Oscar Hu Days Well Madeby Oscar Hu 中文
At the edge of an old timber jetty, a marked sounding line runs down into clear green water with the lead weight just below the surface.

School & Career

Make the next application a better decision.

Why this chapter exists

I did my bachelor’s in Canada and my master’s in the UK, and applied to schools around the world. Then I worked in several industries across Canada, China and Spain.

What I learned is that you don’t have to stay inside the place you happen to live. What you’re looking for is the smartest choice that actually fits.

One CV, sent a hundred times. A system screens it out, or you tweak keywords to get past it. Now everyone applies with AI, and the other side screens with AI.

Drop a line under every sentence first. Only what holds goes in, and whatever goes in you can answer for.

A consultant hands you a dream-school list, or a league table.

You get measured depths: what each path really costs, and what an offer can’t settle.

You don’t need to apply to a hundred places.

Go only to the three you’ve measured and found worth the trip.

The subject, the school, the role and the status that follows all join into one route.

Choosing well beats trying hard. Sending one CV a hundred times does less than first measuring how deep each line really goes.

Take a sounding

Her CV says 18%. The bottom is at 12%.

Maya is fictional, and so is the job. A reviewer compares the job’s requirements with her material and records a judgement for each. No evidence, no wording.

  1. Requirement 1

    Monthly variance reporting

    Holds

    Wording you could usePrepared April-June monthly variance schedules for finance-lead review.

    Evidence: monthly close memo (S1 v1), section 2.

  2. Requirement 2

    Independently lead supplier savings initiatives

    Holds halfway

    Wording you could useCompared supplier quotations for a team project that reported a 12% cost reduction against the previous supplier baseline over three months.

    Evidence: supplier review (S2 v2), section 3. A team result, and the director negotiated, so it can’t be written as independently led or as annual.

  3. Same requirement

    That line on the CV

    Conflicts with your CV

    The CV saysLed 18% annual savings in supplier costs.

    The evidence saysA team result of 12% against the previous supplier baseline over three months, with the director negotiating.

    The tool sets the two lines side by side. It doesn’t rewrite this one for her.

  4. Requirement 3

    Power Query automation

    No evidence

    Her CV mentions automated reporting, but nothing she supplied mentions Power Query. It’s recorded as having no evidence, and the tool doesn’t invent a line for her.

The moment an interviewer asks “how did you get 18%?”, this page has earned its keep.

What you’re seeing is a reviewer’s recorded judgement, not automatic matching.

Your turn

Drop one of your own lines and measure it.

Pick the line on your CV you’re proudest of. It only uses your own words and makes nothing up.

Whose result is it

From one line to the whole decision

Study, work, or a smaller step?

Compare against your actual target: what each path costs in cash and in lost income, which requirement it closes, and what an offer can’t settle.

I don’t know what I want yet

Write two or three directions, and give each a small test you can finish in a few weeks.

Open Exploring

I want to change direction

Compare another degree, a shorter bridge and working first, then build an evidence plan you can test.

Open Switching

There’s no score, no salary guess and no judgement on admission. A ranking is context, not an admission.

Where did it fall short when you used it? Tell me. Write a note

Residency You hold the status, it stops holding youProjects One yard, a hundred small boatsHow a compounding life works What’s left when the job ends