1. What can the writer do to make the resume better tailored to the specific job being applied for?
This person needs to add more to their objective and to elaborate more on their education.
2. Is the layout and design pleasing to the eye? Make at least one suggestion for improving it.
This resume is very eye appealing. The font is not to big or too small. The formatting makes the resume jump out at the reader
3. Does the resume fit comfortably within the page (as opposed to being squished in or stretched out)? What can the writer do to improve it?
To improve this resume, the writer needs to elaborate on more subjects like education. Besides that, it fits very well on one page. I would also limit the references to three people.
4. Is it easily readable (no confusing fonts, clearly marked sections)? What improvements can be made?
The resume is very easy to read. There is no confusing wording or font being used.
5. Does it use typography (including headers and bold and italics) appropriately and effectively?
The writer does a very good job of using headers and font styles to format the resume. That is what makes it stand out to me.
6. Is the most important information located on the left side of the page and near the top whenever possible? Identify at least one part that could be better placed.
Yes the formatting of information is great. To change something, I would change the contact information and place it in the upper right hand corner and move your name to the left side.
7. Does the content of the resume support the objective (if there is one)? Explain.
The content does support the resume. All of the relevant experience is experience needed to obtain the stated objective.
8. Is the resume too short? Where can it elaborate? Job skills? Responsibilities? Education?
The resume is a good length. The writer should elaborate on their education and add some accomplishments to go along with that.
9. Is material sequenced in order of importance and relevance?
Yes, the writer did a great job placing the information in chronological order.
10. Do bulleted items begin with action verbs? Are list items ordered in terms of importance?
The use of action verbs is very superb.
11. Does the resume avoid generalities and focus on specific information and professional terminology?
No, the writer should tell how the tasks were completed. Applying fertilizer, should be specified as either being done by hand or with a mechanical spreader.
12. Does the resume pass the Quadrant, Column, Squint, and Distance tests? Explain how the author might make improvements based on your test results.
The resume is evenly placed and very eye appealing.
13. What other observations can you make about the resume?
The only other observation besides a job well done is that writer needs to some more to their education and cut out a couple of references.
1. I think your interest in turf science is very evident based on your experience.
2. I would have your name cenetered instead of to the left hand side.
3. There is alot of information on your resume, but by the way it is listed, I think you will be fine.
4. It is easy to read. Nicely done.
5. The bold font is used appropriately.
6. Instead of having all of your experience in the middle, I would TAB it to the left about 3-4 times.
7. Your objective is supported by your experience.
8. Your resume is definitely not to short.
9. Yes
10. Yes
11. Column - move information to the left
12. You have alot of experience and it seems as if you know exactly what you want to do.
1. I thought that overall your resume is tailored well to the specific job because you have a lot of work experience in that area and you can tell that by just looking over it. Maybe if you were involved in other activities that also were in this field you could include those.
2. Overall it is easy to read and find information. The only thing I thought that might be better to change was if you put your name on the left or in the middle. The address was also a little confusing to read so you may want to format that a little differently.
3. The resume fits well in the page so I don't feel that any changes need to be made there.
4. The job title of "Groundskeeper" is a little hard to read in the italics, but overall easily able to read.
5. Typography was used well and effectively so that it is easier for the reader to find each section.
6. It looks pretty good but the only thing I would consider changing is under Education making "Purdue University" stand out more.
7. It supports the objective very well because all the experience relates to the job that you are trying to get.
8. The resume seems a little short after you go through the work experience because there are a lot of references, so you may want to cut down on the references and add other activities or something else that you think would be beneficial.
9. I think the order is pretty good, but if you wanted to go more by relevance then you may want to put the "Stanley Coveleski Regional Stadium" experience higher since it related directly to a baseball field.
10. The bulleted items do start with proper verbs, but I'm not sure if they are listed in order of importance. You may want to look over this and see if you feel that they are.
11. I believe it does avoid generalities and focus on information that is the most relevant and important to the objective.
12. Overall I think it passes these tests. You may want to make the cities under experiences line up better.
13. I think your resume is very impressive for the job that you are applying for. One thing that you may want to change is taking off some of the references. Many times companies only want two or three. You could add some other information that may be helpful if you eliminate some of the references.
Questions for Response
1. What can the writer do to make the resume better tailored to the specific job being applied for?
Maybe say in your objective what professional team such as Lake Elsinore Storm Baseball team.
2. Is the layout and design pleasing to the eye? Make at least one suggestion for improving it.
The design is very easy to follow. I don’t know if it is possible or not to make all of the wording (other then your name and information) the same size to make it a bit easier to read.
3. Does the resume fit comfortably within the page (as opposed to being squished in or stretched out)? What can the writer do to improve it?
The resume fits on the page but as I stated in the previous question it would look better if the wording was a tiny bit bigger. Maybe you could remove your references and put upon rquest which will give you more room to space out your experience
4. Is it easily readable (no confusing fonts, clearly marked sections)? What improvements can be made?
I think it is easy to read and like the format.
5. Does it use typography (including headers and bold and italics) appropriately and effectively?
The use of typography is very appropriate and not over board by any means.
6. Is the most important information located on the left side of the page and near the top whenever possible? Identify at least one part that could be better placed.
Most important information is on the left hand side and at the top but I think that you could maybe place your name on the left hand side along with the other important information.
7. Does the content of the resume support the objective (if there is one)? Explain.
Yes, all of your experience is related to your objective in being assistant groundskeeper.
8. Is the resume too short? Where can it elaborate? Job skills? Responsibilities? Education?
I think that maybe you could put some of the main courses that would apply to this position that have given you some skills to help.
Comments
Peer Edit
1. What can the writer do to make the resume better tailored to the specific job being applied for?
This person needs to add more to their objective and to elaborate more on their education.
2. Is the layout and design pleasing to the eye? Make at least one suggestion for improving it.
This resume is very eye appealing. The font is not to big or too small. The formatting makes the resume jump out at the reader
3. Does the resume fit comfortably within the page (as opposed to being squished in or stretched out)? What can the writer do to improve it?
To improve this resume, the writer needs to elaborate on more subjects like education. Besides that, it fits very well on one page. I would also limit the references to three people.
4. Is it easily readable (no confusing fonts, clearly marked sections)? What improvements can be made?
The resume is very easy to read. There is no confusing wording or font being used.
5. Does it use typography (including headers and bold and italics) appropriately and effectively?
The writer does a very good job of using headers and font styles to format the resume. That is what makes it stand out to me.
6. Is the most important information located on the left side of the page and near the top whenever possible? Identify at least one part that could be better placed.
Yes the formatting of information is great. To change something, I would change the contact information and place it in the upper right hand corner and move your name to the left side.
7. Does the content of the resume support the objective (if there is one)? Explain.
The content does support the resume. All of the relevant experience is experience needed to obtain the stated objective.
8. Is the resume too short? Where can it elaborate? Job skills? Responsibilities? Education?
The resume is a good length. The writer should elaborate on their education and add some accomplishments to go along with that.
9. Is material sequenced in order of importance and relevance?
Yes, the writer did a great job placing the information in chronological order.
10. Do bulleted items begin with action verbs? Are list items ordered in terms of importance?
The use of action verbs is very superb.
11. Does the resume avoid generalities and focus on specific information and professional terminology?
No, the writer should tell how the tasks were completed. Applying fertilizer, should be specified as either being done by hand or with a mechanical spreader.
12. Does the resume pass the Quadrant, Column, Squint, and Distance tests? Explain how the author might make improvements based on your test results.
The resume is evenly placed and very eye appealing.
13. What other observations can you make about the resume?
The only other observation besides a job well done is that writer needs to some more to their education and cut out a couple of references.
Resume Peer Editing
1. I think your interest in turf science is very evident based on your experience.
2. I would have your name cenetered instead of to the left hand side.
3. There is alot of information on your resume, but by the way it is listed, I think you will be fine.
4. It is easy to read. Nicely done.
5. The bold font is used appropriately.
6. Instead of having all of your experience in the middle, I would TAB it to the left about 3-4 times.
7. Your objective is supported by your experience.
8. Your resume is definitely not to short.
9. Yes
10. Yes
11. Column - move information to the left
12. You have alot of experience and it seems as if you know exactly what you want to do.
Peer review
1. I thought that overall your resume is tailored well to the specific job because you have a lot of work experience in that area and you can tell that by just looking over it. Maybe if you were involved in other activities that also were in this field you could include those.
2. Overall it is easy to read and find information. The only thing I thought that might be better to change was if you put your name on the left or in the middle. The address was also a little confusing to read so you may want to format that a little differently.
3. The resume fits well in the page so I don't feel that any changes need to be made there.
4. The job title of "Groundskeeper" is a little hard to read in the italics, but overall easily able to read.
5. Typography was used well and effectively so that it is easier for the reader to find each section.
6. It looks pretty good but the only thing I would consider changing is under Education making "Purdue University" stand out more.
7. It supports the objective very well because all the experience relates to the job that you are trying to get.
8. The resume seems a little short after you go through the work experience because there are a lot of references, so you may want to cut down on the references and add other activities or something else that you think would be beneficial.
9. I think the order is pretty good, but if you wanted to go more by relevance then you may want to put the "Stanley Coveleski Regional Stadium" experience higher since it related directly to a baseball field.
10. The bulleted items do start with proper verbs, but I'm not sure if they are listed in order of importance. You may want to look over this and see if you feel that they are.
11. I believe it does avoid generalities and focus on information that is the most relevant and important to the objective.
12. Overall I think it passes these tests. You may want to make the cities under experiences line up better.
13. I think your resume is very impressive for the job that you are applying for. One thing that you may want to change is taking off some of the references. Many times companies only want two or three. You could add some other information that may be helpful if you eliminate some of the references.
Peer Edit
Questions for Response
1. What can the writer do to make the resume better tailored to the specific job being applied for?
Maybe say in your objective what professional team such as Lake Elsinore Storm Baseball team.
2. Is the layout and design pleasing to the eye? Make at least one suggestion for improving it.
The design is very easy to follow. I don’t know if it is possible or not to make all of the wording (other then your name and information) the same size to make it a bit easier to read.
3. Does the resume fit comfortably within the page (as opposed to being squished in or stretched out)? What can the writer do to improve it?
The resume fits on the page but as I stated in the previous question it would look better if the wording was a tiny bit bigger. Maybe you could remove your references and put upon rquest which will give you more room to space out your experience
4. Is it easily readable (no confusing fonts, clearly marked sections)? What improvements can be made?
I think it is easy to read and like the format.
5. Does it use typography (including headers and bold and italics) appropriately and effectively?
The use of typography is very appropriate and not over board by any means.
6. Is the most important information located on the left side of the page and near the top whenever possible? Identify at least one part that could be better placed.
Most important information is on the left hand side and at the top but I think that you could maybe place your name on the left hand side along with the other important information.
7. Does the content of the resume support the objective (if there is one)? Explain.
Yes, all of your experience is related to your objective in being assistant groundskeeper.
8. Is the resume too short? Where can it elaborate? Job skills? Responsibilities? Education?
I think that maybe you could put some of the main courses that would apply to this position that have given you some skills to help.