Top Law Schools

Do schools see who your professors were or does the author of my rec letter have to specifically state he taught me multiple times?

It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

excellent thanks

JAG Dog wrote:It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

Not sure what you mean by respectable/meet that criteria in the letter. The author definitely doesn't have to spend a paragraph talking about their own credentials. And as long as the person taught you, it doesn't matter if they're famous/prestigious or not (not saying you suggested that with "respectable", but just trying to be clear).

bp shinners wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

Not sure what you mean by respectable/meet that criteria in the letter. The author definitely doesn't have to spend a paragraph talking about their own credentials. And as long as the person taught you, it doesn't matter if they're famous/prestigious or not (not saying you suggested that with "respectable", but just trying to be clear).

You're right that the recommender doesn't have to spend a paragraph, but you're wrong if you are implying it doesn't matter who they are. I took classes from graduate assistants who would have had lots of good things to say about me, but I would never use them for an LOR. The recommender's title will add to or detract from what is said in the letter.

JAG Dog wrote:

bp shinners wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

Not sure what you mean by respectable/meet that criteria in the letter. The author definitely doesn't have to spend a paragraph talking about their own credentials. And as long as the person taught you, it doesn't matter if they're famous/prestigious or not (not saying you suggested that with "respectable", but just trying to be clear).

You're right that the recommender doesn't have to spend a paragraph, but you're wrong if you are implying it doesn't matter who they are. I took classes from graduate assistants who would have had lots of good things to say about me, but I would never use them for an LOR. The recommender's title will add to or detract from what is said in the letter.

That's interesting that you say that. I've heard from others that if it is even a teaching assistant, it can be an effective letter of recommendation. On what do you base your statement that a graduate assistant would not be good or that the recommendation writer's title means anything? I'm just curious.

Tyr wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:

bp shinners wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

Not sure what you mean by respectable/meet that criteria in the letter. The author definitely doesn't have to spend a paragraph talking about their own credentials. And as long as the person taught you, it doesn't matter if they're famous/prestigious or not (not saying you suggested that with "respectable", but just trying to be clear).

You're right that the recommender doesn't have to spend a paragraph, but you're wrong if you are implying it doesn't matter who they are. I took classes from graduate assistants who would have had lots of good things to say about me, but I would never use them for an LOR. The recommender's title will add to or detract from what is said in the letter.

That's interesting that you say that. I've heard from others that if it is even a teaching assistant, it can be an effective letter of recommendation. On what do you base your statement that a graduate assistant would not be good or that the recommendation writer's title means anything? I'm just curious.

It shows they know something about what they're talking about. Even if your recommender is a professor who has never published anything, by the time she's a full professor, she has taught thousands of students. She can gauge the ones who are likely to succeed at the next level. If she has done something great, and the reviewer knows that, it just lends more credence to what she's saying about you because she has earned a certain measure of respect. A grad student might as well be a classmate. The reviewer will have worked hard to get where she is, and thus will respect someone of a similar stature who recommends you.

I've read from pretty much every law school consultant out there (and a few top schools) that it is MUCH better to have a TA who knows you and your work very well write you a letter over a professor who doesn't. Of course, all things being equal, the prof's letter would carry more weight.

JAG Dog wrote:

bp shinners wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

Not sure what you mean by respectable/meet that criteria in the letter. The author definitely doesn't have to spend a paragraph talking about their own credentials. And as long as the person taught you, it doesn't matter if they're famous/prestigious or not (not saying you suggested that with "respectable", but just trying to be clear).

You're right that the recommender doesn't have to spend a paragraph, but you're wrong if you are implying it doesn't matter who they are. I took classes from graduate assistants who would have had lots of good things to say about me, but I would never use them for an LOR. The recommender's title will add to or detract from what is said in the letter.

This is absolutely horrible advice. If your graduate assistant has more substantive things to say about you, then definitely choose them over a professor who would only write a generic letter of rec. Peruse through TLS long enough and you'll know this is definitely TCR.

altoid99 wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:

bp shinners wrote:

JAG Dog wrote:It has to be in the letter. An LOR should be from a respectable person who knows you really well. A letter that meets these criteria but does not show BOTH of these specifically in the language might as well not meet them.

Not sure what you mean by respectable/meet that criteria in the letter. The author definitely doesn't have to spend a paragraph talking about their own credentials. And as long as the person taught you, it doesn't matter if they're famous/prestigious or not (not saying you suggested that with "respectable", but just trying to be clear).

You're right that the recommender doesn't have to spend a paragraph, but you're wrong if you are implying it doesn't matter who they are. I took classes from graduate assistants who would have had lots of good things to say about me, but I would never use them for an LOR. The recommender's title will add to or detract from what is said in the letter.

This is absolutely horrible advice. If your graduate assistant has more substantive things to say about you, then definitely choose them over a professor who would only write a generic letter of rec. Peruse through TLS long enough and you'll know this is definitely TCR.

My point was not that if you can't get a distinguished professor to write you a LOR, you might as well not get one at all. I'm just saying that the position of the person writing the letter will factor into the equation to some degree. My real question now is how you can go through 4 years of college and not know a tenured professor well enough to get one from her. It doesn't seem like to big a stretch to think the reviewer will have the same question.

JAG Dog wrote: My point was not that if you can't get a distinguished professor to write you a LOR, you might as well not get one at all. I'm just saying that the position of the person writing the letter will factor into the equation to some degree.

And we're telling you that specific statements by people who review applications for law schools have stated that it doesn't matter.