PhD supervisor younger than me... does it matter?

[CommonFishDiseases]

Hi everyone, would value your thoughts...

I'm mid-30s and considering doing a PhD. I did my Masters 8 years ago. I have about 12 years' work experience in various fields. I am self-motivated, driven, academically able and don't require much hand-holding.

SO... I met with a prospective supervisor this morning. I think we would work well together and she does challenge me but not in an intimidating way! I feel I can be honest and vulnerable with her, if that makes sense. She is keen, as has never supervised a PhD before, which I think could be a positive thing as she would be more conscious about 'getting it right'.

HOWEVER I've just done a sneaky online stalking exercise and she is younger than me..........

Does this matter? Am I being ageist? Is her lack of supervisor experience a huge risk? Maybe my second supervisor could be someone older with more gravitas and experience?! For my Masters I was supervised by a 'celebrity' academic in the field, who I could barely get a 10 minute appointment with, so it wasn't that great after all.

Appreciate any advice!

I can kind of understand where you are coming from - however my boss is 7 years younger than me, with significantly more "power" and earns almost double what I do.

Lucky her, is what I think!

So YABU, in the kindest way

My PhD supervisor is very senior and well known in our field... which means in practice he's barely engaging in current empirical research and I'm left feeling a little out of the loop as a result.
An early/mid-career supervisor could be a real asset in comparision. If she challenges you intellectually and you feel you can be honest with her, that sounds like the basis of an excellent supervisory relationship!

I supervise people older than me. It's not about age but knowledge. With my students they know more about their specific subject than I do but I know more about research. However, someone who has not supervised a PhD before should be a cosupervisor first so you should be looking for a second more experienced cosupervisor.

I'm doing a PhD at the moment. I'm 52. My supervisor is about 7 years younger. However, she's about 20 years ahead of me on this academic pathway, which is what counts! I think the relationship is a bit different when one is older than the supervisor - she's not teaching me grammar or how to organise my time, but her knowledge of the subject and of academia is obviously much greater than mine and why I'm there. I think this is only a problem if you perceive it as one. However, as previous posters said, its more of a concern if she's not supervised people before...

As cauliflower says, having this person as a co-supervisor sounds ideal, at our institution all supervisors supervising for the first time have to be co-supervisors, and it's very common to pair with an older experienced supervisor. I don't think you can generalize too much about age, there are some great and very involved senior staff with lots of PhD students at my uni, but a few slackers, with the less experienced staff they often put a lot of effort in, I do with my students.

Ultimately, someone has to be your first PhD student! Mine now works in my organization, so I'm very happy with the outcome and I think they were too.

yes, ageist.

Lack of experience is a different problem, but you can't tell which way it will be a problem. What do the PG satisfaction surveys say for this dept? What training do supervisors get, what support do PGs get & what systems & checks does the institution have for making sure PGs are making good progress?

What's your end goal? Do you want to go into academia? Because networks might be important if you do and a more established supervisor (regardless of age) may provide that. I see no other issues though, I supervise several PhDs who are older than me

Thank you all! Your advice has been very helpful

Ageist.

She's got more experience than you. She's done a PhD for a start. You really will have to get over such judgement of people's value by chronology.

If it's a halfway decent university, you'll have a 2nd supervisor, who has supervised before, and will also work as a mentor for your principal supervisor.

Look, you have to realise that entering academia at this high level - as a PhD student - will challenge you in lots of ways. You'll have a lot of your asumptions turned upside down - that's how you'll develop an original piece of work. So see this as the start!

Age is irrelevant. It is experience that matters.

Someone is always going to be someone's first PhD student. However, I would caution you against doing your PhD with someone who has not supervised a PhD project before unless you have significant experience in the area you wish to study, knowledge about how to run a project, and a solid understanding of your field. If you don't have this, it would be wise to select an advisor who has experience in training people. You will be at a disadvantage if you need a lot of training if you select someone who has not had experience in training to that level.

If you want to work in academia, you will have to get over the fact there will be people cleverer, younger, smarter and so on. I know quite a few professors younger than me, I'm a slow-coach by comparison! But I still feel I'm doing interesting work and will keep getting on career-wise, sometimes others shoot ahead of you- the trick is to find out why they do so well and take advice from them, I've learned a lot from a colleague of mine who is very successful and younger than me.

Both of my PhD students are older than me. It never occurred to me that they might think it was an issue. They've both had professional careers and have decided to shift into academia first.

I agree with others that it's much better to have a supervisor who will have time for you and with whom you feel comfortable than a superstar who'll barely give your work a glance.

Same here - age does not matter, and everyone will have a "first".
I have supervised approx ~15 PhDs to date.

Approx half are / have been older than me - there are time where it has not worked, and it usually came from a place of bias on the part of the student. I have a good track record with my PhD graduates, so things are more straightforward now, and they know what they are in for when they join our group.

One BIG advantage: you may well be her ONLY one for a while, which is a total luxury / indulgence!

I was my supervisor's only student for two years (and his first student as primary supervisor). It meant he had loads of time for me.

Having a young supervisor also means they'll be around for a long time to mentor you/write references. A couple of my cohort were supervised by the hot-shot prof who is now the emeritus hot-shot prof, and getting him to write references on time or respond to emails is a nightmare.

LRDI have known that, I know someone whose supervisor has retired, very difficult then for them to get references/contacts as the person just isn't motivated (although some emeritus are not like that, I have an amazing referee who still makes the effort over a decade after his retirement).

DH is supervising his first student and he is only 30, but he has so much time for her AND his own boss is there too for back up and advice. He also has a very strong vested interest in her doing really well as it's proving himself too. When he was doing his phd his high up experienced supervisor was almost inaccessible and even now, 5 years on nigh on impossible to pin down for the odd paper review etc. So often the work was outdated before it was published because the supervisor was too busy to read anything. I'm biased but i'd choose dh out of the two!

I have supervised a few PhDs older than me as I worked in a department that specialised in continuing education. Some were even professors in their area of expertise but wanted to learn more about my discipline (which was relevant to their main area of work). It was never a problem. They were highly motivated, intelligent people and we got on really well.

If you are concerned perhaps it's worth asking for a second supervisor whom you will only see once or twice a year to check on overall progress. This is standard anyway in some institutions and is good practice not only for supporting more junior first time supervisors but for offering another set of eyes to judge overall progress. It also helps if supervisor no1 goes on research leave as supervisor no2 just takes over seamlessly.

I tend to look younger than I am (maybe not anymore!!!!) so I've had my fair share of startled looks when I walked to the front of the room, but as soon as I speak people realise I know what I am doing and I've never had any problems gaining the respect of my students.

I was older than my supervisor and although not her first student, I was only her second or third and I was her first at the particular uni she had recently moved to. As she was new and settling in, I was also her only supervisee for a while. I got a 'pass no revisions' at viva! So the relationship and her guidance must havd worked well! I'd say your relationship and your fit with your supervisors style and research background are (much) more important than age! (I stared off with a different, much more experiencd and established supervisor, but we completely didn't click!! .. if I'd not changed, I dread to think what my PhD journey would have been like! and I doubt I'd have passed, let alone have been awarded 'no revisions' !