i just went on my first interview this morning. yes, i said first. and it's definitely not the ideal position (it's administrative, and i was an administrative assistant for four years in college), but as you can tell by my previous posts, it's not like there are tons of job offers out there.
the thing is, i'm not sure how the interview went. i'm usually really great at interviews, but this one was hard to read. and it was a different sort of interview than i'm used to. the interviews i've been on have usually been lunch dates, with people just sort of chatting and feeling you out, not a sit down and have three people ask you questions in a conference room. i was prepared for it, but it still wasn't the most comfortable of situations. i did not feel like i rocked this one. i felt tongue-tied a lot, and i mentioned something that i wish i hadn't even though i was able to spin a bad experience into a lesson-learned sort of thing.
plus, (and i've actually been worried about this recently) i think that the interviews think i'm overqualified for the position.
which i am.
but i still need a job.
i mean, the organization's executive director kept asking me about how i was going to stay interested in the work if it was so administrative in nature and i was so used to much more intellectually challenging work. his words, not mine. and it's true, admin work gets really tedious and boring after a while. but it's not like my interests are much less boring. i generally do legal research, for crying out loud. it's not really the high-strung, fast-paced creative environment it's touted as, let me tell you. and besides, what am i supposed to do? i'm overqualified for the jobs i could get, i'm underqualified for the jobs i couldn't get, and the jobs i want are non-existent.
that doesn't leave me with much.
it's just frustrating i guess. one more reason to wish i had re-thought going to law school.
in light of this, i want to pose a question to you all: should i take the J.D. off of my resume (as some have suggested)? would you? how would i explain the huge gap in my life if i did? if you leave it on there, what's your best answer for being asked how you think you'll stay interested in a job you are obviously overqualified for (but need desperately)?
October 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
*sigh*
That's so frustrating.
My vote - keep the JD on there. 1) it would be difficult to explain what you did for 3 years and 2) if/when they run a background check, I'm pretty sure they'd find that you were in school and then get pissed at you for lying about it. And 3) I don't think having a JD is something to be ashamed of
Here's the thing - by the time you and I decided that maybe law school wasn't the best decision for us, we already had put some time in which left us with 2 options: 1) quit and have to start paying back student loans for a degree we didn't obtain or 2) stay with it and leave with a degree that we may or may not directly use. I don't think there was anything wrong with choosing the second option because even if you don't apply for legal jobs, it's a life experience.
This is how I would respond to employers asking how I'd stay motivated in a job that I was "overqualified" for: tell them why you went to law school and the type of work you were interested in. Tell them that you realized part way through law school that while you really enjoy and are moved by the subject matter, you realized that you didn't want to work in that field from a "legal" perspective. Tell them that you chose to take the classes that weren't the "typical" law school/bar related courses, but that you took stuff that had so much more than a legal element to them which if you think about it, the classes that you took were so much more than law. And those classes, that experience is something that will carry you through to something non-legal.
And finally, just say that if you did something legal, that you "qualified" for, you wouldn't be motivated because it's not the work you want. Even though something admin is technically something under your qualifications, if it's something you love and enjoy, you'll be motivated because you care about the work you're doing.
Does my ramble make sense? If not, I'll try to better explain it next time I talk to you :)
Not that I really have any wisdom about this, but I would say keep the JD on there. You're right, it would be too hard to explain that big gap. Plus, I think it will impress more people than it scares away. I don't know how you can answer the difficult question, but you can try to assure them you'll stick around.
That's very frustrating and I had the same problem with having an MA from a prestigious university and only being able to find admin positions to interview for.
Here's how I handled the question (because it ALWAYS came up) I told them that I'd gone to grad school intending to get my PhD, but while in grad school decided I didn't want to do that, and just got the MA (which is true)
Then Itold them that while I was overqualified for the admin position, I was honestly uncertain of which way to go career wise, since the PhD amibtions didn't work out, and that I felt I needed to start from the beginning again. (About half true)
Tell them you know admin work isn't the most exciting or challenging but that you are GOOD at that, and that you are happy when you are good at your job (doesn't have to be true)
Anyway, that's just based on my experience. That's how I landed my job as an admin (that I was very overqualified for) and a few months later they basically invented a position for me to be promoted for and gave me more interesting work. It's still not my ideal, and I still have to do a lot of filing and nonsense, but my boss knows I'm smart and trusts me with projects that he wouldn't give someone who was "just" an assistant. So maybe an admin position doesn't have to stay just an admin position.
Sorry for writing a novel in your comments!
Post a Comment