emilywantstogetin

I don't have any hard evidence of this, but the general impression I've gathered in the past 7 years studying in the US is that

1. In natural sciences, engineering, studio art, music performance...etc, where your Absolutely Perfect Grammar and Fantastic Vocabulary is not mandatory for success, there are always more international students than humanities and social science programs.

I know this hasn't taken into account Canadians, British, Australians, New Zealand-ers...etc. My apologies. I am just talking about folks who I can tell didn't grow up in the US.


2. What has been said about funding seems to be true.

3. If you did your undergrad in the US and you are into social sciences, you are in a very awkward situation, especially if your undergrad was not in a discipline geared towards Absolutely Perfect Grammar and Fantastic Vocabulary-- which, if you are international, I am guessing you are unlikely to major in English or ESL education ( I don't know that you are eligible for that, even if you do have excellent English)

Why is that? Because nobody knows what to expect from you in terms of your English. Obviously, you are still not a native speaker. But you've had more exposure than someone who did their undergrad in their home countries. So, if your English isn't so great, or if you speak like you grew up in Boston, nobody knows if they should be impressed, concerned, or if it's just normal.

To the folks who think/were told that they are too old for a meaningful career, and for the other folks whose life calendars (where you get your ph.D. at age 28, first job at 29, tenured by 40...etc)are thwarted--


Two things-

1. I once read that it takes roughly 10,000 hours of focused hard work, or 10 years of continuous effort, to become a trained expert in one field. That's just the training part.

2. Another thing I heard has to do with class mobility and career.

During the 10 years of training, it's very possible to climb up the ladder or fall flat on your face. We've all heard of people who graduated high school with a 2.0 GPA, but rocked out the dinky college they went to and was offered a full ride to Harvard. Or vice versa.

After that, the first 10 years of working professionally there are still some mobility, but much slower and much harder. Where it used to take only good grades and stellar papers to change where you stand, now you have to publish, win approvals of senior scholars, and come up with something original.

The second 10 years after your 10 years of training, you are basically stuck where you are. So, you work to become the best among second tier ______-ologists, you train students to move towards a higher level, you increase breadth. Or you continue to be the very best and move the field forward when you are shaving. Basically, the introductory paragraphs of the "career" chapter of your memoir are already written; now you make the best out of it and finish that chapter on a good note.


After that, whatever time you have left, you split between wrapping up your life and mentoring young-ins.

The person who said this is a businessman, so the number of years might not match exactly to an academic career. And of course, the desire to be the best of ___________ is different for everyone.

What I took from these are that

A. One can expect to have a meaningful career if they foresee another 30 years of productive life. This is assuming that none of their prior trainings is in their projected field or translatable to that field-- which is rarely the case.

If your field regularly see 70+ folks still kicking around, I would imaging a 40-year-old can and should expect a career.

B. Even if we are not in a formal training environment, there's nothing to stop us from getting started with those 10,000 hours.

C. You wouldn't be reading this if you don't still have 15-20 years of possible career class mobility. So, any more time spent sulking beyond its necessary cathartic functions, can be considered career-damaging.

To the folks who think/were told that they are too old for a meaningful career, and for the other folks whose life calendars (where you get your ph.D. at age 28, first job at 29, tenured by 40...etc)are thwarted--


Two things-

1. I once read that it takes roughly 10,000 hours of focused hard work, or 10 years of continuous effort, to become a trained expert in one field. That's just the training part.

2. Another thing I heard has to do with class mobility and career.

During the 10 years of training, it's very possible to climb up the ladder or fall flat on your face. We've all heard of people who graduated high school with a 2.0 GPA, but rocked out the dinky college they went to and was offered a full ride to Harvard. Or vice versa.

After that, the first 10 years of working professionally there are still some mobility, but much slower and much harder. Where it used to take only good grades and stellar papers to change where you stand, now you have to publish, win approvals of senior scholars, and come up with something original.

The second 10 years after your 10 years of training, you are basically stuck where you are. So, you work to become the best among second tier ______-ologists, you train students to move towards a higher level, you increase breadth. Or you continue to be the very best and move the field forward when you are shaving. Basically, the introductory paragraphs of the "career" chapter of your memoir are already written; now you make the best out of it and finish that chapter on a good note.


After that, whatever time you have left, you split between wrapping up your life and mentoring young-ins.

The person who said this is a businessman, so the number of years might not match exactly to an academic career. And of course, the desire to be the best of ___________ is different for everyone.

What I took from these are that

A. One can expect to have a meaningful career if they foresee another 30 years of productive life. This is assuming that none of their prior trainings is in their projected field or translatable to that field-- which is rarely the case.

If your field regularly see 70+ folks still kicking around, I would imaging a 40-year-old can and should expect a career.

B. Even if we are not in a formal training environment, there's nothing to stop us from getting started with those 10,000 hours.

C. You wouldn't be reading this if you don't still have 15-20 years of possible career class mobility. So, any more time spent sulking beyond its necessary cathartic functions, can be considered career-damaging.