1. Assessment of the Applicant's Research Potential:
* Intellectual Capacity: Does the letter explicitly mention the applicant's intellectual curiosity, critical thinking skills, analytical abilities, and problem-solving skills? Anecdotes illustrating these qualities are highly valued over generic statements.
* Research Aptitude: Does the letter provide evidence of the applicant's research skills – ability to formulate research questions, design studies, collect and analyze data, interpret findings, and communicate results? Specific examples from research projects, theses, or independent studies are crucial.
* Potential for Original Contribution: Does the recommender believe the applicant has the potential to make a significant and original contribution to the field? This requires more than just competence; it suggests a unique perspective or approach.
* Work Ethic and Perseverance: The letter should comment on the applicant's dedication, persistence, and ability to overcome challenges in research. This often manifests in stories about their resilience in facing setbacks.
2. Assessment of the Applicant's Suitability for the Program:
* Fit with the Program: Does the letter explicitly mention the applicant's suitability for the specific program, faculty, or research areas? Connecting the applicant's skills and interests to the program's strengths is essential.
* Mentorship Potential: Does the recommender suggest the applicant is likely to thrive under mentorship and supervision? This speaks to their ability to receive constructive criticism, engage collaboratively, and work independently.
* Collaboration and Teamwork: Can the applicant work effectively with others? Many doctoral programs involve collaboration, so evidence of teamwork skills is important.
3. Credibility and Specificity of the Letter:
* Specificity and Detail: Generic statements are unhelpful. The letter needs concrete examples and specific anecdotes to support the claims made about the applicant. Quantifiable achievements are highly valued.
* Context and Perspective: The recommender's relationship to the applicant (duration, nature of interaction) and their expertise in the relevant field are important considerations. The letter should clearly establish the recommender's credibility.
* Writing Quality: While not the primary focus, a well-written and organized letter reflects positively on the applicant. Grammatical errors and unclear writing can detract from the overall impression.
* Comparison to Others: While not explicitly stated, a strong letter often implicitly (or sometimes explicitly) positions the applicant favorably compared to other students the recommender has known.
4. Addressing Potential Weaknesses (implicitly):
While a letter shouldn't dwell on weaknesses, a strong letter might preemptively address potential concerns raised by other parts of the application. For instance, if the applicant has a lower GPA, a letter might emphasize their exceptional research skills or resilience despite challenging circumstances.
Ultimately, the admissions committee seeks letters that offer a nuanced and comprehensive picture of the applicant's abilities and potential for success in a rigorous doctoral program. Generic praise is easily dismissed; compelling evidence and specific examples are crucial.