Later on today I will go in for a job interview for a part-time job teaching night school. I wasn't really looking for a job at the time, but my wife found an ad in the newspaper for a position that I am qualified for, so I decided to give it a shot.
Before going in, I had to prepare a resume. Prior to learning about the job I wasn't really searching, so I had to write a new resume (as my old one was out-of-date.)
Going over the templates on Microsoft Office, and pondering resumes in general, I had a few thoughts:
- Does anyone in a personnel position really read the "Objective" section of a resume? (I mean: besides for laughs?) One would think that something so meaningless wouldn't have such a prominent place on a resume. Why wouldn't relevant experience, professional licenses, or education go first? A realistic objective would be: I want this job so I can get a series of consistent paychecks, buy a house, and start a family. I'd also like to take the occasional vacation. Please hire me so I can stop looking for a job.
- What's the deal with the fancy paper? I feel that there is an inverse relationship between the quality of stationery and the qualifications of the applicant. (Don't take this analogy too far. I doubt that even an eminently qualified candidate wouldn't write his resume on a bar napkin. I am just saying that too big of a deal is made of the fancy schmancy paper. Plain old typing paper makes the job hunter seem less desperate, doesn't it?)
- "References on Request" What's the deal with that? If you've got them, put them in. References are just as important as the other important ones I mentioned.
So those are my thoughts on resumes. I hope that I get my one-night-per-week job. (I didn't put an "Objective" statement on my resume by the way.)