Page Comparison

What makes a good vs great résumé?

Good résumé vs great résumé (by section)

Good résumé:

Navid put the “Education” section immediately following the “Summary of Qualifications” section.

Great résumé:

Navid moved “Education” to the second page of his résumé so that “Relevant Experience” immediately follows “Summary of Qualifications”.

Rationale:

Navid moved “Education” further down on his résumé because the skills he used to earn his degrees are more important to highlight than the actual credentials. Further to this point, although the job description asks for a master’s degree, Navid knows that he is not automatically qualified (or overqualified) for this position just because he has a PhD.

Navid realizes that he needs to provide evidence of the relevant skills he developed throughout his education. This evidence can be found under his role as a doctoral researcher and within his “Relevant Projects” section — both of which appear before the “Education” section.

Good résumé:

Navid wrote the first point of his “Summary of Qualifications” as follows:  

• Extensive experience in a university environment, including supporting first year students in transition 

Great résumé:

Navid added the amount of experience he has in a university environment to the beginning of this first point. It now reads as follows:

• 3+ years of experience in a university environment, including supporting first year students in transition

Rationale:

Because the job description states that XYZ University is seeking someone with “2 to 3 years of university (or related) experience” Navid wants to clearly indicate that he meets this key qualification. He recognizes that it’s a good strategy to start with a strong, quantified experience bullet in the “Summary of Qualifications” section and to frame his experience in such a way as to map it onto the job description.

Good résumé:

Navid wrote the second point of his “Summary of Qualifications” as follows:  

• Exceptional interpersonal skills and ability to actively engage students from various backgrounds  

Great résumé:

Navid added additional information to the end of this second bullet in the “Summary of Qualifications” section. The point now reads as follows:  

• Exceptional interpersonal skills and ability to actively engage students from various backgrounds as evidenced by winning student-nominated Teaching Assistant Award  

Rationale:

By adding that he won a student-nominated Teaching Assistant Award, Navid provides the employer with direct evidence that he is well-liked and able to connect with students. This statement also indicates to the employer where he/she can find additional evidence in support of the claim that Navid has exceptional interpersonal skills (i.e., under his Teaching Assistant role).  

Good résumé:

Under his role as a doctoral researcher, Navid put the following bullet point first:

• Independently wrote two successful grant applications; awarded $50,000 of research funding

Great résumé:

Under his role as a doctoral researcher, Navid reordered his bullet points. “Independently wrote two...” is now the fourth bullet rather than the first.

Rationale:

By moving this point further down under his Doctoral Researcher role, Navid is able to highlight his experience supervising students as well as his collaboration and presentation skills before drawing attention to his written communication skills. Based on the job description, Navid believes these skills are more central to the role than written communication. He also knows that it’s important to strategically organize his résumé, so the most relevant information appears first.

Good résumé:

Navid worded the fifth bullet point under Doctoral Researcher as follows:

• Presented at an international conference

Great résumé:

Navid added more information to this bullet point to highlight the impact of his actions. It now reads as follows:

• Presented at an international conference and was subsequently invited by one of the attendees to give a lecture at their institution as part of a guest speaker series

Rationale:

Rather than simply listing that he presented at a conference, Navid has identified the positive outcome that stemmed from this action. By adding that his presentation resulted in an invitation to present again, Navid provides tangible evidence of his ability to successfully engage an audience.

Good résumé: 

Under Navid’s first relevant project, he described his data analysis evidence as follows:  

• Analyzed the probability of occurrence of extreme events such as floods (~100-year duration), rainfall, etc. using stochastic differential equations for predicting the probability of occurrence of such events .

Great résumé: 

Navid altered this bullet point to make it less technical and content specific. It now reads as follows:  

• Analyzed data using quantitative analysis techniques to predict outcomes  

Rationale:

Navid removed the specific content information from this bullet point because it is irrelevant to the position. Including extraneous technical details that are not meaningful to the employer distracts from Navid’s argument and makes it weaker. However, by describing his data analysis skills in more general terms (e.g., “quantitative analysis techniques”, “predict outcomes”), Navid focuses on the most applicable aspects of his knowledge for this particular job.  

Good résumé:

Under his “Activities and Interests” section, Navid listed his role as a graduate student representative as well as his interest in yoga, chess and trivia.  

Great résumé:

Navid reformatted his “Activities and Interests” section and added more information. He specified his role in the various activities, the name of the organizing body and when he was a part of the activity.  

Rationale:

By adding additional contextual information and reformatting this section, Navid maintains the same professional formatting that appears in the rest of the résumé rather than having a list of activities and interests that appears like a brief afterthought at the end of the document.  

Good résumé vs great résumé (by work experience)

Good résumé:

Navid worded the second bullet point under his teaching assistant experience as follows: Gave weekly tutorials to undergraduate students on various engineering topics.

Great résumé:

Navid refined his wording choice for this bullet point and added additional information. It now reads as follows: Presented complex concepts in a clear, concise manner for up to 30 students during weekly tutorials using PowerPoint slides and interactive activities.

Rationale:

Navid changed the verb in this bullet point from “gave” to “presented” because the latter is a strong, action-oriented verb that is clearly associated with a skill set that Navid made claims about in his “Summary of Qualifications” — namely, communication skills. He also explained how he presented the information using PowerPoint slides and interactive activities to refer to his computer proficiency and to highlight his engagement with students.

Good résumé:

Under his international orientation facilitator role, Navid described his experience using the following two bullets: Enthusiastically encouraged student participation and engagement in social activities by facilitating personal connections among participants. Facilitated discussions and information sharing (in English and Farsi) with students regarding cross-cultural living and learning by establishing a respectful environment for open conversation.

Great résumé:

Slightly altering these two bullets, Navid highlighted that he worked specifically with first year students: Enthusiastically encouraged first year student participation and engagement in social activities by facilitating personal connections among participants. Facilitated discussions and information sharing (in English and Farsi) with first year students regarding cross-cultural living and learning by establishing a respectful environment for open conversation.

Rationale:

By specifying that he worked with first year students and not just students in general, Navid can show greater alignment between his experience and what the employer is looking for. The job description explicitly states that supporting first year students is a critical component of the Student Success Centre’s programming.