Controversial letter of recommendation Forum

[Anonymous_userCLXXX]

Hello,

I know that most people don't usually ask questions about letters of recommendations, but I have an odd one. Here's the scoop:

I have a professor that is eager to write a letter of recommendation for me during this application cycle. However, he said that, in a letter of recommendation, he normally writes about the research students have done for him in his class or as an RA (He is a political science professor). The problem is that the research I have done for him was about ending marijuana prohibition, which is a controversial topic to say the least. We both think it might be a bit odd/strange if he wrote extensively about it in a letter - even if the work was great. But, if he didn't he might not write as strong of a letter.

I told him I would consult the TLS forums for advice before he proceeds. Thoughts? I know this seems a bit odd. I just don't want any red flags on my application to schools.

Thanks.

[ggocat]

No problem so long as the letter is more about you and your work than about pot.

[smile0751]

No problem so long as the letter is more about you and your work than about pot.

[KD35]

Additionally, students do not decide what the research is going to be on, which I think a school would understand and know.

[BillsFan9907]

Your research is well within the mainstream. Hell, even Sanjey Gupta is in favor of ending prohibition

[Anonymous_userCLXXX]

Thanks for all your feedback. I'll pass it along to my professor.

Seoulless, I may have touched upon the fact that the overwhelming number of arrests, convictions and sentences for marijuana crime (and all drugs for that matter) are minorities, especially African-American men. The main crux was that prohibition is a failure & needs to end. Any specific ideas on how my professor should integrate this into his letter? He's a bit more old fashioned than most professors.

[BillsFan9907]

In terms of him actually writing a recommendation about this subject, it should be treated no differently than any other academic subject. Academia touches so many aspects of life. .

[Anonymous_userCLXXX]

Thanks for all your feedback. I'll pass it along to my professor.

Seoulless, I may have touched upon the fact that the overwhelming number of arrests, convictions and sentences for marijuana crime (and all drugs for that matter) are minorities, especially African-American men. The main crux was that prohibition is a failure & needs to end. Any specific ideas on how my professor should integrate this into his letter? He's a bit more old fashioned than most professors.

I wouldn't overplay it at all. I would just explain to him that its important that admissions officers know that your research has tremendous implications for the relationship between the criminal justice system and disenfranchised communities. It should just be a subtle passing mention. Schools like those who are somewhat affiliated with "progressive" causes. Your research on its own is incredibly appealing and quite cool. My suggestion is that you merely add a pebble in there to make yourself more appealing.

In terms of him actually writing a recommendation about this subject, it should be treated no differently than any other academic subject. Academia touches so many aspects of life. There is this woman professor who was doing Youtube videos on fisting and facesitting. Your research is a far cry from that.

I am sure that if I spent a half hour browsing through the literature of the most prestigious policy institutes, I would find that the overwhelming majority have published against the prohibition of drugs.

So to summarize 1) your research is very much within the mainstream as are your conclusions 2) if possible, try to subtly pepper in the progressive implications of your research.

Wow! Thanks for the advice! I'll pass it along to my professor for sure.

I know this is a bit off topic from what I originally posted, but throughout my entire undergraduate degree I have tackled marijuana prohibition from multiple angles; in pharmacology classes, history classes, political science classes, health policy classes, etc. At the start of the application cycle I contemplated discussing this in my personal statement at the very least, but decided it would be too risky to show that to admission committees.

Now that you mention it, should the focus of this ongoing research of mine be more apparent in the rest of my application? Personal statement, optional essays etc. How would you recommend I proceed?

Anyone else, feel free to chime in too.

[hillz]

Wow! Thanks for the advice! I'll pass it along to my professor for sure.

I know this is a bit off topic from what I originally posted, but throughout my entire undergraduate degree I have tackled marijuana prohibition from multiple angles; in pharmacology classes, history classes, political science classes, health policy classes, etc. At the start of the application cycle I contemplated discussing this in my personal statement at the very least, but decided it would be too risky to show that to admission committees.

Now that you mention it, should the focus of this ongoing research of mine be more apparent in the rest of my application? Personal statement, optional essays etc. How would you recommend I proceed?

Anyone else, feel free to chime in too.

OP, I think it's great that you've done so much research on this topic. You should definitely have your professor discuss your work from an academic perspective and focus less on the topic, more on the skills you showed working on the project. However, I would stay away from discussing it in your personal statement. Not necessarily because it is controversial, but because I think it would be hard for you to write a compelling piece that talks about research. Ad comms want you to share an experience or experiences that have made you the person you are (the person who wants to go to law school). I think you will come off as more well-rounded and as a real person if you tell a story that says something about who you are and not just the academic work you have done.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Jokes aside, if you have done some research on how it adversely affects black folks, your adcom will look favorably upon you. If you haven't, find a way for your professor work it in.

That's just the way academia is today.

This is a complete stereotype and you don't need to try to work anything in. If you are the student doing research for the professor, who chose the topic/set the research agenda, you just need your prof to talk about your skills and abilities. The topic of the research in question is moot.

[BillsFan9907]

It's the link i posted above.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Jokes aside, if you have done some research on how it adversely affects black folks, your adcom will look favorably upon you. If you haven't, find a way for your professor work it in.

That's just the way academia is today.

This is a complete stereotype and you don't need to try to work anything in. If you are the student doing research for the professor, who chose the topic/set the research agenda, you just need your prof to talk about your skills and abilities. The topic of the research in question is moot.

I think that when 98% of professors from elite universities who donate donate to the leftWing party, we've moved beyond calling my characterization a stereotype.

But you're stereotyping their reaction to a LOR. They don't care what subject the professor is researching, they want to know what the student did, and they can separate the student from the professor. They particularly know that undergrads (and most grads) play no role whatsoever in the professor's research agenda. And at most schools, profs don't read LORs, adcomms do. They really don't care what take a professor has on a particular subject. You're advocating completely unnecessary and possibly counterproductive work (the prof in question may not want to characterize their research in a certain way) based on an irrelevant assumption about law professors' political leanings.

[BillsFan9907]

Okay. fair enough.

[A. Nony Mouse]

No, I don't think that, because I don't think they give a shit about an applicant's politics, they care about their academic potential. They want the prof writing the letter to speak to the applicant's academic ability, including relevant personal qualities like work ethic. Adcomms are not actually out to fill their classes with "progressives" over "conservatives" or whatever categories you're creating. The student's interest in whatever aspect of the professpr's research is not something adcomms care about. I know people like to construe academia as this scary liberal PC bugaboo, but because many academics' politics skew liberal doesn't make them incapable of evaluating someone's intellectual ability anymore that someone who's conservative is unable to evaluate intellectual ability based on their politics.

[BillsFan9907]

Also - if you've worked on any journal articles with him, then you wouldn't need to worry about the subject. It obviously indicates this was an area of research that was taken seriously.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Dude, I used to evaluate students for a living. You're mischaracterizing an entire profession based on your perception of their politics. It's paranoid and counterproductive. Can you give an example of someone whose failure to pander to the adcomms' perceived politics has hurt them in any way, apart from actual deficiencies in their application?

And evolutionary psychology is useless.

[Felix the Cat]

Jokes aside, if you have done some research on how it adversely affects black folks, your adcom will look favorably upon you. If you haven't, find a way for your professor work it in.

That's just the way academia is today.

This is a complete stereotype and you don't need to try to work anything in. If you are the student doing research for the professor, who chose the topic/set the research agenda, you just need your prof to talk about your skills and abilities. The topic of the research in question is moot.

I think that when 98% of professors from elite universities who donate donate to the leftWing party, we've moved beyond calling my characterization a stereotype.

But you're stereotyping their reaction to a LOR. They don't care what subject the professor is researching, they want to know what the student did, and they can separate the student from the professor. They particularly know that undergrads (and most grads) play no role whatsoever in the professor's research agenda. And at most schools, profs don't read LORs, adcomms do. They really don't care what take a professor has on a particular subject. You're advocating completely unnecessary and possibly counterproductive work (the prof in question may not want to characterize their research in a certain way) based on an irrelevant assumption about law professors' political leanings.

This. Letters of recommendation are there to demonstrate an applicant's skills, work ethic, and abilities to admissions people. In my experience, professors aren't the ones who review admissions files. It would also be tricky to ask your professor to frame your letter in a political way because it might make them question your judgment.

[BillsFan9907]

Dude, I used to evaluate students for a living.

[Ron Don Volante]

take a chrill prill bro

[Anonymous_userCLXXX]

Ron, I second that.

I'll take your advice, Mouse & Seoulless and advise my professor to approach this letter from an academic angle.

Thanks for all your help.