English 421Y: Technical Writing Online

In this week’s various readings on resume development, the main point pressed forth in every instance seems to be that resume writers must understand, and then reflect in writing, that they are in fact “selling” themselves to their potential employers. The idea is constantly stressed that your resume should not, as one might assume, be about you, but rather about the company. From their perspective it doesn’t matter what you’ve done or accomplished, but rather only what you can bring to the table and contribute to the growth of the business.

What did I learn from the Resume reading sections? Well for one I learned that everyone has an opinion on what makes a resume good.

My conclusion, after reading all of these articles on resumes, is that resumes and cover letters suck. It just seems that we have to put sop much work into these documents, and it seems almost pointless. After reading the articles from the recruitment managers it seems like you have to make a perfect resume for these people. You put so much work into a resume just for it to be glanced at for maybe a max of one minute. It just does not seem fair that we have to put all of this time and effort into producing an effective resume for it to be discarded at the whim of the recruiter.

These readings are very valuable tools for a person who is trying to land that dream job they have always been wanting. But, I found that I already knew most of the information in these readings. Two years ago, when I first started looking for jobs, I went to a class held by the CCO that taught people how to make resumes and cover letters. After taking this class I made a resume and brought it back to the CCO department in Stewart Center and got it reviewed and critiqued. I then made revisions to my resume, went back and got the green light from them.

Overall, I am drained by the amount of resume help I have been getting recently. Not just these readings, but from other classes and workshops that I've attended. I really think that resumes will not please everyone, but that the resume should be designed and written to please the maximum number of reviewers as possible. Although I have had a lot of help already, these readings shined light on new areas that I have left in the dark until now.

Like many of the other responses, I too was a bit shocked by the amount of time that is spent on reviewing résumés. It’s a bit discouraging knowing that even after spending countless hours perfecting a résumé, it might only be looked at for forty seconds. None the less, résumés are not going away soon, so with this knowledge, it is imperative to create a résumé that earns it extra attention.

My draft is attached

I just have to preface my post by saying that I am SO tired of getting resume advice. Just as the "Instructor Blog #2" says, if you ask 10 people, you get 10 different answers, and thus, I'm tempted to disregard about 90% of the advice I'm given -- unless it's from someone directly within the company to which I'm applying. That being said, I still think there are some universal truths, per se, to resumes that these readings hit upon.

While most of the readings talked about the basics of how to write a good resume/cover letter, they all seemed the same to me. The readings that did strike me though were the accounts of the actual recruiters and how they look at resumes and decide who gets an interview and who doesn't get a second look.

One of the main reasons for why I took this course was for the section on resume building. With graduation around the corner, I figured that it was time to get serious with my application materials, and these readings have really taught me a lot. One of my most common mistakes, according to “Skeptical Resume Reader Tells How He Really Thinks,” is the use of weak verbs. Up until now, my resumes have always included phrases like “participated in” or “assisted with,” and apparently this strategy does not appeal to employers.