next »

[notamotua]

Hi, all. I just applied for a PhD (cognitive neuroscience and affiliated fields) this cycle and got rejected across-the-board. I'll take a break from applying in the 2010 cycle so I can help support my family in these difficult times.

I'd just like to ask when it's too late for graduate school. Yes, I know that one can technically get a PhD at 90, but, practically speaking, at what age is a fresh PhD holder no longer young enough to realistically consider the (yes, quite meager, but all the same present) possibility of seeking a tenure-track position doing research and teaching? Y'know, the works. I'm not at all limited to the US in my putative future job search, if that's relevant here.

Things are starting to look pretty grim for my family over here, and this is where I'll be needed for quite a long time to come. I'm 22 now, and I'd like to see if it's still realistically possible to consider a PhD more than a decade later (possibly even two decades). I've done a fair bit of research and I've done tertiary-level teaching and I can honestly say I love both, so I definitely know what I'm getting into here. If I just wanted to "learn", I'd just subscribe to a couple of journals and be done with it.

I look forward to seeing your thoughts on this.

[laurel_knx]

If we're going to have an academic discussion about the ideal time, I would say that the work on cognitive aging indicates that it's going to get increasingly difficult to dive into an entirely new field starting in the late 30's onward (it never becomes impossible, just more difficult). The more technical and abstract the field (cognitive neuroscience is pretty high on both), the steeper the curve on difficulty.

There's a lot of work on eminence (e.g., D.K. Simonton) and when scholars make their big contributions (if ever). The more abstract the field and demand on working memory (math vs. history), the earlier the typical career peak occurs (late 20's for some math and physics fields, 50's for some humanities fields).

If you just want a TT job and to teach because you love the field, then probably older is ok. If you want to revolutionize a field and make a major contribution, age is more important, but not all important.

Caveat: I am absolutely not arguing that older scholars don't make major contributions, and I think that cognitive aging research underestimates the role of knowledge and continuous practice in eminence. BUT empirically there's a trend for some fields.

[kamiakin]

If you wrestle a bit with the search function you will find that we have had a new post about this every week since 2004.

[helpful]

You are eligible for a Phd program at 22. Are these programs without a Masters beforehand because if not, how did you get your Masters before you were 22?

[psyche74]

I am 34 and just entering a PhD program in accounting at UIUC, which is one of the top accounting programs in the world. So from my perspective, worrying about a decade at the age of 22 is silly :)

I've known people in their sixties who were pursuing PhD's and heard of a woman in her seventies earning a PhD. My advice is to keep your mind sharp, and you'll be ready mentally when your life is ready to let you go for it.

[spectacle]

Definitely 25.

[mdwlark]

At 22, you are not old enough to drive or get married.  I started my PhD at 41.  That was a little on the old side, but you always have to live life forward.  You don't get rewind.   

[tolerantly]

Jaundice ahead:

It might depend on what you mean by "graduate school".  There are programs and fields where you'll see programs full of 40- and 50somethings, but for  most you're looking at years' worth of life with people in their early-to-late 20s -- not as a teacher, but as a sort of peer.  Before you do that, spend time with a gang of recent college grads, and see if this is really what you want.

I applied to a master's program last winter, and a month or so later came across a blog full of people who'd applied to that and similar programs.  It wasn't a good moment.  I'm a middle-aged mother, and I'd forgotten, or not noticed, just how much older I am.  Some of these people weren't properly out of adolescence.  And the reality is no, I do not want to spend the bulk of my time and energy with people at that stage of life -- I don't want to do it as a teacher, much less as a gray peer.  I've already been there.  Twice.  Don't need to do it again.  

When I first started querying around about "how old is too old" for PhD programs, I got what I suspect was a lot of happy horses*** about how of course, I wasn't too old, I ought to apply to top programs, etc. But had I started right away, I'd have been on the market in my late 40s. At the earliest, and early 50s would've been more realistic.  My experience of academia is that people are on the whole excruciatingly aware of appearances, fashion, and perceptions of prestige, and that there's routine sexism, ageism, and other forms of discrimination to a degree I haven't seen elsewhere in years.  Combine that with the way academia expects you to prostrate and impoverish yourself for the chance at a tenure-track job (more prostration and impoverishment, and at the end, if you win, you get a job for life with a handful of other crazies), and I decided against.

I will never forget the scorn and bitterness of an ex-art-professor I met in his second year of med school; he was in his early 50s.  He felt he'd been completely marginalized by the faculty, whom he believed had decided in advance that it wasn't worth being more than polite to him, since he was obviously too old to have a career in medicine.  One of them had said as much to him, as though it must've been obvious to him, too.

[tolerantly]

You have nothing to worry about.

For others, jaundice ahead:

It might depend on what you mean by "graduate school".  There are programs and fields where you'll see programs full of 40- and 50somethings, but for  most you're looking at years' worth of life with people in their early-to-late 20s -- not as a teacher, but as a sort of peer.  Before you do that, spend time with a gang of recent college grads, and see if this is really what you want.

I applied to a master's program last winter, and a month or so later came across a blog full of people who'd applied to that and similar programs.  It wasn't a good moment.  I'm a middle-aged mother, and I'd forgotten, or not noticed, just how much older I am.  Some of these people weren't properly out of adolescence.  And the reality is no, I do not want to spend the bulk of my time and energy with people at that stage of life -- I don't want to do it as a teacher, much less as a gray peer.  I've already been there.  Twice.  Don't need to do it again.  

When I first started querying around about "how old is too old" for PhD programs, I got what I suspect was a lot of happy horses*** about how of course, I wasn't too old, I ought to apply to top programs, etc. But had I started right away, I'd have been on the market in my late 40s. At the earliest, and early 50s would've been more realistic.  My experience of academia is that people are on the whole excruciatingly aware of appearances, fashion, and perceptions of prestige, and that there's routine sexism, ageism, and other forms of discrimination to a degree I haven't seen elsewhere in years.  Combine that with the way academia expects you to prostrate and impoverish yourself for the chance at a tenure-track job (more prostration and impoverishment, and at the end, if you win, you get a job for life with a handful of other crazies), and I decided against.

I will never forget the scorn and bitterness of an ex-art-professor I met in his second year of med school; he was in his early 50s.  He felt he'd been completely marginalized by the faculty, whom he believed had decided in advance that it wasn't worth being more than polite to him, since he was obviously too old to have a career in medicine.  One of them had said as much to him, as though it must've been obvious to him, too.

[bewilderedta]

I started grad school at age 30, and it seems like the upper-normal range for grad students in my (humanities) department.

But overall, I think this really depends on you. I think about moving around the country and having crazy stress until I'm getting towards fifty (if all goes well), and I feel like that's acceptable. If you don't think that would be acceptable to you, than I'd say either get in grad school now or see what else might make you happy.

Actually, seeing what else makes you happy has some distinct advantages, because after 5-10 years, you can always say, to heck with this, I'm going to grad school.

[harborcoat]

I'm 41. I returned to my undergrad uni last year, got my BA, and later this year--after the awful, paralyzing, ridiculously nervous wait-and-see process known as "applying to PhD programs"--I'm choosing between 3 great programs to start my grad studies in the fall.

I actually like the fact that I had a "life" in the years between finishing undergrad, and I think that it can only inform the journey I'm about to begin as an academic.

I will say, however, that it's odd to my ears--though increasingly common--to hear someone 22 worrying about being "too old" to do something in ten years time! I do agree with mdlrk--you have to live life forward.

And unlike tolerantly (who I hope I'm interpreting correctly), I have no problem interacting with people 20 years or so younger--I accept people where they are, remember my own dramatic and crazy youth, and expect that they'll mature at the same pace most of us do, slowly and by dint of lots of good and bad experiences. I've found that they appreciate it and that a lot of the new young "friends" I made while back in college liked having an older person around who didn't treat them like "young people" no matter how "properly out of adolescence" they were. I feel as if I learned as much from them as they seemed to think they were learning from me... :)

[polly_mer]

Notamotua,

While reading your post, I kept thinking "Those are the wrong questions."  Yes, people who finish Ph.D.s later in life may be at a disadvantage depending on what they did before going to get their Ph.D.s.

If you spend twenty years as a beach bum before going back to school at 45, chances are poor that you will get that tenure-track position.   However, having a rich, full intellectual life before returning to school as an older student can be an asset.  Some life experiences will be valuable to the process.  The benefit of additional maturity and experience working in the field are often good trade-offs for not jumping immediately into a graduate program.  On the other hand, you may not get those benefits if you take a bill-paying job that is completely unconnected with your interests and doesn't engage your mind in other fascinating fields.

The number of years you've drawn breath isn't the biggest factor in getting a tenure-track position.  The number of years of experience relevant to that position is a far greater factor as is the number of people competing for a given position.  A person with a shiny new Ph.D. but a very thin CV and a minimal network will lose out to the person who has a Ph.D. with a thick CV and a good network.  The only way that age plays into that equation is that people who have lived longer should be better at figuring out the important unstated parts of the professional life.  Thus, while younger people may have a perceived advantage because they have the potential of sticking around for decades in a department, older people can have an advantage by leveraging their past experience dealing with people, working in the field, and networking by relating to senior people in ways that are difficult for younger people.

Consequently, while you are working to support your family, think hard about where you want to be in five, ten, or twenty years.  Be strategic about your career choices, volunteer work, and leisure time.  The best piece of advice I ever received was "People want to hire those who can succeed.  Show that you will succeed by already doing many components of the job."  The corollary is that if you aren't motivated enough to do the kinds of things that will position you to take the next step, then you probably should be investigating other life paths.

[sciencephd]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPeVbEg1DHE

[octoprof]

I'd just like to ask when it's too late for graduate school.

Why assume any barriers exist relative to age? I have a friend who retired then went to graduate school to get a PhD at 60 and had a long and productive academic career.

[tolerantly]

And unlike tolerantly (who I hope I'm interpreting correctly), I have no problem interacting with people 20 years or so younger--I accept people where they are, remember my own dramatic and crazy youth, and expect that they'll mature at the same pace most of us do, slowly and by dint of lots of good and bad experiences. I've found that they appreciate it and that a lot of the new young "friends" I made while back in college liked having an older person around who didn't treat them like "young people" no matter how "properly out of adolescence" they were. I feel as if I learned as much from them as they seemed to think they were learning from me... :)

Yeah, I used to feel that way too.  Then I had my own kid, and now much of my life's about raising, protecting, and supporting her.  It's a lot of work, and it changes the perspective in a radical way.  When I hear the post-teen sex-driven angsting now, I think about the five years or so of relative peace and non-angsty civility I've got before my kid hits puberty, and I think, "Do I really want to go, voluntarily, and spend three of those years with young 20somethings?  Oh nooooo. No, I don't.  I need a rest."