CV/Resume question

[Alyanumbers]

Hey everyone,I'm polishing up my academic CV and I'm stuck on this. I've attended two academic conferences (and I could have sworn a third, one-day conference, but I cannot for the life of me remember when, and googling the theme and location gives me nothing...), and last spring entered a research competition and won 1st prize. I've put those items together under 'Academic Achievements and Activities'. On the other hand, I've put my research experience separately under 'Research Experience' (duh). Should I instead list the conferences under 'Conferences' and put the research prize under 'Research Experience'?

Basically does this look better:

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS AND ACTIVITIES

November 2010: Volunteered to help run Conference 2.

April 2010: Received 1^st prize in an inter-universities research competition, for my paper Paper, organised by My Department at My University.

March 2009: Attended Conference 1

RESEARCH EXPERIENCE

August to October 2010:

Conducted field research blah blah

February 2010:

Edited a survey blah blah

June to July 2009:

Assisted with basic research blah blah

OR:

CONFERENCES

Conference 2 (volunteer), dates and details

Conference 1, dates and details

RESEARCH EXPERIENCE

August to October 2010:

Conducted field research blah blah

April 2010:

Received 1^st prize in an inter-universities research competition, for my paper Paper, organised by My Department at My University.

February 2010:

Edited a survey blah blah

June to July 2009:

Assisted with basic research blah blah

I think the second option looks more professional, but arrogant... And I'm honestly not sure a 4-page research paper counts as 'Research Experience'. Please advise! Thanks!

Edited November 13, 2010 by Alyanumbers

[Bukharan]

I'd go for the second option. It makes more sense and I don't think it sounds arrogant!

[anonacademic]

^ I'll second that - I like the second option better.

Some of these conferences you volunteered at? Did you present at the others, or just attend? (And LOL at not being able to remember one of them - I love coming home and thinking, OK, what just happened?! Conferences can be such a blur!) Anyway - you might want to clearly differentiate. A C.V. with a header "Conferences" would seem to imply (maybe just to me - hopefully others will chime if there are dissident opinions) that you presented at each listing.

I might suggest splitting up your C.V. a little more than it is now: for instance, the award currently under research would go under an "Awards and Honors" header. Along the same lines, you could make a header ("Related Experience" possibly?) and list your volunteering commitments at those conferences. Of course, if this makes your C.V. have headers with only one listing underneath, I wouldn't recommend this approach! Isolating the award highlights the actual research you have listed (which, although vague by necessity, sounds really interesting!) and highlights that it was good enough to be recognized.

There's a C.V. page on the Purdue OWL site I stumbled across (and subsequently lost) awhile back, which is where I'm drawing this from, FYI.

Good luck!

[Alyanumbers]

Thanks for the advice, both of you!

I only attended the first conference and volunteered at the second (and in consequence, attended). I asked my father, though (he's a math lecturer, so an academic), and he said if I just list the conferences' names and dates, it means I just attended. If I'd presented something, I'd add the presentation title. However, if someone else has more insight, I'd appreciate it; I'd hate for my CV to come off as ambiguous.

And as I was going through my papers yesterday, I remembered I got another research award the year before! o.O I love my memory. Anyway, an 'Awards and Honors' header would not be a good idea, since I got other awards for my fiction, and I'm listing those separately (I'm pretty sure the ad-com doesn't care about those).

Ah well, I think I'll just go with the second option. Thanks!

^ I'll second that - I like the second option better.

Some of these conferences you volunteered at? Did you present at the others, or just attend? (And LOL at not being able to remember one of them - I love coming home and thinking, OK, what just happened?! Conferences can be such a blur!) Anyway - you might want to clearly differentiate. A C.V. with a header "Conferences" would seem to imply (maybe just to me - hopefully others will chime if there are dissident opinions) that you presented at each listing.

I might suggest splitting up your C.V. a little more than it is now: for instance, the award currently under research would go under an "Awards and Honors" header. Along the same lines, you could make a header ("Related Experience" possibly?) and list your volunteering commitments at those conferences. Of course, if this makes your C.V. have headers with only one listing underneath, I wouldn't recommend this approach! Isolating the award highlights the actual research you have listed (which, although vague by necessity, sounds really interesting!) and highlights that it was good enough to be recognized.

There's a C.V. page on the Purdue OWL site I stumbled across (and subsequently lost) awhile back, which is where I'm drawing this from, FYI.

Good luck!

[fuzzylogician]

This is an old thread but since it's been resurrected -- it'd be a good idea to find out whether or not it's customary in your field to list conferences you just attended but did not present at in your CV. In my field no one lists such conferences. If you volunteered to help at a conference that could go under service, but having a heading in your CV that says conferences and listing under it ones you did not present at is very misleading, in my opinion.

[runonsentence]

This is an old thread but since it's been resurrected -- it'd be a good idea to find out whether or not it's customary in your field to list conferences you just attended but did not present at in your CV. In my field no one lists such conferences. If you volunteered to help at a conference that could go under service, but having a heading in your CV that says conferences and listing under it ones you did not present at is very misleading, in my opinion.

I think that listing conferences attended is fine, as long as it's very clearly separated from service and presentations (so fuzzylogician is astute in observing that they may not yet be separated clearly enough).

Listing conferences attended is a somewhat common practice in English, I know, for those who are coming from undergrad or otherwise have little in the way of graduate-level experiences but want to show that they're making efforts to expose themselves to conversations in their field.

[fuzzylogician]

I think that listing conferences attended is fine, as long as it's very clearly separated from service and presentations (so fuzzylogician is astute in observing that they may not yet be separated clearly enough).

Listing conferences attended is a somewhat common practice in English, I know, for those who are coming from undergrad or otherwise have little in the way of graduate-level experiences but want to show that they're making efforts to expose themselves to conversations in their field.

Therefore, reiterating my previous advice:

1) find out if it's customary in your field to list conferences attended. We've learned that it's fine in English, but it may not be in other fields.

2) clearly separate "conferences attended" from "conference presentations" (and possibly from "service").

[runonsentence]

Therefore, reiterating my previous advice:

1) find out if it's customary in your field to list conferences attended. We've learned that it's fine in English, but it may not be in other fields.

2) clearly separate "conferences attended" from "conference presentations" (and possibly from "service").

I wasn't trying to correct you, fuzzylogician, just add onto your advice. The OP is in English.