Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Back to Applications in Academia 101 [A Survival Guide, Part 5]: How Academic CVs are different

As you may remember, I did a blog post series about applications in academia roughly one and a half years ago. Now, with stipend committee duties back on my plate, I’ve realized there are a few things I forgot to explain last time.

Looking back at the series, I still think the content is really solid. There are some important gold nuggets of wisdom in there, hard-earned and tested. In fact, this blog post series was even mentioned in an archaeology newsletter as tried-and-tested information, so I’m glad others agree with the advice I gave. That said, upon re-reading it, I’ve noticed that the presentation is quite chaotic. The writing style is very stream-of-consciousness, which makes it harder to read than I remembered. For this reason, I’ll include a brief summary of the key arguments at the bottom of this post (or throughout the new posts in this series, as I have a feeling that one post won’t be enough to hold all those new ideas, as per usual). But if you’re interested in more details, you can always revisit the original posts for the full content.

Academic CVs for first-timers: How are they different?

If you’re new to academia, you might not realize that an academic CV differs significantly from what you’d normally submit for other jobs. In fact, I’m often shocked to realize that I again forgot to mention this to new students because it’s so second nature to me that I’m not even aware first timers don’t tend to know this. Anyway… In English, the shorter version is often called a résumé, which, as the name suggests, is more of a summary. Résumés are typically one to two pages long, tailored to the specific application, and include only the most relevant information.

CV presents a full history of your academic accomplishments, while a resume presents a concise summary of your qualifications. (source)

In academic applications, however, a CV goes into far more detail. For instance, you need to list the titles of your theses and the topics you work on, particularly in fields like Digital Humanities (DH), where your specific focus might not be immediately clear. DH is such a broad and diverse field that even people within it might not understand your work without some concrete details. Listing topics, technologies, or classes you’ve taken that are particularly relevant or interesting can help paint a clearer picture of your expertise. I only send my full CV when that is explicitly asked for (big stuff like job or professor applications) but my CV has also already grown quite long. If yours is shorter, send it all except if there’s a page limit (then make sure to stick to it!).

Padding your CV (to show them where to place you)

If your CV is still relatively empty, focus on providing information that contextualizes your background. For example, what is your discipline of origin? What are your focus areas within DH? Be as specific as possible—people reviewing your CV want to understand who you are and what you bring to the table. A bare-bones list of jobs or academic accomplishments might make sense to you, but others won’t automatically know what you did, what skills you gained, or how it’s relevant.

For jobs you’ve taken during your studies to earn money, it’s worth considering whether they add value to your CV. If they’re unrelated to academia, they’re usually not relevant to your application. However, if you have jobs that overlap with your field (e.g., working for a newspaper if you’re in language or cultural studies), include those, as they show transferable skills (but maybe make some effort to explain how the skills transfer). Avoid letting irrelevant roles take up too much space, especially if it comes at the expense of highlighting academic or subject-specific experience. Don’t submerge the important info under a wave of irrelevant stuff!

If your academic CV is still quite empty, focus on making the most out of everything you do have. Even seemingly minor details can help, so be strategic about presenting them. For example, expand on what you’ve studied in your degree—mention specific subjects, projects, or skills gained (but maybe not all of them). This not only helps fill out your CV but also makes it easier for reviewers to understand your background. However, be aware that this fluff or padding is not considered appropriate anymore once you’re at later stages of your career (starting at the PhD level). I still know from my experience evaluating stipend applications from super early career applicants that there is a time and place for it very early in your career. At some point, as you advance in your career, you’ll need to prune your CV of elements you initially included to pad it out. However, early on, when your CV isn’t very full, padding is essential. For example, if you’ve taken a class relevant to the application, mention it.

In cases where your experience is limited, being creative and resourceful is key. Find ways to emphasize whatever relevant work you’ve done, no matter how small it may seem. For instance, detail the skills or methods you’ve learned, technologies you’ve used, or insights you’ve gained from specific classes. Building a strong academic CV, especially early on, is about maximizing what you’ve got and clearly communicating its relevance to the application.

Remember the earlier posts in this series: How are you (with the skills and experiences you’ve already gained or the fresh perspective you bring in) contributing to the organization? What do you bring to the table? State how you would/want to benefit from them but also show them how they benefit from having you! Now you may ask what this has to do with your CV: your CV is evidence of your claims (that you may make elsewhere in your application), so be sure that the way you tailor your CV backs them up! (also, read part 2 on the role of the different application documents)

Another way to strengthen your CV, especially when you don’t have much material, is with any accompanying materials like a project description (if that’s asked for in the call). Keep in mind that your CV and application materials are what people are evaluating in your application (not you as a whole). If you forget to mention something relevant, even if the reviewers know about it, they often can’t consider it officially. That’s why it’s critical to include all relevant information, even when applying to someone familiar with your work.

Returning to how academic CVs differ from traditional résumés: academic CVs are often much longer. If you look at a professor’s CV, it may feel overwhelming to compare, but remember, they’ve spent years building it. The key is to get started early. Apply for small stipends and grants, which can serve as the first steps on a ladder. Once you have a small grant, it qualifies you to apply for bigger grants, creating a compounding effect over time. Karen Kelsky’s book on academic career design emphasizes this approach: building your CV step by step.

Be aware that CV/resume culture isn’t the same everywhere (and definitely quite different between the US and Europe!). For US contexts, take a close look at Dr. Karen’s Rules of the Academic CV (esp. “III. Content” and see also The 7 Best Tips from ‘The Professor is in’ (Book review)). Also, note that Karen Kelsky strongly advises against some of what I suggest here: The reason (I think) is that Kelsky’s target audience is PhD students or after but my advice here is for the super early career level. However, if you’re already towards the end of your PhD, note that you will have to remove some of this older fluff from your CV or it will look unprofessional! But also, Kelsky’s advice doesn’t apply everywhere internationally: for example, I had stopped mentioning my PhD title and advisors but was recommended to put them back in as this info is especially relevant in a field so broad as DH (whose traditions can drastically differ across country, institutional and disciplinary borders). Leaving this info out can leave reviewers at a total loss where to even place you (alhtough I thought this was abundantly clear from my application materials… happened to me not that long ago…).

It’s also important to avoid giving the committee reasons to reject you. This might sound obvious, but many people unintentionally do just that in their applications—I’ve made this mistake myself. For example, in one application, I inadvertently gave the impression I didn’t truly need the funding. True, I was at a stage in my career where another fellowship wasn’t technically essential, but I realized too late that I could have said the same thing in a way that wouldn’t have immediately disqualified me (but I’ll detail this in a post of its own).

Dos and don’ts: Navigating making yourself look good vs. stretching it too far and other nuggets of advice

When presenting your case, focus on framing your application in a positive light. Don’t lie, of course—academia has a long memory and unethical behavior can have lasting consequences. But don’t hesitate to make your CV look as polished and substantial as possible. Especially if you struggle with imposter syndrome (which is common, particularly for women in academia), feel free to pad your CV in reasonable ways (while you’re still super early career).

On the other hand, avoid giving reviewers reasons to disqualify you (see next post in this series for more details). Committees often have far more applications than funding available, so they’re looking for reasons to exclude candidates.

Rejections are a normal part of the process, but they’re an opportunity to learn. If possible, try to find some form of feedback to understand why you were rejected and what you might need to improve—whether it’s a adding something to your CV that it had been lacking or fixing some mistake in your application. Rejections are tough, but they’re part of building a stronger CV over time. They are an inevitable part of the process, and learning to navigate them is crucial. Often, there are far more applications than available funding, so rejection is not always a reflection of your qualifications but rather the competitive nature of the field.

Interestingly, this competitiveness is intentional and often necessary. Many stipends, grants, and awards are designed to be given out on a competitive basis. Rejecting someone allows the organization to maintain the perception of selectivity and prestige. For you as the recipient, winning a competitive stipend or award enhances its value—it means that your application stood out in a rigorous process rather than being granted without competition. Ultimately, academia operates within a framework of prestige and performances of excellence.
And I say “performance” deliberately because yes, when you look closer at how institutions create and “foster” prestige, it’s often through ridiculous nepotistic processes where it’s hard to believe that this even works or is legal (like Ivy League universities are giving out awards to their own students so they can seem even better than their existing prestige alone makes them look anyway, even though it’s basically an award they made up themselves. It’s not by any independent source evaluating if the quality of the work is truly excellent and outsiders aren’t even able to enter the competition. Or early career article essays that are statistically more likely to go to Ivy League students because it’s almost impossible to learn this specific type of writing style already during your PhD when you’re not at one of those elite institutions and get mentored by some of the best academics in the field who know exactly what reviewers are looking for when they decide who gets the award (and who may even be on the board of advisors or their best friend is). This is insider info and tacit knowledge you can basically never hope to get this early on in your career as a mere mortal who stands on their own.). Anyway, snarky comment over.
While this may feel strange, dishonest or even outright unfair at times (which it kind of is…), it’s important to approach the process strategically, to learn from rejections and continue to deliberately and carefully build your experience and application materials over time (in how you present it and also, the CV items you accumulate to generate some form of prestige for yourself).

On the flip side, it’s surprising how many travel stipends or smaller grants go unclaimed simply because no one applies. This is worth remembering: opportunities exist and success is possible if you apply. Then that’s one more thing on your CV, one more stepping stone to being qualified for the next higher thing.

But also, in academia, competition comes with its own set of challenges. One of the main issues is that candidates are often very similar—most have excellent qualifications. While differences exist between career stages, those at the same level usually (almost) all tend to share quite comparable experiences and achievements. How do you get noticed then? Tailor your application better! Know/research what they’re looking for. Practice. Build your intuition and experience by simply trying and learning from failed attempts.

This is not meant to discourage you if you’re just starting and feel like your CV is empty. Instead, it’s an invitation to take proactive steps to build it, even if you’re starting small.

How to proactively and deliberately start building your CV by making use of “low-hanging fruit”

For instance, volunteering at a conference can be an excellent starting point. It not only adds an item to your CV but also increases your chances of securing travel stipends or other opportunities at future conferences. The key is to begin collecting such experiences early, even if they seem minor, like contributing to a blog or writing about a class discussion.

Don’t underestimate how these small steps can help you stand out. Including a blog post or a similar low-hanging fruit on your CV isn’t cheating—it’s leveraging what you’ve done, especially early in your career. Just ensure you eventually move on to more substantial achievements as you progress (later on, only the big stuff really counts and the smaller distractions really aren’t worth the time cost anymore).

Creating visibility for yourself is another underrated strategy. Starting a blog, being active on social media in academic communities, or contributing to project blogs can help you gain recognition in your field. Over time, this visibility can lead to invitations for conferences, collaborations, or mentorship opportunities. These opportunities, in turn, add value to your CV and open more doors. Just writing a blog post on your own blog (or contributing to somebody else’s – there are many project blogs that accept and even invite external contributions! Most people who maintain blogs have a hard time creating new content consistently and would only be too glad if somebody were to help out with that…) is such an easy step that you can do right away. It’s totally within your control. In fact, that’s how I started my blog (latex-ninja.com) and the fact that people knew me from there and social media made such a big difference!

It’s also worth noting that many low-barrier opportunities exist in many fields but it’s especially easy in Digital Humanities (DH) in my opinion. For example, joining a working group, applying for travel stipends, or giving a talk at a smaller conference are achievable first steps. Often, larger conferences have early career bursaries, but these might require more substantial contributions, like presenting a thesis.

When people offer you opportunities, say yes a lot while you’re early in your career

One recurring theme is that you should take advantage of offers and opportunities that come your way, even if they feel intimidating. Join the mailing lists to hear of such opportunities. Find websites that typically share them. Keep your ears open. If the information states that you are eligible to apply, do so. Try and if you fail, try again. (Maybe if you fail three times, ask someone to help you spot if you’re doing anything wrong.)

Many students miss out on leveling up their CV simply because they don’t respond to offers. Be that from mailing lists or directly from mentors or professors. I’m sure this is often due to self-doubt or shyness, but especially if you get personally invited to apply to things by professors or more senior colleagues, it can be perceived as a lack of motivation if you never seem to respond to it. If someone extends an opportunity you can’t take, acknowledge it graciously. For example, you can say something like:

“Thank you so much for this offer that I find exciting for [x reasons that are mostly truthful/likely]. Unfortunately, I can’t take it up right now because of [reasons you’re comfortable to share], but I truly appreciate you thinking of me and would love to hear about similar opportunities in the future.”

This small act of communication ensures that you remain on their radar for future opportunities. Professors or mentors are more likely to extend other offers if they feel their efforts to support you are appreciated. At least I know that I subconsciously “give up on people” where I feel I invited them to things multiple times or offered XY more than 2-3 times and they never took any of the opportunities, I will stop asking them and often even subconsciously tag this as a lack of interest or motivation if they never share what the actual reason is. (Although consciously I know that there are probably many valid reasons.) And I think many others are doing the same but being even less reflected in their judgements, so be careful that you don’t accidentally send the wrong message. At least, that’s if you don’t want them to stop doing that (because they likely will if you never respond). Although of course, you’re in no way obliged to accept offers you don’t want or can’t take; you don’t need to let anybody pressure you, especially if you’ve communicated you don’t want any more pestering and you don’t owe anything to anyone.

If you don’t know how to proceed, ask the person who invited you or made you aware of the opportunity. If they made that first offer, they’re most likely also willing to help in bigger ways. If not, they will tell you they don’t have the resources. Ergo, no reason not to ask.

Ok, I think that’s it for now.

Ultimately, building an academic CV is a step-by-step process. Mostly everyone applying for the same opportunity is excellent, so it’s essential to take every chance you get to demonstrate involvement and build up your profile, starting with the smaller, more accessible options. But, knowing what you know now, also don’t let rejections destroy your self-esteem. It’s not that personal (even though of course I too get extremely emotional when I get rejected and take it personally). It’s a normal part of the process. Everyone gets rejected in academia. Even the really successful people. It’s part of the process. Trust the process and don’t give up.


OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Sarah Lang (February 27, 2025). Back to Applications in Academia 101 [A Survival Guide, Part 5]: How Academic CVs are different. Epigrammetry. Retrieved March 21, 2025 from https://doi.org/10.58079/13dzg


You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.