next »

["of a certain age"]

I will be in my mid-40's when I go on the job market a year from now, but am told I look 10 years younger.  I've heard both sides in the debate of putting grad dates on your CV or leaving them off.  I'm curious to hear the experiences of other "older" grads, especially fellow females, re: perceived age discrimination.  Is there ever any point in addressing it in an interview if you perceive a vibe - for example, saying "I realize I may be slightly older than most applicants for the position, however I can bring to the job ..."  All insights appreciated.

[of another certain age]

I'm 25 and look 16 and I get the other side of this coin.  No suggestions, just empathy.  Good Luck.

[Thundering Marshmallow]

I think dates are a fairly conventional piece of information. I sometimes worry about the gap between degrees, but in my field that's not unusual.

As far as being old, you are not. You still have twenty years to enjoy a new career. We are living longer and longer, and now it is more common for people to shift careers, and increasingly common for people to be fit and healthy and therefore younger looking. Every extra ten pounds ages you five years, I seem to recall being told while pigging out on lite beer and microwave popcorn. But I digress.

In academia, the important thing is to recognize the first five years on the TT as the begining of the steepest ascent. The dissertation was just foothills, with a guide. Publishing enough and establishing a rapport with colleagues and students will consume your attention. It is this labor-intensive aspect that makes youth seem like an advantage. However, the very young are also navigating early family milestones: marriage, babies, first time homeowners, etc. By your age, that whole thing may be tedious but it is not a surprise.

We of greater experience sometimes have an advantage, as long as we function with an appropriate degree of deference for the customs in place. If you have never had a boss younger than you, it is important to find a hybrid niche of being a strong and loyal colleague without being the loyal opposition thanks to your more extensive background. Again, I digress. But I'm a good ten years older than you, and tend to indulge my trains of thought more. Given the logical conseqeunces of tenure, there will be people older than your parents still actively engaged in the work of the university, with no intention of retiring anytime soon.

[Voter]

I just wanted to say that I'm not a fan of the expression "the elephant in the room."

Now I feel better.

[in the midst]

I just finished up a very successful job search with multiple offers, and my time left as a "30 something" can be measured in months (I'm also female).

While I will give the caveat that there are some discipline-specific issues that probably enter the equation, I would honestly say that age and experience were an advantage for me on the market.  Here is why:
1) I teach in a professional field where I've worked for over a decade.  There is rarely a situation where I can't quickly and easily think of some practical example to illustrate a lecture point.  This has given me tremendous respect in the classroom (and correspondingly high teaching evaluations)
2) I know what I LIKE and DO NOT LIKE in prospective employers and colleagues.  I was able to use my developed "professional maturity" to interview schools as much as they interviewed me.  I wasn't afraid to ask hard questions and I think that was respected more because of my age. (i.e. it came off as genuine curiousity about "fit", not intrusive questioning)
3) I was roughly the same age as many people currently in the departments where I interviewed (even those that had been there a while!).  When I talked with them, it was very easy to present myself as "colleague", rather than "student".  I think that sets the tone differently & allows for very easy "down time" conversation during lunches, dinners, etc.
4) I know my own challenges and strengths.  I could talk about experiences in life & work from which I stumbled, learned, grew, and now present as a more capable & confident leader.  I couldn't have done that a decade ago when I felt I still needed to scramble for respect.  My attitude is different and I think that conveys well on the market.
5) You get more latitude on what to wear (this point may be arguable, granted).  I think for both women and men, age means never having to explain your sense of style.  It doesn't come across as "trendy", because you've risen above that.  It comes across as "YOU" because (likely) it's well established.  My point:  I think with age, you are more free to be yourself.  The more comfortable you are in your own skin, the more you portray yourself with confidence on the market.  That is a definite advantage.

Anyhow, that's my take on it.  As TM said, you are NOT old (nor am I):  there are at least a good 20+ years for me in this career if all goes well and that is plenty long enough to prove myself a success!

Best wishes to you in your search!

[oldster?]

I interviewed for my current job a few days before turning 44. It was not an issue, or should I say it was probably a positive in my department, where a number of us took unconventional routes to academia (meaning we're older than "normal," whatever that is).

I thought it was important to include dates on my CV for the simple reason that I wanted search committees to see how long it took me to go through each stage of my education, and to interpret my other activities (presentations, publications) in light of that. The dates told them I got my degree four years ago, not 15 years ago. And the dates also told them that I hadn't been on the job market for 10 years without getting anywhere.

Having been on search committees, I can say it's very confusing when candidates don't include dates. Sometimes you can't even figure out if they got their Ph.D.

[%sig%]

[thinks I'm funny, but I'm not]

"I just wanted to say that I'm not a fan of the expression "the elephant in the room."

OK, the "800 lb gorilla", then

[%sig%]

[anon]

Another related question. 42 yr old female (but could easily pass for 30-32) and because of circuitous route after highschool and through higher education the dates on the CV (mainly the date of BS) would indicate an age of about 32-33, typical age for first time on market. Is there any need to indicate actual age when applying for jobs (next year) or am I just lucky I don't have to address the issue up front?

[textonscreen]

Age - does not matter! What you have to offer is the key

The Elephant in the Room? - are you overweight?

[%sig%]

[40-ish]

I've always wonder if age IS a factor is hiring decisions. Academics is my second career so I entered my first TT job in my early 40's. Where I am now, it certainly does not matter. But I've wondered about some (not all) the campus interviews I had where I didn't get the job.

Like others on this post, I look alot younger than I am and I do include dates on my CV but still I wonder.

[Search Committee Member]

The age question may well differ by field -- one of my great friends on the faculty began with a PhD in math, realized that (his terms) "all mathematicians have done their best work by the time they're 30," did enough grad courses and publication in philosophy to be welcomed by the philosophy department (where he teaches logic, mostly), and comforts himself that "most philosophers reach their peak in their seventies." Granted this is a jokish way of putting it, but my impression is that the sciences like 'em young, the humanities and fields like history and political science prefer a bit of maturity, and the "practice" fields seldom hire anyone under 40.

I'm really bothered by a c.v. without a date of PhD on it -- I want to know how long someone's been out so I can compare that with how much has been published, and will check  out the date of degree in the dissertations abstracts database if it's not on the vita and the person seems to be otherwise worth thinking about.  Doesn't bother me at all if the first degree's date is left off, though.

[anontoo]

I'm female and graduated when I was in my late 40s. I wish that I could tell you that the experience has been entirely positive, but I've found that age really does play a significant role in the job hunt and how you feel about your work.

Frankly, I'd say that you'll find that employers will often discount your previous work experience (too long ago to be meaningful) and consider your new PhD to be mere academic exercise. You'll also be competing against people your own age (who have been doing the work for many years) and newly minted PhDs who are much younger.

In terms of academic positions, I would say that at least for me, I don't have the same energy for the work that I had when I was getting my degree in my late 30s early 40s. Thundering Marshmallow's analogy is apt: I had no trouble keeping up with (and exceeding!) much younger students while we traversed the foothills together getting the PhD, but the mountains are another story altogether. I simply don't *want* to work a 60 hour week anymore.

Many professional women are taking the same position: The quality of life matters a great deal. I want meaningful work, but also the time to enjoy my personal life.  I'm just not willing to sacrifice all on the altar of academe.

So, should you put age-revealing info on the CV? It depends on where you want to apply and what the SC wants -- heavy research and publication demands might make them question your energy over the next 10 years when you could be expected to be most productive.

[literatureprof]

In my experience age matters a good deal and is rarely a plus. I put my PhD date on but not my BA date (that's the one that reveals the age). Going on the mkt for the first time at 40 was not good; in my Ivy MLA interview, they asked flat out "How old are you?" Tricky. I got much better MLA taps than oncampuses--13 MLA interviews, among which an Ivy and 4 R1 jobs, but only 3 oncampuses, at the least impressive R1 and at 2 ho-hum LACs.  (I read that as a "maternal" fit vibe--yech.)  

Clothing, energetic but not frantic selfpresentation, etc can help, but at the asst level this is very tough on the older woman. (Ms Mentor had a column on "energetic" as code for "young" or "not disabled" recently. Worth a look.)

The good news: now that I'm tenured, and have published like crazy, I have in some ways caught up with the younger competition---as associate, I have more pubs and better confidence, style, assured knowledge, maturity, etc., so finally finally finally I can reap the benefits of being older. To pull this off you have to have really top scholarship, but it can be done. I just have better "fit" for the big senior jobs now than the ones who don't quite look like full professors yet.

Good luck.

[Thundering Marshmallow]

Literatureprof wrote a wonderful reflection. Thank you for the candor and caution regarding the competition.

["Mature Age" pluses]

Literatureprof refers to something that is actually one of the pluses of being older in academe: being able to navigate both the tenure process and the publishing process in a more mature and efficient manner.

I'm actually glad that I didn't go the academic route in my 20's -- I really think my "older" age now is an advantage in many ways.