And, as much as you can, try to get them from people that are known in your field.

[grad_wannabe]

Letters matter quite a lot. In grad school for my MS I was awarded a full-ride fellowship (the only full ride the department awarded), and I'm pretty sure it was because one of my letters came from a super-star in my field (as my research, CV, GPA, and general background were pretty equitable with my cohort - in my opinion I wasn't that noticeably better than anyone). 

[Eigen]

I would say that letters are probably the most important part of your package. 

 

They are the support for almost everything else you're saying! You have to have a competitive transcript and research experience and a good CV, but your letter writers emphasizing that and giving a personal recommendation that you'll do well in graduate school/are heads and shoulders above everyone they've worked with in the last 5-10 years?

 

You can have a bunch of research experience, but as time goes on and more and more people list "years" of research experience on their CV and then have very little practical functional experience, letters become the defining factor that says not just how much research experience you had, but how good it was, and how good of a researcher you are. 

 

A letter writer saying that you are perfectly capable of hitting the ground running and masterminding your own research project? That's a huge deal for a grad school, and can really help. 

 

That will get you in places you might otherwise not have a shot at. 

 

Unlike, say, GRE scores where a bad score (may) keep you out, but a good score won't get you in, letters are much more straightforward: A bad or limp letter can keep you out, and a good letter can get you in.