Guidelines for e-mail reviewers
Job seekers (reviewees) send their resumes to the Résumé Review Service ( RRS) email account with some information about the type of library that they are interested in and their area of specialization. The co-chairs of the Résumé Review Service monitor this email account and match the reviewee with a reviewer from our list.
If you are matched with an applicant, the following will occur:
1. One of co-chairs will contact you and will ask if you are able to complete a review within 2 weeks.
2. Please respond to the email as soon as you can, either accepting or declining the review.
3. If you are unable to review, just reply and let us know. We will contact another reviewer. We realize that everyone is busy and that some times are better than others.
4. If you accept, then we will send you the resume and/or cover letter, along with a bit of information about the reviewee.
5. Please take a look at the review tips below*. Sometimes the reviewee will ask for specific advice on a part of her/his resume. If so, please comment on that in addition to your overall review.
6. When you are finished with the review, send the review to the reviewee and copy the RRS email email@example.com. If you would like to remain anonymous, you may send the review to RRS to be forwarded. (if so, please note in your email that RRS needs to forward the review to the reviewee)
7. At any point during the process, please contact us if you have questions. We check the RRS e-mail every day.
8. Lastly, thanks again. Your time can make a huge difference to new librarians searching for their first job. The RRS committee and NMRT thank you too. Without you, we could not provide this important service.
We would like you to tell the job seeker what sort of first impression his or her resume makes on you based on your experience as an employer.
Some points to consider:
Formatting (Is the resume appealing? How's the font? Type size? Is the use of bold and italics distracting? Is there enough white space?)
Does the organizational approach work for the job the person is seeking or would a functional approach be better?
Are there any typos or grammatical errors?
Has the person included all relevant work experience, associations, etc?
Please direct any questions or comments to:
NMRT Resume Review Service Co-chairs