Letters Of Recommendation Research Articles

A Practical Guide to Writing Performance Appraisals and Letters of Recommendation

Writing performance appraisals and letters of recommendation is a difficult and timely task for some. This paper provides direction to writers about choosing applicable words for those being evaluated. This is accomplished by providing a list of words useful in describing characteristics of those under consideration.
 This paper considers Mentality, Presence, Disposition, Character, Knowledge, Application, and Results regarding the person under evaluation. For each characteristic noted, a list of words is provided to reflect the appropriate word/words to describe the individual. The paper also provides a template useful for getting started in the writing of performance appraisals and Letters of Recommendation.

Feature statistical analysis and comparison of machine learning models for university admission prediction

In recent years, the pursue for academic degrees has intensified, leading to a surge in the number of undergraduate students applying for graduate programs at renowned universities worldwide. Consequently, universities have adopted a multifaceted approach to evaluate applicants, moving beyond traditional metrics like GPA to assess their overall potential. This study aims to comprehend the criteria employed by universities to select graduate applicants and assist undergraduate students in planning their academic trajectory. To achieve this, a diverse set of machine learning models are compared, including multiple linear regression and K-nearest neighbors, decision trees, support vector machines, and Bayesian classifiers. These models were trained with online admission probability data to predict the likelihood of admission and uncover the primary factors guiding university selection processes. The findings reveal that while research experience can enhance competitiveness in graduate admissions, academic indicators such as GPA, GRE scores, and language proficiency remain critical determinants of acceptance. Moreover, higher-ranked institutions exhibit a higher proportion of applicants with research experience. For candidates with strong GPAs, it is essential to demonstrate competitive language proficiency, augment research experience through well-crafted recommendation letters and personal statements. Conversely, applicants with lower GPAs should strive for outstanding GRE scores to compensate for academic performance.

Predictors of Excellent Urology Residents at the Time of the Urology Match

ObjectiveTo update our experience and report on features predictive of high quality urology residents at the time of the urology match, because data predicting which medical students will mature into excellent urology residents are sparse. MethodsWe reviewed our experience with 84 urology residents who graduated from 2006 to 2023. Residents were independently scored 1-10 based on overall quality by the current and former Program Director. Discrepant scoring by >2 was resolved by an independent review. Associations of features from the medical student application with an excellent score (defined as 8-10) were evaluated with logistic regression. ResultsDiscrepant scoring >2 was noted in only 5 (6%) residents. Among the 84 residents, the median overall score was 7 (range 1-10) and 36 (43%) residents had an excellent score of 8-10. Univariably, higher USMLE step II score (p=0.03), election to AOA (p=0.004), no negative interview comments (p=0.002), honors in OB/Gyn (p=0.048) and psychiatry clerkships (p=0.04), and honors in all core clinical clerkships (p<0.001) were significantly associated with an excellent score. In a multivariable model, no negative interview comments (p=0.003) and honors in all core clinical clerkships (p=0.001) were independently associated with an excellent score (c-index 0.76). There were several notable features (sex, letters of recommendation, USMLE step I, externship at our institution, surgery clerkship grade, and rank list) that were not significantly associated with excellent residents. ConclusionsWe demonstrate features associated with excellent urology residents, most notably no negative interview comments and an honors grade in all core clinical clerkships.

New and Old Letter Types in the Corpus of Julian the Apostate ( 361–363 )

Abstract The emperor Julian’s career as a letter writer began long before his brief term as sole ruler of the united Roman empire from 361 to 363. In the surviving collection of 82 letters, only 73 were deemed authentic by their editor Emily Wilmer Cave Wright in the 1923 Loeb edition. The remaining nine she deemed apocryphal. This paper looks at two methodological issues associated with Julian’s letter collections. What grounds should the modern scholar use to discern authentic from forged letters; and were Julian’s letters of the same types as Christian letters of Late Antiquity or were they closer to Classical models? A third question arises from a survey of Julian’s epistolary addressees. These reveal a diverse network of people of various levels of status, including Basil, bishop of Caesarea, the Jews of Alexandria, and a priestess of Demeter and Cybele. How does this diversity compare with the correspondence of ( Christian ) emperors and bishops of the fourth century? I aim to answer these questions by considering those letter types in Julian’s letter corpus that were new in the fourth century, such as letters of recommendation for travellers and letters to religious groups, and others more familiar, that is, letters of friendship and letters of consolation. The overarching hypothesis is that Julian was inspired to write and have collected his public and personal letters in the same way as the Christian bishops whom he knew and with whom he corresponded, notably Bishop Basil of Caesarea.

Gender bias in colorectal surgery fellowship letters of recommendation

BackgroundAs leaders strive to create equitable surgical pipelines, one process under scrutiny is letters of recommendation (LORs). We sought to review the Colon and Rectal Surgery (CRS) Resident Candidate Assessment questionnaire and LORs for gendered differences. MethodsThis retrospective observational study of letters of recommendation to CRS fellowship during the 2018–2019 application cycle utilized linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC2015) software to assess letter length and themes comparing differences by applicant and referee gender. Results103 applicants (35 ​% women) with 363 LORs (16 ​% written by women) were included. Short answer responses were longer for women applicants, while LORs were longer for men applicants (368 vs 325 words p ​= ​0.03). Men applicants' strengths had more technical skill descriptors, while women applicants’ strengths had more emotional language and cognitive and perceptual words. ConclusionsThis study found significant differences between LORs written for CRS fellowship applicants based on gender.

Applicants Performance in Interview for a General Surgery Residency Pre- and During Coronavirus Disease-19 Pandemic

IntroductionThe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has created a shift from traditional in-person interviews for a residency position to a virtual platform over the last 2 y (2020-2021). With this significant shift, there is controversy about how this may affect applicant performance. We hypothesized that applicants scored higher during virtual interviews than in-person interviews. MethodsApplicants interviewed for postgraduate year 1 positions at a single university-based residency program over six interview cycles were divided into group A (4 cycles, pre-COVID-19) and group B (2 cycles, during COVID-19). All candidates were interviewed by faculty and senior surgical residents and scored on letters of recommendation (LOR), personal statement (PS), research (RS), the way the candidate represented themselves (RP), interest in the geographic area (IN), and degree of connection between candidate and interviewer (CN). Differences in mean scores between candidates in these two groups were assessed using an independent-sample t-test. ResultsOf 332 total applicants, 187 (56.3%) were in group A (cycles 2016-2019) and 145 (43.7%) were in group B (cycles 2020-2022). Group-B had higher United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 and Step 1 mean (standard deviation) scores (251.1 ± 10.6 versus 247.6 ± 11.8, P = 0.006 and 241.1 ± 10.3 versus 238.4 ± 10.4, P = 0.02). Group A scored higher median [interquartile range] in CN (4.4 [4.1, 4.6] versus 4.2 [3.9, 4.6], P = 0.005) and IN (4.3 [4.0, 4.5] versus 4.1 [3.8, 4.4], P = 0.002), while group B scored higher in LOR (4.3 [4.1, 4.6] versus 4.2 [3.9, 4.5], P = 0.011) and PS (4.3 [4.1, 4.4] versus 4.1 [3.8, 4.4], P = 0.001). No differences were noted between groups A and B in RS (3.9 [3.4, 4.5] versus 4.1 [3.5, 4.5], P = 0.108) or RP (4.4 [4.1, 4.7] versus 4.4 [4.2, 4.8], P = 0.317). No differences in the median [interquartile range] total scores of personal characteristic categories (25.1 [23.7, 26.5] versus 25.1 [23.8, 26.7], P = 0.703) were observed. ConclusionsFrom a program perspective, there were no differences between groups; however, candidates in the pre-COVID era scored higher in CN and IN, while those who interviewed virtually had higher scores in LOR and PS. Applicants perceptions may differ regarding in-person versus virtual interviews.

Comment on “Gender bias in postgraduate year one pharmacy letters of recommendation”

Comment on “Gender bias in postgraduate year one pharmacy letters of recommendation”

Response to comment on “Gender bias in postgraduate year one pharmacy letters of recommendation”

Response to comment on “Gender bias in postgraduate year one pharmacy letters of recommendation”

외국인 유학생의 한국 정주 체류를 위한 한국어능력 입증 서류에 관한 고찰

The purpose of this article is to take a close look at the documents proving Korean language proficiency, which are essential requirements when issuing visas and changing residency status for foreigners, identify the problems, and propose ways to prove Korean language proficiency for permanent residence in Korea from the perspective of international students. there is. For this purpose, documents proving Korean language proficiency presented in the “Visa Issuance Guide Manual” and the “Foreigners Residence Guide Manual” were presented by residency status, and TOPIK and KIIP were compared and analyzed. This is a way to prove practical Korean language skills for international students settling in Korea. First, prove Korean language skills through integration with academic achievements. Second, prove your Korean language skills by submitting a letter of recommendation from the evaluator. Third, prove your Korean language skills through actual conversations or interviews. Fourth, it was proposed to demonstrate Korean language proficiency based on cultural activities and volunteer experiences.

Do gender differences exist in letters of recommendation for reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship?

Objective(s)To determine if gender differences exist in letters of recommendation for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility fellowship. DesignCohort study SettingAcademic medical center SubjectsCohort of applicants to a reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship program at single Midwestern academic institution in a single year. Intervention(s)None Main Outcome MeasureQuantitative measures included linguistics inquiry and word count analysis, with four summary variables and twenty-five word categories, to quantify tone and themes present by gender. Performing qualitative analysis in parallel to linguistic analysis allowed for exploration of themes not conveyed in quantitative methods alone. Qualitative measures included frequency of code themes in letters of recommendation by applicant gender. Result(s)There were 272 letters from 72 applicants, 54 (76%) of which were women and 17 (24%) were men. One applicant was excluded because gender information was not specified; 269 letters were included in the quantitative linguistics and qualitative coding analysis. One hundred ten letters (41%) were written by women, and 159 (59%) by men. Letters of recommendation written for men had higher mean word count than those written for women (537 vs 474, p=0.04).Linguistics Inquiry and Word Count analysis exhibited more risk words used to describe men applicants (p=0.01). When comparing word categories by letter writer gender, women letter writers more frequently used communal, affect, and home word categories while men writers more frequently used affiliation-related words.Qualitative analysis revealed that letters for men applicants described leadership, altruism, rapport with patients, and strong endorsements more frequently, while women applicants’ letters more often mentioned doubt raisers and disclosures of personal life. Additionally, letters for women applicants more often described candidates as drama-free, not easy to “fluster,” and not complainers. Further, letters for women more frequently disclosed parenthood status. Conclusion(s)Gender differences exist among both letter writers and applicants. Qualitative analysis revealed that women applicants were more likely to be described with doubt raisers and personal life disclosures, while men were more likely to be described by their altruism and with a strong endorsement. Increasing bias awareness and implementing mitigation strategies would improve gender equity in letters of recommendation.

Language Differences by Race on Letters of Recommendation for the Pediatric Surgery Match

This study aims to evaluate if there is any significant linguistic difference in LoR based on applicant's race/ethnicity. Retrospective review of applications to pediatric surgery fellowship at a single institution (2016-2020). Race was self-reported by applicants. LoR were analyzed via the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software program. Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital, St. Petersburg, Florida USA. A free-standing tertiary pediatric hospital. Pediatric surgery fellowship applicants from 2016 to 2020. A total of 1086 LoR from 280 applicants (52% female) were analyzed. Racial distribution was Caucasians 62.1%, Asian 12.1%, Hispanics 7.1%, multiracial 6.4% African Americans 5%, and other/unknown 7.1%. Letter writers were largely male (84%), pediatric surgeons (63%) and professors (57%). There was no difference in LoR word count across races. LoR for female multiracial candidates contained higher use of affiliation and negative emotion terms compared to Hispanic females (p = 0.002 and 0.048, respectively), and past focus terms when compared to Caucasian and Asian female applicants (p < 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). Religion terms were more common in LoR for Asian females when compared to Caucasian females (p < 0.001). This study demonstrates linguistic differences in LoR for pediatric surgery training programs based on applicant race/ethnicity. While differences are present, these do not suggest overt bias based on applicants race or ethnicity.

Preparing for College and Graduate School

We know of no single programs that prepare students both for success in college and entry to graduate school. Here we will describe a 5- week summer program that attempts to do that.This 5- week summer program helps students with Math, Writing and gives them access to information on graduate schools and research as a career. We recruit primarily underrepresented or economically disadvantaged (Pell eligible) entering freshmen science students (likely science majors) using a rigorous application form that includes high school transcripts, letter of recommendation and an essay. For success in improving academic skills, motivation is key. That’s why we carefully and rigorously evaluate all candidates for this program. And that’s why we can claim some success.For science majors, Math is critical. So let’s begin with describing our Math program, which runs 3 days a week, for 5 weeks, all day, usually Mon, Tues and Fri.

Perceptions of Preference Signaling in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Survey of Applicants and Program Directors.

To improve transparency between candidates and training programs, a preference signaling program (PSP) was implemented before the 2022 to 2023 orthopaedic surgery match. The PSP allows applicants to 'signal' up to 30 programs, informing the program of the applicant's particular interest in interviewing for their available position(s). This study reports the perspectives of orthopaedic surgery residency applicants and program directors (PDs) on the effects of preference signaling on the orthopaedic match. Electronic surveys were distributed to PDs and applicants. Almost all programs participated in the PSP (90%), and most of the applicants (97.6%) used 25 to 30 of their allotted preference signals. Most of the applicants (67.2%) thought that their likelihood of obtaining an interview was improved at 'signaled' programs but decreased at programs without a 'signal' designation (85.3%). Both applicants and PDs considered preference signaling to be one of the three most important factors for interview selection, along with Step 2 CK score and letters of recommendation. The applicants did not think that their likelihood of matching would improve with fewer allotted signaling tokens (35.2%), and 55.2% of PDs believed 21 to 30 tokens were optimal. Preference signaling is highly regarded by applicants and PDs. Signaling a program will likely improve an applicant's chance to interview. The optimal number of signaling tokens remains unknown, although both groups favored a larger allotment of tokens than has been seen in other specialties. Universal guidelines and recommendations for applicants and PDs would improve the utility of preference signaling.

Gender and culture bias in letters of recommendation for computer science and data science masters programs

Letters of Recommendation (LORs) are widely utilized for admission to both undergraduate and graduate programs, and are becoming even more important with the decreasing role that standardized tests play in the admissions process. However, LORs are highly subjective and thus can inject recommender bias into the process, leading to an inequitable evaluation of the candidates’ competitiveness and competence. Our study utilizes natural language processing methods and manually determined ratings to investigate gender and cultural differences and biases in LORs written for STEM Master’s program applicants. We generate features to measure important characteristics of the LORs and then compare these characteristics across groups based on recommender gender, applicant gender, and applicant country of origin. One set of features, which measure the underlying sentiment, tone, and emotions associated with each LOR, is automatically generated using IBM Watson’s Natural Language Understanding (NLU) service. The second set of features is measured manually by our research team and quantifies the relevance, specificity, and positivity of each LOR. We identify and discuss features that exhibit statistically significant differences across gender and culture study groups. Our analysis is based on approximately 4000 applications for the MS in Data Science and MS in Computer Science programs at Fordham University. To our knowledge, no similar study has been performed on these graduate programs.

Key factors for residency interview selection from the National Resident Matching Program: analysis of residency Program Director surveys, 2016-2020.

As the number of medical school graduates continues to outpace the available residency training positions, applying for residency in the United States has become a highly competitive process, often associated with a low rate of selection and invitation for interview. The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Program Director survey provides data assessing factors considered by Program Directors (PD) in selecting and inviting candidates for interview. Assessing the evolution of these factors over time is efficacious to inform and guide prospective applicants toward improving preparation for residency application. We aim to synthesize NRMP data showing factors that PDs reported and rated as important in their decision to select and invite applicants for interview. Data from residency PD surveys from 2008 to 2021were accessed, but after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, only the data from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed and analyzed. The NRMP survey reports provided two metrics that characterized PDs' evaluation of the residency factors for interview, namely, "percent citing factor" and "average rating" on a 0 to 5 Likert-type scale. These two metrics were combined into an aggregate measure of importance (AI), and another measure of relative importance (RI) was constructed from normalizing the AI of each individual factor to the sum of the AI within each survey year. The top ranked factors were United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1/Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX) Level 1, Letter of Recommendation (LOR) in the specialty, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter), and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK)/COMLEX Level 2 Cognitive Exam (CE) score, any failed attempt in USMLE/COMLEX, and perceived commitment to specialty. Factors rising in importance were Audition Elective/Rotation Within Your Department, Personal Statement (PS), Perceived Commitment to Specialty, Perceived Interest in Program, LOR in the Specialty, Other Life Experience, and Personal Prior Knowledge of the Applicant. Factors with declining importance were Interest in Academic Career, Awards or Special Honors in Basic Sciences, Graduate of Highly Regarded US Medical School, Awards or Special Honors in Clinical Clerkships, Lack of Gaps in Medical Education, Awards or Special Honors in Clerkship in Desired Specialty, and Consistency of Grades. Compared to the 2021PD survey, our findings show continued predictive consistency, particularly related to specialty and program commitment. The factors identified for the selection of medical school graduates for interview into a residency program reveal that PDs move toward a more integrated approach. Specifically, PDs are placing increasing emphasis on factors that border on subjective qualities more so than the more traditional, quantitative, and objective metrics. Medical students and educators need to continually apprise themselves of the NRMP data to inform students' preparation endeavors throughout medical school to strengthen their application portfolios and enhance their competitiveness for the matching process.

Promoting Equity in Letters of Recommendation: Recognizing and Overcoming Bias

Promoting Equity in Letters of Recommendation: Recognizing and Overcoming Bias

Letters of recommendation for gynecologic oncology fellowship differ by gender and race

IntroductionLetters of recommendation (LOR) play a significant role in applicant selection for gynecologic oncology (GO) fellowship. LORs can be agentic, associated with competence, independence and strength, or communal, associated with being accommodating, cooperative and empathetic. Agentic LORs have been shown to reflect favorably on applicants, making them more likely to be selected for interview. The primary goal of this study was to determine linguistic differences in LORs for applicants applying to GO fellowship based on applicant gender and race. MethodsAll applications to a single academic institution from the years 2018–2020 were analyzed. LORs were extracted from all applicants who self-reported their gender and race/ethnicity. Analysis was performed using Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) in terms of agentic and communal language. All analysis was done using SAS version 9.4. ResultsFrom 2018 to 2020, there were 239 GO fellowship applications to a single academic institution. There were 186 (78.1%) applicants who identified as female and 52 (21.8%) who identified as male. Female applicants were more likely to have more research (p = 0.047) and volunteer activities (p = 0.02) than male applicants. There were no differences between female and male applicants in terms of age, geographic location of residency, USMLE scores, AOA status, number of publications or attending a Doximitiy-rated top 20 residency program. There were 139 (60.7%) applicants who identified as White, 46 (20.1%) as Asian, 16 (7.0%) as Black, 19 (8.3%) as Latinx and 9 (3.9%) as other. On multivariable analysis, LORs written for male applicants had higher agentic scores compared to females (p < 0.05), and LORs of female applicants received higher communal scores (p < 0.05). LORs for applicants who identified as Black or Latinx were found to have lower agentic scores compared to individuals who identified as White(p < 0.05 for both). ConclusionThere were demonstrated linguistic differences in LOR for GO fellowship based on applicant gender and race/ethnicity. LORs written for white, male applicants were more likely to have higher agentic scores compared to minority, female applicants. LORs written for female applicants were more likely to have higher communal scores. As LORs have been shown to be instrumental in GO fellowship interview selection and linguistic differences exist based on applicant gender and race/ethnicity, this study highlights the need for a more objective GO fellowship application process. DisclosuresPortion of this paper was presented at the Society for Gynecologic Oncology as part of a focus plenary.

Determinants of respectful maternity care at a tertiary care teaching institute in South India: A mixed-methods study.

To determine the proportion of women who experienced disrespect and abuse (D&A) and the type of D&A during labor and postpartum, and to determine the factors significantly associated with D&A. A cross-sectional mixed-methods study undertaken in tertiary care teaching institute South India. After ethical approval, 380 postpartum women within 72 h of delivery were recruited for the study. The determinants of respectful maternity care (RMC) were assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. For quantitative assessment, they were interviewed using questionnaires adopted from the United States Agency for International Development- Maternal and Child Health Integrated Program (USAID-MCHIP) protocol, which has verification criteria for RMC. As a second method for quantitative assessment, they were asked to rate the care from their perspective on a 10-point score. For the qualitative component, they were asked to identify the healthcare workers associated with D&A by their designation and to answer three open-ended questions. IBM SPSS Statistics 25 (IBM Corporation, Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 25) was used for analysis. D&A as per RMC standards I-VII and its severity were expressed as frequencies and percentages with 95% confidence interval. Univariate analysis was used to determine the associated factors, and severity was determined by χ2 test. The prevalence of D&A was high (85%) according to the RMC standards of the USAID-MCHIP questionnaire, whereas it was only 33% according to women's perspective. The most common type of D&A was non-dignified care. The factors significantly associated with D&A were women over 25 years, those admitted as an emergency referral, having a recommendation letter, and relatives working at the same healthcare facility. The prevalence of D&A was high as measured by the USAID-MCHIP questionnaire, and the most common type was non-dignified care followed by physical abuse.

Gender and Language in Letters of Recommendation for Obstetrics and Gynecology Fellowship Applications

To delineate the use of gender-biased language in letters of recommendation for Obstetrics and Gynecology fellowships and its impact on applicants. Fellowship letters of recommendation from 4 Obstetrics and Gynecology specialties at a single institution in 2020 were included. frequency of agentic and communal language in letters of recommendation using Linguistics Inquiry Word Count software. letter of recommendation length and language utilization by author gender and applicant success measured by interviews and match success. Marginal models were fit to determine if language varied by applicant and writer gender and subspecialty. Modified Poisson regression models were used to determine associations between language and interview receipt. Single academic institution (Duke University); 2020 OB/GYN fellowship application cycle. A total of 1216 letters of recommendation submitted by 326 unique applicants for OB/GYN subspecialty fellowships at our institution. Rates of gender-biased language were low (Agentic:1.3%; communal: 0.8%). Agentic term use did not vary by applicant or author gender (p = 0.78 and 0.16) Male authors utilized 19% fewer communal terms than females (p < 0.001). Each 0.25% increase in agentic language was associated with an 18% reduction in the probability of interview invitation at our institution (p = 0.004). Percentage of agentic or communal language was not associated with successful matching into any subspecialty. No differences in agentic vs communal language based on applicant gender were found in this cohort, though female letter writers wrote longer letters with more communal terms. Increasing agentic terms negatively impacted interview invitation but did not affect successful matching.

Successful Integration of Blinded Interviews for Resident Selection: Applicant and Faculty Perspective

To evaluate interviewer and interviewee perceptions of semiblinded interviews performed during 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 urology matches at our institution. Traditional interviews, where interviewers have access to the entire application, are open to significant bias. Blinded interviews are common in industry but under explored in resident selection. Interviewers had access to a limited portion of the application (personal statement and letters of recommendation). Applicants were ranked by faculty based solely on their interview and these documents. Following the interview, a survey was given to applicants and faculty regarding their experience. A total of 67 applicants and 10 faculty responded to the questionnaire. Among applicants, 51% felt that blinding of interviewers offered a better assessment of fit into our program (39% neutral), while 37% felt they had improved eye contact with the interviewer (51% neutral) and that interviewers had improved (66%) or similar (19%) knowledge of their application in relation to nonblinded interviews. All but one faculty member felt able to accurately assess a candidate with the information provided, and 80% felt that the blinded interview allowed them to focus more on the applicant during the interview (20% neutral). Semiblinded interviews allow for accurate assessment of applicants and decrease bias in the interview process. Overall applicants and faculty were highly receptive to blinded interviews. Reducing the amount of information available to the interviewer allowed them to spend more time on the materials provided, leading to both improved eye contact and improved engagement between participants.