My Presentation for WSU’s EGO: 5 Keywords for Professional Development

This presentation was part of a panel with Lori Beth De Hertogh and Todd Butler covering various aspects of “Navigating Academia.” Todd talked about the different structures within an English Department while Lori Beth had some really useful advice about how to develop as a scholar and teacher while working as contingent faculty. I’m also copying Brian Croxall’s style for presentations, which is mundo-awesome and makes me jealous.

Catherine Tetz asked me to talk about conferences, publications, CVs, networking. I thought I’d distill a few strategies that have helped me navigate the job market and professionalize myself. There are different approaches, but this is my approach and articulates the values I think are important for my identity as a professional teacher and academic.

When academics speak about sharing, they often talk about publication. Greg Ulmer once told me at the University of Florida to have 5 articles before going on the market. Georgia Johnston told me at SLU to have 4 things in the cycle of publication at any one time. I had two articles, and a slew of pubs that came from an edited collection I did (introduction and interview). But it is also important to remember what Graham Harman says about productivity: that you build up to being a highly productive scholar gradually.

I also think it is important to consider a wider definition of sharing. Being on social media, especially blogging and twitter is a must. It won’t be looked on as being as fundamental as publication, but it can be a powerful tool for getting your name out there. Several of my invited publications have come from people who’ve read my blog or interacted with me on Twitter. I don’t think it benefits anyone to keep my work to myself or to worry that someone will steal my ideas. It’s more important to put myself out there.

People will disagree about this, but I think it is important to have some kind of technical skill. May mean just being able to use HTML and CSS, or it may mean baseline competency in some programming language: Python or Javascript. Why? Increasingly professors are going to be asked to work with technology. The better you understand this technology (whether it is part of your research program or not), the better equipped you will be to address these changes.

More broadly, though, code means to understand how systems work (technological systems, but also academic systems). Procedural rhetoric. Learn the politics of your institution. Learn how to navigate those politics. For grad school, this may mean simply knowing the people in your field, how to respond to threatening questions from big-name scholars, or knowing the power-players in your department.

[In the Q&A, Catherine Tetz asked about how politics worked in departments, which Todd Butler answered very astutely by discussing both formal power structures (i.e. the various levels of professors and the departments relationship to the college and the University) and informal power structures (which is something you get to know after being in a department for a while). Matt Frye also asked me how to get skills at Python or HTML/CSS. I discussed my summer job creating a website for Drury University’s Writing Program and connecting my scholarly projects to learning some new skill, like programming Twitterbots.]

I got the idea for this image from Bill Hart-Davidson, who is a master at finding great images for presentations. Overall, you should put yourself out there. You don’t have to do everything, but it is better if people recognize you as someone who regularly goes to departmental and disciplinary functions. Participate on Twitter. Involve yourself in things like #FYCchat run by Lee Skallerup, #altac and #postac, #digped, #satchat, #profchat, and disciplinary listservs. Twitter chat at conferences. Go to colloquia in your department, attend each other’s classes. Get comfortable with other people assessing you, communicating with you, and yes judging you. Go to as many conferences as you can afford. If you don’t know something, figure it out! Admit you don’t know it. Don’t sacrifice a potential learning experience for your own ego.

Increasingly, it’s becoming important for people to not only publish their own work, but promote the work of others. I recently read some Huffington Post article on steps for a successful marriage. One of them was to make sure you find two things about a person you like for every one thing you dislike. Academics are used to critiquing, but we are less experienced with promoting. It’s interesting how (in a reading group) people will inevitably start most discussions with a critique of the work. And the vast majority of the comments about the work will be negative.

Practice also looking for the beneficial things in other people’s work. This will do two things: 1) it will show people that you know something about your field other than your own work; and 2) it also helps to create relationships.

[In the Q&A, Todd Butler and I talked about the importance of attending departmental events. Todd noted that many faculty only attend events if it relates to their specific research program. But, it’s also a good opportunity to notice how departmental politics work. I also argued that people who regularly attend departmental events are noticed. Those who don’t are also noticed. It’s important to be part of your community.]

I just want to reinforce what I said earlier: put yourself out there! Kathleen Fitzpatrick has a great post urging graduate students to “Do the Risky Thing in the Digital Humanities.” She’s talking specifically about digital dissertations, but I believe this applies across the board. I’ll only add that we need more people willing to experiment in the humanities. Let’s face it, the job market is dismal. You need something that will help you stand out for potential employers. This may mean having a digital component. It may mean doing something different in your own field, or doing something interdisciplinary. We need to stop taking refuge in our disciplinary foxholes. I mean, sure, it’s risky (you may be killed by standing up) — but our field can’t stay safe in the same place forever. As Kathleen says, “real innovation requires risk.” Make sure someone has your back, as she says, but put yourself out there.

[In the Q&A, Todd added a useful rejoinder that it is important to think in terms of long-term interventions in fields - and to not simply risk everything at the same time.]