Applications, without the generic letter

The failure mode is obvious to the reader

Most machine-written applications share the same shape: enthusiasm about the company, a restatement of the job advert, three adjectives about the candidate, no specific evidence. Recruiters see dozens a day and recognise them instantly.

The gap is not writing quality. It is that the letter contains nothing only you could have written.

So the whole task is supplying material, which is what this course has been about from its first example.

What to paste

• The advert, in full. Not a summary. The exact words matter: those are the terms the employer chose, and often the terms a screening system will look for.
• Your CV, in full.
• The two or three things you have actually done that bear on this role, with numbers if you have them.
• The awkward truth: the gap in your employment, the fact that you have no paid experience, the career change, the fact that you were let go.

That last one is the most important and the most often hidden. A letter written around a gap reads evasively. A letter that handles it in one plain sentence and moves on reads well, and the model cannot write that sentence if you have not mentioned the gap.

The prompt

I am applying for [role] at [organisation] in [city]. The advert is below, in full. My CV is below, in full.

The hard part: I have no paid experience in this field. What I do have is a six-month university project where I cleaned and analysed 40,000 hospital records in Postgres, and two years of retail work where I handled complaints.

Write a covering letter under 300 words that makes the Postgres work the centre of the first paragraph, addresses the lack of paid experience in one sentence without apologising for it, and uses only things stated in my CV. Invent nothing. Plain sentences, no adjectives about my personality. Mark with [?] anything you had to assume.

<advert>...</advert> <cv>...</cv>

Everything specific in that prompt comes from you. That is the point, and it is why a template cannot do it.

The CV itself

Two useful passes, and neither is “rewrite my CV”.

Targeting. “Here is my CV and the advert. Which of my experience matches which requirement in the advert? Where is there a requirement I have no evidence for? Do not rewrite anything.” That produces a map, and the gaps are where you decide what to say.

Evidence. “For each bullet in my CV, tell me whether it states a result or only a responsibility.” Most CVs are lists of duties. Turning three of them into results is worth more than any rewrite, and only you know the numbers.

Interview preparation, which is where it is strongest

• “Based on this advert and my CV, what are the eight questions I am most likely to be asked, and which two will I find hardest?”
• “Ask me the hard ones one at a time. After each answer, tell me what was missing.” Practice, not a script.
• “What should I ask them, given that I care about [the thing you care about]?”
• “What would concern an employer about my application, reading it cold?”

That last one is uncomfortable and useful, and it is the question you cannot ask a friend.

Two honest cautions

Screening systems. Many employers filter applications automatically. Using the advert’s own vocabulary helps and is not dishonest: it is describing your experience in the reader’s words. Stuffing keywords you cannot support is a different thing and it fails at the interview.

Never let it invent. A fabricated project, an inflated figure, a language you do not speak. It will produce these smoothly if your prompt leaves room, which is why “use only what is in my CV, invent nothing” is in the prompt above. An application is a document you sign.

What stays yours

The reason you want the job. What you would do in the first month. The sentence about the gap. Those are the parts a reader remembers, and they are the parts nobody else can write.