This is the fifth in a series of “Exit Interviews” of CWRL staffers. These interviews are intended to record the value of the lab to professional development. Matt Russell, former CWRL AD, is finishing up his doctorate in Comparative Literature. He is still considering a few job offers and will accept one in the coming weeks.

How long did you teach/staff in the lab? What roles did you fill?

Well, I have taught and worked in the lab ever since I set foot on campus seven years ago. I started out as an AI and proctor before becoming a developer and AD. Aside from various administrative duties, such as working on the web site and Currents, I have seen and taken part in many of the changes that the lab has undergone in that time. I helped shape the new workgroup model for developers and staffers, and tried to help in the transition to the Drupal sites. Over the last two years, I’ve worked on the eFiles and Blogging Pedagogy through funding from an LAITS grant that I wrote with Brian Bremen.

You’ve recently completed a successful academic job search. Did your CWRL experience play a large role in your job materials? Did you talk about teaching, service, or both?

There are sections in our letters of application for academic jobs that are devoted to discussing our teaching and administrative experience. There are also sections in the CV that include “academic service,” “administrative service,” and the like. In my basic job letters, I referred extensively to the lab, my experiences in it, and the projects I worked on for both sections. At first, I included these experiences because, well, I didn’t have any other real ‘administrative’ experience, and because I had used technology in the classroom so much over the last seven years. I thought that they would demonstrate to potential employers that I had worked on some innovative projects involving technology and pedagogy over the years (a number of job listings stated that they were interested in “technology” in a kind of vague way). At first, I thought that everything I had done wouldn’t look all that impressive on a CV or in a letter, but, after listing those experiences in the CV and letter, they actually gave me an interesting profile. In any event, they definitely allowed me to fill out sections of my CV with accomplishments that were legitimated by an actual institutional program and that had some kind of weight in terms of the university.

Did interviewers ask about the CWRL? If so, what seemed to be the source of their interest?

Everyone asked about the lab. At first, I was a little surprised (silly me, I thought that they would want to discuss and become engrossed in the finer points of my dissertation during the half-hour interview). Eventually, I started waiting for people to ask me the following: “So, it says here on your CV and in your letter that you worked for something called the ‘CWRL.’ As you know, we are really interested in technology. What is the ‘CWRL’ anyway, and could you tell us what you’ve done there?” I found out that, while I could easily become lost in the finer points of my dissertation, points sadly lost in the blank stares of hiring committees, I had a lot of easily translatable, very clear things to say about the lab. Those interviews that were weighted more towards discussions of the lab, as opposed to those about my dissertation, were the most successful. I also found out that this focus didn’t detract from my appeal as a scholar (or so I continue to think!). Rather, I think that hiring committees became excited about how I could bring something to their own departments involving technology, and that this was a positive addition to my academic profile.

How did you describe the lab in your job materials or in interviews?

Normally, I said the “nationally recognized CWRL,” as, well, it is pretty prominent among those in the know. I spoke very specifically about what I did in the lab; in fact, the more detail that you can go into, the better, as you are listing your skills as a teaching, administrator, and the rest.

Is there a specific project, such as a work group or developer project that you talked about?

I’ve worked on a lot of projects in my time in the lab, and I chose to emphasize those which had the most relevance for the position I was applying for. I talked about my MEME award (yes, I was asked about that all the time), about eFiles and Blogging Pedagogy, about my time as an AD and editor of Currents. All I can say is that each CWRL-related entry that you put into your CV is going to be looked at quite carefully (like everything else), even if it doesn’t seem to be all that impressive to you right now. I was asked probing questions about all the projects I included; these questions were great because I could answer them with positive statements that reflect accomplishments. The more that you speak positively and about having accomplished things in grad school, the better.

Do you have any words of wisdom or advice for people just coming into the lab? Either in regard to teaching and/or staffing?

Well, I don’t know if I have words of wisdom, but I do know that everything that I did in the lab has proved valuable in going on the market. It has given me options, and options are always good. My advice, based on experience, is to get involved in projects in the lab and do things that are innovative, big or small. Don’t just check boxes and pass through the lab without gaining some of the professional benefits that could come your way later on. As a matter of fact, I would love to see a workgroup do a survey of English positions (on the Chronicle, the ADE job list and elsewhere) and find out how many advertise for “use of technology in the classroom.” I’d bet that the percentage is getting bigger every year.

Look, in all honesty, many of us in the lab think of ourselves as serious literary or rhetoric scholars. We happily and determinedly toil in these very traditional fields here at UT in the hopes of getting that great tenure-track job in the future where we can work with wonderful and engaging students. It is a nice dream; however, as you’ve heard time and again, the reality is that these tenure-track jobs are massively difficult to land, especially right out of grad school, and the competition is unbelievable fierce. And you’ve heard it time and again because it is true.

The work that you do in the lab can make the difference in getting a job, even if it isn’t a dream job, because hiring committees will consider how you spent all your time in grad school (well, most of it, anyway). Work in the lab gives you something to talk about with hiring committees that will separate you from the pack. Also, if you have a hard time on the job market, the experience you have in the lab can get you a real, full-time teaching job for a year or two as you prepare to go on the market again (I’ve seen this happen a number of times). I mean, until you go on the market, you really don’t even know what a “dream job” is (I really think that this is true, and I’ve seen UT grads have changes of heart after a year or two in a job that at first appeared perfect). Does it involve location, for example? Well, if living in a particular area of the country or in a particular kind of environment (big city, culture, etc.) is important to you, then you’ll find out that your experiences in the lab will extend your range of options. Like me, you may find that your experiences in the lab can get you a job that allows you to work on the texts (whether literary or not) that you cherish even if the job itself isn’t advertised that way, even if, in other words, you are hired primarily for your work as a teacher and administrator in a computer lab, and only secondarily as a brilliant scholar.