Hello
@Jessica Booker Hope you are doing well. I had a question about extra-curricular activities and the work experience section.
1- As a graduate recruiter, what piece of work experience do you find to be better and more convincing, a stint as a barista in a cafe for a month vs a paralegal position at a reputed law firm for a month? What I mean is, clearly there is less intellectual stimulation while working as a barista (I mean no disrespect to anyone here) compared to a person who is a paralegal at a firm.
So do you think that the paralegal is the clear winner here, or is there actually no difference since it boils down to how the applicant writes about the experience and how he/she is able to pull out transferrable skills?
2- This is regarding extra-curricular activities.
Is an applicant who writes academic papers and takes part in moot-court competitions preferred over an applicant who is a content creator on YouTube and has a channel where he/she uploads funny videos.
3-As a graduate recruitment specialist, again, what piece of work experience do you find to be better and more convincing, an applicant who is a paralegal at a low-mid tier firm vs the other applicant who is a paralegal at the best law firm in the world.
Basically, does the prestige of the organisation matter? Also, how do things change in the context of international applicants because to a Grad Rec member in a UK law firm, most Indian law firms (even the well-known ones) might be unheard of.
4
- This is regarding extra-curricular activities, again. If two people have participated and won prizes at, say, a painting competition, and one applicant has won the contest at the highest level in the UK and the other applicant has won it in his society block,
does it matter or does the Grad Rec member view both these experiences in a similar fashion and is more interested in how the applicant pitches the competition?
Thanks in advance and my apologies if this has been answered somewhere on the forum already.
