Application documents

How to Get a Strong Letter of Recommendation

An annotated template written for your recommender to use — plus a briefing checklist, a worked example, and the sentences to cut.

A letter of recommendation is a letter from a professor, supervisor, or employer that vouches for your ability and character, submitted directly to the program rather than through you. Most graduate applications ask for two or three, and admissions committees weigh them alongside — and often against — the claims you make in your own essays.

The person reading it is usually the same committee member reading everything else in your file, comparing what your recommender says about you to what you said about yourself. A letter that praises you in general terms adds little; a letter that describes one specific thing you did and what it showed is worth more than three vague ones combined.

The mistake that costs applicants the most here isn't in their control directly, which is exactly the problem: a vague, generic letter from someone too busy, or who doesn't know the applicant well, quietly undercuts an otherwise strong application. The template below is written for your recommender to use, and the briefing section after it is what you can actually do about it.

Who this template is for

Unlike the SOP and personal statement templates on this site, this one is written in the recommender's voice, in first person as them, not you. Share it directly with the person writing your letter — most recommenders write several of these a year and will genuinely appreciate a starting structure, especially alongside the brag sheet described in the briefing section below.

LOR structure at a glance

Letter of recommendation — paragraph structure

Paragraph
Opening — relationship and context
Purpose
Establishes the standing to speak — how long, in what role, in what setting — before any evaluation. A letter that skips this reads as secondhand.
Length
2-3 sentences
Paragraph
Comparative standing
Purpose
Admissions committees read hundreds of 'excellent student' letters. A specific rank against a real comparison group is the one line that's hard to fake and easy to weigh.
Length
1 paragraph, 3-5 sentences
Paragraph
Specific evidence
Purpose
The paragraph that separates a real letter from a form letter. One well-chosen anecdote with a beginning, an action, and a result does more work than five adjectives.
Length
1 paragraph, 3-5 sentences
Paragraph
Character and working style
Purpose
Programs, especially research-based ones, are betting on how someone will behave in a lab or cohort for years, not just whether they're smart.
Length
1 paragraph, 3-5 sentences
Paragraph
Closing endorsement
Purpose
A clear, specific endorsement with an invitation to follow up signals that the recommender stands behind the letter enough to be reached.
Length
2-3 sentences

The annotated template

Written from the recommender's perspective — the "I" in each block is the person writing the letter, not the applicant. Every block below has its own copy button.

1. Opening — relationship and context

                I have known [Applicant Name] for [duration] as their [professor / research supervisor / manager] in [course, lab, or team], where I [taught, supervised, or worked alongside] them on [specific context]. In that time I have had the opportunity to observe [their coursework, research work, or team performance] closely.

Why it's here: Establishes the standing to speak — how long, in what role, in what setting — before any evaluation. A letter that skips this reads as secondhand.

What readers scan for: Duration and role. A recommender who's known the applicant for one semester in a large lecture class carries less weight than a two-year research supervisor, and readers notice which one they're reading.

2. Comparative standing

                Among the [number] students I have [taught / supervised] in [X years, or in this role], I would place [Applicant Name] in the [top X%, or a specific rank — be honest and specific]. [Optional: a comparison to a named prior student who went on to succeed in a similar program.]

Why it's here: Admissions committees read hundreds of 'excellent student' letters. A specific rank against a real comparison group is the one line that's hard to fake and easy to weigh.

What readers scan for: A number or rank, not just superlatives. 'One of the best' without a denominator is filler.

3. Specific evidence

                One example that stands out: when [Applicant Name] [a specific situation — a project, a problem, a setback], they [specific action taken], which resulted in [specific outcome]. This demonstrated [the quality it shows — analytical ability, initiative, resilience], which I have also seen in [a second, shorter example].

Why it's here: The paragraph that separates a real letter from a form letter. One well-chosen anecdote with a beginning, an action, and a result does more work than five adjectives.

What readers scan for: A story with a specific outcome, not a list of traits. 'Hardworking and diligent' with no example attached is the most common reason a letter reads as generic.

4. Character and working style

                Beyond the [academic / technical] work, [Applicant Name] is [a specific character trait, briefly evidenced] — for instance, [a short example of how they handled a disagreement, mentored a junior colleague, or responded to failure]. They work well [independently / in a team], and I have never had reason to question their integrity or reliability.

Why it's here: Programs, especially research-based ones, are betting on how someone will behave in a lab or cohort for years, not just whether they're smart.

What readers scan for: Whether the character claim comes with even a short example, or floats unsupported.

5. Closing endorsement

                I recommend [Applicant Name] for [program name] [without reservation / with enthusiasm — pick the phrase that matches your actual confidence]. I am confident they will [a specific prediction tied to the program], and I am happy to discuss this recommendation further at [email or phone].

Why it's here: A clear, specific endorsement with an invitation to follow up signals that the recommender stands behind the letter enough to be reached.

What readers scan for: Whether the language actually reads confident. 'I recommend without reservation' followed by a vague or short letter contradicts itself, and experienced readers notice the mismatch.

Briefing your recommender

The single biggest factor in whether a letter turns out specific or generic is how much the recommender has to work with. This is the part of the process you actually control.

  1. 1

    Give them at least three to four weeks

    A rushed letter reads rushed. Ask well before the deadline, and confirm they're genuinely comfortable writing a strong letter — a lukewarm 'sure, I can do that' is a signal to ask someone else.

  2. 2

    Send a brag sheet, not just a request

    A one-page summary of the courses or projects you worked on together, your GPA and test scores, the programs and their deadlines, and two or three specific moments you'd want mentioned. Most recommenders welcome this — it's the difference between a letter with detail and one that reads generically.

  3. 3

    Share your statement of purpose draft

    It helps them see how your story lines up with theirs, and keeps the letter from contradicting or duplicating your essay word for word.

  4. 4

    List every deadline and submission method in one place

    Most programs now use an online portal that emails the recommender directly. Give them the full list on day one rather than one link at a time as deadlines approach.

  5. 5

    Follow up once, politely, a week before the deadline

    A short reminder a week out is normal and expected; chasing daily isn't. If a portal shows the letter as unsubmitted two days before the deadline, a direct message is fair.

Worked example

A complete letter written to the template above, from a Brazilian engineering professor recommending an undergraduate research assistant for a master's program abroad.

Example — not a template to copy verbatim

I have known Mariana for three years, first as a student in my Mechanics of Materials course at the Universidade de São Paulo, and for the past eighteen months as a research assistant in my structural fatigue lab, where she works on my most demanding data-analysis problems.

Among the roughly 40 undergraduate research assistants I have supervised over the past twelve years, I would place Mariana in the top three. That group includes two students who went on to PhD programs at ETH Zürich and Georgia Tech, and Mariana's independence and rigor are on the same level as theirs at the same stage.

One example that stands out: midway through her second semester in the lab, the fatigue-testing rig we depend on began producing inconsistent readings that three other students had already tried and failed to diagnose. Mariana spent a weekend re-deriving our calibration procedure from first principles, found a systematic error in how we were compensating for temperature drift, and proposed a fix that improved our measurement consistency by roughly 30%. She wrote it up as a two-page internal memo without being asked to, which is now how every new student in the lab is trained on the equipment.

Beyond the technical work, Mariana is someone other students go to before they come to me. When a first-year research assistant was struggling with our data pipeline last year, Mariana spent two afternoons walking him through it unprompted, and he has since become one of the stronger members of the group. She works well independently on ambiguous problems and just as well when a project needs coordinating across three people's schedules, which is not a common combination in undergraduates at this stage.

I recommend Mariana for your Master's program in Mechanical Engineering without reservation. Structural fatigue and reliability engineering research demands exactly the mix of independence, technical rigor, and clear communication she has shown me for three years running. I am confident she will contribute meaningfully to a research-focused graduate program from her first semester, and I would be glad to discuss this recommendation further by phone or email.

What to cut

Share this section with your recommender too — these lines show up across a large share of the letters an admissions reader sees in one sitting.

  • "[Name] is a hardworking, dedicated, and passionate student."

    Every letter says this. Replace each adjective with the specific moment that proves it.

  • "[Name] has excellent communication skills and works well in a team."

    True of most people who make it to your desk asking for a letter. Needs a specific instance to mean anything.

  • "I have no doubt [Name] will succeed in whatever they pursue."

    Reads as a closing reflex rather than an assessment of fit for this specific program.

  • "It is with great pleasure that I write this letter of recommendation for..."

    A throat-clearing opener that delays the one sentence readers actually need: who you are and how you know the applicant.

  • "[Name] is one of the best students I have ever taught."

    Without a denominator — best out of how many, over what period — this is unverifiable and reads as reflexive praise.

  • "I recommend [Name] without any reservation whatsoever."

    Stacking qualifiers doesn't add confidence. One clear sentence backed by evidence carries more weight than three intensifiers.

Frequently asked questions

Who should I ask for a letter of recommendation?
For academic programs, at least one should come from a professor who supervised you in a course, thesis, or research setting — someone who can speak to your academic ability with specific evidence, not just a job title. Employer letters work well alongside that, especially if you've been out of school for a few years, but most graduate programs expect at least one academic voice among your two or three letters.
Is it okay to draft the letter myself for my recommender to edit?
It's common practice, and not dishonest on its own, but it's also the fastest way to end up with a generic letter — a busy professor who lightly edits a draft you wrote keeps your voice, not theirs, and readers can often tell. The safer version of this is the briefing checklist below: give them detailed material to work from and let them write it themselves, or at minimum insist on a genuine rewrite rather than a light edit.
How many letters do I need, and from whom?
Most master's programs ask for two or three. Check the program's own requirements before you ask anyone — some specify that at least one must be academic, and a few won't accept a letter from a family member or personal friend under any circumstances.
What if my strongest connection doesn't know me that well academically?
Give them the detail they're missing rather than defaulting to someone who knows you less well overall. A specific brag sheet — your work in their class or on their project, the grades, the context — often closes the gap enough for them to write a strong, specific letter instead of a generic one.
How long before the deadline should I ask?
Three to four weeks minimum, longer if it falls during a busy period for them, like end-of-semester grading or grant deadlines. A last-minute request signals low priority and often produces a rushed, generic letter — and a recommender who feels ambushed is less likely to write you a strong one next time.

Never miss a new deadline or scholarship match

Get an email when new deadlines, intakes, or scholarships match what you're looking for.

Not sure who to ask, or how many letters you need?

An admissions advisor can help you plan out recommenders and deadlines across every program on your list. Most students hear back the same day.

Talk with an AdvisorVIP service →