<p>What does your teacher going to Harvard have to do with your rec? I think a lot of people think that a teacher who went to a prestigious school writes a better or more credible LOR.</p>
<p>I disagree LOR rarely helps anyone. One big reason I think I got likely letters from Columbia and Duke was my LORs from both teachers were awesome. The Dean of Duke Admissions even ranked it 2nd after secondary report! (I assume Columbia has similar admissions process and standards for LOR). Obviously, it's impressively weighted and that most people tend to ignore it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Who are you to say that "most" LORs rarely "helps you", and that "most are neutral and generic"? Do you work at the admission office or something? I doubt that this is the case.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm an alumni interviewer for CU. And, this is common knowledge and is found in any book by an Ivy adcom "insider."</p>
<p>
[quote]
I disagree LOR rarely helps anyone. One big reason I think I got likely letters from Columbia and Duke was my LORs from both teachers were awesome. The Dean of Duke Admissions even ranked it 2nd after secondary report! (I assume Columbia has similar admissions process and standards for LOR). Obviously, it's impressively weighted and that most people tend to ignore it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't understand how you have a basis to disagree with me, and your acceptance at Columbia would be entirely consistent with my post. If your LORs were truly awesome, you would be the fortunate candidate with letters that helped you get in.</p>
<p>I guess it's just a play on semantics. I believe most of the applicants who are eventually accepted have awesome recs, and that proportion doesn't constitute for "rarely."</p>
<p>I think it's probably true that "most of the applicants who are eventually accepted have awesome recs" when we're talking about schools with 10% acceptance rates.</p>
<p>Also keep in mind that a good majority of the applicant pool will have strong recs. is it that hard to find TWO teachers who can say good things about you? But, your run of the mill "strong rec" is average and generic in the same way that someone who plays a varsity sport, is the president of 2 clubs, and volunteers at the sop kitchen has generic ECs.</p>
<p>I think "A is for Admissions" (former Dartmouth adcom) said that 95% of all recs aren't so influential that they matter, 3% are so bad that they get you rejected, and 2% are so good that they help you get in.</p>
<p>10% is still not "rarely."</p>
<p>And I do not agree with A for Admissions. If recommendations are 95% not influential, then why do all the top schools require them? Won't that be a waste of time for admissions officers to read thousands of letters that statiscally only have a 5% bearing on admissions (3% reject/2% accept)? I would assume adcoms are smart enough to get rid of LORs if those aren't important and add a category that's more helpful to the admissions process.</p>
<p>At Columbia, LORs aren't the most important piece of the application (everything is important, but LORs are clearly below your academic record, your ECs, your essay, and your "why Columbia"). But that doesn't mean that they don't serve a purpose. They can tell the adcoms something about you that isn't elsewhere in your app, confirm something about you that pervades your app, etc. With the many pieces of information that Columbia looks it, it's expected that a less-important piece of information like your LORs or your interview is really only going to make-or-break you a small percentage of the time.</p>
<p>bumppppp..........................</p>
<p>So if I do great in everything but get a really horrible rec, would Columbia call the recommender to clarify? How often does Columbia call the person who wrote your LOR?</p>