Kindly review my profile - Software Engineer

Stage 1
1

I am app developer having 4 years of contunious experience in product based companies. I am going to apply for Exceptional promise with MC, OC2 and OC3

Below are the documents I have prepared

Personal statement (980 words)

Mentioned about about my curiocity in digital technology, education, achievements as employee, planned occupation in the UK, region where I want to live in and why this region, contribution I will make in digital economy

CV :

  • Work experience and link of products on which I worked

  • I have my personal Apple Store account where I have been publishing apps. I have around 30 apps on my personal store

  • information on various activities out side occupation ( publication, talks, participation in coding content, volunteering and various communities member)

LOR 1 - CEO from Company A who know me and my achievemnts

LOR2 - CEO from company B for whom I worked (My past employer)

LOR3 - CTO of my current employer

MC - I prepared 4 documents for this criteria

1.1 - Employment offer later with salary info and comparison from Glassdoor and official UK website

1.2 - Public Talk (link of talk, picture of my speaking , topic and date) ( 1/2 Talks)

1.1 and 1.2 are combined into 1 evidence

2 - Publication
I mentioned various blogs and articles I have published (Title, Date, and Link) and personal App Store (link and screenshot)

3 For recognition, I mentioned about the apps which I developed (added screenshot of app , link , downloads, user reviews). To prove I worked for these apps I added screenshot of GitHub commit and referes in LOR also mentioned contributions in these apps

4 Github profile link and screenshot, profile states, contriution in open source repos, sources and forked repos, pull request and merge ( I have around 90 repos(41 are public)

OC2 (Outside ocupations) - 3 documents

1 - Volunteering in digital technology field

Here I showed evidence of my technical contribution in organisations. I volunteered in 3 organisations with different task. I added screenshot of my work showing my name on their website and certification from organisation about contribution I did for them

2 - Communities

I am member of various communities and platform where I gave answers, participated in activities, joining discord and meet up groups and attending different tech events. I added screenshots, links and ,my profile page link. I also shared discussion on a blockchain topic in discord server.

3 Open Source & Tech Events

For open source same as 4th evidence in MC

Tech Events

(2/2) talk with link, number of attendees, screenshot of me speaking, recording link and event URL

Participation in different hackathons- I participated in 5 hackathons and submitted 4 projects.

OC3 (Significant Contribution) - 3 documents

1- offer letter from current emoloyer

2 - Detailed document of product of past employer in which I was key engineer ( About project, user reviews, downloads, challenges I faced and overcame, impact of my contribution in making product successful, code commit to prove my contribution and tech stack )

3 - Detailed document of another product of my current employer ( About project, user reviews, downloads, challenges I faced and overcame, impact of my contribution in making product successful, code commit to prove my contribution and tech stack )

@Francisca_Chiedu and other expert’s feedback would be helpful … :pray:

2

@May @alexnk @Victrr @Francisca_Chiedu your feedback would be very helpful

Thanks in advance :pray:

3

Personal statement
-I suggest including 90% of words about your future.
Your details of education and achievements could be a few sentences to save your best shot for personal statement purposes, while you may include those in the evidences or CV, which usually talks about the past.

MC

  • Ensure that the public talks or publications contain the date and estimated number of viewership.
  • It will be great if you can prove the significant impact or success of the app you contributed, rather than focusing on the “activity” you did. It can be through LOR, analytic evidence in the period of your contribution, etc.
  • GitHub profile could also be in OC2. I am not sure the exact reason you put it here.

OC2:

  • Perhaps you may want to switch a talk in high-profile digital technology sector events (if applicable) to MC to show that you are a leader in this field.
  • However in overall, your OC2 looks fine for the promising route.

OC3:

  • In general, you have a good plan here. It is based on the strength of your evidence now.

Summary:
I think you have done good research and added up a good list for the application. In the improvement area, I see that your MC is not very strong, but it might work as a promising route. It is based on the assessor to decide. But again I suggest you to add a bit more into it to show that you are a potential leader in this field, by showing the impact, growth, news clipping, LOR about your senior contribution, etc.

I hope this helps

1 Like
4

Are the companies (A and B) product led tech companies?

How many were in attendance? And is it structured?

Does this letter show that you earned a high salary? If not I don’t think it would be relevant.

Can you consider reusing the evidence in MC1.1 in OC3 1?

In general, nice profile :+1:t5:

5

Thank you so much @alexnk for giving your valuable feedback.

In personal statement I structured it in storytelling.

who I am
my education,
professional experience and achievements
and then for each of the below questions I created one para each

  • Why do you want to come to the UK?
  • What is your planned occupation in the UK?
  • Which region or city of the UK are you planning to live in?
  • How will the UK digital technology sector benefit from your work?

[quote=“alexnk, post:3, topic:5376”]
Ensure that the public talks or publications contain the date and estimated number of viewership.
[/quote] yes it has dates and views

I mentioned impact of my contributions in apps in 3rd document of MC (recognition) where I added number of users, their reviews and also mentioned that respective referee has wrote about my contribution in their LOR

I considered Github is profile for OC2 as well. I think we can prove Github contribution for both MC and OC2. I just kept it for both so reviewer can consider it for any of the criterias. If they think MC as enough evidences without github they count it for OC2 and vice versa.

I spoke at two different events- both are related to digital technology and have more than 100 attendees . I chose one for MC and another for OC2

your feedback is really helpful. For MC I can make stronger than this if you think I should add more info than it it. Currently I have
MC#1 which has salary info and public speaking with dates, link of event, number of attendees and picture of me speaking
MC#2 Publication

  • List of blogs and articles published with date and views(I just added views) and link to my home page which shows my name as author
  • Link of personal apps and screenshot showing my name as developer
    MC#3 List of apps(link,screenshots, user feedback) on which I worked and my contribution in those via LOR
    MC#4 Open source (profile link, stars, number of repo and number of contribution from starting.

If you think I can make it stronger please share your thought. Thanks again Alex Really appreciate your time and effort … :pray:

6

Thanks @Victrr for sharing your thought

yes both are product led companies. They have their own products on the market which have 100K+ downloads

Talk 1 - 388 attendees
Talk 2 - 198 attendees
Can you tell me what does structured mean? I got invitation from organisers to be speaker for their events.

Well here I compared it with glassdoor, gov.uk and PaySclate.com and I am earning higher than mentioned in all of these

Thanks again @Victrr for reviewing

1 Like
7

yes I have used it in both places. MC1 and OC3

Thanks

1 Like
8

@May @Francisca_Chiedu would you please take a look also? :pray: Your suggestions would be very valuable
Thanks in advance

9

I think you have a good profile for promise.

Is there a reason you are not getting a lette from any of your employes to confirm your impact?

I don’t think participation in Hackathon should be OC2 where a judge or participant?

For the articles don’t just add the link also do screenshots and highlight where your name appeared.
For all your evidence add explanatory note on how they demonstrate that you have been recognised a leader. For OC2 also explain how the evidence advance the sector. For OC3 ensure your impact is clearly explained. Don’t leave anything to assumptions or interpretation.

10

Thank you for your feedback…I really appreciate

I can get them but they have already mentioned my contribution in recommendation letter and for the evidence I added screenshot of github commits summary and graph(from Playstore account) where number of increased new users increased

I was participant in hackathons. Should it be in MC? Ii’s outside occupation so I thought to add it in OC2… Please advice

I have around 16 blogs and articles so all of them won’t fit into single doc if I add screenshot. However I have added screenshot of my profile where they can see blogs titles, date and my name

Sure I will add notes in every evidences.

By this you mean I should add how these work is being advancing the sector?

Sure thing…

Thank you so much again… Please let me know if you still think I can make any evidence stronger.

11

@Francisca_Chiedu

Should participation in Hackathon be in MC instead of OC2? It was participation…Unfortunately I could not win

12

I got rejection in all criteria

Can you please share you valuable feedback. I have posted here

13

I think the issue here is that you have been accessed as exceptional talent not promise. Your evidence suggests you have more than 5 years experience. If you want to appeal first you need to check if they didn’t consider all your evidence and if they misinterpreted your evidence.

14

Thanks @Francisca_Chiedu

All my evidences are within 5 years. There is one thing which I think they misinterpreted and then for every other evidences they kept that mind set.

in one of my LORs referee mentioned my achievements where we both worked together in same organisation from 2013 to 2015. However since then we have been in touch with each other and often met in local events. Now he is CEO of his own product led company. He also mentioned some of my achievement within last 5 years.

Well here as per their feedback you can see they did not consider all evidences from all criteria. For example in MC
I submitted 4 evidences.
1.1 - Employment offer later with salary info and comparison from Glassdoor and official UK website

1.2 - Public Talk (link of talk, picture of my speaking , topic and date) ( 1/2 Talks)

1.1 and 1.2 are combined into 1 evidence

2 - Publication : I mentioned various blogs and articles I have published (Title, Date, and Link) and personal App Store (link and screenshot)

3 For recognition, I mentioned about the apps which I developed (added screenshot of app , link , downloads, user reviews). To prove I worked for these apps I added screenshot of GitHub commit and referes in LOR also mentioned contributions in these apps

4 Github profile link and screenshot, profile states, contriution in open source repos, sources and forked repos, pull request and merge ( I have around 90 repos(41 are public)

They shared feedback on two of them.
Certificates are not sufficient to meet this criterion. Furthermore, published material should be in professional or major trade publications or major media about the applicant related to the applicant’s work in the digital technology sector. The evidence provided does not convincingly meet the required level. MC is not rewarded.

For OC2 I submitted 3 evidences
1 - Volunteering in digital technology field
2 - Communities
3 - Open Source & Tech Events(Public talk and hackathons particiaption)

Their feedback - We are not convinced that the evidence meets the required level for OC2. Talks or conference speaking that have had a significant viewership. Conferences must be widely regarded as sector-leading events for the applicant’s field. Leading a workshop or running a session at a conference is not sufficient. The evidence here is not compelling to reward OC2.

For OC3 I shared 3 docs
1- offer letter from current emoloyer
2 - Detailed document of product of past employer in which I was key engineer
3 - Detailed document of another product of my current employer

They said : Self-statement documents should be backed with further evidence. OC3 is not rewarded.

I wonder if they considered me as Talent instead of promise and do not fit for that they could have endorsed for promise. I mean many people apply for talent but got promise. Also how do I make sure that they havenot considered all evidences. I have their feedback only and from that it seems evidences are skipped because they did not mention anything on those.

Que : if they do not mention anything about any evidence what should be considered? Are they valid and accepted or missed? If they are valid and accepted then I should have passed their criteria so most probably missed. Still need expert’s advice

Please share your feedback @Francisca_Chiedu
Thanks in advance

15

You should draw their attention to evidence not mentioned in the feedback. List the evidence you provided for the criteria that was rejected, then explain how you meet the criteria. Also explain how the recommender knows you from a nontech related company if that’s the case. It didn’t make sense merging 1.1 and 1.2, they are unrelated documents.

16

Thanks @Francisca_Chiedu

Sure I will list evidences not mentioned in their feedback. However I still have doubt that some evidences which considered and shared feedback stating that those are not valid. For example

I think they did not consider my published articles(I posted them on Dev.to and hashnode and itch.io) are in professional or major trade publications. Also I am indie developer and have my own apple developer account where I published around 30 apps/games to Appstore. I added my developer account screenshot and link… What do you think about this?

For OC2 they said I lead or ran workshop. Which is not true. I did not mention anything about workshop or conference since I never did anything like that. I think they considered my talk as workshop… Can there be any other meaning from their feedback?

It would be greatly appreciate your feedback :pray:

17

You simply need to clarify that you didn’t lead a workshop and explain that for OC2 , they required talk with more than 100 people in attendance. Let them know they missed up or misinterpreted your evidence. Also show them how your evidence is based on the example in the tech nation guideline.

18

Thanks again
You mean 100 attendees instead of 50 Right?

19

Thanks, I meant 100 attendees

1 Like