The Power of a good LOR Forum

[Mack.Hambleton]

All top schools expect "good" letters of rec. They're something that can hurt you if you have really shitty LORs, but won't make you outperform your numbers.

I had meh recs from a couple TAs and only one I'd call good from a former boss, S and H didn't care.

do you think better recs would have gotten you a regular admit instead of in off the waitlist? or do you think it wouldn't have mattered? (actual question, not trying to be a dick)

probably not my LSAT was slightly below median

[scone]

.

[fisheatbananas]

agree that most schools expect a "good" LOR and they generally dont make much of a difference unless if its a bad LOR that says negative things about you, then that would hurt you.

so for a LOR to be powerful enough to influence your admission it has to be "extremely good". its kinda hard to explain but i think the admissions committee can tell the difference between a prof or employer that really knew you well and liked you vs someone that honestly didnt care about you that much but wrote a nice LOR since you asked and theyre good people. just by the tone and diction of the LOR etc.

but, i was accepted to several schools where i was below median and received several scholarship offers that i didnt expect, and i personally think my LORs had something to do with it. altho i can never know that for sure. i got one from a prof that taught 2 of my classes in my last semester of college, and one from my boss at the time when i was applying. i didnt read them but for both LORs we discussed what kind of experiences and characteristics i would like them to write about and i have no reason to think they didnt write what we discussed.

[03152016]

but, i was accepted to several schools where i was below median and received several scholarship offers that i didnt expect, and i personally think my LORs had something to do with it.

don't look too much into this
many schools give significant scholarships to the vast majority of admitted students
it's just a marketing technique, the sticker price is artificially inflated. the scholly makes it seem like you're getting it at a steal

[Ron Howard]

but, i was accepted to several schools where i was below median and received several scholarship offers that i didnt expect, and i personally think my LORs had something to do with it.

don't look too much into this
many schools give significant scholarships to the vast majority of admitted students
it's just a marketing technique, the sticker price is artificially inflated. the scholly makes it seem like you're getting it at a steal

This needs to be said more often.

[rrwwa]

To one of the posters above, I don't think LORs will have an effect on scholarship offers. It might have depended more on how much they needed your numbers at a certain point in the cycle and how much you were convincing in your negotiations.

OP, your URM status will help in your cycle, but LORs will be negligible, as Mack said. Admission officers get thousands of applicants, with at least two LORs for each applicant. They've read every possible thing that anyone can ever say about an applicant. That you read your LOR already kind of weakens its strength though, but not much. Personally I wouldn't think more about it.

That was me. I didn't negotiate at all actually, with any schools. I did apply early, though I didn't get the scholarship offer until February. If I'm remembering correctly, I got it in the first round of offers that went out for the scholarship. I mean, obviously I don't know how much my LORs helped, but the school liked something about me besides just my numbers.

[fisheatbananas]

To one of the posters above, I don't think LORs will have an effect on scholarship offers. It might have depended more on how much they needed your numbers at a certain point in the cycle and how much you were convincing in your negotiations.

OP, your URM status will help in your cycle, but LORs will be negligible, as Mack said. Admission officers get thousands of applicants, with at least two LORs for each applicant. They've read every possible thing that anyone can ever say about an applicant. That you read your LOR already kind of weakens its strength though, but not much. Personally I wouldn't think more about it.

That was me. I didn't negotiate at all actually, with any schools. I did apply early, though I didn't get the scholarship offer until February. If I'm remembering correctly, I got it in the first round of offers that went out for the scholarship. I mean, obviously I don't know how much my LORs helped, but the school liked something about me besides just my numbers.

same. i applied early but didnt negotiate, except one school (after i got the scholarship offer i asked them to increase it and they did, twice. i ended up not attending there though) im not saying it was definitely because of the LOR that i got my acceptances and scholarship offers, just that as you said "the school liked something about me besides just my numbers" and in retrospect i think my PS, work experience, resume etc were pretty average too so maybe it was the LOR. of course i dont know for sure but just a guess.

[LawsRUs]

Honestly, I doubt admission committees are authorized to assign scholarship offers based on subjective factors. Giving a person more money based on personal likability would get AOs into trouble. And the word getting out about that policy may make a school unpopular among applicants. Their anxiety about filling their class sizes can affect aid decisions though.

[fisheatbananas]

Honestly, I doubt admission committees are authorized to assign scholarship offers based on subjective factors. Giving a person more money based on personal likability would get AOs into trouble. And the word getting out about that policy may make a school unpopular among applicants. Their anxiety about filling their class sizes can affect aid decisions though.

makes sense seeing you explain it this way

[NigeranOU]

Strong LORs won't necessarily entirely distance you from the pack either (though your LOR that you mentioned certainly sounds to be very strong). I'd venture to say that most informed applicants would approach LOR writers who they know will go to bat for them and who will have great things to say about them. I know that when I was thinking about who to ask for my letters, the two things that were most important for me were how well the professor knew me/could speak to my work and which professors i had good relationships with who I knew would go the extra mile for me and have good things to say about me. Just some food for thought, not trying to belittle your great LOR or anything, but there will likely be many others who also have strong LOR.

This is a great point.
What I take away from this thread is that a strong letter of rec carries a small amount of weight in addition to other softs like URM status and strong personal statement. It may help me especially since I am a splitter (3.2 gpa, mid 160 LSAT). You honestly never know, especially for URMS

[landshoes]

Honestly, I doubt admission committees are authorized to assign scholarship offers based on subjective factors. Giving a person more money based on personal likability would get AOs into trouble. And the word getting out about that policy may make a school unpopular among applicants. Their anxiety about filling their class sizes can affect aid decisions though.

This makes no sense. Admissions committees make decisions based on personal and subjective factors ALL THE TIME. If you read Spivey's blog he specifically mentions likeablity as an admissions factor.

Yale's dean of admissions has specifically mentioned exemplary letters of recommendation as a factor in admissions. Turns out that people still apply to Yale!

You really have no idea what you're talking about on this particular topic.

[NigeranOU]

Honestly, I doubt admission committees are authorized to assign scholarship offers based on subjective factors. Giving a person more money based on personal likability would get AOs into trouble. And the word getting out about that policy may make a school unpopular among applicants. Their anxiety about filling their class sizes can affect aid decisions though.

This makes no sense. Admissions committees make decisions based on personal and subjective factors ALL THE TIME. If you read Spivey's blog he specifically mentions likeablity as an admissions factor.

Yale's dean of admissions has specifically mentioned exemplary letters of recommendation as a factor in admissions. Turns out that people still apply to Yale!

You really have no idea what you're talking about on this particular topic.

damn

[landshoes]

From Sarah Zearfoss, dean of admissions at Michigan

How important are references? Do you all prefer to see academic references or work references. I’ve been in the workforce a long time, and am preparing my applications for Sept/Oct. I have several choices regarding references and am curious whether I should choose.

In my opinion, the ideal mix for letters of recommendation is two academic and one employer. There you go. A direct, unambiguous answer from an admissions officer—you thought that was impossible!

But of course there’s more, depending on the situation of the applicant. If you’ve been away from school for four or five years or longer, it may be pretty difficult to get an academic letter, and at that stage, most law schools’ expectations of receiving an academic letter will start diminishing anyway. If you can get one—great. Do that. But if you can’t, then concentrate on getting the best work recommendations you can. Those should be not from peers, but from someone who supervised you. Ideally, the supervisor can compare you favorably to other similarly situated employees—i.e., saying something like, “I’ve had 12 paralegals over the years who have gone to great law schools, and Mary is the best of the bunch.”

In contrast, if you’re going to be a senior in college, you may not have had the kind of work experience that leads to a powerful letter. The writer should be someone who supervised you long enough to get to know you well, and ideally, who knows the kind of things a graduate or professional school is looking for in an applicant. When I was in college, I worked in a law office for a time, and my boss there might have written me a good letter—but I also worked in a butcher shop, and I’m pretty sure my boss there would not have added much.

If you read the foregoing two paragraphs and despair—because you can’t get an academic letter, or because your supervisor is an idiot, or you’ve never had a job, or what have you—well, cheer up. Just do the best you can. I’m talking here about the ideal, not the required. I’d estimate that 10-20% of letters are really, really helpful—they will carry significant positive weight because they are so specific, so informative, so enthusiastic. Another 5-10% move the needle in the opposite direction: They are so muted, general, and unenthusiastic that I think, “Yikes. What’s going on with this person?” (One such letter probably won’t be fatal—but if all the letters are that way, well, that’s a problem.) But that leaves 70 to 85% of applicants with letters that make differences at the margin only. I’m not saying, don’t put any effort into this—you should exert quality-control over every element of the application you can! And you can never be sure what element of the application is going to add the peppercorn of weight that you need to move from a no to a yes. But a sense that your letters are at best at the median should not be something that keeps you up at night.

For the record, it is extremely unusual for a letter to be actually negative.

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/michig ... ng-series/

[landshoes]

Asha (aka the Dean of Admissions at YLS) on letters of rec

http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/18866.htm

[TheodoreKGB]

.

[landshoes]

Asha (aka the Dean of Admissions at YLS) on letters of rec

http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/18866.htm

LOL at your Yale reference. They're unequivocally known as the pickiest school.

sigh

[landshoes]

Asha (aka the Dean of Admissions at YLS) on letters of rec

http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/18866.htm

LOL at your Yale reference. They're unequivocally known as the pickiest school.

sigh.

my point is not that every school is yale, my point is that thinking that subjective factors don't make a difference is a really unsupported and, frankly, ridiculous assertion to make. they matter, and they matter more to some schools (like yale) than others, but lawsrus was going on some weird blind-leading-the-blind kind of thing where he was claiming that admissions committees literally wouldn't be "allowed" to use subjective factors and shit like that

[landshoes]

double

[TheodoreKGB]

.

[fisheatbananas]

He was referencing the fact that applicants don't get scholarships based on softs. He never said they're not authorized to use LORs for admissions purposes. The point is: scholarships are based on merit or need. You're not going to get a scholarship based on two paragraphs written by a teacher.

sorry if this is a stupid question. just to clarify, does "merit" only mean LSAT and gpa? softs are never included?

[TheodoreKGB]

.

[thesealocust]

There are softs and then there are softs. LoRs are about as squishy as it gets - work experience, accolades, etc. intuitively form a more solid foundation to differentiate candidates with similar numbers when it comes to admissions and scholarship decisions.

It's also important to consider bias and perspective here. Admissions committees want as many applicants as possible and they want as much information about them as possible - they not only want to get the best students, but they want to weed out the applicants who look good on paper but wind up being trainwrecks at or after school. They have every incentive to hype the importance of every aspect of the application and sing a song of holistic application review. But look at those quotes! The dean of admissions at Michigan telling you that you've got "75% to 85% of applicants with letters that make differences at the margin only" is just the politically correct and less hyperbolic version of me telling you "I kind of doubt law schools even read the LoRs for 90%+ of their applicants."

We have years and years of data suggesting that undergraduate GPA + LSAT come very close to controlling admissions decisions for most candidates (obviously excepting schools like Yale, but there aren't many of them). Nobody likes how mechanical law school admissions seem to be, but that doesn't make it any less true.

[Generally]

Post removed.

[cdotson2]

The more I read these TLS debates on basic admissions issues, the more I think no one really knows what the hell is going on with anything.

1+ there is a lot of contradictory advice

but tcr
1.make sure every part of your application is as perfect as you can
2. apply everywhere
3. wait and see what happens.
4. profit $$$

[thesealocust]

False dichotomy. It's generally a debate between those who have spent a long time with the data on lawschoolnumbers.com (and/or seen the results of many application cycles) and those who have not.