Most amusing interview moment

So, my resume (2 pp.) states that I have X number of publications/presentations, and then I have a (2 pp.) addendum that lists the actual details (it's my way of cheating and pretending that I'm not distributing a 4-page resume. See, it's an addendum! You can throw it away if you want!).

I've had a number of interviews by now, using this resume, and all the interviewers have been able to figure out exactly what this meant.

Last week, I had one interviewer who was initially baffled that I hadn't included the authors' names for each publication. Zie couldn't seem to grasp that the reason was because the author was the same for each: ME. I had to state that I'd written everything on the list at least 3 times.

I know that resumes are different from c.v.s and maybe zie was just confused by the convention, but come on - everyone else who's read my resume has figured this out. (Why would I list publications and presentations on my resume if I hadn't written them?) I just think this person couldn't quite grasp that I would actually have written all that stuff. (Hmm, maybe I don't look that old after all??)

Comments

[The History Enthusiast]

I haven't met you IRL, but your photos on The Site That Won't Be Named do make me think you look a lot younger than you are.

[Another Damned Medievalist]

LOL

[Anastasia]

I agree with History Enthusiast. Also, maybe zie was just...um...there's no nice way to say it.

[profgrrrrl]

I'll admit that I took a moment and double-blinked the first time I saw a cv with pubs that didn't have author names listed. In my field you always list them (but joint publications are not uncommon, either), and so it looked really funny to me to not have the full citation with name.

But I didn't have to be told multiple times to figure out what was going on.

[Notorious Ph.D.]

Maybe s/he was used to seeing only co-authored publications?

[loyal reader]

Why would pubs be relevant on this type of application? You could have left them off and just focused on work experience, to avoid confusion, and to give them more of what they are used to / looking for.

[New Kid on the Hallway]

Well, in future, when I have more legal experience, I probably won't include the publications. But they are relevant to my applications at the moment because the work in all these jobs is very writing-intensive, and showing that I've published some stuff and written more (conference presentations) is very useful. I know that having these publications/presentations has impressed interviewers and distinguishes me from the herd. (The info is on separate sheets from my actual resume, so no one has to look at them/have them in order to have all my basic resume info. And this is also what the career center recommended as standard for people with publications.)

And yeah, it may be that zie was used to co-authored publications - I kind of forget that the conventions are different. Mind you, a lot of legal scholarship is single-authored. It was just a little weird!