Letters of recommendations for grad school - who reads them?

[waterboy]

This is the time of year when we not only write letters of recommendation for students applying to grad school, but also have to read them. Honestly, I don't read them anymore (though I do write them - reluctantly - as they're required at the other end). They basically all say the student is wonderful and I've rarely gotten any useful information from them (and probably my letters are viewed in the same vein).  More and more they seem like a waste of time on both ends. Anyone else in the same boat?

[Kron3007]

This is the time of year when we not only write letters of recommendation for students applying to grad school, but also have to read them. Honestly, I don't read them anymore (though I do write them - reluctantly - as they're required at the other end). They basically all say the student is wonderful and I've rarely gotten any useful information from them (and probably my letters are viewed in the same vein).  More and more they seem like a waste of time on both ends. Anyone else in the same boat?

No, I read them and sometimes the identify potential issues and deficiencies. 

On the flip.side, I was almost rejected from a grad program due to an LOR because my previous advisor wrote an honest letter (positive, but included strengths and weaknesses).  As a group, we should be writing honest assessments so they can be taken at face value.

[Puget]

Maybe this is field-dependent, but we read them and use them very extensively. They vary a lot, because our competitive PhD candidates all are coming in with extensive research experience, and at least 2 of the letters are usually from people who have been their research supervisors/mentors and can speak directly to their experience and aptitude. I suppose in a field where all letters are from faculty who simply had students in class they would not be as informative.

[artalot]

I write them, and I agree that we need some sort of best-practices guide wherein we can say negative things without completely tanking the student's chances. No one is perfect and every student needs to grow. The job should be matching a student's strengths and weaknesses with the program.

[arcturus]

I write them and I read them. We find the letters very useful, as the ones in my field usually do include both positive and negative.

[waterboy]

Sigh...apparently I'm an outlier.

[Ruralguy]

I doubt you are a true outlier, but the truth is that many of us use them on both sides of the process. They could stand to be a bit more forthcoming on weaknesses.

[Kron3007]

I doubt you are a true outlier, but the truth is that many of us use them on both sides of the process. They could stand to be a bit more forthcoming on weaknesses.

Yeah, it's kind of like grade inflation.  A B should be pretty good, but I wouldn't want ion my grad transcript...

[bio-nonymous]

To me the sad reality seems to be that if the letter isn't over the top glowing praise it is considered a weakness. is it possible that anyone trying to be more honest and give incite about weaknesses may be damaging the prospects of the candidate? Worse yet are the sad cases where someone trusted somebody to write them a letter and the letter comes in with bad formatting, mistakes, AND a tepid recommendation--is this more reflective of the reference or the referee?

[Puget]

To me the sad reality seems to be that if the letter isn't over the top glowing praise it is considered a weakness. is it possible that anyone trying to be more honest and give incite about weaknesses may be damaging the prospects of the candidate? Worse yet are the sad cases where someone trusted somebody to write them a letter and the letter comes in with bad formatting, mistakes, AND a tepid recommendation--is this more reflective of the reference or the referee?

That's why we ask for 3 letters-- one off letter may reflect more on the referee. If all three are tepid that reflects on the applicant.
Referees may rarely outright talk about weaknesses (but pay attention when they do!), but there is a world of difference between a brief, bland, positive letter and an "over the top glowing praise" letter with lots of specifics to back up the praise. I've written both and read both-- there is a lot of signal there.

[marshwiggle]

Maybe this is field-dependent, but we read them and use them very extensively. They vary a lot, because our competitive PhD candidates all are coming in with extensive research experience, and at least 2 of the letters are usually from people who have been their research supervisors/mentors and can speak directly to their experience and aptitude. I suppose in a field where all letters are from faculty who simply had students in class they would not be as informative.

Most references ask "In what capacity have you known the student?" so if they've only been in my classes, rather than been supervised by me or been a TA for me, I tell them a reference would be much more useful from someone in one of those categories. I would assume someone reading them wouldn't place a lot of weight on a reference from someone who just taught the student, either good or bad.

[Ruralguy]

It depends on how well you know the student, what you say, how you say it.  probably a mentor relationship is more valued than "just" teaching, but that's where
it can be dependent on how well you knew that student in class and what you can say about that student.

[Hibush]

I'm on grad admissions for an R1 applied science program. I read the letters with great care, they make a very large difference.
The most important thing the letters convey is whether the applicant has the research potential to succeed in a research-heavy grad program. How much independence did they show in their research (or comparable experience)?
How well do they study independently to find solution to what they need to do in their project?
How much did the mature as a researcher over the time you knew them.

Also, and this can be answered by course instructors

Are they going to be high-maintenance?
Are they going to get along well with others, especially in groups with diverse origins, objectives, and styles?

We also look for validation of notable claims made in the research statement, whether of high achievement or about an obvious gap or bad semester.

This is all stuff the numbers and self-descriptions don't tell you.

Even if you don't have information on a lot of that, it can help to get "Student Y was in my class on Basketweaving 2100 and was one of the better students. They engaged in the discussions well, contributing synthesis and building on other's insights."  That isn't a goldmine of information, but it helps the application because it shows something of the ability to interact.

Letters with obvious "puffery" get recalibrated, so one saying everything is just wonderful, best ever!, etc will need some concrete examples to back it up.

[kaysixteen]

How do you deal with a situation where Prof. X writes a 'tepid' rec for an applicant-- but then a look-see at the applicant's transcripts revealed he had one or more courses with X, and got As in all of them?

[Kron3007]

How do you deal with a situation where Prof. X writes a 'tepid' rec for an applicant-- but then a look-see at the applicant's transcripts revealed he had one or more courses with X, and got As in all of them?

Depends on the transcript.  If they include averages for each course as some do, then we would know the relative performance in prof X's course.

We often act as though transcripts are objective assessments, but they can be  nearly as.questuonable a lot of LORs.  I also find grades a very poor indicator of grad student quality.  This is why I do read LORs and appreciate honest assesents.