ADVANCE: Institutional Transformations for the
Future of the Faculty
Annual Report
June 2008-June 2009
Table of Contents:
1. Project
Participants:
ADVANCE Steering Committee Members
2. Partner
Organizations
3. Introduction
4. Recruitment and Retention
A) Policy and Recruitment
B) Policy on Retention
5.
Faculty Development
A) Mentoring
B)
WomenÕs Academy
C)
Bonnie Cone and Solution Team Awards
D)
Leadership UNC Charlotte
6. Outreach
7.
Publications and Products
A) Poster
Presentations
B)
Publications
i)
Journal Articles
ii)
Book Publications
C)
Conference Presentations
D)
Grants Subsequently Awarded
E)
Patents Filed
8. Evaluation Activities
A) NSF Toolkit Data Summary
B) NSF Toolkit Data Summary
C) Equity salary study
9. Appendices
1. PROJECT PARTICIPANTS
Principal Investigator:
Joan
F. Lorden: Provost; Vice Chancellor
for Academic Affairs
Co Principal Investigators:
Yvette M. Huet: Department of Biology: Dr. Huet is the
Project Manager to the ADVANCE grant. She has worked43 months on the
ADVANCE grant.
Cann, Arnie: Department of Psychology: Dr. Cann works
as an evaluator and works on the project for three months annually.
Mickelson, Roslyn Arlin: Department of Sociology: Dr. Mickelson
continued to work as an evaluator until December, 2008. She worked 1
month on the project this year.
ADVANCE Steering Committee Members:
Blat, Catherine: Student Development and Success. Dr.
Blat works on the Competitive Awards Program. She receives a time release for 0.5 months.
Buch, Kim: Psychology. Dr.
Buch works on the mid-career mentoring initiative and works 0.5 months a year.
Coger Robin: Mechanical Engineering. Dr Coger chairs the
Competitive Awards program and works 0.5 months a year.
Gutierrez, Nancy: Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. She
is on the UNC Charlotte Leadership Committee. She has worked 0.5 months
for the ADVANCE Grant.
Hilger, Helene: Civil and Environmental Engineering. She sits on the
UNC Charlotte Leadership Committee. She has worked 0.5 months for the
ADVANCE Grant.
Schmaling, Karen: Dean of the College of Health and Human
Services. She chairs the Committee for the Future of the Faculty.
She has worked 0.5 months on the project.
Sell Susan. Assistant Dean in the Graduate School.
Dr. Sell is on the Future of the Faculty Committee and is part of the
team for the Competitive Awards Program. I would take her off the list.
Tong, Rosemarie. Center for Professional and Applied Ethics. Dr
Tong is a member of the WomenÕs Academy. She works 0.5 months
Wayland, Coral: Department of Anthropology and Program Director for
WomenÕs Studies. She is the chair of the WomenÕs Academy. She works 0.5 months
Peta Katz: Advance Grant Coordinator. She is employed full time and coordinates projects for the
ADVANCE grant
Students:
Neena Banerjee: A graduate student in Sociology. She works 20
hours a week with the evaluation team.
Krupesh Thacker: A graduate student in Public Health Policy. He works 20 hours a week in the ADVANCE
Faculty Affairs Office.
2. PARTNERS
We have formed alliances with the UNC Bridges Program, which aims to
develop and sharpen the skills of women alumni of the UNC system in the realms
of administration and leadership.
The Bridges alumni on our campus hold monthly meetings for networking
and are often called on to carry out projects, such as the focus groups that
address pertinent career issues, and the subsequent follow up meetings with all
women faculty and staff. We will
continue to work with these groups.
Because the UNC Bridges program is a UNC system-wide program, this
alliance allows us to bring the work of ADVANCE to our 16 sister institutions.
The
ADVANCE Program is located in space that is contiguous with the Office of the
Council on University Community. The Chancellor charged the Council, which
was appointed in 2006, with leading diversity efforts at UNC Charlotte, and
advising him on means to create and sustain an inclusive environment that
values the presence of people with diverse backgrounds, experiences, and
ideas. The Council is comprised by members of the ChancellorÕs cabinet
and chaired by Provost Joan Lorden. The Council launched the ChancellorÕs
Diversity Challenge Fund, a mini-grant program to fund faculty, staff, and
student initiatives to promote the value of diversity at UNC Charlotte. The Council has also completed a draft
of the university Diversity Plan. Ms. Kerrie Stewart, staff to the Council, has
drawn heavily on the work of the ADVANCEÕs Committee on the Future of the
Faculty, in providing input to the Council for the Diversity Plan. Ms. Steward
works with the ADVANCE staff to raise campus awareness around diversity and
inclusiveness issues, share data relevant to gender and equity, and work with
and through ADVANCE initiatives to promote equity and inclusiveness in policy
and climate.
The
ADVANCE Program partnered with the Center for Professional and Applied Ethics
to host several speakers. This
provided several opportunities to raise awareness of the ADVANCE ProgramÕs
goals and initiatives to students and faculty from across the institution.
3. INTRODUCTION
The ADVANCE
Institutional Transformation Project was designed to address the specific needs
of gender equity at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. The aims of
the grant are to increase the recruitment, retention and promotion of women in
the STEM disciplines, notably science, technology, engineering and mathematics.
We report here
on project activities occurring since our last annual report, June 1st 2008, which includes the last quarter of project
Year Two and three quarters of project Year Three.
During Year 3
of the University of North Carolina CharlotteÕs NSF ADVANCE Institutional
Transformation for the Future of the Faculty Award, we have continued to make
strides in the recruitment, retention and advancement of women in the STEM
disciplines.
In the fall of
2006, (the inception of the grant), 27.7% of the Assistant Professors and 33%
of the Associate Professors hired were women, for a total of six new STEM women
faculty. In 2008-2009, 20% of new
tenured/tenure-track positions in STEM were women (12 males and 3 women)
including one spousal hire. This
is a decrease from the previous year and we are working to understand if this a
one year drop and possible changes to our current recruitment workshops.
In 2006 all
four women who were eligible for tenure and promotion were successful. This
number includes one woman in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. In 2007, 5
women were eligible and received tenure. While these nine women have added to the
diversity of their departments, 22 men were promoted and tenured during the
same period. Thus, 18.5% of those
receiving tenure were women. In contrast, in 2008-2009 one woman was promoted
to Full Professor and 5 women received tenure in STEM disciplines. There were no men that were promoted to
Full Professor and 11 men received tenure an increase to 45% of faculty
receiving tenure being women.
The data on
recruitment, promotion and tenure indicate the need for the broad based
approach to institutional transformation that we are engaged in with the help
of the ADVANCE Program. At this point, our proposed initiatives are in place
and we are evaluating their effectiveness. For example, we have conducted
recruitment workshops for search committees to emphasize best practices and
ways to avoid cognitive biases.. More details on evaluation are presented
below. The ADVANCE Leadership Team has met to discuss progress and policies. In
addition, this committee has guided and implemented the projectÕs initiatives. As
of writing this report all of our initiatives are in place and are reaching
their target audience.
The NSF 3rd
year review team had their site visit at the end of April, 2009. They met with every constituency of the
ADVANCE program as well as individuals that have not participated in ADVANCE
initiatives. To date we have not
received the report from the site visit.
However, the observations of the site reviewers will be used to guide
our future plans for years 4 and 5 and beyond.
4.
Recruitment and Retention
Recruitment and Retention of faculty continues its focus in two major
areas. A) Faculty recruitment seminars of which focus on unconscious bias,
university diversity goals, places to seek underrepresented candidates, how to
conduct interviews that facilitate gender equity and the hiring process itself.
In 2008-2009 we held four such workshops open to anyone but required of at
least one member of a search committee. B) The continued efforts of the
Committee on the Future of the Faculty.
Policy Changes
A) Recruitment
We have expanded the
training of faculty search committees.
The recruitment workshops use an interactive case study format. The discussions have been engaging and
have allowed faculty across the campus to share successful approaches to
recruitment. The initial intent
was that one member of every search committee would attend a workshop. In
practice, multiple members have often attended and, in 2008, the department
chairs requested that an additional workshop be added to accommodate hiring
committees. Feedback from the
Program Evaluation Team (PET) has helped structure the workshop to more
effectively meet the needs of the faculty. In addition, the PET has recently completed a study of
patterns in STEM faculty hiring by gender and rank from 2004 to 2008. The data indicate that the proportion
of women hired at the assistant professor level has decreased slightly although
the total number of women has
increased (29% to 25%; n=18 vs. 20).
This is of concern, but appears to be a function of a large amount of
hiring in fields in which there are relatively few women candidates. Importantly, the percentages of women
STEM associate and full professors have increased over the same time
period. This appears to be due, in
part, to the hiring of relatively more women than men at the associate
level. It is also worth noting
that before the start of the ADVANCE project, UNC Charlotte had only one female
distinguished professor. This
year, there are five. Further review of this programÕs outcomes is
underway. Nonetheless, it is clear
that there has been some change in behavior that coincides with attendance at
the recruitment workshops and the emphasis placed on fair and effective hiring
practices.
On the policy and practice side, the Committee on
the Future of the FacultyÕs purpose make changes where necessary to remove
barriers that might impede the recruitment, retention and full professional development
of women faculty members, especially those in the STEM Disciplines. UNC Charlotte has allowed faculty to
stop the tenure clock for family leave for many years. This past year, ideas
from the FFC for expansion of family friendly policies include a recommendation
that the University add new rationales for the extension of the tenure clock.
Other policy recommendations relevant to the success of women faculty include
allowing for multiple pathways for promotion to full professor such as those
involving contributions in leadership. The work of the FFC was launched early
in the project, recognizing that it would take time to deliberate over policies
and build support for change.
Previous recommendations have proceeded through the Faculty Council and
revisions to policies are being drafted.
In addition, the position of Ombudsman will begin this fall and will
include formal training.
High priority items for the next two years that
have been generated by our work to date include: improvement in clarity for the
standards and criteria around promotion and tenure; improvement in annual
evaluations of faculty at both the pre- and post-tenure levels; addressing ways
to structure start-ups in STEM areas to better meet the needs of women faculty;
refining mentoring and orientation programs; and implementing an effective dual
career program. Our data indicate
that women faculty experience greater degrees of work/life stress. This is an area that we need to explore
in more detail to determine whether the policy and other changes we have put in
place are having an impact on this dimension of faculty life.
We have attempted to bring women of color and
issues that are important to them into all our programs. However, we have
had only a few aspects of the project that have been specifically targeted
toward women of color. ADVANCE in the spring of 2009 sponsored an
AAC&U Campus Women Lead workshop that was designed specifically for women
of color. This is an area in which
we still have work to do.
5. Faculty
Development
There are four major components of the faculty development
program. A) The Mentoring
Program. B) The WomenÕs
Academy. C) Bonnie Cone
Fellowships and Solution Team Awards. D) Leadership UNC Charlotte.
A) The Mentoring Program
Currently there are
two programs in place, the New Faculty Mentoring Program and the Mid-Career
Mentoring Program. The New Faculty
Mentoring Program has completed its second year. Early data indicate that when paired with mentors with whom
they make a positive connection, new faculty found the program useful. However, the programÕs impact on
retention is difficult to determine after only two years of operation. It is clear that good pairings are
extremely important and we continue to make changes to improve the matching
process. Anecdotal data on the
program derived from the ProvostÕs new faculty luncheons suggests that women
often find it helpful to be paired with other women with similar family
circumstances, regardless of discipline.
While not part of the mentoring program, the new faculty orientation has
been developed and refined continuously.
With the mentoring program and the orientation program, first year
faculty across the institution report feeling well supported.
At the recommendation of our external reviewers the Mid-Career
Mentoring Program began during Õ08-Ō09.
Monthly meetings have provided opportunities for associate professors
across campus to meet to discuss the benefits of and barriers to promotion.
Most recently a template for development plans has been circulated to help
define goals and ways to meet those goals. In addition, a pilot program is underway in which women
associate professors that have been in rank for more than 6 years are paired
with professors for the purpose of reviewing the associate professorÕs C.V.
and, development plans and to help define steps necessary to achieve both
short- and long-term goals.
The goal of the UNC Charlotte Leadership Program
has been to expand the number of faculty with skills in inclusive
leadership. Focused on issues at
the department level and organized around case studies, leaders (chairs and
program coordinators) and emerging leaders from across the institution meet for
networking, discussion, and skill development. Of the 24 faculty in the first
cohort, 6 have taken on new administrative duties in positions of chair (3),
dean or director of a school (2) and University Ombudsman (1). While careful evaluation is needed, we
can at least say that these individuals had the opportunity for more systematic
preparation than is often the case in academia.
The fledgling ŅFocus Energy FridayÓ coffees are
important networking opportunities for faculty. While these coffees were not in the original proposal, we
heard of other institutions using such meetings successfully and thus had
planned to have them weekly, rotating among different groups. However, the only consistent meetings
have been those for the Mid-career Mentoring Program. With added staff, we plan to resume rotating weekly
meetings. These will provide
regular opportunities to meet and discuss career issues with colleagues in an
informal setting.
B) The WomenÕs Academy
The WomenÕs Academy was proposed as a structure
to facilitate networking, mentoring, and collaboration and to enhance the
visibility of womenÕs contributions to science. The initiative has evolved in two directions. The FAO has largely subsumed the
networking and mentoring functions of the WomenÕs Academy as faculty support
programs continue to expand. The
speakers program envisioned as part of the WomenÕs Academy has evolved into a
co-sponsorship program in which ADVANCE has partnered with centers and
departments to bring to campus distinguished scholars to discuss gender issues
in academia and to present the research of women in a variety of fields. This
program has sponsored visits from Deidre Mulligan, and Helen Nissenbaum, among
others. Workshops on gender issues
led by several of these speakers have been targeted to department chairs and
deans.
C). Bonnie Cone Fellowship and Solutions Team Awards
The Competitive
Awards Program (CAP) includes both individual Bonnie Cone fellowships and
unit-based Solutions Team Awards. The Bonnie Cone
Fellowship is awarded to individual applicants in one of two categories: young or mid-career. This was the first year that we
extended awards specifically for mid-career women as recommended by the
external reviewers. This year we
received 10 submissions, of which 3 were successful at the young investigator
level and 4 at the mid-career level.
Awards requested included summer salary, conference attendance, career
coaching, graduate student support and technical assistance. These fellowships have two purposes. First, we want to provide flexible
support to women to help them overcome the work/life stresses that we detect in
our surveys of faculty. Second, by
letting women self-select the kinds of support they need, we will be gathering
data on the kinds of interventions they consider most important and that lead
to positive outcomes in promotion and tenure.
An evaluation of the
Cone program based on individual interviews with 16 of the 18 women awarded
fellowships in 06-07 and 07-08 indicated that the program has been effective on
a number of levels. The women were
able to formulate career development programs that advanced their research
careers. In addition, the program has provided insight into the kind of support
mechanisms that are most helpful, particularly to beginning women faculty. The funds allowed women to make contact
with new mentors and collaborators and to attract students to their labs. The flexibility in when and how the
funds could be spent allowed the women to fill gaps in start up packages that
may not have been anticipated at the time that they negotiated for their positions. The awards have also helped boost the
confidence of the awardees, providing them with a more positive view of the
institution.
The Solutions teamÕs
awards were proposed to stimulate thinking about the obstacles to the
advancement of women at the unit level and to seek creative solutions. While, the number of competitive
proposals has not been as robust as we would like, we did have one proposal
this year ,which was funded.
Previously, the Department of Psychology received a Solutions Team Grant
that resulted in a report on the climate for women and the outcomes of
recruitment and retention initiatives for women and women faculty of color. The
Department is working on solutions for issues raised in the report.
D.
Leadership UNC Charlotte
The goal of the UNC Charlotte Leadership Program
has been to expand the number of faculty with skills in inclusive
leadership. Focused on issues at
the department level and organized around case studies, leaders (chairs and
program coordinators) and emerging leaders from across the institution meet for
networking, discussion, and skill development. This year, the faciliators were largely internal
leaders. However, COACh also
facilitated a workshop on The Power of Strategic Persuasion which was very well
received. We will also seek ways to continue to develop and support the
Leadership Program. We have
introduced training in the Leadership program on how to run meetings and will
consider developing a meetings workshop similar to our recruitment workshop for
committees such as reappointment, promotion, and tenure committees
Of the 24 faculty in the first cohort, 6 have
taken on new administrative duties in positions of chair (3), dean or director
of a school (2) and University Ombudsman (1). While careful evaluation is needed, we can at least say that
these individuals had the opportunity for more systematic preparation than is
often the case in academia.
6. Outreach
Activities
Outreach
activities have been numerous and varied.
ADVANCE has supported workshops on publishing, negotiations and
difficult conversations, etc.
These have been open to all faculty and attended by both men and
women.
We
have hosted speakers that include Sue
Rosser on Gender issues in promotion and tenure as well as in patents; Helen
Nissenbaum on equality, diversity, and creativity; and Deirdre Mulligan on
Civil llberties during crisis.
These speakers have been available for multiple seminars and luncheons
that were open to the broad institutional audience as well as targeted
groups.
Dr. Lorden, Dr. Yvette Huet and Dr.
Peta Katz attended the PI meeting in 2008 and presented a poster.
Dr. Yvette Huet was interviewed along
with other local individuals for our local NPR affiliate, WFAE. The issues discussed pertained to
science education.
7. Publications and Products
A. Journal Publications (funded by Bonnie Cone
Fellowships):
B. Peer-Reviewed
Conference Publications:
(supported by Bonnie Cone Fellowships)
8. Evaluation Activities
The Evaluation Team, consisting of Dr. Roslyn Mickelson, Dr Arnie Cann, and
graduate student Neena Banerjee, have been engaged in three major data
collection and analysis activities during the reporting period. First, they have collected data and
prepared tables 1-11 of the ADVANCE toolkit. Second, UNC Charlotte has participated in several national
surveys of faculty, including the UCLA Higher Education Research Institute
(HERI) survey. Since we have data
from three successive administrations of this survey, the Evaluation Team has
done a longitudinal analysis of questions relevant to climate and experience
for the STEM faculty. Finally, the
Evaluation Team performed an equity salary study.
A) The HERI Data Summary
UNC
Charlotte has participated in the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI)
survey of faculty every 3 years since 1998. This report examines data from the last three
administrations of the survey (2001-2002, 2004-2005, and 2007-2008) and looks
only at questions that have potential relevance to issues addressed by the
Advance initiatives.
Six themes are
considered:
1. Overall Climate
2. Career Choice and Views of the
Profession
3. Lifestyle and Personal/Professional
Goals Compatibility
4. Perceptions of the University Practices
and Priorities
5. Satisfaction with Aspects of OneÕs Job
6. Sources of Stress
For
some of the issues concerning general climate, the data were considered from
all faculty who responded regardless of their rank. In most other cases, because the questions applied to
issues primarily relevant to tenure track faculty, only data from faculty in
professorial ranks were considered.
Based
on a comparison with the number of faculty identified in the Institutional
Research faculty data base, the response rate was around 40% for each
administration of the HERI survey (2001, 41%; 2004, 40%; 2007, 43%). The
distribution of faculty by rank in each sample appears to be comparable to the
overall distribution within the entire faculty.
A
summary of the findings for each theme is provided with representative
data. The actual frequencies of
responses to each question, broken down by year, gender, and area (STEM or
NonSTEM) are provided in the Appendices.
In each section, the specific questions asked are listed, and the pages
in the Appendices on which the detailed responses are provided are
indicated. Statistical analyses
were conducted to identify areas in which there were clear and reliable
differences between womenÕs and menÕs responses. Otherwise, detailed statistical analyses were not conducted. Instead, the percentage of faculty
responding positively or negatively to an item was noted as descriptive
information and consistent patterns of responses across years were noted. A consistent pattern of differences
across years, even when not statistically reliable in any given year, does
provide evidence of a reliable finding.
Conclusions:
There continue to be gender differences in many areas, especially those
dealing with climate issues, perceptions of efforts to insure fairness and
diversity, and outside demands on time.
In all of these cases, women report having a more negative experience or
perception than do men.
Furthermore, in a number of instances (e.g. clarity of guidelines for
promotion, relationships with colleagues, mentoring) gender differences were
more pronounced in STEM departments than in NonSTEM departments. Although the HERI survey does provide
data to track these issues, data are available only every 3 years, and the
questions of interest are not always included. It may be desirable to develop an in-house survey that
focuses on the specific issues of interest that could be administered every
year or every other year.
B)
NSF Toolkit Data Summary
Summary of Baseline Data for ADVANCE
Evaluation
The attached Tables contain the data that are
recommended for evaluations according to the ŅToolkit for Reporting Progress
Toward NSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation GoalsÓ (January, 2005). Tables 1 through 8 are numbered to be
consistent with the Toolkit examples, and the additional Tables, not specified
in the Toolkit, are numbered consecutively beginning with Table 9. The data represent a baseline period of
at least 3 years, and in some cases up to 5 years.
The
data summarized in Tables 1, 6, & 7 have previously been evaluated in a
separate report (Changing Patterns in STEM Faculty by Gender and Rank - Fall
2004 through Fall 2008) prepared in March 2009, so a detailed analysis will not
be repeated here. In the summary
of the earlier report it was noted that the percentage of women in STEM areas
at the assistant professor rank has remained relatively constant since
2004. The increases in the number
and percentage of STEM women at the associate and full professor ranks are dues
to higher rates of hiring women at the associate rank, and higher rates of
separation by men at both associate and full ranks. For details, and a comparison of STEM Science to STEM Social
Science departments, see the earlier report.
In Table 2, looking at the current numbers of
STEM women at each rank, it is clear that there are still very few women at
senior ranks (associate or full) in Engineering. Only in the social sciences are there significant numbers of
women at the full professor level, and even in these disciplines there is
considerable variability across departments. In Sociology (50%), Anthropology (33%), Criminal Justice (25%),
and Political Science (22%) over 20% of full professors are women. However, in Economics, Psychology, and
Geography women make up only about 10% or less of full professors. Given the small numbers in some
departments, it is worth noting that only Sociology and Political Science have
more than one female full professor.
Tables 3 and 4 provide the data on Reappointment,
Promotion, and Tenure decisions since the 2002 academic year. There does not appear to be any clear
evidence of a gender bias in these data, but women have been denied tenure at a
slightly higher rate. Overall,
there have been very few negative tenure decisions (8 of 75). For women, 14% (3 of 21) of cases have
been denied, and the rate is the same for STEM Sciences and STEM Social Sciences. For men, the overall rate for denial of
tenure was 9%, with 13% for STEM Sciences and 0% for STEM Social Sciences. There have been only 2 instances of a negative
decision in an evaluation for promotion to full professor, one woman and one
man.
The data in Table 5, for time at UNC Charlotte
and time in rank, do not suggest any major gender differences. Because women have only recently been
promoted to full professor, the time at rank in that category does reflect
differences only due to the recent changes. The more important data would be those for associate
professors, and here there is no evidence that women, overall, have more years
in that rank. Only in the social
sciences and psychology have women associates been at that level longer, on average,
than men, and the difference is less than two years. It will be important to monitor these data to see if this
pattern continues as more and more women are hired and promoted to associate.
In Table 8, the data for Distinguished and Titled
Professors indicate no real change in the pattern over the last 5 years. There has been a single female
Distinguished or Titled Professor over that time, while the number of men in
such positions has ranged from 10-12.
These data are consistent with the overall percentage of women at the
rank of full professor, around 10%.
The data in Table 9 on salary will not be
interpreted because an extensive Salary Regression analysis was completed
during the last year. The results
of those analyses, provided in a separate report, indicated small, but
consistent gender differences.
Details about the variable examined, and the interpretation of the
differences identified can be found in that separate report.
In Tables 10 and 11 we have updated the
information about Start-up Packages and Space Allocations for new faculty. When the original data were collected
covering a 5 year period of hiring, no differences based on gender were
identified. The updated data
continue to reflect these findings.
Although there are differences across disciplines, and some variability
within disciplines, probably based on research needs in specialized areas, none
of the differences appear to be related to gender.
C) Equity salary study
The
University of North Carolina at CharlotteÕs ADVANCE institutional
transformation program sponsored by the National Science Foundation promotes
the equitable participation of women faculty in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM). ADVANCEÕs goals include the examination
of, and possible transformation of, the opportunity structure at UNC Charlotte
so that fundamental components of the universityÕs climate, culture, and
organizational structure are equitable with respect to gender, ethnicity, and
race. Salary equity is an important dimension supporting faculty participation,
and nationwide, studies of salary equity have documented gender disparities in
salary. Thus, it is important to
know the conditions that exist at UNC Charlotte with respect to salary equity.
This
report presents findings of the ADVANCE Evaluation teamÕs investigation of the
factors related to salaries of faculty at University of North Carolina at
Charlotte from 2004-5 through 2007-8.
Like many other institutions of higher education, UNC Charlotte has
struggled with gender-based salary inequities for decades. The purposes of this
study are to investigate the various factors that currently predict salaries,
to explore whether there is evidence of systemic gender bias in salaries, and
to examine if there have been changes in these relationships over the four year
period.
Our results
indicate three types of factors influence salaries at UNC Charlotte . The first
one is market forces. This factor includes rank, discipline, and prior
experience. Actions by UNC Charlotte administrators are unlikely to affect
these dynamics because they are consistent across the academy. The second factor is internal
university operations as captured by salary compression and chair salaries.
UNC Charlotte administrators could alter the internal reward structure to
compensate for the salary compression that penalizes faculty the longer they
serve at this institution. The University may determine that the salary penalty
that chairs incur is the result of decreases in their scholarly
productivity, and reprioritize
contributions based on leadership.
The third factor is possible bias as captured by the salary
differences associated with gender and disadvantaged minority status. For both factors, the differences
consistently appear across the four years examined and require attention to
insure that they are addressed. Salary
inequities rooted in gender and race erode campus climates and will undermine
achieving the goals of the ADVANCE program.