Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Fool's avatar
  2. Santa Monica's avatar
  3. Charles Bakker's avatar
  4. Matty Silverstein's avatar
  5. Jason's avatar
  6. Nathan Meyvis's avatar
  7. Stefan Sciaraffa's avatar

    The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…

Uploading “Letters of Recommendation,” Again

We touched on this issue last year, and with a new hiring season upon us, the issue is a live one again.  A philosopher at Princeton writes:

As this year's job market season gets started, I'm worried about a problem that emerged last year with some philosophy jobs.  Many jobs are moving to a policy of having applications submitted entirely online.  Some accept email.  Some allow applicants to indicate one administrator's name and email, who will upload a PDF of all of the recommendation letters (the entire dossier) as one file.  But some schools require applicants to list each recommender separately with his/her email address, with the expectation that recommenders will upload the recommendation letters themselves.  This system is unworkable and creates serious problems for applicants. 

(This bad system is increasingly the norm for graduate school admissions as well.  That is also a serious problem and worth separate consideration.  But since the numbers are so much greater with the job market, the job market problem is more urgent.)

Most recommenders write for several job candidates.  Job candidates apply for many jobs.  If a recommender writes for 4 people, and each applies for 20 jobs that require recommenders to upload letters individually, that means the recommender would have to do 80 uploads.  That is absurd.  More seriously, professors are busy and realistically it just won't happen.  Those online systems will mark the applications as "incomplete" and those job candidates will not be considered for those jobs. (Or they'll be considered without some or all of their letters.)

In my department, we're considering using the following system.  The department administrator will create a gmail address, say "JaneSmith@gmail.com."  The students will use variations of this email address for the email addresses for their several letters; the variations will involve insertions of periods, which gmail ignores, so all the emails will go into this one account.  (For example, "Jane.Smith@gmail.com" and "J.aneSmith@gmail.com", etc.)  For the first uploaded letter file, the administrator will upload the whole dossier.  For the rest of the files, she will upload a PDF that says "This applicant’s recommendation letters have been uploaded as a single PDF document.  Please see the computer file for the first recommendation letter for all the letters." 

Does anyone see any possible problems with our handing things this way?

This will make things a bit easier for our administrator than if she had to create dedicated gmail addresses for each of the letter-writers and upload each letter individually.  But this will still require *hours* of extra work time on top of the already very time-consuming task of mailing out the dossiers.  In many departments, there simply isn't enough support staff to have an administrator do this kind of extra work.  This is a lot of extra work.

If anyone doubts that this takes lots of time:  trust me, it does.  It can easily take an hour to upload five letters–all you need is to run into a glitch with one system, or encounter one slow system.  And that definitely happens.

If any schools are using systems that require that letters be uploaded individually, it seems that one thing they could do is have the minimum number of letters (as far as the online system is concerned) be *one letter* and thus allow applicants to have all of their letters uploaded as a dossier of one computer file.  Of course the online instructions to applicants would have to make clear that this is possible to do.  At the very least, a note to applicants on department webpages would be helpful.

Once applications are being submitted, it would be useful to have a thread on Leiter Reports about which schools are using this bad system and what workarounds they are adopting to make it manageable.

Signed comments will be preferred, but you must at least include a valid e-mail address that indicates your department.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Job Seeker Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

19 responses to “Uploading “Letters of Recommendation,” Again”

  1. Last year, I simply put our administrator's regular email address as the address for all my letter-writers, and it worked fine.

  2. Interfolio handles the 'email' style requests nicely. It generates a unique email address for each letter of recommendation you have on file with them. You put that email in the appropriate spot in the online application and that submits the request to Interfolio. They then contact you, and as soon as you pay ($6 + $1 for each additional letter to the same search) they submit it for you. It's a little steep (costing about as much as mailing an entire hardcopy dossier) but easy.

    The ones I have trouble with were the online applications that have no email option, and require you to upload the letter yourself. Interfolio so far has no way to handle those. They make little sense. What job seeker has the capacity to upload confidential letters to a website?

  3. Meena Krishnamurthy

    Interfolio also allows individuals to upload confidential letters to online applications. It does this by creating individual email addresses for each reference letter that has been uploaded to their system. So, when filling out the job application, you simply input the correct Interfolio email address and the request for the letter goes to this address (rather than the original letter writer) and then someone from Interfolio uploads the letter to the online job application. From my experience, it works quite well.

  4. We've already realized a problem with our plan, which is that the dossier will be too big for some systems to accept it, so we're going to have our administrator upload each letter individually.
    That is so much unnecessary work.

  5. Anonymous job seeker

    I don't know why people think that Interfolio handles electronic delivery "nicely." They charge $1 for each letter uploaded electronically on top of the $6 per institution. To send hard copies of all letters costs just $6. For those of us with more than 3 letters, the difference can be substantial. In other words, by going online and reducing some of their administrative cost burden, departments (and Interfolio) are shifting cost burden onto applicants, which isn't nice at all.

    In general, the cost burden involved in obtaining letters of recommendation should not be on the applicants. It should be part of the administrative cost of running a search, since the hiring department has at least as much interest in the letters as the applicant. Interfolio has accounts for hiring department such that delivery of documents is charged to the recipient, not the sender. Chicago is using this system this year (and many kudos to them!). Academicjobsonline similarly charges the hiring departments or institutions, not the applicants (kudos to Duke).

    Hiring departments paying for letter delivery should be standard in philosophy (as, I might add, it is in other disciplines). Why are we requiring large expenditures from those least able to afford it?

  6. Interfolio *handles* it nicely. By which I mean it's easy to use.

    I didn't say the price was nice. I actually referred to it as steep, and then detailed exactly the pricing scheme you describe.

  7. With all due respect to Princeton prof, I just don't think it is too much to ask of a faculty member to upload somewhere in the neighborhood of 50-80 letters over a period of roughly two to three months. My letter writers last year were all doing this, and they were okay with it. In fact, one of them said it was no trouble at all – a minor inconvenience at worst. It may, however, be too much to ask of a department administrator to upload all of the letters of every student on the market in the department. The administrator could end up uploading something like 400 letters. That's a lot, and the potential for error seems high. In any case, I would encourage those in positions of power – whatever decisions they make with respect to things of this nature – to let the interests and sanity of the job seekers be their guiding standard.

    BL COMMENT: This is the second comment in this vein, so I'm going to approve this, but I hope we don't derail the discussion. I am sure that at the end of the day faculty will make sure their letters get to hiring departments. But a realistic scenario for a Princeton professor, or any other professor at a department with a sizable graduate program, is that he or she will be writing letters for three or more candidates, each of whom will be applying to between 30 and 60 jobs. That's a lot of uploading–several hours worth, and that's on the assumption everything goes smoothly. It isn't unreasonable to wonder whether there is a more efficient way to do this, and I take it that's what my original correspondent was after.

  8. My experience with Interfolio, as someone submitting recommendations, has been mixed, at best. It does not always upload nicely, and it is expensive for the requester.

    One way of reducing the effort in emailing letters is to employ a simple email trick. Get the addresses of all [or all currently at hand] recipients. Create an email to yourself; attach the letter[s]; then put all the recipient emails in the Blind Copy address box. Each recipient gets the same attachments, but no one sees who the other recipients are.

    (I’m assuming that most university/college systems provide for the BC option.)

  9. This is certainly anecdotal and coming from my own experiences, observations I made hanging out in offices, and talking to several people over the past few years.

    In the previous years, I applied for jobs in the US. I am originally from Germany and so I had letter writers from both countries. My experience is that German professors (like many European countries) have more trouble with the idea of writing this many letters or writing letters for jobs at all, because in academia in Germany it is not yet a usual procedure to do so; rather, there are peer-review like systems in place for fellowships and grants, but not jobs.

    Often, and this should be of interest for those of you who do have to evaluate German candidates,and I have heard this from many other junior German grant-seekers and job-applicants, their professors have them draft the letters, then just sign them and have their former students send the letters themselves. To avoid this trouble, I have on occasion used a third party service run by someone I know who is in the business of handling academic counseling and research development and who handles the acquisition and sending of the letter so that the whole confidentiality issue is not a problem for me and
    also there is some "pressure" on the letter writer who actually agreed to do it to also do it in time. My experience with American letter writers was that while they were kind enough to send them for me, they often ended up sending them in way too late.
    I also recently read an interesting piece of news that one German university, with the number of students and early career grads seeking grants and the use of letters of rec becoming more common, that this university is now introducing an "automated system" that generates these letters. I don't know what's gonna come from that, but I think these are issues that should be discussed openly. I know of one or two American grads who have been "tasked" by their professors to write their own letters also. I think that, in general, the current situation is less than ideal because grads are encouraged (not just in academia) to apply for anything they even remotely qualify just to try and get lucky. This creates an unbearable level of friction in the system and also leads to a less than ideal placement of candidates.

  10. In addition to ignoring periods, gmail will also ignore anything after a + sign in the local-part of an address specification. That is, these all go to the same place:

    janesmith@gmail.com
    janesmith+foo@gmail.com
    janesmith+bar+quux@gmail.com

    etc.

    It might be simpler to use the plus-form, putting the actual recommender's name after the plus, than to intersperse periods. (Or perhaps it's not precisely simpler, but it strikes me as more appealing.) If you can get people to use a canonical formatting for recommenders' names after the plus (probably unlikely), you could create a filter for each address, which could conceivably be useful or interesting somehow.

  11. Regarding the BCC trick, the "Visibility" section of the relevant Wikipedia article is worth bearing in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_carbon_copy#Visibility

    Specifically, "Since the hiding of the Bcc: addresses from other Bcc: addresses is not required by RFC 2822, one cannot assume the Bcc: addresses will be hidden from other Bcc: addresses."

    It sounds as if what happens is entirely determined by relatively local factors, though, so it should be possible to test this.

  12. Average burdens on faculty have been mentioned a number of times, but it's worth pointing out the extreme cases. I personally have been asked for 10 new or updated letters so far this semester. I may still receive more requests. Also, when I was first on the job market I applied for 150 jobs internationally. (There were many more jobs back then!) I don't believe anyone will ever have to submit 1,500 letters, but on the other hand, 80 strikes me as a very conservative number. These changes threaten to turn me into a full-time letter submitter.

  13. Anonymous Job Seeker

    Well, I wouldn't dare ask my letter writers to upload my letters to different departments individually. I think they put in enough effort in writing the letters in the first place, but perhaps I shouldn't feel that way.

    There are three nice things about Interfolio (the cost I admit is not so nice, but it is cheaper than sending out dossiers from a country that is not the USA): it allows those of us who are no longer eligible for departmental job support to get easy access to our letters in a confidential manner (many departments will support candidates only for a certain period of time); it allows easy submission of letters to departments without requiring letter writers to do so; it allows the candidate control over the sending of the letters, which given that one year 12 of my sets went missing somehow, is quite significant for me.

  14. an anonymous grad student

    I have a somewhat naive question about this. As a current grad student who is accustomed to applying for everything electronically, I'm unclear on how things were easier before. Having 80 letters of recommendation mailed seems like it would have to be more effort than making 80 electronic submissions. Obviously there would have been more options for how to distribute that burden, but was there some other advantage?

    BL COMMENT: Just briefly (others are free to elaborate), the prior norm was generally that you sent one copy of your letter to either a departmental or university office that then compiled dossiers containing all the letters, CV, writing samples, etc., which were then mailed to each department to which the candidate applied.

  15. Another Job seeker

    I wonder if I might ask a related question here. It currently seems that the only two options for candidates who no longer receive dossier support from their PhD institution are (1) have their letter writers handle submission individually, or (2) use Interfolio.

    Is there another option? For instance, is it acceptable to arrange for a private third party (no relation to the candidate) to handle collection and distribution of all letters of recommendation? I imagine it is possible to find a more affordable local option than Interfolio, but I'm not sure whether this would be viewed as an "illegal" way to handle one's letters.

  16. I am sure that all responsible faculty will make sure their letters get in on time, but I know of many irresponsible faculty members who fail to send out their letters when individually requested. It happened to me once or twice, and it happened to many students in various departments at my graduate institution (an excellent public university). Often these are the very same faculty who make it anxiety-provoking to ask for the letter in the first place (see anon 6:50 a.m.), so you dare not follow up with them. If you are lucky, you are informed of the omission by the institution to which you are applying, and have a reason to remind your advisor to put his/her letter in the mail. This is bad enough when only a few institutions ask for letters from faculty directly, but if that becomes the norm, people with irresponsible (or frazzled) advisors are royally screwed.

  17. I just called our HR office to see how they handle this issue. I was told that they do not require applicants to separately list the references, and they do not insist that the letter writers be the ones to upload the letters (so, one person could do all the document uploading, as with the old system of sending out hard copies). Moreover, the person I talked to is in contact with university HR offices across the country, and she's never heard of that fearfully individualized practice. So it *may* be that the practice is relatively rare. I would recommend folks talk to their HR office to see what system is being used at their university, and if it's the hyper-individualized model, to petition strongly for a change – rather than inventing creative work-arounds.

  18. Anonymous job seeker

    CharlieH,
    I'm afraid your HR contact doesn't talk to enough people. I've often encountered the practices you describe many times. In fact, online systems try to enforce sender uniqueness by refusing to allow the same email address to be entered for different references. Sometimes, there's a workaround (Interfolio helps by assigning a unique email to each letter), but not always.

    From Penn's ad for this year's search:
    "Applications must be submitted on-line … and must include … email contact information for at least three recommenders, who will then be requested by the University of Pennsylvania to upload their recommendations."

  19. Anonymous Job Seeker

    This is Anonymous Job Seeker 6:50AM again. I just wanted to clarify. I am not afraid of my letter writers, I just think its just too much to ask them to keep track of uploading letters to individual institutions. I myself get A LOT of email and already find it hard to keep track. I also wanted to note that my missing letters went missing due to the administrators oversight, not my letter writers. Another option, so I have heard, is to have your current institution handle your letters, but that seems a bit much to ask also. To me, at least. So, I have opted for interfolio and I find it is very convenient. It doesn't require me to do any more work than I would have had to do already and it ensures that I am in control of my letters being sent out. The cost, well, sucks. I never had to pay to have my institution send out letters. It will, therefore, be an extra cost, but it will likely be cheaper than sending hard copies, I hope.

Designed with WordPress