CV Question

[ashiepoo72]

Hey everyone, I've been googling what research experience to put on a CV and it seems to vary depending on major, so I figured I'd post my question here. I'm at an MA program that, like many others, is losing funding by ridiculous amounts each year and cannot support TAships or outside research anymore. I'm planning on attending a conference this coming semester but need to spruce up the paper I want to submit--also hoping to get it published. However, the conference and publishing are not guaranteed and may not occur before I submit applications.

 

I have intentionally taken as many research seminars as possible at my program. All of them have required original primary source based research and lengthy papers (two 15 pagers, four 20 pagers, and two 30 pagers). I do 20th century U.S., and all but one paper was in my time period and all were related somehow to U.S. history. My question is, should I mention these on the CV? Obviously I don't want a big fat blank on there, but I also don't want to sound like a desperate applicant trying to add fluff. I feel like it's all relevant because I made sure to always pick topics in my area and got lots of experience using primary sources and sources in other languages, but I'm second guessing the first draft of my CV.

 

Oh, the joys of applications!

[Sigaba]

My question is, should I mention these on the CV?

 

IMO the answer to your question is no. Research courses in graduate school are a part of your training as an aspiring professional academic history. Your CV should reflect what you've done with that training. If taking those extra research courses makes you a better candidate for a position, you should strive to show and prove it, e.g. the conference presentation and published paper.

 

Also, I respectfully suggest that you not define your projects by page length. It isn't how many pages you write, but what you write on those pages and how well.

[ashiepoo72]

Thanks for the response. I definitely agree about the page length comment, I just wanted to give some context and lots of the POIs I've spoken to have asked about my different papers in terms of page length-I'm sure to get a sense of if I can do a sustained project. I've made use of every opportunity to write and research by gearing it toward my focus as much as possible, and the page number doesn't necessarily reflect which ones have been the best or most fruitful.

I'm working on the paper for the conference now. Hopefully I can get it done in time! Thanks again for the advice.

[CageFree]

I would only list papers that you've published and/or presented. 

[Sigaba]

I would only list papers that you've published and/or presented. 

 

FWIW, I've seen papers that have been accepted for publication but have not yet gone to press listed on the CVs of established historians.

[CageFree]

FWIW, I've seen papers that have been accepted for publication but have not yet gone to press listed on the CVs of established historians.

 

Good point, and usually I see those with a note saying "forthcoming" or "expected publication date mm/yy." What meant is I wouldn't add papers that were done for courses. 

 

I think people usually list their MA theses too.

[Riotbeard]

I agree with cagefree and sigaba.  Research experience is implied in activity, i.e. grants, presentations, and publications.  Everyone with an MA has written a research paper, so to list them or explain you have taken research seminars is unnecessary.  Most people do list their masters thesis (although eventually, this comes off your cv).

[ashiepoo72]

You guys are awesome.

[JacksonBaby]

For a CV what does everyone think about Non-Peer Reviewed publications or Reports?

 

If you completed a report for a museum or have a publications via a non-profit or magazine that is not peer reviewed do you still include it?

 

If it gets its own section such as "Non-Peer Reviewed Publications" does each entry get the full name, title, date, etc. treatment?

[ashiepoo72]

For a CV what does everyone think about Non-Peer Reviewed publications or Reports?

 

If you completed a report for a museum or have a publications via a non-profit or magazine that is not peer reviewed do you still include it?

 

If it gets its own section such as "Non-Peer Reviewed Publications" does each entry get the full name, title, date, etc. treatment?

 

I googled your question and found several examples of CVs that have a section titled something like this: Other Articles (Non-Peer Reviewed Publications and Reports).

 

Definitely put the section for peer-reviewed publications above the non-peer reviewed one.

[dr. t]

I agree. Also remember that a CV, like a resume, should be tailored to the place you're sending it, so questions regarding sections are contextual, not absolute.