Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Fool's avatar
  2. Santa Monica's avatar
  3. Charles Bakker's avatar
  4. Matty Silverstein's avatar
  5. Jason's avatar
  6. Nathan Meyvis's avatar
  7. Stefan Sciaraffa's avatar

    The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…

PhD Admissions and the Job Market for “Older” Students/Candidates

Brian Leiter

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY:  I hope more readers will comment on these issues!  Thanks

=========================

A philosophy student in Australia writes:

(1) To what extent are people applying to philosophy graduate programs at the top schools disadvantaged (in the selection process) if they are older than your average grads – say 35-40 years?

(2) To what extent are older graduates disadvantaged in the job market  once they’ve received their phds?

I get asked variations on this question every couple of months, and it occurs to me that I ought to solicit input from other philosophers, faculty and students, on this score.  I’d prefer signed comments, but as long as you use a real e-mail (it won’t appear) that matches the IP address, it’s OK to post anonymously on this thread.  I’ll add my own comments after others have weighed in with their perspectives and experiences. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

25 responses to “PhD Admissions and the Job Market for “Older” Students/Candidates”

  1. Chicken Little

    As far as question (1) goes the first thing that comes to mind is the disadvantage non-traditional students have on the GRE, especially the quant portion. Older students consistently score lower on that god-forsaken test and one would think this puts them at a disadvantage.

    I know there have been many debates on this blog (and others) about the capacity and the legitimacy of the GRE as an admissions tool, and there is a lot of data out there that can lead a person in many directions as far as how useful the GRE really is. But, in the case of non-traditional students, it appears less emphasis on the GRE is warranted.

    I don't think anyone can realistically argue that a lower GRE score means less intelligence no matter what your age. There is a difference between being less intelligent and less "standardized".

    What to do about this? Maybe consider waving the GRE for students with a Masters; i.e. displayed ability at the graduate level.

    Reply
  2. Peter

    I'm 30 and I just wrote my GRE. It was a useful experience. The quant was, indeed, an uneasy ramble through long-lost high school math that was both painful and pleasing. There's reference available from ETS that confirms lower quant (but higher verbal) scoring as a factor with age. I don't know about waving the GRE necessarily (it's often a requirement of the Graduate Department generally than the Philosophy Department in particular) , just be sure to interpret it appropriately to the candidate so best to give them a fair shake.

    My two-cents.

    Reply
  3. NonTradGrad

    I'm an older grad student, and I did okay on the quant portion of the GRE; I don't think it mattered TOO much, although I can't say for sure. I'm far more interested in hearing about the second question – ARE older PhD grads disadvantaged when applying for jobs? This had never even occurred to me as a possibility. I was, I guess, under the quaint impression that my philosophical work would be at issue, not my age. It's not like we're supermodels, anyway, with a useful career of only a few years.

    Reply
  4. Eric Schwitzgebel

    On (1): Speaking from my own experience on the admissions committee at a mid-ranked U.S. Ph.D. program, we don't explicitly consider age as a factor in admissions, and my sense is that there isn't much implicit bias either.

    One issue is the overall time trajectory of the applicant's schooling. If the applicant has spent a long time away from academia before applying, that can have a negative impact on the letters, and there may be issues about the applicant's commitment and readiness that don't arise as much for those who follow a more traditional path. For an older student who has recently completed a Bachelor's or Master's, however, there's no such issue.

    My impression is that for most admissions committees, the quantitative section of the GRE is substantially less important to one's application than one's grades, writing sample, and letters of recommendation. I also suspect (purely impressionistically) that older students write a bit better than younger ones on average.

    On (2): When I've served on hiring committees, we have interviewed applicants (for Assistant Prof positions) ranging from their 20s into (I'd guess) their 40s, maybe even a little older. I haven't noticed much explicit or implicit ageism. If anything, I suspect applicants who seem too young and green are a bit disadvantaged. However, if the applicant seems to be already near retirement age, it wouldn't surprise me if age became a factor (whether conscious or not, justified or not).

    Reply
  5. Michael Rosen

    As I understand it, we're talking about someone 35-40 who is applying to a Ph.D. program at a top university. The question in my mind is: how much recent philosophical training has this person had? If the answer is 'not a great deal' I can't imagine her having very much chance of being admitted (and rightly so, in my view — it's a matter of preparation, not age).

    If she has done a Masters or even a B.A. recently, however, I think that she would be looked at sympathetically in most departments. But, of course, everything will turn on the quality of work that she has produced there.

    Reply
  6. Stephen Nayak-Young

    My experience reflects what several of the above comments suggest: If you've been out of school for several years, applying to PhD programs is likely to be futile, but a good MA program could put you back in the running.

    I'm now 36. I applied to PhD and MA programs in 2006-07 and was rejected from all PhD programs but admitted to several MA programs. I entered U of Toronto's one-year MA program in fall 2007, applied again to PhD programs, and was admitted to several good schools, including Michigan, where I am starting this fall.

    It was tough to get up to speed and produce good enough work for a writing sample and to impress potential letter-writers in the first term of my MA (most application deadlines are in December and January), but I was both determined and fortunate in finding some great and helpful professors at Toronto.

    At Michigan, at least one other PhD student who is closer to 40 than 20 was recently admitted from an MA program, and I have met or heard of several other "non-traditional" students who gained acceptance to top programs after demonstrating their commitment and ability in MA programs. I'm sure there are exceptions, but for the most part, if you've been out of school for a few years, you should count on moving from MA to PhD rather than straight into a PhD.

    As for the job market, I can't yet comment, but I would of course be very interested to see further comments from those with relevant experience on either side of the job search.

    Reply
  7. Matthew Kramer

    One of my former PhD students — a really outstanding PhD student — began his job search in his mid-40s about six years ago. (He had practiced as a lawyer for 15 years before turning to philosophy.) Though he has ended up at a very good university, he encountered significant age-based discrimination at universities in both England and the USA. Some of the discrimination was quite overt (though I feel that I should refrain from providing details here).

    Reply
  8. João Abreu

    How frequently do the top 10 departments accept students older than, say, 35? By a quick look at the details provided at the graduate student lists available on-line, I feel that the higher a department is ranked, the less likely it is to have accepted older applicants. Is it really so?

    Reply
  9. Tim O'Keefe

    Another option for people who have been away from academia for a while is to enroll as a post-bacc student at a local university. Take a few classes, polish up your writing sample, and score some recent letters of recommendation–this can help alleviate worries about rustiness. (It can also help alleviate rustiness…)

    Reply
  10. Jonathan Cohen

    I'll restrict myself to speaking just on the question about grad admissions for somewhat older students (my data sample for placing such students in jobs is much smaller so I don't have much confidence on that topic).

    I would agree with other commentators who have served on grad admissions committees and report never having encountered in such committees overt discrimination against age per se. On the other hand, I think there are some worries that can arise more commonly for such students and that, if they do arise, need to be overcome by the rest of the application.

    One concern of this type that others have raised is that such students often have been out of academia — or even just outside academic philosophy — for a while, and consequently have a harder time putting together a competent-looking philosophical writing sample than do those whose philosophy-specific chops are recently honed.

    A second concern that hasn't yet been raised is about follow-through. If someone goes through 10 low-level jobs in 10 years between college and grad school application, for example, then there is reason to worry about whether that person would have the persistence to stick with a PhD program. And the committee really doesn't want to extend offers to people whom its members believe might abandon ship. Younger applicants might carry the same risks, but since they have fewer years in which to dabble around, those risks might not leap to mind quite as readily for the young 'uns as for someone who has a demonstrated track record in dabbling. Obviously, this concern wouldn't arise for every older applicant — it depends what the applicant has done and over what time period.

    Reply
  11. NonTradGrad

    There's a couple of different scenarios being discussed here, it seems, including: (1)an older student who completed his BA some time ago, attempting to get into PhD programs; (2)an older student who just completed a BA applying to PhD programs; (3) an older applicant for jobs who has just finished his PhD work (compartively late, then); and (4) an older applicant for jobs who finished his PhD work some time ago and – apparently – hasn't been a "working philosopher" during the interim. I took the thread to be mainly about (2) and (3), although this might simply reflect my own obsessions (I was in situation 2 and will be in situation 3). In any case, it seems pretty clear why the students in situations (1) and (4) would be at a disadvantage in their endeavors, so I'm sure what's really interesting there, and from several comments, it doesn't seem that (2) is much of a problem, as long as all the usual things (grades, writing, test scores, etc) are in order. So what seems most interesting is situation (3), and the sort of age-ism on the job market that even a recent and (hopefully) well trained PhD might face. I would hate to press Professor Kramer for details, but it seems like this is the sort of thing that should be discussed, not only to provide warning for older grad students like me of what we might be facing in an already competitive job market, but also to perhaps ameliorate the problem by throwing light on it. Is there anyone who thinks that such age-ism (which I recognize is a loaded term for it) is appropriate professional behavior?

    Reply
  12. Anonymous Grad

    Regarding the last section of Professor Cohen's comment, I spent less than five years out of undergrad in two jobs and was met with this objection when I went back to my undergrad profs (who were from a PGR top-20) for recommendations. The thought that students who spend a few years out in the non-academic world are less committed than students who've been taking classes every semester since kindergarten thus seems prevalent to me and most bothersome. Of course, I've not seen as many grad students as my professors, but it seems to me that students without real-world experience drop out just as frequently as students who make a more measured decision to study philosophy after trying out other things. Certainly, I think the completion of an MA program makes that resolve considerably more believable, but that's true for any student, regardless of whether he or she took a few years off. I just sense that a lot of people on admissions committees are going with their gut on this matter more than they're going with their heads. I know some philosophers endorse consulting intuitions before consulting data, but for this sort of decision it seems like the wrong move.

    Reply
  13. Mark Richard

    Speaking as the former chair of a fairly decent M.A. program that passes a large number of M.A.s onto very good Ph.D. programs:

    For our own program, age is not a factor for admission. Certainly some of our best students have been in (or pushing) their early to mid 30's, as they came to us with advanced degrees from outside of philosophy, or with non academic careers (stock broker, journalist, etc). And these students have had no problem whatever going on to the best Ph.D. programs and then excellent jobs. We certainly have had more than a couple of students in their 40s who did very well and went on to very good programs.

    I don't really know what to say about the second question so far as it concerns the profession as a whole. I'm sure there's discrimination against those over 50 in general; if philosophy was immune to it that would be a surprise. It should be well known that there are a lot of top philosophers who got their first TT job around or after 40. Guess: Don't worry if you'll be under 40 when you hit the market. Not much help, I know, if you're 38 and thinking about starting the Ph.D. process. But at least it's not BS.

    Mark Richard
    Philosophy, Tufts

    Reply
  14. Mark Lovas

    As an older philosopher, I've found the questions and discussion pertinent.
    However, I am reminded of a famous study about teachers who claimed that
    they called upon girls just as much as boys. When someone counted, it turned
    out that they did favor boys.

    Without a more external source of evaluation, one can't know what's really going on.

    By saying that I do not wish to in any way detract from the seriousness or candidness of previous commentators.

    Reply
  15. mark lovas

    Sorry Brian, In a posting I just made, I think I wrote "candidness".
    Should have typed "candor".

    Apologies,
    Mark Lovas, Ph.D.
    no affiliation

    Reply
  16. Matthew Kramer

    In response to NonTradGrad, I'll sketch the most glaring instance of overt discrimination to which I was referring. My former PhD student, whom I'll designate here as "Candidate X," applied in late 2002 or early 2003 for a job at a major English university. Several weeks after he was turned down for that job, I happened to encounter one of the members of the search committee. She promptly volunteered to me the information that Candidate X had been unanimously regarded as the most impressive applicant for the job. However, the committee had decided to offer the job to somebody else — Candidate Y — because…Candidate Y was in his late 20s, whereas Candidate X was in his mid-40s. This brutally candid explanation of the decision was offered politely but wholly unapologetically.

    Still, to encourage NonTradGrad, I should remark again that Candidate X has ended up with tenure at a very good university. With sufficient perseverance and flexibility, you should fare well.

    Reply
  17. Derek Bowman

    I'm an only slightly older than average grad student (early 30s), in part because of an unusual path through graduate school, and in part because of having taken a couple of years off, thought I was technically still enrolled in an MA program at the time.

    Speaking to Anonymous Grad's (@9/3 7:56) point about the correlation between time off and commitment to the field: The time I spent out of philosophy gave me a clear and vivid picture of an alternative life and career path, and that has strengthened my commitment to my philosophical career. It wasn't that I was unsuccessful outside of philosophy, but I just find philosophy so much more rewarding. Thus, even when I find myself getting frustrated with certain parts of the job (like grading or trying to explain to my family why I can't really say where I'll be moving after I finish my degree), I don't have any credible alternative in mind which would allow me to wish I were doing some other job.

    That said, Anonymous Grad's 2 jobs in 5 years is very different from Prof Cohen's hypothetical 10 jobs in 10 years. And an admissions committee may have a hard time distinguishing the person who keeps changing jobs because they're unhappy with non-philosophy/non-academic jobs, from those for whom philosophy will be yet another career path they're unhappy with.

    Reply
  18. Yuri Balashov

    I applied to a top-20 Ph.D. program in philosophy when I was 32. I finished my degree at 38 and landed a tt job at a research university (with an unranked Ph.D. program) at 39. By all counts, I was an older grad. student.

    It took me three full years on the job market to get this job. But I can say with some confidence that my age was not a factor at any point in the process. (Other considerations not in my favor were, in all likelihood, more important at early stages of my job search: not a native speaker, rather “un-American” in appearance and behavior, etc.)

    On the other hand, there was no interruption in my academic career. When I applied to a US program I already had an advanced philosophy degree and several years of teaching in my country (Russia), as well as an emerging publication record (including papers in US and British journals).

    Reply
  19. Jonathan Cohen

    Anonymous Grad worries about the concern I had mentioned about older students who had been through a large number of activities/jobs in a short number of years. But the concern wasn't, as reported, that "students who spend a few years out in the non-academic world are less committed than students who've been taking classes every semester since kindergarten". It was that students who spend a while after college doing many things for relatively short time periods (my perhaps extreme hypothetical example was having 10 jobs in 10 years) don't thereby demonstrate commitment to any one activity. In such cases it seems to me there is reason to be worried about persistence that there isn't with someone who simply spends a few years in the non-academic world.

    Of course, such worries may turn out to be unfounded. But since the admissions committee ultimately has to guess about future outcomes, they may factor in. And it seems to me germane to the original question since it is in the nature of the case that the problem is more likely to arise for somewhat older applicants….

    Reply
  20. Pil

    What if a person has 10 jobs over 10 years that get progressively better? Or what if a person has 10 jobs over 10 years that challenge the said person in different, interesting ways? The "10 year situation" may then seem less negative as it may have seemed initially.

    Reply
  21. Anonymous Grad

    To Professor Cohen:

    I understand your point, and it is a good one. I did not think your comment was not germane. Quite the opposite, actually. I was merely expressing my frustration with the impression I get from some professors who take the reasonable concern you described to the extreme.

    For instance, I have a friend whose undergraduate adviser (not in philosophy) had her in a state of panic after scolding her for even considering to take a non-academic job during her year off between undergraduate and graduate degrees. Another one of my friends from a top-10 liberal arts college (though, admittedly, also not in philosophy) was given similar advice.

    I just hope that on admissions committees they remember to make a clear distinction between dubious dabblers and late bloomers, especially since, in my biased view, frequently early bloomers haven't yet made the full commitment to philosophy required for serious graduate study.

    (Of course, I don't mean that early bloomers aren't the norm. My impression is that they are. It's just that enough students seem to drop out of PhD programs from any camp that saying an early bloomer is more likely to complete the program than a late bloomer is basically saying that one has a 45% chance of successfully completing the program while the other has a 35% chance.)

    Reply
  22. Max

    As the original poster, thanks a lot for all the very informative responses!

    Reply
  23. phree one

    As an older applicant, post-doc (43), I can tell you that if you do not have serious publications in the pipeline it will be tough. So tough in fact, that if you choose to lecture while writing, it will work against you in the search process until the publications come through. At least that has been my experience.

    My teaching credentials are great, but despite numerous awards for teaching, my lack of publications, (Ph.D. @ 39) has been a major detractor from all applications. I've had to stop lecturing and take a writing break to even out the score. Still it is a struggle and I am having a hard time reestablishing my connections to persons in my field. Publish first, teach later because no matter the lip service given to teaching, no one really cares about good teaching. You'd have to be horrible to not meet the teaching standards at most schools, but search committees expect brilliance in publishing, which is not realistic given the attitude most journals have towards potential contributors.

    Reply
  24. Chris

    Profile:

    34 year old; practising law for past 2 years; completed mandatory 1-year articling term at large law firm after completing standard 3-year Bachelor of Laws. Prior to this, taught high school for 3 years after obtaining 1-year Bachelor of Education. Prior to this completed 4-year Honours Bachelor of Arts.

    I know there would be further questions to ask of me, but based upon the above profile sketch (only) could anyone tell me if, based upon the previously-posted views, I am foolish to be thinking of applying to a PHd philosophy program — because I am feeling that way after reading the comments?

    Reply
  25. Tim O'Keefe

    No, you're not foolish.

    Coming out as a 40 y.o. (or so) Ph.D. with some prior background in law plus teaching HS, I'd guess you'd have a decent shot a getting a decent job if everything else was OK–with the caveat, of course, that a decent shot may still be not so great.

    Reply

Designed with WordPress