Academic CVs Editing and Proofreading Services

A hiring committee reaches page four and finds eleven publications. Three are peer-reviewed articles, two are conference abstracts, one is a book chapter, two are "under review", one is "in preparation", and two are the same paper listed twice under different titles. The candidate has not exaggerated anything. They have made it impossible to see what they have actually published.

We edit what academics produce for the job market — curriculum vitae and publication lists, teaching and research statements, grant and funding records, conference and invited talk listings, service and supervision records, promotion and job application packages, and the covering letters that accompany them. Our editors work on the document a committee reads with a checklist beside it.

The publication list is the part of an academic CV that decides shortlists, and its failure is a single list that mixes categories a committee treats as entirely different. A reader must be able to count your peer-reviewed output in under thirty seconds. We work through these so publications are grouped by type under clear headings — peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, conference proceedings, preprints, other — since a committee counting refereed papers will not do the sorting for you and may guess low; so the status of anything unpublished is stated exactly as it stands, with "submitted", "under review", "revise and resubmit" and "accepted" distinguished, because these are four different facts and collapsing them into "forthcoming" is the thing that gets noticed; so your position in the author list is visible and any convention that governs it is explained where a reader outside your field would misread it; so joint first authorship, corresponding authorship and equal contribution are marked, given that these carry real weight and are invisible unless flagged; so the same output appears once, with any conference version noted under the article rather than listed separately; so numbering runs so that a reader can cite "item 14" in a discussion; so the ordering within each group is consistent and stated, whether that is reverse chronological or by significance; and so anything with an identifier carries it so a claim can be checked in one click. Lists written this way survive a committee's arithmetic.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including unpublished work, applications and material under review. We are editors rather than academics or hiring committees, and we offer no view on the strength of a record, publication practice or any appointment. What we can do is make your output countable.