<p>I don’t mean to hijack this post…but I am the OP, so probably OK.</p>
<p>When should one ask for LOR’s? I’ve heard the end of junior year after the seniors are gone? I’ve heard emailing over the summer?? And I’ve heard early senior year??</p>
<p>I understand wanting an early start, but the teachers at my kids school are preparing for finals and getting grades in. So right now sees too early?</p>
<p>Emailing over the summer seems impersonal.</p>
<p>End of junior year is a really good time to ask, in my opinion (though again it’s a question of local culture). The point would be to ask now, so that the teacher can jot down a few things to be included in the letter, but that might slip his/her mind by the fall. The actual letter probably won’t be written until late summer or early fall. However, the “heads up” is valuable to the teacher, in terms of thinking what to say. Also, some teachers have limits on the number of students for whom they can write, and asking early tends to insure a place on that teacher’s list.</p>
<p>Our kids’ school had rules around it. They had the kids identify one teacher about now(near end of junior year), and then one in the fall a few weeks into the school year. The teachers could then focus on some letters over the summer. A couple of teachers had lists of questions they gave the kids (in Word, I think) asking a bunch of questions about themselves & their ambitions for college, words they use to describe themselves, etc. Not sure what they did with those exactly, but it does seem like a good way to try to make sure the LOR is in synch with the narrative the kid has about themselves.</p>
<p>It is important to get a strong and personalized LOR from teachers who know your child well as opposed to a generic LOR from a teacher in a class where the student just got a good grade. Some teachers ask the student for a “brag” sheet where they can provide some background information that may be used to personalize the letter. Our D did that even with teachers who did not request it and they all seemed to appreciate it. Some teachers may get dozens of request for LORs from students and cannot possibly remember them all very well. It helps to give them some reminders.</p>
<p>
Different schools weight the things you listed differently. Most college websites have a page where they give a general description of what they are looking for. A few state schools even have a calc that shows the point where you have guaranteed admission. If you search around on Google you can also often find comments made by persons working on admissions at that school.</p>
<p>That said, you can find exceptions who were accepted to top schools who did relatively poorly in any or all of the categories you listed. Earlier I mentioned I was in the 46th percentile on my verbal SAT. I also was not in the top 10% of my class rank with a mediocre GPA, had min ECs (average only ~1 hour per week), no sports or volunteer work, nothing on my app to display leadership, no major award, not a legacy to any college I applied, went to a basic public school where only ~1-2 students go to HYPSM each year, etc. Many on this site would probably have said to not bother applying to the most selective universities. Yet I applied all of the universities that I was most interested in, and was accepted to all but 1 (accepted at Stanford, MIT, Brown, Cornell; and rejected at Princeton). What I did do was ace anything related to math, logic, or programming (800 on math and math II), show that I was passionate about and truly interested in learning, and separate myself as unique from other applicants by excelling at ridiculously high levels of courses compared to others with my background (my low class rank related mostly to easy classes I found boring or subjective classes, like English). For example, during my senior year of HS I was half-time student at a nearby state school, where I had all A’s in higher level classes than offered in my HS. A college professors at that school wrote one of my LORs.</p>
<p>Question C7 on each college’s common data set can be quite revealing as to what they’re looking for–or not. Harvard’s 2011-12 CDS, for example, identifies nothing as “important” or “very important.” Instead, everything is “considered,” except class rank, state residency, religious affiliation, and level of applicant’s interest, which are “not considered.” There’s a kind of cool distance from the application implied in that, as if to say, “We can’t or won’t tell you in advance what will impress us; it could be anything, or it could be nothing. And don’t bother trying to tell us how much you love us, either, because We’re Harvard, and everybody loves us.”</p>
<p>Yale is almost the opposite extreme. They list as “very important” rigor of HS record, class rank (not even “considered” at Harvard!), academic GPA, standardized test scores, application essay, recommendations, ECs, talent/ability, and character/personal qualities. They list nothing as “important.” They list as “considered” interview, first generation, legacy, geographical residence, state residency, racial/ethnic status, volunteer work, and work experience. “Not considered” are religious affiliation and level of applicant’s interest. This bifurcation of so many factors into just two categories, “very important” and “considered,” seems to underscore the importance of those in the “very important” column. And they seem to be saying, “We want to see applications that are stellar across the board.” This is perhaps more what you’d expect from schools at this level of selectivity, but it stands in sharp contrast to Harvard’s seemingly cool indifference. (Maybe Harvard is really saying, “Don’t bother trying to impress us, because We’re Harvard, and we’re not easily impressed by anything.”</p>
<p>Princeton’s is like Yale’s, except ECs drop from “very important” to “important,” state residency is “not considered,” and level of applicant’s interest is “considered.”</p>
<p>MIT, on the other hand, lists only character/personal qualities as “very important.” The various academic and EC/talent/recommendation factors are merely “important” (except class rank, which is merely “considered”). Legacy joins state residency, religious affiliation, and level of applicant’s interest as “not considered.”</p>
<p>Dartmouth lists volunteer work as “important.”</p>
<p>Michigan lists only rigor of HS record and academic GPA as “very important.” Standardized test scores, essays, recs are merely “important”; ECs and talent are merely “considered.” Also “important” is first-gen, probably because they’re now prohibited by state law from considering race.</p>
<p>Northwestern also downplays standardized test scores, listing them as “important” while HS rigor, class rank, academic GPA, essays, and recs are all listed as “very important.” ECs, talent/ability, and character/personal qualities are also merely “important.”</p>
<p>So there’s quite a variation. I’m never quite sure, however, to what degree the CDS reflects the actual view of the admissions committee, and how much is just the personal view of whoever is filling out the CDS form.</p>
<p>Ya. I see the subjective aspects of the CDS as just that…subjective.</p>
<p>Quant - D waived the right to see LORs. Her HS does have a good reputation for knowing how to write LORs though.</p>
<p>Mihcal - D’s stats are good - not great. I volunteered to offer feedback for D’s essays. Most were lackluster - and it was like pulling teeth to get some of them out of her. We went back and forth with edits - and eventually - I just ran out of steam. But she was really only passionate about one school and worked on the essays without nudging. The minute I read “so where is waldo really” I just knew that she would be accepted at the school. That’s how good the essay was. And it drew commentary from college administration in interactions with her. I think that because of her motivation for this school - her top choice - she went on to write a really good personal statement for the common app to accompany the waldo essay. Pretty much everything else she wrote was only so, so - pretty average. She was admitted to 6 of her 8 choices. Waitlisted at one and the only reject came from a top school that doesn’t use the common app - so never saw her best essay(s). I am convinced that it was her essay(s) that made the big difference. Of course, I have no empirical proof…</p>
<p>
This is simple. What my kid has is vitally important, and what my kid doesn’t have is irrelevant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s no consensus because every school is a little different. My D applied to 5 schools - 4 of them didn’t want teacher LORs and 2 didn’t even want a GC letter. I think it’s a safe bet that the school that said they’d throw LORs away without reading them didn’t put much weight on LORs. Only 2 of them required essays; a third suggested you send an essay if you wanted; 2 weren’t going to read them even if you sent them. Again, pretty easy to see where essays stood at 3 of those schools. One school clearly was much more focused on GPA than the others, and recalculated GPA based on its own formula; the others seemed to put more weight on test scores. So my D, who applied only to large state flagships, none of which used the common app, had a much different application experience than classmates who applied to top schools and small LACs with much more holistic approaches. Some of her friends are convinced that the well crafted essays they spent months working on are the reason for their admission; my D, OTOH, is fairly convinced that her essays didn’t much matter.</p>
<p>Speaking of essays:</p>
<p><a href=“College Essays That Stand Out From the Crowd - The New York Times”>College Essays That Stand Out From the Crowd - The New York Times;
<p>Emily - that is exactly what I mean. D had an opening line in her personal statement that took me totally off guard. I thought I should ask her to change it, but I didn’t because it captured something about her that I didn’t even realize that she was aware of. And it was definitely a risk. The waldo essay was not as risky, just a bit edgy and well written with a nice concept. The article is right on target. Just imagine reading hundreds of boring essays and finally coming upon one that captures your interest. That has to be a relief.</p>
<p>Bigdaddy: dependent on your HS culture, certain teachers may limit the # of LOR’s that they’ll agree to write. There are about 5 teachers at our HS who are hit up hard, and they have sign up sheets in their room. Once the sign up sheets hit their limit (and it’s 30+) they turn students away. Knowing that, both D’s approached their favored LOR writers at the end of junior year. I <em>believe</em> they were told: great, yes, please come back the first day of senior year to get your name on the list. So they primed the pump, but still had to follow up as soon as senior year started.</p>
<p>Our HS strongly encourages the students to check the box on the common app saying they waive their right to see the letters of recommendation. So we have no idea what the LOR’s said. Both my kids had good relationships with the teachers they asked, and they had performed well in their classrooms. Since my basic attitude about all this college admissions stuff is “if that one thing is the thing that kept my kiddo out of College X, then it wasn’t the right school for them,” I didn’t do much hand writing about the LOR content.</p>
<p>Rob,</p>
<p>I agree. My D knows which teachers will write good letters. Like you said, I can’t stress over every little detail. If a single LOR makes or breaks the admission decision then so be it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I saw all 3 of my son’s LORs (one high school teacher, one college professor and the guidance counselor). Yes, he signed a waiver. But all 3 were enthusiastically behind him and made a significant effort in crafting a deeply personalized recommendation. They were “proud” of their results and naturally wanted to share. </p>
<p>He also got a peer LOR, required for a scholarship application, and I was impressed at how well written it was.</p>
<p>FWIW, my kids teachers gave them copies of the LOR’s of their own volition - it was pretty much assumed that the student would be given a copy. The copies were provided after the letter was written – it has nothing to do with providing input or suggestions. </p>
<p>I don’t believe than anybody should ever “waive” any legal rights without good reason. It’s possible that my son checked the “waive” box on the application because he knew that the teachers were giving him copies anyway (I don’t remember). I know that my daughter probably did NOT check that box, if it was presented to her on any applications, as a matter of principle. I doubt very seriously that ad coms are even aware of which students have waived the rights or not – they are extremely busy as is and I can’t imagine them ever bothering to check unless there was something fishy about the wording of the LOR - but I think given the time pressures involved, it would be more likely that the “fishy” wording would lead to a rejection with or without the waiver, simply from the gut sense impression that the LOR writer was hiding something or holding back.</p>
<p>As far as people who write the LORs, especially at the high school level: no one should ever write anything about any other human being unless they are quite comfortable with the idea the the other person may someday be reading what they wrote. Nor should any person be ashamed or afraid to write honest facts – but a cloak of presumed secrecy can provide cover for dishonesty or presenting a negative opinion as fact. Imagine for example that a teacher suspected a particular student of cheating but had no proof – and lets imagine also that student was totally innocent, and further doesn’t have a clue about the teacher’s suspicions. How many “confidential” letters get written for college where the teacher feels free rein to vent about those suspicions?</p>
<p>My d had a teacher she very much admired but I always got the sense that the teacher didn’t like her very much. When I saw the LOR he wrote, it became clear to me – the teacher had a low-key personality and I think he thought my daughter was pushy and overly ambitious. There are positive words and negative words that can be used to describe that characteristic – and I am sure that many candidates for top colleges are similarly ambitious. I wasn’t concerned because I figured that the colleges my d. was looking would want a student who took initiative and was ambitious – even though perhaps many high school teachers are not as comfortable with students who are comfortable speaking their mind in class. But the point is, most people who are “ambitious” and “assertive” could also be described as “aggressive” or “arrogant.” The same would be true for many different personality types-- perhaps one teacher might describe a quiet, hard-working student as “disciplined” and “studious”, whereas another might characterize the same student as “self-absorbed” and “withdrawn”. </p>
<p>Teachers who know the student will see the letter might be careful to be accurate, neutral or positive about their choice of words… and if they can’t honestly find something positive to write about a student, then they should turn down the student’s request for a LOR. </p>
<p>Anyway, that’s why I think that the mystery of why some students inexplicably are accepted to reach colleges and why others are inexplicably rejected from matches might lie in those LOR’s. (I think most teachers who write positive, glowing apps would be happy to share - but that’s not something we on CC generally see). The significance of checking that “waiver” box is that if the student is unexpectedly rejected from colleges, that student will have no way of ever finding out whether there was a particular teacher who either inadvertently or deliberately sabotaged their application. (And yes, I’ve seen it happen IRL.).</p>
<p>My spouse is very strongly in agreement with you, calmom, that people should not waive their rights–on principle, not that he would be concerned that confidentiality of the letter could work against the student. I am somewhat ambivalent. QMP checked the box because it was the strong recommendation of the GC to do so. I remain ambivalent.</p>
<p>The one thing that I wonder about: as I understand it, if the student is rejected, the letter never becomes part of a file subject to FERPA, so the student cannot see the letter, regardless of whether the student has checked the box or not. Am I wrong about this?</p>
<p>Incidentally, I usually give my students (undergrads and grad students) copies of the letters that I write for them.</p>
<p>
I think it would depend on the practice of individual colleges --they would not be under any obligation to retain those records, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they promptly destroy things. These days, with more and more information being transmitted and stored electronically there may be records in all sorts of places. </p>
<p>Also consider this hypothetical: student has the same teacher write letters to all colleges including safety. Student is rejected from all but the safety. Student then makes request for contents of admission file at safety.</p>
<p>My sons’ school writes extensive LORs for the students and they are not permitted to give them out. They go directly to the colleges and this is the school’s policy. This way no teacher feels any pressure to give out the recs to anyone because others do, and some teachers do not want their recs seen. Neither my husband nor I would write recs either without the rights waived. When one writes a lot of recs, there are just too many things that can arise when they are released to parents and students, and this just cuts that out. </p>
<p>Personally, in a highly selective situation, I would check if such boxes were checked for recs, and it could be an issue if I knew that the person being recommended had access to those LORs. In this area, with connections and contacts and pressures often present, i would not feel comfortable with recommendations that were likely to have been viewed by parents and students. I don’t think they are as a matter of course in admissions, but there may be times when they are. I do know that my DH did notice LORs without waivers in job situations and, yes, he did make note of that. So you are taking a chance, maybe a small one, but a chance, nonetheless when you go against this protocol.</p>