next »

[psyche74]

I will admit that I mostly commented based on this:

"At 22, you are not old enough to drive or get married."

Where?  In the U.S., 22 is certainly old enough to do both of those things.

Yes, but you are not old enough to do them well--especially the marrying part.  :-)   

Plenty of people do a great job of marriage at 22.   And, did you know this?  Married 22 year olds drive better than unmarried 22 year olds - or so claimed our insurance company.   After the wedding, our car insurance payments dropped to 1/3 of what they were previously.  We were worried that there was a mistake, so we called the insurance company for an explanation.   

Geez guys, I was joking.  It is just funny to hear 22 year olds worrying about whether they are too old for something.  You will see the humor in that in 30 years

Well *I* laughed. From my nice comfortable position 14 years away from being 20. At 20...I might not have laughed.

[dolljepopp]

Joining the anecdote-flinging party...

I will probably be forty-eight when I defend my dissertation. I will be just shy of that when I get married. Either or both of these experiences would have been very different twenty-five years ago, to be sure, but this late bloomer has no regrets about not doing either until now.

Though I'm sure ageism exists in my field, I am roughly bang in the middle, age-wise of my cohorts. The youngest defended first, but everyone else kind of wondered why the hell someone so young was pursuing a PhD already. (Kudos to her -- she's smart and disciplined and will be an asset to any department. She also came from a wealthy family and didn't have to spend anywhere as many hours adjuncting to keep the lights on as the rest of us, but that's another thread.)

My social sphere generally went about ten years in each direction when I still lived in PhD school city. But then, that's been a long pattern for me. Twenty-somethings can be irritating, sure, but so can thirty-, forty- fifty-, sixty-, seventy-, eighty-, and, I imagine, ninety-somethings. Assklownishness is not decade-specific.

I spent the intervening years between my undergraduate degree and PhD school working in the "real world" of my field, in various capacities. It is a mercurial field and I had periods of unemployment, but mostly I came to PhD school with twenty-plus years as a professional out there doing many of the things undergraduates in my field come to college to learn how to do. Indeed, I viewed the doctorate as the next logical step (for me) in engagement with my nearly life-long passion -- as was, in a less obvious way, the Masters in a related field I picked up along the way (during which time I continued working full-time in the field).

But I don't (and won't) have kids, and the vagabond life to this point has served me well in many ways. I'm also not pursuing the usual North American tenure track position; I am quite limited by geography (willingly, I should add) and have accepted that how I get to use the degree likely won't fit the standard narrative.

Assess your own situation very carefully, do your research, and then decide which versions of which dreams you can pursue.

Then pursue them with a vengeance.


not quite senile,

dolljepopp

[asteria]

The average age of my cohort is about 28. We are all safely out of adolescence and we don't subject older students to our maturation experiences. Everyone does her work and pays her bills and goes home to responsibilities. There really isn't any room for immaturity; there really isn't much time to sleep.

I was out of school for a few years before I started my program, and it's taking time to get used to being up all night. Rather than worrying about whether your classmates will be immature, I would suggest that applicants think in terms of whether they can sacrifice a lot of time and money and freedom for grad. school. Really, who cares if people are immature? Who cares if you don't get to lord it over them because you are older and have children? It seems petty. That's just my two cents.

[polly_mer]

 But if you're talking about grad school, you're usually talking about years of intense contact with the others in your program.  And I think you really have to stop and ask yourself whether you want the PhD badly enough to spend your days, for years, sitting as a peer with a room full of young people.

That's field-specific.  Engineering graduate school doesn't work like that.

  It's unlikely you're going to do the social bonding that's so important, later, to many careers, and in some ways -- if there are enough years between you -- you won't be speaking the same language. 

Considering that when I was about ten, I helped a dear friend celebrate his 90th birthday, I fail to see a large age gap as necessarily leading to nothing to talk about.

I'm quite sincere when I say I don't want to spend three of the next five years with highly-strung classmates who go into the usual tizzies of young people who're responsible only for themselves, and sometimes not even that.  Nor do I really want three years of the moral pronouncements of revolutionary souls who haven't met the lead pipe called responsibility for family.

Some of us who were the same age during graduate school but were responsible adults tired pretty quickly of those interactions, also.  I don't think age is the driver here.

I see my daughter's teenage years staring me in the face, and I can see from here that they'll take some fortitude.  I want to rest up before that hits.  These years of sweetness and relative civility...I'd have to want another degree a sight more than I do to spoil them. 

If you can think of something you would rather do than go to grad school, then you should do it.  If while checking possible programs, you find that the likely cohort isn't one that you want to spend time with, then you should pick a different program.  However, basing the decision purely on stereotypes of age is not a great idea.

FWIW, in my current position, I share an office with three traditional age undergraduates and one just started master's student.  It's fine, although I often say to myself, "I'm so glad that phase of my life is over".  When I was first in this office, I was the youngest (we spanned from me at 22 to 50, older than the professor) and it was fine. 

The age gap alone is not necessarily the problem as long as <tongue somewhat in cheek> we all embrace diversity and make an effort to get along with our fellow person.

[tolerantly]

 But if you're talking about grad school, you're usually talking about years of intense contact with the others in your program.  And I think you really have to stop and ask yourself whether you want the PhD badly enough to spend your days, for years, sitting as a peer with a room full of young people.

That's field-specific.  Engineering graduate school doesn't work like that.

There is no cameraderie or sense of cohort in engineering graduate school?

I've been interviewing ancient scientists for a science history; they seemed to be acutely aware of age differences in their old lab.  They were young, at the time, but here and there they remember the "old men" (then in their 30s, even 40s).  They were not, as these scientists remember, part of the life of the lab.

  It's unlikely you're going to do the social bonding that's so important, later, to many careers, and in some ways -- if there are enough years between you -- you won't be speaking the same language. 

Considering that when I was about ten, I helped a dear friend celebrate his 90th birthday, I fail to see a large age gap as necessarily leading to nothing to talk about.

I didn't say "nothing to talk about".  I said "speaking the same language".  Your 90-year-old friend was carefully talking to you, a child, not speaking the cultural shorthand of people who came up in his time.  If you're 20, 30, 40 years ahead of most of the other students in your program, you'll miss many of their references, and they'll miss yours; your assumptions about the world will also be different enough from theirs to put you in the position of an immigrant from a small old country coming to America.  The effort to bridge the gap will be yours, not theirs.  While this might be charming for some, it's also exhausting and can be demoralizing to the point where you develop a public face for "Americans" and reserve your real self for fellow expats.

I was a returned-undergrad in my early 30s and had a marvelous time, but I was also childless and had time and energy to go on cultural safari among my classmates.  Even so, it was a reach. I remember waking up one morning and understanding clearly that this part of my life was over.  I still have close friends from that time, but the relationships have always been unequal, older/younger cousin sort of relationships.   And I still enjoy talking to my daughter's babysitters (who are generally in their early 20s) and the undergrads in the classes I take now and then.  But I don't see the wisdom in putting myself in a peer position with people in their early 20s.  I'm not one, particularly since having had responsibility for raising a kid.  That may be the most important factor.  You hear similar things from traditional-age undergrads who are parents.

I'm quite sincere when I say I don't want to spend three of the next five years with highly-strung classmates who go into the usual tizzies of young people who're responsible only for themselves, and sometimes not even that.  Nor do I really want three years of the moral pronouncements of revolutionary souls who haven't met the lead pipe called responsibility for family.

Some of us who were the same age during graduate school but were responsible adults tired pretty quickly of those interactions, also.  I don't think age is the driver here.

Yes, I expect you're right.  I think age exacerbates it, though.

I see my daughter's teenage years staring me in the face, and I can see from here that they'll take some fortitude.  I want to rest up before that hits.  These years of sweetness and relative civility...I'd have to want another degree a sight more than I do to spoil them. 

If you can think of something you would rather do than go to grad school, then you should do it.  If while checking possible programs, you find that the likely cohort isn't one that you want to spend time with, then you should pick a different program.  However, basing the decision purely on stereotypes of age is not a great idea.

Purely, no.  But as an important factor, yes, I think that's reasonable. 

FWIW, in my current position, I share an office with three traditional age undergraduates and one just started master's student.  It's fine, although I often say to myself, "I'm so glad that phase of my life is over".  When I was first in this office, I was the youngest (we spanned from me at 22 to 50, older than the professor) and it was fine. 

Sure, but it's not the same kind of relationship.  You may be sharing the same space, but you aren't working together or going through the same kind of professional development.  My editors are generally younger than I am, and some of my clients are older, but our interactions are fairly limited -- unless we have children of about the same age, and then we're closer.

The age gap alone is not necessarily the problem as long as <tongue somewhat in cheek> we all embrace diversity and make an effort to get along with our fellow person.

I do appreciate the Coca Cola moment.  But I also think grad school involves more, socially, than getting along.

[polly_mer]

 But if you're talking about grad school, you're usually talking about years of intense contact with the others in your program.  And I think you really have to stop and ask yourself whether you want the PhD badly enough to spend your days, for years, sitting as a peer with a room full of young people.

That's field-specific.  Engineering graduate school doesn't work like that.

There is no cameraderie or sense of cohort in engineering graduate school?

I've been interviewing ancient scientists for a science history; they seemed to be acutely aware of age differences in their old lab.  They were young, at the time, but here and there they remember the "old men" (then in their 30s, even 40s).  They were not, as these scientists remember, part of the life of the lab.

Well, I may have had an unusual experience, but no, I had no sense of cohort in either of the programs that I attended.  I had a sense of camraderie with the people in my research group, but that was because we had related interests and spent up to 20 hours a day in the same office.  However, age was not the prime determiner of whether one belonged.  Instead, belonging was much more a function of who was around all day, all night, weekends, and holidays and who acted as though research were a 20 hour a week part time job.   At no point did we become friends, but even at the last conference we were collegial enough to spend a coffee break catching up...well, those of us who graduated and went on to use our degrees instead of dropping off the face of the planet.

I do appreciate the Coca Cola moment.  But I also think grad school involves more, socially, than getting along.

Well, yes, one should be collegial and start on the relevant professional activities (e.g., I'll give you feedback on your paper and you critique my talk), but becoming BFFs is not a necessary part of graduate school.  People looking for that experience may be disappointed.

[sciencephd]

Once you finish course work in the sciences, usually by the end of the second year, that is about it in terms of a cohort.  Mostly everything is focused on the research lab, where people are distributed in terms of age.

[polly_mer]

Once you finish course work in the sciences, usually by the end of the second year, that is about it in terms of a cohort. 

For my particular case, another indication that I'm out of sync with the world, I took almost no classes with people who started in the departments at the same time I did.  For my master's degree, the relevant classes for my specialty were offered in other departments so I took almost nothing from my home department.  For my first attempt at a Ph.D. because I already had an MS in a different discipline, I had to take a mix of remedial classes and highly specialized classes instead of the standard courses.  For my second attempt at a Ph.D., I already had a lot of graduate classwork and so chose interesting specialized classes to complete enough credits.

Thus, little of my graduate work had anything to do with a cohort and I am bemused about the idea that cohort matters other than as an indication of the kinds of students admitted to the department.

[sciencephd]

We don't do Master's degrees in most sciences, so all of the coursework is lumped into the PhD.  Basically, we had a group in the first year or two based on common courses and the need to pass comprehensive exams, but then I would say there was no cohesion at all.   

[polly_mer]

We don't do Master's degrees in most sciences, so all of the coursework is lumped into the PhD.  Basically, we had a group in the first year or two based on common courses and the need to pass comprehensive exams, but then I would say there was no cohesion at all.   

Apparently, you missed out on something important that the humanities have.

[sciencephd]

Apparently, you missed out on something important that the humanities have.

I don't think so.  Well we didn't get much in the way of teaching experience....unless you didn't get funding.

[polly_mer]

Apparently, you missed out on something important that the humanities have.

I don't think so.  Well we didn't get much in the way of teaching experience....unless you didn't get funding.

Yep.  As I recall I got something like an extra 50 bucks a month when I was a TA because "Everyone must do at least one semester" and "The Graduate Student Union pay scale means that your current fellowship puts you near the maximum allowed stipend.  Therefore, we cannot legally pay you any more".  Strangely, I felt no need to sign up for more semesters for nothing pay when my research was going very well.

[macaroon]

I'm quite sincere when I say I don't want to spend three of the next five years with highly-strung classmates who go into the usual tizzies of young people who're responsible only for themselves, and sometimes not even that.  Nor do I really want three years of the moral pronouncements of revolutionary souls who haven't met the lead pipe called responsibility for family.

Some of us who were the same age during graduate school but were responsible adults tired pretty quickly of those interactions, also.  I don't think age is the driver here.

Yes, I expect you're right.  I think age exacerbates it, though.

Yeah, I have to jump on with polly_mer here.  I was the youngest in my cohort by several years, and I also became annoyed with these people.  I slipped away from the scene and had a social life outside of the university, with adults of all ages.  I wasn't annoying to begin with, and then I was gone.