PhD CV example and writing guide

Choose the format for the application

Start with the reader. A doctoral selection panel, an academic hiring panel and a non-academic employer may value the same project for different reasons. Tailor the order and emphasis of your PhD CV to the opportunity, placing the most relevant evidence where it will be seen quickly. For a non-academic job, keep the CV to no more than two pages. An academic CV can run longer when publications, teaching, presentations and research projects genuinely need the space, but length should follow substance rather than seniority.

Use a plain, single-column layout, familiar headings and consistent date formatting. Reverse-chronological order usually works best within education, employment and research outputs because it puts recent evidence first. At the top of page one, give your full name, current city, mobile number and a work-appropriate email address. A relevant professional profile link can follow. Leave out your photograph, date of birth and full street address.

Build an evidence trail

Under the contact block, write a three- or four-sentence PhD personal statement supported by selected achievements, skills and qualifications. It should name your area or intended direction, establish the kind of work you can do and point towards evidence that appears later. Avoid opening with labels such as "passionate researcher" or "hard-working professional". They take up room without helping the reader judge your work.

For an academic or university-external research role, you can open with a short Research Interests section. Use it to connect your work so far with the questions you want to pursue next. Keep the scope controlled. A few precise themes are easier to understand than a catalogue of everything that has ever interested you.

A useful PhD CV template starts with contact details and a personal statement or research interests, followed by education and qualifications, research or employment experience, methods and technical skills, selected outputs, then relevant additional information. Treat this as a starting point rather than a rigid formula. A recent graduate may put education first, while an experienced researcher may lead with a current appointment or substantial research programme.

The personal statement is a signpost, not a covering letter squeezed into the top quarter of the page. Name your field, the type of problem you investigate and one or two pieces of proof. Use terminology from the opportunity when it accurately describes your record, but do not copy whole sentences. Every claim in the statement should connect to a project, result, output or qualification elsewhere in the CV.

For experience, separate research appointments, teaching and other employment when the division makes the document easier to scan. Each entry needs the organisation, title, location and dates. Follow it with three to six concise points covering relevant responsibilities, contributions and achievements. Specific outcomes and defensible figures make those points easier to assess. State your role, the scale of the work, the method or constraint and what came from it. A project title on its own tells the reader very little.

Give skills enough context to be credible. Group them into categories that fit your work, such as research methods, analysis, software, communication or project delivery. Then repeat the important ones naturally inside project evidence. "Statistical analysis" becomes useful when the reader can see what you analysed, why you chose the method and what the result informed. A list copied from a vacancy may contain the right words, but it will not prove that you have used them.

In the education section, list the institution, start and end dates, subject title, qualification level and result for each relevant award. Applicants to academic or research roles should also outline their research and applicable areas, together with relevant technical skills such as software packages. Keep module lists selective. Include a module only when it helps explain your preparation for the proposed research or job.

For academic jobs, separate publications from conference papers and poster presentations. Put publications first, followed by conference papers and posters, with entries in each category ordered from newest to oldest. Use one citation style, record the author order accurately and distinguish clearly between published, accepted and submitted work. Do not make a conference contribution look like a peer-reviewed article.

For roles beyond academia, translate the doctorate instead of hiding it. Bring forward evidence of managing time, meeting strict deadlines, collaborating with industry where that occurred, and communicating difficult material through publications or presentations. Replace unexplained disciplinary shorthand with language the intended employer uses. Keep enough technical detail to prove that your expertise is real.

A change of academic field needs a visible bridge. Explain which methods, subject knowledge or project experience transfer from the earlier degree and how that work led to the new research interest. The reader should not have to infer why the transition makes sense.

Extras earn their place by adding evidence. Public engagement, reviewing, committee work, languages, funding activity and relevant professional development may help. A long interests section rarely compensates for missing research detail. Follow the application instructions on references instead of reserving space for them automatically.

Finish with two checks. First, skim only the headings, job titles and opening words of each point. Your intended story should still be visible. Then read every line for unexplained abbreviations, duplicated evidence and vague claims. Compare the finished document with the opportunity and give the most space to the evidence that matters there. Check the requested file type, choose a professional filename and inspect the final page breaks before sending it.

Write experience points as evidence, not a diary of doctoral life. A dependable structure is action + scope or method + outcome + defensible measure. Useful measures include dataset size, delivery time, participant numbers, teaching load, audience size or processing time. Money is not the only useful metric. If a number would disclose confidential information or distort your contribution, use a precise non-numerical result instead.

Doctoral researchers commonly synthesise literature, conduct fieldwork to acquire data where relevant, analyse findings and write reports or a thesis with supervisory feedback. Those activities are familiar to many readers of a PhD CV. Your points therefore need to show what was distinctive about your part: the question you answered, the judgement you exercised, the difficulty you resolved or the way somebody used the result.

The revised versions reveal action, scale and consequence. Keep the causal link honest. The size of an audience does not prove that a presentation changed policy, and co-authorship does not support a claim of sole ownership. Choose "led", "co-developed", "contributed" or "supported" according to the work you performed.

For an academic application, give priority to research design, methodological choices, outputs, teaching and collaboration. For a non-academic application, bring forward evidence of time management, strict deadlines, industry collaboration where it occurred, and the transferable skills developed through writing and presenting research. Translate obscure procedures into recognisable capabilities, but retain the technical detail needed to establish expertise.

Choose verbs that describe the contribution precisely: designed, investigated, synthesised, analysed, modelled, validated, recruited, facilitated, taught, authored, presented, coordinated and delivered. Avoid "assisted with" when you can define your part. If the result is the most persuasive fact, put it first. "Reduced coding time by 28% by developing..." reads more directly than a long account that saves the outcome for the final clause.

Give recent and relevant work more space. Compress older employment when it adds only transferable evidence. Research integrity and ethics should appear through practice, such as following approved procedures, maintaining accurate records or handling data responsibly, rather than through a vague claim of "excellent ethics". Project and time management also deserve evidence: show how you planned phases, handled dependencies or met a fixed submission date. If you applied for research-related funding, state your contribution, the activity supported and the outcome without implying sole credit for a joint application.

Lead with education when academic preparation is central to the application, especially near the start of a research career. For every relevant qualification, record the institution, start and end dates, subject title, qualification level and result. A thesis or dissertation title, selected methods and a short account of the research area may help when they bear directly on the proposed work. Applicants to academic or research roles should also outline the research and applicable areas covered, along with relevant technical skills such as software packages. Keep module lists short and purposeful.

Entry criteria belong to the programme that publishes them. Do not present them as universal PhD rules. For the Development Studies Pathway within the PhD in Development Studies at The University of Manchester, applicants need a Bachelor's (Honours) degree at 2:1 or above, or an overseas equivalent. They also need a Master's degree in a relevant subject with an overall average of 65% or above and a dissertation mark of at least 65%, or overseas equivalents.

For the Development Economics Pathway within the same PhD programme, applicants need a Bachelor's (Honours) degree at 2:1 or above, or an overseas equivalent. The pathway also asks for a Master's Degree in Economics or related field, strong training in economics and quantitative methods, an overall average of 65% or above and a dissertation mark of at least 65%, or overseas equivalents. In your PhD CV, give the exact award and result you received. Do not rename a qualification to resemble the wording of an entry criterion.

All applicants to the PhD in Development Studies at The University of Manchester must provide evidence of English language proficiency. Applicants choosing IELTS for that evidence need a minimum overall score of 7.0, with 7.0 in writing and 6.0 in the other sections. Those choosing TOEFL (internet based) need a minimum overall score of 100 and 25 in every section. For Pearson Test of English (PTE) UKVI/SELT, the stated minimum is 76 overall, 76 in writing and 70 in the other sections. The same minimum scores apply to PTE Academic.

A separate route is available to applicants using an undergraduate or postgraduate degree taken in a majority English speaking nation within the previous five years to demonstrate English language proficiency for this programme. Applicants who submit an English Language test report that is valid for two years need that report to remain valid on the course start date. These provisions apply only to the routes described. Copy dates, results and test details accurately from your records rather than treating one programme's conditions as rules for every PhD.

The University of Manchester advises applicants to this PhD in Development Studies to include all requested supporting documents with the application, as an incomplete submission may not be considered. Use the programme checklist to identify what belongs in your submission. A CV does not replace other requested records.

Professional development can sit below education or in its own section. Imperial College ties completion of a minimum number of professional skills workshops to PhD Milestone progression, and attended workshops appear on the transcript. This is an institution-specific progression arrangement, not a general certification for doctoral researchers. If it applies to you, record completed professional skills workshops accurately and do not present attendance as an external certificate.

Elsewhere, include a named certificate only when you hold it, it is relevant and your records support every detail. Give the exact title, issuer and completion date. If no meaningful certification applies, use the space for assessed research training, methods or professional development that better explains your preparation.