I am deep into the job search this year with the PhD behind me and looking to clean things up with my applications package this week as the Chronicle seems not to have had many new calls for apps in a while. So I was looking for some authority on CV’s. I’ve always wondered what is”right” for academic CVs and what I am doing “wrong.” (I just have to be doing something wrong, right?) However, as a doc student one is really guessing. I’ve seen a number of formats that I liked, but when it comes down to it, what I like is not all that important. I know what I’ve written and where I have been. A cv is for the hiring committee to see, not me– and what they want to see is simple and to the point– but what is really simply and to the point for them. My opinion of my cv doesn’t matter as much as the hiring committee’s opinion of my CV, and I don’t really have a god idea what it is like to view from their vantage point. So, I went to the chronicle looking for an article written from that perspective, and read The Rhetoric of the CV… which was interesting and written from the perspective of a search committee member, but the comments lead me to something more practical, Dr Karen’s rules for CV’s, which was more straight forward and gave a fair bit of direction. I hope she’s right, because I bought into some of her arguments and took all the horizontal lines and links out of my printable CV. Somehow, the idea kills me for the online one– I like having the articles linked right there. If not for them, for me. So compare, a new CV all formatted according to Karen’s Rules, and the old one according to Craig’s sense of what he thought was looking good. Old cv here.