What to Include in a Recommendation Letter for Graduate School

A recommendation letter is one of the few parts of an application the applicant does not write. That makes it valuable to a committee — and it also means a well-intentioned referee can weaken an application without realising it.

Here is what admissions readers are looking for, and what tends to go wrong.

What the committee is actually reading for

Not praise. Committees expect every letter to be positive, so positivity carries almost no information. What they are reading for is specificity — evidence that the referee knows the applicant well enough to describe them concretely.

A letter saying a student is "hardworking and intelligent" tells a committee nothing, because every letter says that. A letter describing how the student redesigned an experiment after a null result tells them everything.

The structure that works

1. The relationship, stated precisely

How the referee knows the applicant, in what capacity, and for how long. "I supervised her final-year research project over eight months" is far stronger than "I have known him for several years."

2. Where the applicant sits among peers

Committees value comparative framing because it gives them a scale. "Among the strongest three students I have taught in eleven years" is concrete. Referees are often reluctant to commit to this, but its absence is noticed.

3. Two or three specific episodes

This is the core of the letter and the part most often missing. Not a list of qualities — actual moments. A question the student asked that changed the referee's thinking. How they handled a setback. What they did when the data did not cooperate.

4. Fit with the programme

A short passage on why this applicant suits this kind of study. Referees who have read the programme description write noticeably better letters here.

5. A clear, unqualified recommendation

Hedged closings do real damage. "I recommend her without reservation" reads very differently from "I am happy to recommend her."

Common mistakes that weaken a strong letter

Summarising the CV. The committee already has it. A letter listing grades and modules wastes its one advantage — the referee's personal observation.

Generic superlatives throughout. Excellent, outstanding, exceptional. Without an example attached, these read as a template.

Faint praise. "He was never late" and "she completed all assigned work" describe the minimum. Committees read these as damning.

Too short. A three-paragraph letter suggests the referee did not have much to say. Aim for 500 to 800 words.

The wrong referee. A famous professor who barely knows the applicant produces a weaker letter than a junior lecturer who supervised them closely. Committees can tell.

If you are the applicant

You cannot write the letter, and you should not. But you can make it easier for your referee to write a good one.

Send them your CV, your statement of purpose, the programme description, the deadline, and — most usefully — a short note reminding them of specific things you worked on together. Most referees are writing several letters and genuinely appreciate the prompt.

Give them at least a month. A rushed letter reads like a rushed letter.

If the letter needs polishing

A referee writing in English as a second language often produces a letter whose substance is excellent but whose phrasing undercuts it. Editing can fix the language without changing a single claim the referee made.

KhanCopyX offers admissions document editing for recommendation letters, personal statements, and statements of purpose — improving clarity and impact while preserving the writer's own voice and never adding claims they did not make.