Sunday, April 24, 2022

The "Two-Body Problem": Approaching the Job Market with a Partner who is an Academic


The "Two-Body Problem": Approaching the Job Market with a Partner who is an Academic

My previous grad student emailed me after our weekly one-on-one meetings, 

"There are so many little things about grad school that we don’t know but we are expected to know! Even though I always try to be respectful and professional in my emails to professors, having a template like this is helpful."

Navigating the "Two Body Problem" is one of those little, unspoken things no one tells you explicitly in grad school. 


Going on the academic job market with a spouse who is also an academic? You're not the only one; academic wives make up around a third of academics (about the same number as those who have spouses who work outside of academia). Asking yourself these questions can help you decide how to coordinate searches, what your dealbreakers are, and what compromises you're ready to make (for the time being at least) if either of you receives an offer before you put your house on the market. Even if one of you has a job offer in hand, you may still have a long way to go before you discover a career that you both enjoy.

Before putting your house on the market, here are some things to consider.

1) Do you both want or need to work (for money) at some point?

When answering this question, think about what kind of assistance the spouse who isn't earning a salary could require to maintain their academic profile and whether they could fairly expect to receive that support from the hiring institution or grant-giving foundations.

2) Do you want to live apart from me?

3)What length of time and distance are you willing to put up with?

4) Both of your PhDs (which are required for a spousal hire in most cases) should be easily transferable to non-academic positions, right?

5) Are you willing to or would you prefer to work outside of academia if the opportunity arose?

6)What academic positions are either of you interested in?

7) What kind of employment do you both want, a standard tenure-track position, or are either of you open to or enthusiastic for? 

Other choices include, but are not limited to, positions in research or teaching or in administration at a campus center. When looking for a new work, these alternatives may provide you more room to negotiate for a spouse's position once you receive an offer.
Is there anything else you could do to extend your academic search?

There are some academics who have research and teaching interests that allow them to pursue jobs at the intersection of disciplines. It's possible to expand one's alternatives in the job market and during spousal employment discussions if one considers these possibilities.

You and your partner should have a dialogue about these questions to assist you decide how to approach the job market and how well-coordinated your efforts as a couple need to be. Using job search tools that let you look for dual employment alternatives within a region may be a possibility if you're unwilling to live apart. In other cases, you and your spouse may decide that it is best to apply for every job you are qualified for, and then negotiate for a spousal hiring.

On Negotiating a Spousal Hire

There is a good chance that at least one of you has been offered a job. Congratulations! The university's policy on spousal hiring and the receptivity to spousal hires on the part of the search committee, the heads of the relevant departments, the dean(s), the provost, and professors within the department will all play a role in your success in negotiating a spousal hire (s). Studies show that accommodating partner hires has benefits, but despite the drive for institutions to produce standards to accommodate dual-career couples, the recommended principles give a lot of leeway and negotiations may still appear patchwork.

Keep in mind these considerations when you enter negotiations:

Negotiating for a spousal hire is the most difficult part of the process. The details of the contract may be tweaked throughout talks, but don't expect to make any significant modifications.

An advantage may be gained by making a counteroffer. Counteroffers for spouse hires have the extra benefit of demonstrating the academic value of that person. It may be possible to reopen negotiations if your spouse is not employed the first time around by obtaining a counteroffer later on.
Before making an offer, the second-placed spouse is likely to be asked to campus for a tour and an interview.

Closing Thoughts

Remember that academic spouses don't all follow the same path. Some couples choose to live apart for the duration of their careers, while others alternate working in academia, while still others seek out academic positions that are physically close to one another or at the same institution, while still others negotiate for a spouse to be hired, while still others look for work in alternative fields, while still others do all of the above or a combination of the above. 

If you're looking for a job in academia, patience, flexibility, and a healthy dose of self-worth are more crucial than ever. There may be a new path that you and your spouse take that you didn't know about, but keep in mind that you're not alone. There are likely to be coworkers who have had comparable experiences to yours if you ask around. The best of luck to you!

~JTTT

Similar Posts:


WHAT CANDIDATES ARE DOING WRONG, PART I OF III: “DO YOUR HOMEWORK, PLEASE. PLEASE.”

Part I of III: MAJOR JOB MARKET MISTAKES

Earlier last week, I posed the following question on #academicchatter: "What errors do you notice applicants making?" and  "What would you like them to understand and accomplish better?" 

50+ people responded to the question.

10% of applicants today have the training, degree, or experience relevant and defined in the job post.


At the job search stage. 

Mistake 1: Applicants do not customize their applications and performances to the job advertisement 


Candidates: READ. 

Take a look at the real advertisement! 

Please follow the directions provided. Make sure you're qualified for the position before applying!

I was consistently surprised by the number of candidates who failed to meet the basic requirements for the job.


Even while this may seem simple, I was continually astounded by the sheer amount of applicants who were unable to fulfill even the most basic qualifications for the position. A quarter of the candidates for the position of Infectious Diseases Epidemiologist at my former school had no credible claim to being an epidemiologist at all. International veterinarians who had done a graduate course on infectious diseases in animals, or doctors who operated solely in sub-Saharan Africa, were among the participants. It's a waste of time if you don't meet the general requirements for the position. If I apply to 40 locations, I have a greater chance of landing a job than if I just apply to 30 places, I think several applicants approach the market that way. Yes and no — if you don't qualify for any of the additional 10 positions, you aren't improving your chances in any way.

Mistake 2: Don’t follow the darned directions in the application process.


Prepare for the interview by researching the company and position thoroughly, and make sure your materials and replies reflect this. Make sure you follow the application process's instructions to the letter. Approximately half of our applicants do not include all of the essential documents and do not tailor their application to our requirements. Make sure you specify exactly what your credentials are for the job you're applying for. A white, 40-year-old married lady (*tenured nursing professor; **in her second marriage) In the midst of a job search. Mistake 3: Failure to address the job advertisement “I'm baffled as to why applicants fail to address the specifics of the job advertisement in their cover letter! On some of them, it's clear that the writer had a different goal in mind when they penned the letter. If the ad specifies a requirement, be sure to make it clear how you'll satisfy it.” [Social Sciences Professor, 30-year-old married white female, cis-gender (*Tenured)]

I don’t understand why candidates are not addressing the specifics of the job posting in their cover letter!


“I wish people would really read the job post before submitting an application. It takes us a long time to work on it! The best illustration of this may be found in the following: When we post a position in the foreign language department for someone with a certain skill or path, we receive applicants who don't speak the appropriate language! This is despite the fact that we explicitly specify in the ad that "(near) native English and [necessary language]" are prerequisites for the position in question. In addition, as part of the application process, we inquire if they have (near) native English and [necessary language] fluency. Can you imagine saying "no" to such question?” [a 60-year-old female administrator in the humanities]

Oh, and get the address right!

Mistake 4: Failure to Tailor your Cover Letter 


If you're applying for a job, don't submit a generic cover letter or neglect to respond to specific questions in the ad. In general, be more specific—tell the reader how YOU FIT INTO the description. It's impossible for us to make it any clearer how to succeed in this search if we state "successful applicants will..." Make sure to include keywords from the description of your scholarship in your ad so that the committee may easily find you! You must use language that demonstrates your suitability. There are just too many applicants for each position to thoroughly review your cover letter, CV, and any supporting documents.” Just write to the faculty search committee or the department head if you don't know who to write to (committee chair). At the interview and campus visit


Mistake 5: Failure to show an educated interest in how they do what they do. 


This is when the fervor peaked among the Twitter opinions. It's not that they don't want you to know who they are, but they want you to show that you care about them as people and as a department or school. Pay attention! When you don't, they get really, extremely irritated. Do a lot of study about the goal and vision of the institution you're applying to for the Humanities. 
[...]
Undergraduates only are allowed in my program at a tiny, public institution. Because they don't explain how they've demonstrated their commitment to under-represented minorities and first-generation students, applications from people with unrealistically ambitious research objectives are a lousy fit from the start. A 45-year-old white single mother who identifies as cisgender (*Tenured Professor in the Social Sciences**). Maintaining a clean and logical presentation of information in your application can help you stand out from the competition. Make it obvious in your cover letter if you're just starting out and don't have a lot of publications yet. 

Mistake 6: You do not demonstrate a genuine interest in the position 

As a search committee member at one of the nation's most prestigious educational institutions, I can tell you that this topic has come up time and time again while considering candidates for open positions. You may be deciding whether or not you want the job at this point, but don't make us feel like you're doing an interview with us. Given our fatigue and the possibility of many searches underway, we will treat your application with less seriousness and move on to the next candidate if you do not demonstrate a genuine interest in the position. If you're an assistant professor of history and you're in your 30s, you're in the minority. 

Mistake 7: You focus solely on research publications 


“Many candidates focus solely on their academic background when applying to tenure-track (TT) positions, but search committees are also looking for someone who will be a good fit in terms of their research interests and professional priorities, which vary not just by university "type." If you want to be taken seriously by a search committee, you'll need to show that you've done your study on the school and the department.” [non-TT, humanities-related ) 

Mistake 8: You show up to campus interviews without knowing anyone that works there. 


“Candidates repeatedly show up for interviews on campus without doing any study about our department or the individuals working here. Rather, they come with a lengthy list of the reasons why they are unique. Take the time to think about how you'll fit in and what you can bring to the table, so prepare well. Take a look at the department's initiatives and programs to get a sense of how your skills and expertise may be utilized in a positive way.” (*Tenured Professor, Cinematography**40, female, white, married, mother) 

People who don't make it to the interview stage of the process haven't done their homework on the uni they hope to work for. You should spend some time looking into the university and the people you'll be working with. Some presenters fail to adhere to the topical guidelines and instead focus on their own research. There will be plenty of room for you to talk about your research if you're invited to do so. Prospective coworkers may take interviewees out to lunch or offer them a tour of the campus. Engage them in conversation. Even if you're uneasy or uncomfortable with them, show an interest in them. [*Tenured Professor, Social Sciences, Woman). 

Mistake 9: You haven’t proven you’ll “FIT” in the department for 25-30 years. 


It's important to keep in mind that not all "fit" criteria are openly specified in the job description There is a lot of investigative work involved. This is where thorough preparation is critical, but you should also retain an open mind and a keen ear and eye throughout the interview. Knowing nothing about someone is one thing; knowing the WRONG THINGS, based on preconceived notions or bias, is quite another. Understand that the posted position does not include all of the selection criteria. You'll have to glean this information through a thorough investigation of the department, its academics and personnel, and its past. You'll also have to be on the lookout for any unsaid signals from those who aren't directly involved in the interview. ) [Associate, 56-year-old Black American female, divorced, Tenured]. 

In our school, Christianity is expressed in a progressive, left-leaning way. To avoid making assumptions, prospective students should take a look at how colleges represent themselves and what sorts of clubs/organizations are offered on campus. Applicants to our school are often surprised to learn that we are a welcoming environment for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. [Professor of Religious and Peace Studies, Black woman, tenured.] 

The term "fit" comprises more than just your physical appearance; it includes how you present yourself, including what you wear. When it comes to "generically suitable" (a decent standard for the interview/campus tour stage) at each university, this respondent points out, there are clearly conventions–which are CERTAINLY UNSPOKEN–of what is regarded acceptable. [Mix things up once you have the job.]  

This interview isn't about you are establishing your academic merit; if you weren't academically accomplished, you wouldn't be here in the interview. In the end, it's all about how well you fit in with the department. As much as you can, try to put the committee and the issues ahead of your own irrational anxieties and concerns. There will be no further discussion on the dissertation now. Describe your book idea to me in the form you would tell your friends, rather than the form you would tell your Chair. No one here is an authority on yours. That's why we're looking to expand our workforce in this manner. 

Make a list of two things that set you apart from the rest of the pack and focus on them. Avoid providing a list of authors you plan on referencing in lectures. Let us know how you'd use them. 


Be honest with us; this is the most crucial rule. 


One of us may have taken a seminar on that author with an expert and can tell you haven't read it. If you looked at our website for more than a few seconds, we know you're here. There are plenty of materials out there on how to look like the institution you want to join while yet being yourself. "I'm cool" has been taken to a poor level if my elder colleague asks me whether you were wearing pajamas in the interview. 

Remember, too, being "fit" isn't about twisting oneself into a pretzel to mimic what they're already doing. If they're going to be successful in their stated objective, they'll need a new colleague who can deliberately and cooperatively offer NEW ideas to the department. 

It is possible that all or some of our interview questions are aimed to see what it would be like to work with that individual for a year (or next 25-30 years, for TT position). Both the candidate's answer to that question and their general demeanor throughout the interview serve as an indicator of how they would behave in a professional context. Candidates should not use defensive or aggressive language during the interview, and the answer to the question "how do you fit as a member of our team" should not be simply "I'm happy to defer to whatever decisions are made," but rather a more thoughtful, balanced response that shows how the candidate will contribute to their team/department instead. [*tenured professor, Humanities.] 

****************************************

These replies are all about THE JOB TALK, a kind of anguish of its own.

Mistake 9: Poor Job Talks


It's a requirement in my humanities department (Classics) that professors lecture outside the scope of their own specialized study areas. Yes, even at the graduate level. After saying "must have the ability to teach both languages at all levels" and getting candidates who are surprised and they can only identify their own research for courses, we are frightened."

Candidate research on a department is minimal. 

In the last several years, our department has had three appearances in the New York Times due to a significant new archaeological find. It was created by our department chief. It's a topic that some candidates have never ever heard of. 

Many of our students are first-generation college students or folks with full-time jobs. They won't be able to accomplish what Harvard students do right out of the gate, and it's frustrating when candidates haven't even considered how to educate our (very amazing!) students.

Job talks that are either too general to be scholarly or too specific for anybody but those in the discipline to follow. –Job talks I've seen a lot of bad job discussions that go either way.” [Associate professor, Humanities, tenured] 

If you don't know someone well, don't ask them to send you a letter; you never know what kind of letter they'll write. 

To demonstrate your ability to work well with others, don't appear arrogant or overly self-aggrandizing in your powerpoint presentations. Over-preparation is better than under-preparation... I've seen lectures that sounded like they were rehearsed, and they were far superior than those that were incomprehensible because the speaker had not prepared. 

Thank everyone you met with by sending them a personal email! When you bring it up, it shows your interest in the subject. There are times when it's impossible for us to make a decision without a communal shrug of the shoulders and a collective "uhhhh, how about so-and-so?" No matter how far your study is from the topic of the position, it's important to at least try to provide an argument for how your research fits in. It's much easier to convince the dean that you "fit" even if we know you're particularly interested in some other topic.”[Assistant, tenured, Woman, Married, No kids, R1, Humanities] 

Before an interview, do your research. 

"I've seen a number of high-potential candidates fail short-form and long-form interviews due to lack of preparation. Similarly, the best applicants who land job offers have done their homework and are able to connect with the department's employees during interviews. This is what you need to do for homework: Get to know the individual you're interviewing by reading their most recent work. Make sure you're familiar with the department's course offerings and program structure. Find out who normally teaches what. In addition to checking out all the student websites, if there are any students working in your area of interest, make sure you know who they are and if possible, have read some of their work. 

In the event that you're delivering a job interview, consider how you may incorporate relevant work from the department into your presentation (e.g., cite people in the department, frame some parts of your talk in a relevant way). If you wouldn't have studied for an exam in school, don't show up unprepared for any interview.” [Assistant, TT, Woman, R1. Social Sciences]

********************************

In sum, you wouldn’t have gone into a test in class without studying, so don’t come into any interview without studying. Share your advice here. We can’t wait to hear from you!

Similar Posts:

Tuesday, April 12, 2022

Improving Readability and Avoiding Redundancy and in Research Writing

Improving Readability and Avoiding Redundancy and in Research Writing

There have been times when I've taken up a research article, only to put it back down halfway through. Although the study's findings are intriguing, the manuscript's writing lacks polish. The effect of your own published work may be diminished as a result of these concerns. We're all aware of how critical it is to speak clearly and concisely. Peer reviewers are less inclined to accept or publish a paper that has been written in a sloppy manner. Good readability, on the other hand, is more than just acceptable English use.

When writing a scientific paper, it helps to provide the facts in a clear and simple manner. This implies that words and phrases need to be carefully selected to convey the desired message with the most effect possible. The removal of redundant phrases enhances reading, since they do not add to the content.

If you've read and re-read your text several times, it might be tough to identify repetitive content. Think about the following phrases in a research paper.


The following are examples of phrases that are redundant:

  • A purple liquid was produced as a consequence of the process.
  •  Recently, a number of improvements to the technique have been created.
  •  The ligand and the compound were competing for binding when the compound was tested.
  •  Each sample was labeled with an antibody.

 

These phrases seem to be innocuous at first look. What's the big deal if you understand what they're saying? In light of this, consider the following possibilities:

 

  • The liquid was purple.
  • Modifications were made recently to the model. (Update: don't write in passive voice)
  • The ligand and the chemical competed for binding.
  • Labeled antibodies were used to identify each sample.

 

Because they exclude extraneous details, the sentences in the second list have a greater effect. Because purple is a color, it isn't required to explain to the reader what it is. Overusing words will cause the reader to get disinterested in what you're trying to say.

 

With a well-structured document, you may increase readability.

The reader is more likely to stay interested in a well-structured piece of writing. If you want to guarantee that your paper is organized, here are some tips.

 

To begin, be certain that each phrase conveys just a single truth. Trying to convey a lot of information in a single phrase may be tedious and confusing for the reader. The active voice may be used to keep sentences brief, energetic, and intriguing.

 

Make sure each paragraph has a distinct subject matter. In one paragraph, present the issue, elaborate on it, and draw a conclusion. Having a smooth transition between paragraphs helps make your writing more readable.


Most papers include an abstract as well as a brief introduction, a methodology section, a set of findings, and a conclusion. The abstract is a brief overview of the work, often no more than 300 words long. The introduction provides background information, while the methods section explains how the research was carried out. There is a discussion part where the findings are presented and the significance of the findings is highlighted. It is critical to deliver information in the appropriate part in order to minimize repetition. As an example, in the findings section, methodological information should not be discussed, and results should not be repeated in the discussion. More particular guidance on article structure may be found in the guidelines provided by each journals.


When crafting your work, always keep the reader in mind. It's important to present significant material that clearly explains why, how, and what you did, with a focus on the essential findings. This article's advice on how to avoid repetition will help you communicate more effectively with your audience.


~JTT

Similar Posts: 

Saturday, April 9, 2022

A Model of Productivity: How to Build Your CV

A Model of Productivity: How to Build Your CV

Today’s post is another Special Request post, this time for Gracie, who had a question about CVs. What is the best way to organize and write an academic CV? she wonders. She also asks if I know of any special tech tools for create a kind of “master” CV that could then be tailored to jobs, grants, etc. I have to admit that I do not know of any such tools. But what about you, my readers? Have you found an app or some fabulous geeked out system for collecting and organizing your CV material? Kind of like Endnotes for a CV? 

Please comment below if you have a good organization system. We would all like to know!!


What I do know is that so many years ago, when I was a young grad student, I received a piece of wisdom from a respected senior professor. That colleague was a model of productivity, and she liked me, and wanted to see me succeed.  This piece of advice was not a trick for organizing CVs but rather a trick for thinking about them.


She told me, early in my first year in the department, “make sure that each month you add another line to your CV”


Each month I add another line to my CV? GOSH. Really?


That sounded impossible. But she did it, sure enough, and her CV was a thing to behold.


She said, "this is not going to be hard for you" - and she was right. By the time I added on the national conferences and other events, I had 9 new items a year to add to my CV (she didn't count summers.) The key was to keep my material in mind all the time. This piece of advice was not a trick for organizing CVs but rather a trick for thinking about them. CVs are not just records that passively reflect the things that you "happen to do" They are records that you actively, consciously, and conscientiously build.


Take charge of your CV and nurture it. You ask, is it where it should be right now, this month, related to the goals I want to reach this year?  I helped out colleagues.  And that goal was tenure.


It wasn’t that hard.


The secret was to always have my cv in the back of my mind. When I had to make decisions about how to spend my time, which offers to accept, when to say no, and so on, I thought about my c.v., and thought about the line. Did I want the line? Was the line really necessary? Was that a clever line? Was there a superior alternative line? It has been an extraordinarily illuminating process.


Sure, I did stuff to be collegial, things that didn’t convert into CV lines. I assisted out colleagues. I went the additional mile for pupils (occasionally) (sometimes). I was an honorable member of the team. But I was focused. I knew what my aim was. And that aim was tenure.


As my career moved on, I got the chance to watch numerous CVs of many colleagues from my own and other schools. And I understood that few of their classmates had gotten this type of counsel. They most clearly had not been adding a CV line each month.


And a lot of those colleagues were suffering. No one was hiring them because of this. They weren't receiving any funding. They weren’t gaining tenure. Their reasoning didn't appear to go beyond the obvious.


Take charge of your CV To me it matters less how well-tailored it is to this application or that. What matters is that it is a document that shows your pride in your work, your passion, and your motivation.


Take control of your professional portfolio by improving your cv. It doesn't matter as much to me whether it is specifically designed for one purpose or another. What important is that it is a document that demonstrates your pride in your job, your enthusiasm, and your motivation.


~JTTT

 

Similar Posts:


Don't ask career services to help write your CV

Don't ask career services to help write your CV

The CV may be the most frequently and closely read of all the documents that candidates send. For search-committee members who often must assess 100 applications in a short time, the CV offers the kind of holistic picture few other documents can match. In each section, and in the CV as a whole, candidates must make an argument that moves from the most important evidence to the least important.


The CV is also a living and evolving document that tells a narrative in its taxonomies, hierarchies of value, and silences, and in the style and economy of its words. Through these extra-textual aspects the CV conveys instantaneously, at a look, the fundamental hireability of you, the applicant. And yet, too frequently it is entirely overlooked.

 

In comparison to other types of application materials, the CV has a reputation for being solely utilitarian. Nevertheless, I don't believe it is an exaggeration to claim that the CV is the most often and attentively examined document that applicants submit. For members of search committees tasked with evaluating 100 applications in a short period of time, the CV provides a comprehensive image that is difficult to duplicate. A copy of this document is accessible to everyone in the department, as well as anyone attending a job discussion. In certain circumstances, it may be the sole element of the program exposed to such groups.

 

Because the CV will be read so often, it's critical to pay attention to the little things like the order in which material is presented, the facts organized, the section titles, and any other apparently insignificant aspects. This is because the CV will be viewed so often. In each part, and in the paper as a whole, applicants must present an argument that progresses from the most significant evidence to the least important. The CV's rhetoric is comprised of all of stuff.

 

There is no document about which misinformation is so rife, as the academic CV. And it is the Chronicle that is primarily responsible for this sad state of affairs. The CV Doctors' advice is all too often outdated and painfully inaccurate. They are coming from a Career Services perspective, and not a hard-core academic one. Career Services are profoundly 'off' because they aren't in the thick of it, fighting through 500 applications for one TT position.


Tenure track hiring is now the equivalent of the Olympics. What was good enough at local, city, state, and national levels is reduced to.001 second differences between winning Gold and not qualifying at all.


It is impossible for someone who has never been tasked with reviewing 300-600 CVs in order to fill one academic job in a department to provide an opinion on how a CV should be written. Because it is not the material on the CV that is at question. It is the Philosophy of the CV—the aura of the CV that conveys that you, the applicant, are the genuine article, the real deal, a serious scholar, a true expert, an independent researcher, a member of the tribe— that must be spot-on, immaculate, and flawless. So Career Services, no matter where they are located or how well-intentioned they are, are unable to assess this. Someone asked me in grad school,


“Are you aware of how much damage well-intentioned Career Services people do to poor, hapless Ph.D.s on the academic job market?”


Then then, who knows? But I will tell you, since I see the result of Career Services’ advice in my student’s writing every year. Even if they are earnest, CV Doctors are fully unaware of the implicit prejudices, rigidities, and unstated standards that are prevalent in Ph.D. recruiting practices. If they actually work closely with Ph.D.s, as far as I'm aware. Anyway, they’re fundamentally ‘off.’ Because they aren't up against 500 other applicants for a single post with a chance for advancement. Many of their theories, although logical in a 'normal' recruiting setting, are lethal when search committees are pressured, with little sleep, overburdened, and compelled to be completely harsh by circumstances because of the broad variety they allow and support.


I realize this is disappointing, since in a climate where the actual tenured academics have almost fully abdicated duty for giving credible professionalization guidance, Career Services is all that many Ph.D.s have left.


But don't even think of going there. Graduate and professional students, as well as undergraduates, should be able to find assistance at the Career Services offices, which are geared toward the demands of the working world. Stay away from Career Services offices if you're in the limbo of the tenure-track academic job market and rely only on the advice of your fellow tribe members who know the secret handshake.


~JTTT


Similar Posts:


Most Popular Posts

Start Here: WELCOME!

Welcome to my Journey to Tenure Track: All things Academia

Welcome to My Journey To Tenure Track I'm still at my first job. I'm now 30-ish and I've been at this University for 3 year...