Wow, so many replies! I can't keep up with them all :-)

Glad to see there's lots of people around here who have gone straight onto PhD. There's one other guy in my department who's my age so we sometimes have a little rant together, but I still manage to convince myself that he's way more prepared than me.
With regards to what PhDbug and others were saying about the masters, you're totally right...I think I was just trying to convince myself that I'm not at a disadvantage because I didn't do one. Really I should just be accepting that I am at a disadvantage but that doesn't mean I can't have a damn good shot at it anyway. As for sitting in on some Master's modules A116, that sounds like a good idea but I'm sure I mentioned it to my supervisor a while ago and there was some reason I couldn't do it. Might be worth asking about again though as it will probably help me feel more prepared.

Thanks everyody for making me feel a bit better though
(up) xx

Not trying to upset anyone here, but I think it would be a good idea if PhD programmes followed the lead of most decent MBA courses and insisted students be of a certain minimum age and/or work background.

I would have to absolutely disagree. I know tons of brilliant scholars who by sheer dint of an inquisitive mind and a commitment to learning, and above all, with a great deal of humility, have got their PhDs at early ages and are immensely succeful in their fields of study. I also know many people who have joined the PhD after collecting years of widom and have not necessarily been very wise with their work. we shall find exact oppsoties to this as well, which just proves I think what all of us here in this discussion ahve been tryint o say: it makes no sense to fix lines of age EITHER way, this way or that.

I work with a supervisor who is a phenomenal success in our field got her PhD at a relatively young age in those days, and today I stand to get a PhD in 2011-12 at the same age as which she got hers. In no way has anything been difficult, on the contrary, youth provides many advantages(just as experience does).

Fixing age-marks for things like these? an MBA needs ro measure professional experience which is why the requirement for years of work, a PhD measures intellectual preparation and supervisors and boards have experience enugh to realise what they are taking on. MBA programmes mention years of experience not age, their philosophy is to focus on what you have done not how old you are (the two may coincide thats a different issues). I say this as the child of a parent who is at the heart of these decisions in a 'respectable' B School. much in the same way PhD programmes have a more qualitative way of deciding intellectual preparation, and again, not age.


I stand to receive my PhD at the age of 26. I have friends who will receive theirs at the age of 46. We have fantastic intellectual exchanges. Fixing an 'age' line is ageist whether it privileges a certain age this way or that way. It is 'other' things that need evaluation, and PhD programmes and MBA programmes both do that in their very distinctive ways.

======= Date Modified 29 Nov 2008 13:21:54 =======
What's a 'B School'? Just wondering.

Edit - Sorry. Only half-heatedly reading your post. You mean a business school I'm sure.

Age can reflect in the quality of a PhD, but this very much depends on the circumstances. It ultimately depends on one's subject matter and whether other experience would contribute to a better quality thesis. E.g. someone who has practiced law for 10 years will undoubtedly produce a better thesis than someone who has not, and I'm sure the same is true for other professional disciplines. Having read a few theses, there is quite a marked difference between the work of a 20something and the work of a 40something, and I've never met a 20something PhD who has had their work published with OUP or CUP. BUT, this doesn't mean a 20something is any less deserving of a PhD than an older candidate..afterall the work goes to examiners who probably do not know the age of the candidate and they 'should' be judging the work purely from an objective point of view.

Whether age (or should I say experience) is a factor really depends on the PhD discipline/subject matter of the PhD. For instance, there is no way I could write my subject matter without a masters degree.

Golfpro - Do you have any reasons for minimum ages?

Missspacey - I agree that the majority of the time experience is beneficial but I think that sometimes those who haven't had that experience can bring a fresh pair of eyes to the research problems or a fresh perspective.

A

hmmmm, I got my PhD age 23.... Couple of Nature papers on, don't think I'm doing too badly....