Take this with you

  • A first CV can draw on paid work, placements, projects and student activity.
  • Connect every claimed skill to a concrete piece of evidence.
  • Analyse recurring requirements within one family of jobs.
  • Close one gap at a time and revise the plan using feedback.

Start with experience, not a blank page

The new report “Dyplom i co dalej?” (“Degree — and what next?”) from the Bilans Kapitału Ludzkiego (BKL, Human Capital Study), run by PARP (the Polish Agency for Enterprise Development) and the Jagiellonian University, covers 8,075 questionnaires collected from March to May 2026 among full-time students in their final semester, drawn from a random sample of 500 fields of study. In the 2025/2026 academic year, 51% of respondents did paid work and 36% worked regularly, meaning at least 16 hours a month. More than three quarters had taken part in an internship or work placement, although compulsory placements within degree programmes dominated. The distinction matters: a first CV does not need to begin with a formal full-time job, but it should show what the applicant actually did.

List four types of experience: paid work, internships and placements, university projects, and activity in a koło naukowe (student research club), volunteering or a student organisation. For each example, record the task, your own contribution, the tool you used and a visible result. Do not inflate the experience or invent numbers. A short description of an analysis, an event or an improved spreadsheet is more credible than a broad claim such as “excellent organisation”.

  • Choose three examples you can explain in two minutes.
  • Separate your own actions from the whole group’s result.
  • Remove confidential data and label practice work honestly.

Compare self-assessment with evidence

Students rated teamwork highest in the survey, at an average of 4.1 on a five-point scale. They rated themselves lowest on adapting to new situations (2.8), working under time pressure (2.9) and working in multinational teams (2.7). These are group results based on self-assessment, not a diagnosis of every graduate. They can still serve as a list of checks before sending an application.

Find one piece of evidence for every skill you put on a CV. “Teamwork” might mean agreeing how tasks were divided in a project. “Adaptability” might mean changing the plan after a failed test. “Time management” might mean completing several stages by agreed deadlines. If you cannot find an example, you do not have to drop that skill forever. Mark it as something to practise instead of presenting it as a proven strength.

  • Treat a skill without an example as a hypothesis.
  • Describe the situation, your action and the result.
  • Do not apply survey averages directly to yourself.

Read job adverts as market data

Collect ten adverts for one entry-level role rather than ten unrelated occupations. In a simple spreadsheet, note recurring tasks, tools, languages, working arrangements and experience requirements. Then mark each item: I have evidence, I can practise this quickly, or I need longer development. This review does not mean every line in an advert is compulsory. It shows which requirements genuinely recur across the group you selected.

The BKL report found the largest gap between the importance employers assign to a skill and students’ self-ratings in adaptive skills: employers rate adapting to new situations at 4.0, while students rate their own ability at 2.8. Instead of immediately signing up for another broad course, choose one recurring gap and build a small task that resembles the work. It could be a data analysis, a reply to a customer, a short presentation or a simple prototype. The result should be something others can look at and discuss.

  • Analyse one family of roles at a time.
  • Look for requirements repeated across several adverts.
  • Build one piece of evidence before paying for training.

Use AI as a tool, not the author of your experience

Some 94% of respondents had used AI tools in the previous 12 months, but only 40% did so at least several times a week. Among students who worked, 55% used AI in connection with their job. Simply claiming familiarity with AI therefore says little. In recruitment, explaining the task, how you checked the output and who was responsible for the final version is more useful.

You can use AI to organise notes, compare keywords across vacancies or rehearse interview questions. Do not let it add projects, tools or results that never existed. Check every sentence before submitting a document, remove confidential information and be ready to explain every entry yourself. If an AI tool made a substantial contribution to a work sample, say what it did and what you verified and changed.

  • Do not paste client or university data into public tools.
  • Verify numbers, names and the scope of your own contribution.
  • At interview, explain your checking process, not only the final text.

Complete a four-week cycle

In week one, choose one role and collect ten vacancies. In week two, describe three pieces of evidence and adjust your CV to the actual tasks. In week three, close one gap with a small project. In week four, send a few focused applications, hold a mock interview and note the questions that were hard to answer. Count not only the CVs you sent, but also the quality of the match and what you learned about the market.

The report describes a defined group: full-time students close to graduation. It cannot predict an individual recruitment outcome and does not replace information about a specific occupation. After four weeks, decide what to change: the range of roles, the way you present experience or the gap you chose. The aim is not a perfect profile before the first application, but a cycle of evidence, application, feedback and revision.

  • Week 1: one role and ten vacancies.
  • Week 2: three pieces of evidence and a focused CV.
  • Week 3: one small project.
  • Week 4: applications, a mock interview and a revised plan.

Sources & further reading

Prepared with AI assistance using the sources below. Editorial standards ↗