Older PhD applicants

[lester]

I've been out of college for a little over a decade, and been working in the field continuously since that time (in Congress, intensive policy work, political campaigns, etc).

Everything I've read about the process states that it's very hard, ironically, for such applicants to be admitted to PhD programs -- supposedly because their academic skills may have atrophied, their recommendation letters will be hazier, there's a sense that their commitment may be questionable because they already chose a different professional route, etc.

Is this right?

I went to a top 10 undergrad university, with good (not perfect) grades, got 166 verbal and 160 quant on GRE, and have excellent work experience. Do I have a shot at a decent PhD program, or do I need, as some suggest, to apply for Masters programs first to ameliorate the problems listed above? (note: Doing a Masters is not really a realistic option for older applicants who may have families).

Thanks very much for any insights and tips for navigating this set of circumstances.

[GopherGrad]

"Everything I've read about the process states that it's very hard, ironically, for such applicants to be admitted to PhD programs -- supposedly because their academic skills may have atrophied, their recommendation letters will be hazier, there's a sense that their commitment may be questionable because they already chose a different professional route, etc.

Is this right?"

No.

Two challenges, both related to the idea that you need to prove yourself to be a capable academic researcher (not just smart, motivated or interesting, even if those things don't hurt):

1) At LEAST two letters of rec. should come from academic sources, so if you have not kept up with professors, try to get back in touch. You need people to vouch for your academic talents. Being a great employee simply doesn't count for much, unless your job involves academic-style research.

2) You will need to demonstrate a grasp of the SCHOLARLY debate you want to tackle in your research during the PhD. This mean that unless through work or interest in your free time you have been reading academic journals, you will need to do some good research to write a decent personal statement. Framing up your puzzles and interests in terms of the practical or policy problems you have faced in your career will not work. Even if the problems are substantively interesting and relevant, a failure to discuss them in the vocabulary of current academics may sink your attempt to prove that you can dive right in to research.

Do not underestimate how hard it can be for a professional to get in touch with the world of scholars. Do not assume that you're there. This second point of advice very much comes from my own experience. The best research statements are drawing from dozens of books and maybe over a hundred articles triangulating on the point of interest. The difference between my statement two years ago and the draft this round is immense, even though the meat of my interests hasn't changed much.

If (and only if) you can establish your research potential and that you are in touch with scholarly debate, your work and life experience will, up to a point, work in your favor.

Good luck,

[emmm]

I started grad school after 13 years out. I took classes part time before applying to get new references, and I had similar GRE scores. It can be done -- good luck!

[lester]

Thank you both. Very helpful. After lots of thought, I've decided to sit out this year's admissions cycle and see if I might be more appropriately suited/ready as a candidate by next year. Appreciate the feedback.