<p>Maybe you can ask someone in admissions for an "unofficial" response.
The FERPA waiver. Is it true that admissions looks more harshly at applications/recs in which the student did not waive his rights to access to the reports? This has been floated on one of the forums here, but I am wondering if it is myth or if it is based in truth.
Since I could see no reason why my son should ever waive any rights, he did not sign the waiver. Will this hurt him? Should he go back and sign it?</p>
<p>This isn't MIT-specific, but in other letter-writing processes in which I've been involved (grad school applications and fellowship applications), I have been strongly advised to sign the waiver. The key is that not signing the waiver makes the people reading your letters assume that the applicant has also read the letters, and therefore all the glowing things said therein don't carry as much weight as they would if the applicant was assumed not to have read the letters before they were sent.</p>
<p>If the letters haven't yet been sent to MIT, if it were me, I'd agree to the waiver.</p>
<p>I also strongly recommend that your son sign the waiver. I'm a faculty member on a graduate admissions committee at my university, and I never regard open letters as highly as those written in confidence.</p>
<p>OK bear with me here, because the reasoning does not make sense to me. Why would a teacher or counselor care if a student saw the letter he wrote? Unless he wants to be really negative in his recommendation, and THEN if that was the case, why would he not opt out of writing a "recommendation" for the student. </p>
<p>Why would he make a report any more "glowing" if he knew the student "might" see it "some day". This makes no sense to me. I am not saying I doubt you, but I can't make sense of it. There is a much stronger chance IMO of a counselor or teacher, who may have an issue with the kid or his family, to deliberately sabotage an applicant if they know the records could never be dug up. Not that I think that would be happening here in my son's case, but I could see that scenario.</p>
<p>Do parents have access to these records? I thought it was only the students who do anyway. Are there many parents who make their kids request their records (say if a kid d not get into dad's alma mater) and is that the reason the teachers and counselors may be leery? I am just trying to see why there is ever a good reason to waive ones rights.
thanks</p>
<p>Son can remmedy MIT app but it is too late I think on the common apps</p>
<p>I think the thought process is not that the student may see the letter at some point in the future, but that the student has already seen the letter -- with the implication that the student may be directing the letter-writer to say certain things, or that the letter-writer may be leaving out negative aspects of the student's personality and work to avoid a confrontation with the student.</p>
<p>I guess he could ask his teachers to say they mailed the letters themselves and did not show it to the student. </p>
<p>I guess I never thought the student would ask to see it BEFORE it was sent, or that students do or can ask this. I have never heard of anyone doing it. I was under the (false?) assumption that the teachers and counselors (especially those doing it online) just sent the stuff off and that the rights to see records were for a future (albeit unlikely) need.</p>
<p>How much am i screwed over that i did not waive my right? I had no idea kids looked at the recs beforehand... :( now im worried. I never looked at mine, and im pretty sure they're awesome, but now I dont want the college to think i ever looked at it before. is there any way i can waive my right after the fact? Can I do this at the other schools I applied to as well???</p>
<p>Here is what the MIT Evaluation Forms say:</p>
<p>"We are required to make your comments available to the student ONLY if he or she subsequently ENROLLS at MIT and has not signed the waiver above" (my emphasis)</p>
<p>Seems to me, students are not given the opportunity to view the recs even if they want to, until and unless they become a student at the college, or the evaluator offers it to them. So I would actually think, given that statement, that MIT will not worry too much about whether the waiver is signed or not, since it does not mean the student saw the rec. They probably jettison the apps, of students who do not enroll, after not too long.</p>
<p>I still don't get the idea of the waiver, but whatever...Don't worry too much about it, at least that is how we are going to deal with it.</p>
<p>Well what about for other schools, esp through the common app?????</p>
<p>My formal subjects (subjects provided by my high school), in my A levels, were Physics, Chemistry, Further Mathematics, Mathematics and GP and I gave Thinking Skills as an extra subject.</p>
<p>As MIT requires two teacher's evaluations (one from Math or Science teacher and the other form Humanities, Social Science or language teacher) and my only humanities teacher, who taught me in my high school (grade 11, 12), was my GP teacher, my GP teacher was the only teacher appropriate for my second evaluation, but as my GP teacher has left the school and as I approached her a bit late (to ask her to evaluate me), she says that she will not be able to evaluate me, as she will not be free this December (travelling). </p>
<p>So, now (I think) there are only two options left for my second evaluation and they are:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Ask a humanities, social science or language teacher who taught me in my school (grade 8, 9, 10) to write my second evaluation, OR </p></li>
<li><p>Ask my another Math or Science teacher who taught me in my high school (grade 11, 12) to write my second evaluation.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Now, my question is, Are these options valid for me, if they are then, which one would be better and if the they are not then what should I do?</p>
<p>The second evaluation must be from a humanities, social science, or language teacher if your first evaluation is already written by a math or science teacher.</p>
<p>You are welcome to submit an evaluation from a teacher you had in 9th or 10th grade.</p>
<p>Alright here's the flaw in the apparently not trusting (at least in this case) adcoms thinking. When a student signs the waiver, they are signing away their rights to see the letter once they have been accepted and have matriculated to the school. There is no reason to assume that signing it means the student has not already seen it or that not signing it means that they have already seen it. It has nothing to do with what happens before or during the application process. All it says is that they can't go pull their application up if they go to the school. </p>
<p>I signed it for all my letters because I really didn't care if I saw them ever and because what does it matter what they said AFTER I got in, if they got me in they were obviously good. However, everyone of my teachers who wrote me a letter came to me and asked me to read it before they sent it and after I read them asked if I wanted them to change/add anything. I told them everything was perfect no matter what they said and was a bit surprised because I also didn't think you had to see them. However, I'm sure this isn't an isolated thing because my school doesn't have a set policy on letters, each teacher has their own policy and all of them thought I should read it even though I signed the waver. </p>
<p>So are my letters somehow more valid than someone's who didn't sign the waiver even though I actually did see mine? What does having the right to see it after you get in have anything to do with whether you see it beforehand? Frankly it really makes no sense to assume that signing it means the student has not seen the letter beforehand or vice versa since that's not what the waiver deals with and thinking less of a student who hasn't signed it is kind of ignorant in my opinion.</p>
<p>It's not that readers think less of the student -- they think less of the letter.</p>
<p>Again, I am not speaking from an MIT-specific or MIT-authorized viewpoint here. I have been advised in other contexts to always waive my right to view letters, as this is a universal reaction to non-confidential letters.</p>
<p>I've just seen on a few other threads people discussing this and some people have said or implied that it shows the student in a bad light because it means they don't trust the teacher, aren't respecting the teacher, lack confidence, or other negative things that are wrong to assume.</p>
<p>Molly: I'm in a similar situation-- neither of my teacher reccs or councelor recc FERPA waivers were signed by me. To say the least, I'm incredibly concerned about this... I chose not to sign because I simply did not agree in principal to signing away my rights on an optional waiver. I would have signed them in a heartbeat if I knew they were important in verifying the credibility of the letters (I unfortunately was not aware of this, and the form doesn't indicate it either). Even though it is late in the EA process, would sending in a letter of explanation via overnight mail be possible/recommended given these circumstances? I never saw my reccs and never gave any direction as to how my teachers should write them... perhaps if the admissions committee knew in writing that this was an honest mistake on my part they wouldn't view it in such a negative light? My greatest fear is that this will be the proverbial "straw that breaks the camals back", the one factor that invalidates my reccs and my chances of admission... I know my teachers were completely sincere and heartfelt in writing these, and I just want their comments to be given proper consideration. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. Suffice to say, I've signed all my subsequent reccs for RA schools...</p>
<p>Teacher's have a personal responsibility to deny writing a letter of recommendation for a student of the teacher feels that he or she would have few positive things to say about the student. It's part of an unwritten ethics code that teachers try to portray their students in the best light possible, so they will often refuse to write for a student for any number of reasons.</p>
<p>I was instructed by all of my teachers, guidance counselors, etc. to waive my rights to view my letters of recommendation. Why? The simple reason was that doing so would give my letters more "weight." As it has been mentioned before, adcoms will simply regard a waived letter more highly than a non-waived one.</p>
<p>mr.panda, it's mollie, not molly</p>
<p>
[quote]
Even though it is late in the EA process, would sending in a letter of explanation via overnight mail be possible/recommended given these circumstances?
[/quote]
No. Definitely not. I think that sending a letter of explanation would only draw more attention to the matter, and I don't think it's a deal-breaker in any way for admission. For that matter, the admissions officers have likely already gone into selection committee and will not be able to incorporate additional material at this time.</p>
<p>Note that in my original advice, I said
[quote]
If the letters haven't yet been sent to MIT, if it were me, I'd agree to the waiver.
[/quote]
I would not suggest doing anything after the letters have been submitted.</p>
<p>Thanks Mollie for the advice! I won't send anything... hopefully it won't be viewed too negatively in my application. and sorry for spelling your name wrongly!</p>
<p>I find it hard to imagine that the waiver, signed or not signed, will make much af a difference at all, if you are a good applicant and your recs are consistent. I don't understand the need for it myself, but given the local consensus, son went ahead and signed anyway. I was against it, out of principle, but it's not my life or future so he can make his own decision. I would not be too worried Panda. My bet is it will not be noticed unless something feels "off" and then they might take a closer look. Think positively!</p>