Assigning Letters Forum

[Dipsychus]

As everyone agrees, better to send two solid recommendation letters instead of four iffy and generic ones. My question is about balance. Specifically: for a non-traditional student, with plenty of work experience, does it make sense to assign a letter from a former employer to all law schools? I should add that my two other recommenders are from college and grad school. I don't have to include the letter that the former employer wrote (this is all through LSAC of course), but it potentially adds value to the holistic review. To put this in a different and more generalized form: if you've been out of school for let's say ten years then would it be silly not to include and employer-written letter?

[QContinuum]

To put this in a different and more generalized form: if you've been out of school for let's say ten years then would it be silly not to include and employer-written letter?

So long as you're confident the employer letter will be strong, then definitely include it. Would be weird and potentially yellow-flaggy to have only LORs from folks who last interacted with you a decade+ ago. Depending on how long ago college was, it could even make sense to ditch the college prof LOR altogether. Schools do prefer to have at least one academic LOR, but the grad school prof LOR takes care of that. I did not include any LORs from college when I applied, which I think was the right move.

[Dipsychus]

I did not include any LORs from college when I applied, which I think was the right move.

Could you say why it was the right move for you, especially given the stress placed on uGPA by admissions committees?

[dvlthndr]

I applied to law school a long time after graduating college. I didn't bother with college professors. Instead, I got my LORs from a grad-school mentor and two work supervisors.

The emphasis on uGPA/LSAT is because the numbers get reported and it influences school rankings. But once you clear that hurdle, the question for a committee is what you "add" to the community and how you will actually perform as a student (i.e., "soft" factors). A college professor might have some great insight into an applicant that is a few years out of school... but the value goes down over time.

LORs are really about getting a sense for who you are, and how you would function in an academic setting (hence the preference for at least one "academic" letter). A letter from grad school professor serves that purpose perfectly well. In fact, they are probably a better choice than some college professor since they will actually remember you and can speak to your more recent accomplishments.

[nixy]

Yeah, I agree. I applied as a non-trad and didn’t include any undergrad prof letters, just one grad prof and two colleagues (who were both actually academics). Schools want to be able to assess your academic potential, and for the vast majority of applicants who are K-JD or no more than a few years out of school, an undergrad prof is the best person to do that. For other applicants, someone else may be.

[QContinuum]

Yeah, I agree. I applied as a non-trad and didn’t include any undergrad prof letters, just one grad prof and two colleagues (who were both actually academics). Schools want to be able to assess your academic potential, and for the vast majority of applicants who are K-JD or no more than a few years out of school, an undergrad prof is the best person to do that. For other applicants, someone else may be.

Exactly. They still want at least one academic ref, b/c law schools are schools and so trust academics, but a grad school prof fills that role perfectly. They don't care to have a college prof LOR for the sake of having a college prof LOR. LORs don't affect USNWR rankings, unlike LSAC GPAs.

To respond to OP's question above, I outperformed my numbers across the board (I like to think I had compelling softs and LORs), and - where I was interviewed - was never asked about why I hadn't submitted a college prof LOR. I strongly suspect submitting a positive but relatively bland college prof LOR from someone who last interacted with me years ago would have detracted from, rather than enhanced, my application.