Timeline for How to get reference from lab I worked with, when lab head seems unlikely to help and I was advised not to ask postdoc
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2015 at 5:20 | comment | added | aparente001 | @theforestecologist - Indeed, my answer was tailored to the specifics of the OP's situation. // By all means, weigh in with an answer if you have a slightly different approach that you think would make a worthwhile contribution. | |
| Dec 9, 2015 at 5:13 | comment | added | theforestecologist | agreed! Your response just neglects the importance of the prominence/relevance issue a little too much. In the end, optimizing the best quality of letter from the most prominent/relevant writer is key, but unfortunately which quality outweighs the other (when parity between the two is minimal) is totally dependent on the situation and position being applied for. | |
| Dec 9, 2015 at 5:06 | comment | added | aparente001 | @theforestecologist - Very true. However, it wouldn't be constructive for the OP to sit and sigh over what would be ideal but is not possible. He just needs to focus on putting together as strong an application as possible, given his particular circumstances. | |
| Dec 9, 2015 at 5:02 | comment | added | theforestecologist | Ah, but at the same time, that strong letter looks MUCH better from a person in a more prominent or relevant position. However, I would agree that a GREAT letter from a post-doc is hands down more valuable to you than a letter from a well-respected prof that knows nothing about you. | |
| Dec 9, 2015 at 1:52 | history | answered | aparente001 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |