Writing Effective Reference Letters

Prof. Lisa Travis

Academic Lead, Supervision Portfolio, TLS

Prof. Josephine Nalbantoglu

Dean, Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies

28 August 2015

1
1
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

2
Objectives
• Know the fellowship application and letter review process from the
adjudicators’ perspective

• Acquire the tools & strategies to draft a “memorable” versus a “good” letter

• Avoid common mistakes when writing reference letters

• Learn to represent McGill students by writing effective reference letters for:

• Excellent students applying to high-profile, elite competitions
• Good student applying to general competitions
• Others

• Identify when and how to say ‘no’

3
Intro Activity

Introduce yourselves at your table – name,

department

Discuss:
What do you look for in a reference letter?

4
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

5
Question

Which letters are the most difficult to write?

a) Excellent students
b) Very good students
c) Solid students
d) Weak students
e) Students you don’t know well

6
Not all letters of reference are equal
Students applying for:
Internships or summer jobs (short, with focus on ability to learn)
Graduate school (longer, completely different audience, student
contributions)
PDF and post graduate positions (more detailed, broader range of
skills and attributes to consider)

Students nominated for awards

http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpful%20recommendation%20letters.ppt

7
Today’s focus: the fellowship letter

General Fellowships
• Short, efficient and to the specific points
• Very space limited
• No faults or weaknesses

“Elite” fellowships
• More room for details but still have to be high quality and
value for the reviewer

8
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

9
The path of a fellowship application –
varies from program to program but …
Department
Widest range of quality – first ranking

University
Narrower range – all are very good
 letters count

National level
Extremely narrow range - everyone is very good to exceptional
 letters can make the difference

10
Understand the review process and the
situation of the reviewers
Reviewers are all volunteers
• Public minded and collegial

Reviewers are all giving up some portion of their

extremely valuable time to be part of the process
Reviewers generally read hundred of files and lead on 50
to 60 files
YOUR LETTERS NEED TO BE SYMPATHETIC TO THE
STATE OF THE REVIEWERS

11
The review process: Where does your letter fit in
& what goes on in the review committee room?

Typical process (Fellowships committee)

• 4 to 5 readers of an application
• Application might have 3 minutes on the floor
• All applications are exceptional at this stage
• Your letter needs to efficiently indicate the points that separate
student X from the crowd
What makes the student truly exceptional – It brings the
student to life.

12
Programs – need to be sure you know the
format and content requirements
SSHRC, NSERC, CIHR, Vanier CGS
Also there are Quebec equivalents to most of these
scholarship programs (FRQSC, FRQNT, FRQS)
Links to these programs are provided ….you need to
go to them to find out what is needed and look at
tips if they are there
They all have different requirements and forms

13
Example: SSHRC
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada

Doctoral guidelines for Completing the Letter of Appraisal

Your Letter of Appraisal should inform the selection
committee about the following:
• the candidate's background preparation, originality, judgement,
written and oral skills, and skill at research;
• the proposal's theoretical framework, its relation to the field, and its
methodology;
• the merits and shortcomings of both the candidate and the
program of study;

14
SSHRC guidelines—continued
• the importance to the discipline of the journals in which the
candidate has published and/or the candidate's prospects for
publication;
• the appropriateness of the institution that will award the degree;
and,
• if applicable, the candidate's proficiency in the foreign language(s)
necessary to pursue the program of study.

When writing your comments, bear in mind that applications

are reviewed by a multidisciplinary selection committee, some
members of which may not be familiar with the field or sub-
field in which the candidate proposes to study.

15
Example: Natural Science and Engineering
Research Council (NSERC)

“Comment on each evaluation criterion listed below and provide a justification of

your evaluation. Rather than providing general comments, assess the applicant's
strengths and limitations for each criterion. Include specific examples of the
applicant's accomplishments and contributions to support your assessment.”

16
Example: Natural Science and Engineering
Research Council (NSERC)

17
CIHR Assessment Grid

18
Do not duplicate what is on the application …

Elaborate, expand added-value points from the

application
Use the letter to provide examples of quality
indicators that cannot be done by the applicant

• Place things in context – awards, papers, abstracts etc.

• Provide specific examples (evidence) to support your assertions

19
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

20
1) Introduction
Introduce yourself and the student
Keep it short—1-3 sentences
Identify your relationship and set the context:
How do you know the student?
How long have you known the student?
In what context do you know the student?

21
2) Body - Scientific (applicant’s academic
strengths)
List their accomplishments
Use specific examples:
significant intellectual contributions (awards)
research skills (with specific examples)
passion for the field, the subject, the topic

Situate accomplishments
Use specific examples:
Gave a paper at a conference with a 10% acceptance rate, etc.
Keep in mind the reviewers

Add details that are not obvious from the rest of the
application
Use specific examples:
role in manuscripts, unpublished work

22
3) Body - Personal strengths

What interpersonal skills, personal attributes, and

special interests make this candidate unique?
What special personality or character can you
highlight?
Have they performed community services?
Describe their quality of teaching or educational
contributions.

23
4) Conclusion

Wrap up your thoughts

Reiterate or give final comments on the
student’s impact
Consider ranking the student (he is in the top
5% of students I have mentored….)

24
Essential Features
Give
• Personal anecdotes

• Specific examples

• A ranking (…in my experience, top 25%)

25
General practical tips:
• DON’T FORGET TO PROOFREAD!!!!
• Only bold or italicize important information
• Use the Common Application form if required or your
department letterhead
• Keep copies for your records, for short term reference
• E-mail the student once you have submitted the letter
• Give yourself time before the deadline to write
Adapted from:
http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpful%20recommendation%20letters.ppt

26
Activity 1: Letter 1
It is a pleasure to write a letter of recommendation for Jane Smith. She is one of the best PhD
students that I have had – easily in the top 2% of the 20 students I have supervised. She arrived at McGill
with a strong undergraduate record from the University of Toronto . As her transcript shows, she has
excelled in her courses at McGill having earned a 3.8 CGPA. Further, she has all of the necessary skills to
be an extrordinary researcher. She is bright, creative, motivated, and goal oriented. She works well
independently and is a clear communicator. She has already shown that she can be productive. She has
presented at several international conferences and has published two papers, an exceptional record for a
student who in the second year of a PhD program. She has also been invited to give a talk next year at a
workshop in Norway.
She has been an active member of my research group for two years. I run a lab where we
investigate the nature of language variation and the mechanisms needed to represent language change.
Ms. Smith’s own research program concentrates on variation and change in word order, with a focus on
Germanic languages. Her research has the potential to contribute in an important way to our knowledge of
the mental representation of language . As well as being academically strong, Ms. Smith has shown
leadership skills and been an indispensible member of the research team – a natural organizer and a
mentor to the younger members of the team.
In sum, Ms. Smith’s research has the potential to have an impact on the field, and she is certain to
become a researcher of note. As such, she is a string candidate for this fellowship and should be given
serious consideration.

27
Guiding Questions

• Do you have the impression that the letter

writer strongly supports this student?
• Has the letter writer provided the appropriate
ammunition?
• Can you pick out two or three sound bytes to
present this student to a review committee?
• What are the strengths/weaknesses of this
letter?

28
Letter 2
Jane Smith has been a star in our department since she arrived at McGill three years ago. She not
only excels in her classes, she shows originality beyond her academic years. In one of the elementary
problem sets that she did for my course, she presented a solution that was close to publishable. Not
only was it highly original, she presented it beautifully – more polished than many theses. When many
new students simply survive the first year of courses, Ms. Smith made every task an opportunity to show
sophisticated research skills.
Within weeks of her arrival at McGill, Ms. Smith became a leader in my lab. She organized a weekly
reading group where students presented relevant literature as well as their own research. Through this
reading group, she encouraged collaborative papers. She was the lead on two of these papers, both of which
were accepted at high profile international conferences. One conference, GLOW, is the top European
conference and accepts less than 10% of abstracts. Both papers have already been accepted for journal
publications, one in Linguistic Inquiry, the top journal in our field. She already has a productivity profile
that is competitive with many Assistant Professors. In my 27 years of supervising 20 PhD students, I have
never seen a student who so quickly showed the necessary skills to be a topnotch researcher.
In keeping with Ms. Smith’s early work at McGill, her dissertation research question is highly original,
and her approach to the problem extremely clever. Her work is already attracting attention, leading to an
invitation by Professor Barkley, the top name in her research area, to present at a workshop on this
topic. Ms. Smith is already a productive researcher and has the potential of becoming a leader in the field.

29
The Secret Language
Rank Words
• Outstanding
• Excellent
• Very good
• Good
• Solid (boring dependable but not creative)
• Appropriate for level of training
http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpful%20recommendation%20letters.ppt

30
Recommend
• Wholeheartedly
• Enthusiastically
• Without reservation
• With confidence
• With pleasure
• With comfort
• Strongly
http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpful%20recommendation%20letters.ppt

31
Red Flag Words
• Punctual
• Generally had little difficulty
• Seems to
• Will improve with…
• Will do well in the right environment
• Has shown signs of being…
• Shows potential
• For further questions, please contact me…
Adapted from AAIM meeting notes, 2009: http://www.im.org/p/cm/ld/fid=183

32
Be sensitive to a possible bias in
language:

http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2009-21033-018

http://mcgill.worldcat.org/title/the-emergence-and-reduction-
of-bias-in-letters-of-
recommendation/oclc/5170871960&referer=brief_results

For example…woman are more communal

(work well with others, create teams) and men
more agentive (individual agents, lead teams)

33
Activity 2 – Backing it up

• Think of an excellent student and write

down an adjective or phrase to describe
one of his/her strong points.
• Back it up with an example or anecdote.
• Share it with your neighbour

34
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

35
Activity 3: The request

“I am applying for a SSHRC (NSERC, CIHR,

FRQSC, …) fellowship, will you act as a
reference for me?”

1. How does the professor respond?

2. What is required of the student?

36
The student’s obligations:
• At least 2 weeks notice
• Deadline for submitting the letter
• Up-to-date CV, including extra-curricular activities
• Draft of relevant parts of application
• Complete information about the award/ fellowship/
scholarship (criteria)
• Completed portions if required
• Memory jogs: which classes, comments on papers, etc.
• Reminders

See: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/AskingForReferenceLetter.htm

37
Sample List of Requirements for LOR:
• I am willing to write a letter of reference for you. However, since
I write on average between 20 and 40 LORs per year I request
from all students that they provide for me the following
information:
• An unofficial copy of your transcript – a capture of the webpage
is fine;
• The name(s) and number(s) of the course you took from me
and a breakdown on the grades you received in your
assignments, mid-terms, and/or project(s);
• Details on who the letter is going to including the individual, if
there is one, or committee, organization and the mailing
address, even if reference is submitted via a webpage;

38
Sample continued:
• Details on the scholarship/program/institute/position/job/
internship you are applying for so I can match your skills and
abilities appropriately; and
• A paragraph on why you think you are particularly well suited for
the scholarship/program/institute/position/job/internship you are
applying for. What to hope to get out of what you are applying
for.
• Do not send me to any websites unless you provide perfectly
clear instructions for I will be looking at (for). I prefer you clip
the relevant details from applicable websites and paste them
into an e-mail to me.
• I ask you give me a minimum of 2 weeks to complete the
reference letter. If the agency sends the request directly to me I
still need the information listed above.
Nigel T. Roulet, PhD, James McGill Professor of Biogeosciences, Department of Geography, McGill University
Director, Global Environmental and Climate Change Centre

39
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

40
You may choose to decline a request
if:

You are unfamiliar with a student’s work

You are unable to write a positive and
supporting letter; suggest another referee
The student is unable to provide
documentation in a timely fashion

http://www.sfu.ca/personal/burtch/Reference.pps

41
If you can’t make a strong recommendation:

Seriously consider declining or disclose to the student

beforehand
Keep criticism limited to a paragraph and place it late in
the letter
Affirmatively phrase criticisms:
• “As Jane gains more experience working on a team, I’m confident that
her interpersonal skills will improve.”

• “Jack readily accepts and incorporates feedback regarding his need to

work on….”
http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpful%20recommendation%20letters.ppt

42
Writing for weaker students:
Note impressive improvements in the student’s work

Focus on what was accomplished (i.e., completed all the reading

assignments, was punctual) EVEN if accomplishments were
expected

Highlight previous successes (This may repeat details from

CV/academic record)

Mention interpersonal skills (Body-Personal) before research (Body-

Academic) for candidates with a weak academic record

http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpful%20recommendation%20letters.ppt

43
Writing for an Incoming Student

• Why did you accept this student?

• What made you excited about this
student?
• Present material from the application
• Quote the letters of recommendation

44
Overview
Objectives of this session
Letters for different purposes
The fellowship review process
Elements of an effective letter
Students’ obligations
Saying ‘No’
Best practices and links to resources

45
Characteristics of excellent reference letters are:
1. Authentic: provide first hand knowledge of the candidate's skills
2. Honest: be accurate and avoid exaggeration or hyperbole
3. Explicit: avoid indirect omissions
4. Specific: provide examples to support praise
5. Confidential: avoid unnecessary disclosure
6. Appropriate: respect guidelines especially detail and length
7. Technically clear: avoid jargon
8. Communicative: use the right code words
9. Personalized: tailor comments to the applicant
10. PROOFREAD, PROOFREAD, PROOFREAD!!
Adapted from: http://www.im.org/p/cm/ld/fid=183 (AAIM meeting notes, 2009)

46
Material taken and adapted from:
http://www.weizmann.ac.il/YoungPI/upload_files/writing/Writing%20helpf
ul%20recommendation%20letters.ppt
http://www.sfu.ca/personal/burtch/Reference.pps
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/AskingForReferenceLetter.htm
http://www.pace.edu/career-services/sites/pace.edu.career-
services/files/PDF/WritingLettersofRecommendation.pdf
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/html/icb.topic58474/Verba-recs.html
http://www.ualberta.ca/~caps/ReferenceLetters.pdf
http://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/9780472031887-appendixg.pdf
http://www.im.org/p/cm/ld/fid=183 (AAIM meeting notes, 2009)

47