Ageism on the academic job-market?

In our June "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:

I am an older graduate student (circa 40) who, in the coming years, expects to go on the academic job market. In your experience, is it true that older candidates are often looked at less favorably than younger candidates? Is there some sense that, with a younger candidate, it is more likely that "her best work is ahead of her"? To the extent that this age bias is prevalent, are there ways for older candidates to mitigate its impact? More specifically, are there particular worries about older candidates that they might be able to address in their application materials?

These are important questions. We had a discussion about ageism and grad program admissions a while back. However, to my recollection we've never had a discussion about ageism and the job-market. On the one hand, I'm tempted to say--on the basis of our grad program discussion and my own experience on search committees--that I don't think ageism (particularly against someone in their 40s) is likely to be a big issue. On the other hand, ageism in job-markets in general is (sadly) well-established. Further, it would not surprise me much if age discrimination is highly implicit, with those who engage in it not able to reliably introspect their own motives. 

Anyway, I'm curious what readers think, both about the existence of ageism in academic job-markets and about what applicants might do to mitigate its potential impact. Anyone have any experience or insights here?

Comments

[Rosa]

I think that having relevant life experience can help you, and depending on what you did before your PhD, you might be in a good position here. Did you work in some kind of industry that would give you insight into stuff in your AOS? That might make you a much better researcher, or better able to collaborate with folks in other disciplines. Did you have a non-traditional path, and do you BA/BS later in life while supporting a family and working full time? That might help you connect with and support students who are working full-time, having caring responsibilities, etc - and at a huge number of schools, these students make up a big chunk of the student body. I'd highlight all of that, and show why the experience you've got is a benefit to their department, rather than trying to do anything to mitigate worries about age *itself*. Good luck!

[Aragorn]

I have heard explicitly ageist reasoning from a faculty member on a hiring committee (note though that this was in a natural science department, not philosophy). Their argument was something like this: "Younger candidates are still to "blossom", i.e., hit their productive stride. And if they do so while being a member of our faculty, then we get the prestige and reputation and (crucially in the sciences) grant money. So even if a younger candidate doesn't quite have the same experience or publication record as an older candidate, one can expect them to do their best work while being one of us, while the older candidates' best work might already be past them."

I know this kind of reasoning sucks, and I hate it, but I'm sorry to say it's out there.

[Prof L]

I would think that 40s would not be a huge issue—I mean, most of us are in our 30s when we get our PhDs, people also move around, etc., will they really even know how old you are? I can't tell a 43 year old from a 37 year old. I think it would start to hurt you around 50-60. It's a bummer, but I've seen older folks struggle on the market in humanities disciplines, despite having excellent research profiles.

[historygrrrl]

This is obviously really anecdotal, but my friends who went on the market as 'older' candidates - say, aged 35-50 - did *better* than the younger folks.

In some ways, it makes sense. Departments want somebody who is going to be a professional colleague, and it's hard to come off that way when you're 27 and don't know how to locate, purchase, and wear professional attire. Philosophy involves teaching, and faculty/deans are sometimes weirded out that the job candidate looks younger than the students. (At places with non-trad and grad students, I usually was.)

Philosophy is also one of the disciplines where many researchers improve with age. In virtue of being older and likely more mature, you may have a better dissertation and writing sample. There's a reason why people keep doing this stuff well into their 80s and even the emeritus faculty still want to read/write/talk philosophy.

[Anon TT]

My sense from being a search committee member is that it really just depends on the candidate and their file. Age is a factor in what a CV looks like, and I think reasonable people tend to make holistic assessments. Age alone might not matter (it certainly doesn't to me), but if a candidate had only 1 publication and was in their 40s, took 10 years to finish the PhD without a reasonable explanation that can be determined from the file, I'd have concerns.

For what it's worth, I landed my first TT job at 27 and I knew how to locate, purchase, and wear professional attire. One might worry that there is ageism going the other way sometimes, too, as I have experienced at conferences. My young age might have also been a strike against me for some schools where I interviewed, especially those with grad programs that had a bunch of students far older than me. So it might be an advantage for some schools and a disadvantage at others, again depending on the candidate and their file.