archive-org.com » ORG » A » AAUP.ORG

Total: 1208

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Losing Focus: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2013-14 | AAUP
    of various service and maintenance functions Another way of looking at the growth in senior administrators is to tabulate the specific titles for those positions For this purpose we use reports covering thirty five years of the Administrators in Higher Education Salary Survey carried out by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources CUPA HR 2 The 1978 79 version of this report provided median salaries for eighty one senior administrative titles thirty one of which were deans of various academic colleges or divisions Fifteen years later in 1993 94 the report counted 171 administrative positions thirty three of which were academic deans It should be noted that the CUPA HR survey does not collect data for associate or assistant deans The count of titles in the 2003 04 administrative survey was similar at 173 total and still included thirty three deans But by this year the survey had expanded again to 191 senior administrative titles fortyone of them academic deans Thus over the course of thirty five years the number of senior administrative titles grew by 136 percent while the proportion of those titles belonging to academic deans decreased from 38 percent to 21 percent Admittedly this is a crude measure but it seems indicative of the trends documented in figure 1 and reflects the experiences reported by faculty members across the country The AAUP is not the only organization calling attention to the continued rapid growth in administrative positions The most recent report from the Delta Cost Project now based at the American Institutes for Research also found the number of administrative employees growing more rapidly than the number of faculty members Growing numbers of administrative positions executive and professional and changes in faculty composition represent long standing trends The shifting balance among these positions has played out steadily over time in favor of administrators and it is unclear when a tipping point may be near Whether this administrative growth constitutes unnecessary bloat or is justified as part of the complexities involved in running a modern day university remains up for debate 3 There is no question that higher education enrollments continue to rise institutions are faced with increased reporting and regulatory burdens and students come to college from more diverse academic and cultural backgrounds than ever before But the massively disproportionate growth in the number of administrative employees coupled with the continuing shift to an increasingly precarious corps of mostly temporary underpaid and insufficiently supported instructors represents a real threat to the quality of our academic programs Spending Priorities More significant even than the increase in the number of employees is the shift in spending that has occurred as a consequence of the expansion of administrative positions As this report has argued for many years the academic mission of teaching and research should be at the core of what colleges do and decisions about spending should reflect a focus on this core mission This section presents an analysis of several trends in institutional expenditures contrasting spending on administration with spending on instruction and the rising salaries of senior administrators with the relatively stagnant salaries of full time faculty members For several years the Delta Cost Project has provided detailed analysis of federal data on the finances of colleges and universities Table B presents one aspect of the analysis of spending patterns over the decade from 2000 to 2010 drawing on a report issued in 2012 The table contrasts the change in institutional expenditures on instruction with those on research student services and institutional support which includes overhead costs such as general administrative services executive management and legal and fiscal operations The authors of the report from which this table is drawn summarize the trends in spending as follows Even though public and private four year institutions have on average made new investments in instruction student services and overhead since the beginning of the decade the relative weight of these investments has gradually shifted Over most of the decade the instruction share of education and related spending declined on average across institutions 4 As the authors note some institutions shifted spending more to student services and some more to overhead although the table makes it evident that public community colleges actually reduced spending on instruction student services and overhead with the reduction in spending on instruction the largest of the three Although this analysis substantiates the perception of many faculty members that institutional spending continues to be shifted away from the core academic mission the broad categories used in federal data collection and analyzed by the Delta Cost Project are somewhat difficult to relate to what is actually happening on campuses across the country More useful for this purpose are comparisons of salaries of administrators holding various titles with those of full time faculty members as depicted in figure 2 Figure 2 compares thirty five years of data on administrative salaries from the CUPA HR Administrators in Higher Education Salary Survey cited above with faculty salary data collected by the AAUP It would have been preferable to disaggregate the analysis into more specific institutional categories but that level of data on administrative salaries was not available In the data from public institutions the increases in median salary paid to four senior administrative positions were at least 39 percent after controlling for inflation with the increase in presidential chief executive officer in the parlance of the report salary much greater at 75 percent By contrast and probably not surprising to regular readers of this report the cumulative increases in mean salary for full time faculty members were mostly less than half as great The same pattern held in the private independent sector although the rates of increase for all positions there were larger Median presidential salary jumped 171 percent above the rate of inflation and the other three administrative salaries increased at least 97 percent while the uptick in mean salaries for full time faculty members reached only 50 percent or less But what of the more recent period especially during the painfully slow recovery from the Great Recession in the national economy Surely governing boards and senior administrators will have recognized the incongruity of continuing to raise administrative salaries for the very few during a period characterized by academic program closures and salary and hiring freezes or even layoffs for many campus employees As the data in table C tell us that unfortunately is not the case Table C presents the average change in salary from 2007 08 to 2013 14 the period of the recession and its aftermath for three senior administrative positions and three full time faculty ranks The table is drawn from data collected as part of the AAUP Faculty Compensation Survey which allows us to make a more direct comparison of changes in compensation for different positions on individual campuses It includes only institutions that supplied data for at least one administrative position and one faculty rank in both years and calculates the change in salary accounting for inflation for each institution and position individually before combining them to produce the averages by category shown in the table This is different from the approach used to produce figure 2 which compares the average salary for a particular job title at two different points in time This more specific analysis also documents the growing gap between salaries paid to senior administrators and those paid to full time faculty members As we ve already observed faculty salaries have been generally stagnant during the last six years and the table indicates that faculty salaries in several institutional categories have actually declined when adjusted for inflation The same is not true for senior administrative salaries As the longer term analysis in figure 2 also shows salaries for presidents in recent years have generally increased more rapidly than those of other administrators reflecting greater concentration of authority in a single CEO Table C indicates that salaries for chief academic officers at doctoral and public master s universities have risen more rapidly than those of presidents in recent years But across all institutional categories the average increases in administrative salaries are greater in most cases much greater than those for full time faculty members The contrast is especially sharp at the private master s degree universities with senior administrators receiving double digit increases while average faculty salaries stagnate or decline But that is not the only institutional category where table C documents this pattern Some commentators have argued that the outsized and rapidly rising salaries paid to many presidents especially have only a trivial impact on institutional budgets that may amount to hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars annually While that may be true from an accounting standpoint the salaries paid to senior administrators are highly symbolic As we have argued previously they serve as a concrete indication of the priorities accorded to the various components of the institution by its governing board and campus leadership Disproportionate salary increases at the top also reflect the abandonment of centuries old models of shared campus governance which have increasingly been replaced by more corporate managerial approaches that emphasize the bottom line The increase in spending on administrative functions coupled with a decline in state funding relative to institutional operating expenses is clearly connected to the continuing increases in tuition prices on many campuses As we have noted in this report on several occasions in recent years faculty pay is not driving up tuition costs In fact the stagnant salaries paid to full time faculty members combined with the increasing use of lower paid part time and non tenure track faculty appointments have been reflected in the lowered relative spending on instruction documented earlier in this section But don t just take our word for it The most recent report from the Delta Cost Project concluded that faculty salaries were not the leading cause of rising college tuitions during the past decade Increased benefits costs nonfaculty positions added elsewhere on campus declines in state and institutional subsidies and other factors all played a role 5 Over the course of the last four decades then the expansion of administrative personnel and the growth in spending on administration have pulled colleges and universities away from their core mission of educating students and expanding knowledge The trend decried by Barbara Bergmann in 1991 has not abated Increasingly outrageous salaries for a few senior administrators send a signal to faculty staff and students alike that their college or university is not the engine of expanding opportunity and enlightenment they may have thought it was Further and in some cases even more egregious evidence that our higher education institutions are losing focus on the academic mission comes from a review of spending on athletics Academic Mission and Athletic Spending Colleges and universities often have lofty academic mission statements But the budgets more clearly demonstrate where institutional priorities lie Is there an athletics arms race under way Concerns regarding the proper role of athletics in the university are not new The University of Chicago was a founding member of the Big Ten Conference competed in Division I of the National Collegiate Athletic Association NCAA and even made it to the Sweet Sixteen round of the men s national basketball championship in 1935 But in 1939 the university s president Robert Maynard Hutchins decided to deemphasize athletics and place greater emphasis on academics Can a university be successful if it doesn t have a nationally ranked athletic team Chicago is certainly one strong example It now competes in Division III athletics but counts eighty nine Nobel Prize winners who are or were faculty members or students 6 To assess whether institutional spending decisions are congruent with their stated mission of education public service and research table D compares data on athletics expenditures reported by colleges and universities to the US Department of Education under the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act with IPEDS data published in the Digest of Education Statistics The table allows us to examine changes in real inflation adjusted spending per student and per athlete between 2003 04 and 2010 11 7 In order to filter out the effects of changing enrollments or changing numbers of student athletes on spending for academic related activities of the institutions we use spending per full time equivalent FTE student and for the athletics related activities we use spending per student athlete In all three institutional categories total expenditures rose at a faster pace than inflation resulting in a positive percentage change figure in the table The increases in total spending per student at public four year and two year institutions were lower in part because of cutbacks in state appropriations to higher education during this period The next three columns in the table examine percentage changes in spending on the three primary functions of a college or university instruction research and public service 8 Community colleges experienced the sharpest cutbacks in all three core categories cutting spending on instruction by 8 5 percent and on public service by 21 4 percent They also cut back on academic support by 5 7 percent Public four year colleges and universities were able to avoid cuts in instruction but spending on both research and public service decreased during this period Finally private four year institutions were on average able to avoid reductions in spending on instruction and research but partially at the expense of an almost 18 percent cut in public service spending One area of higher education institutional spending that has appeared immune to efforts to cut costs is athletics Spending rose most rapidly at community colleges some of which have been adding extracurricular activities as a way to attract more students But for all three institutional categories the increases in athletics spending adjusted for inflation have been spectacular The expenditure changes in table D clearly show a bias toward more spending on athletics and less spending on the core mission of higher education The table doesn t account for the fact that institutional categorization doesn t neatly align with membership in the NCAA s three divisions Division I D1 includes just under 350 colleges and universities 9 It is characterized by the highest level of competition and the largest number of athletic scholarships allowed Division I is split into three subdivisions based on participation in men s football The Football Bowl Subdivision D1 A includes roughly 120 schools that vie for spots in the major postseason bowl games 10 The Football Championship Subdivision D1 AA includes approximately the same number of institutions which play football at a slightly less competitive level and participate in less prestigious bowl games during the postseason The third subdivision D1 AAA includes universities that compete in D1 but don t have football teams for example DePaul University Fairfield University and George Mason University In the NCAA s Division II D2 universities grant athletic scholarships but the numbers allowed are smaller This division also imposes different regulations on recruiting athletes and the length of athletic seasons D2 includes 291 colleges and universities In Division III D3 students are not offered athletic scholarships their practice and competition seasons are shorter and there are bans on redshirting the practice of holding first year athletes out of competition to provide them with an additional year of competitive eligibility There are 439 colleges and universities that are members of D3 We next look at the recent trend in spending on athletics for colleges and universities broken out by the division in which they compete Given the highly competitive nature of D1 sports one might expect to see the largest increases in athletics spending per student athlete at D1 A universities As figure 3 shows however that isn t so Between the 2003 04 and 2011 12 academic years the largest percentage increase in inflation adjusted median spending per student athlete was at D3 institutions without football teams where athletics spending rose by 112 percent beyond inflation during a seven year period that encompassed the Great Recession Indeed spending in D3 with football also grew more quickly than in the most competitive D1 A division Part of the explanation for this counterintuitive finding is the increased emphasis being placed on athletics in D3 institutions as a mechanism to boost enrollments According to the National Federation of State High School Associations 7 7 million boys and girls played high school sports in 2012 13 11 Student athletes who don t have the ability to earn a scholarship in D1 or D2 institutions but want and can afford to continue playing their sport are prime targets for D3 college admissions officers and coaches Figure 4 compares increases in overall undergraduate enrollment by institutional type Although it isn t possible to map NCAA divisions precisely onto the institutional divisions in the chart the majority of D3 colleges and universities are private four year colleges As figure 4 shows the increase in the number of student athletes was slightly lower than the increase in undergraduate enrollment at public colleges and universities But at private four year institutions the number of student athletes on campus increased by nearly 22 percent over this period much faster than the rate of increase in the total undergraduate population The combined data from figures 3 and 4 show us that at D3 colleges and universities total athletics spending has increased in part because those institutions are spending more per athlete as well as increasing the number of student athletes on their campuses It has been argued that athletic spending doesn t take funding away from academics because revenue generating sports such as football and men s basketball bring in sufficient funds to finance themselves along with other sports teams The evidence however shows this assertion to be untrue The NCAA collects annual data on revenues and expenses of athletics programs from its member institutions 12 In the reports for 2012 of the more than one thousand college and university members of the NCAA only twenty three institutions reported

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2013-14salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Here's the News: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2012-13 | AAUP
    for profit institutional level based on degrees awarded and geographic region The effects of these factors on part time faculty pay are similar to those observed in full time faculty pay albeit on a much smaller scale With a range in median per course wages from 1 800 at southeastern community colleges to 5 225 at private doctoral universities in New England the variation is considerable In general per course pay increases with the level of degrees awarded by the institution Within each of these classifications private nonprofit institutions generally pay more than public institutions and private for profit institutions pay much less It should be noted however that the number of responses from faculty members teaching in for profit institutions was much smaller than the numbers from the other two sectors Finally there are differences in pay between regions with institutions in New England generally paying the highest wages and those in the Southeast paying the lowest We find similar differences by region in full time faculty pay in the AAUP survey It bears pointing out how low part time faculty pay rates actually are In spring 1989 the second author of this report was a doctoral candidate at Carnegie Mellon University where she was paid 3 000 per course to teach undergraduate economics In 2010 dollars that would be 5 457 per course slightly more than the median amount reported in 2010 by CAW respondents from the highest paying sector private doctoral universities in New England and twice the overall national median rate Although it has now been more than two years since the CAW survey data were collected we have not adjusted the pay rates shown in table B for inflation because it is not at all clear that part time faculty pay rates are adjusted regularly to match increases in the cost of living Only 18 8 percent of part time faculty respondents to the CAW survey reported receiving regular salary increases 2 Solely for the sake of comparison we can multiply the per course wage rates shown in table B by a factor of eight courses a full load for all but the most overworked community college faculty members to produce an academic year equivalent salary These salaries would then range from about 18 000 in associate s degree colleges a little more than the pay of a full time minimum wage worker to just over 30 000 at private doctoral universities That rate of pay represents one third or less of the national average salary for full time faculty members at those institutions based on the AAUP s 2010 11 data and part time positions do not include benefits in most cases Later in 2012 the Center for the Future of Higher Education released a report based on data collected by the New Faculty Majority Foundation in fall 2011 Who Is Professor Staff and How Can This Person Teach So Many Classes focuses on the deleterious effects of two prevalent practices in the employment of part time faculty members just intime hiring and a lack of institutional support for instruction Because of its relatively small respondent pool the report focuses on exposing the negative consequences of these unsatisfactory working conditions on the educational experiences of students rather than on specific measures of compensation or workload The AAUP continues to work in collaboration with both organizations and we welcome the increased data collection but we need much much more data Using available national data we cannot say definitively what proportion of total college and university instruction is provided by our colleagues on part time appointments We do not have a precisely representative national sample from which to estimate typical per course pay rates And we cannot say with absolute certainty what proportion of faculty members in part time appointments would prefer to be in full time tenuretrack or tenured positions But the data we do have make it abundantly clear that part time faculty members are paid unacceptably low wages and the extent of this inequity together with the situation of full time non tenure track colleagues described in the next section forms a very real even if still hidden from public view multi tier academic labor structure It s an inequity that cannot be allowed to stand Full Time Non Tenure Track Faculty This section presents an entirely new analysis of data from the 2010 CAW survey which also garnered responses from more than 7 500 full time faculty members employed in positions off the tenure track We should begin with two caveats first that the analysis in this section does not constitute a report from the coalition and second that the respondents to the CAW survey do not form a fully representative sample of all full time non tenure track faculty members nationwide Even so these data provide an important new source of information focused specifically on the compensation and working conditions of our colleagues working off the tenure track The lead author of this report was a member of the working group that developed and carried out the CAW survey and takes responsibility for any shortcomings in the data As noted in table C about 85 percent 6 418 of the full time non tenure track respondents to the 2010 CAW survey provided information on their rate of pay When standardized to an academic year basis the overall median salary reported by these individuals in 2010 was 47 500 A majority of the respondents held a full time position in a public institution with the largest group employed at public doctoral or research universities 3 The salaries reported in this sector were below the overall median for the group Salaries at private institutions were generally higher than those at public institutions in the same category as has been the case for the overall full time faculty salaries reported in the AAUP survey for many years see the section on increasing public private salary differentials below But contrary to the pattern found in AAUP data for full time faculty members overall among CAW non tenure track respondents salaries were not necessarily higher in universities than at community colleges Some caution is required in interpreting differences between some of the cells of table C however as they represent the responses of only a few faculty members Another factor confounding the interpretation of the salary data shown in table C is the lack of a distinction by academic rank The CAW survey unfortunately did not ask for academic rank from full time non tenure track respondents and a comparison with AAUP data indicates that this is a significant deficiency The annual AAUP Faculty Compensation Survey collects fulltime salary data by rank and gender It also collects counts of faculty members by rank gender and tenure status however it does not collect salary data by tenure status The median academic year salary for non tenure track respondents to the 2010 CAW survey was 47 500 very close to the 2010 11 average for the instructor rank 47 143 in the AAUP s survey These similar results conceal differences however To provide context we looked at the distribution by rank of full time non tenuretrack faculty members in the 2010 11 AAUP survey There were just over ninety six thousand non tenure track faculty members reported that year distributed through all the faculty ranks Nearly half were in what might be considered the typical nontenure track ranks of lecturer and instructor but 40 percent were in what are commonly presumed tenure track ranks assistant associate and full professor More than one in five 21 percent assistant professors reported that year were employed off the tenure track And only a small proportion of these non tenure track colleagues about 16 percent were employed at institutions that did not grant tenure In sum individuals employed on a contingent basis constitute a significant proportion of the full time faculty even at institutions that grant tenure and in ranks that normally lead to consideration for tenure The lack of faculty rank in the 2010 CAW data complicates the analysis in two ways It conceals the true impact on the salary distribution of other variables some of which are examined in the tables described in this section and it makes an adjustment of the 2010 data for inflation impractical The AAUP data indicate that salaries at the various ranks have increased at different rates between 2010 11 and 2012 13 rendering any overall inflation factor applied to non tenure track salaries inaccurate But without salary by tenure status in the AAUP data a specific non tenure track inflation rate also is unavailable As a consequence we present tables in this section using unadjusted 2010 CAW data for all non tenure track faculty respondents Readers should bear this in mind when comparing the reported salaries to those at their own institutions Table D presents median salaries for a set of disciplinary categories by type of institution The disciplines in the table represent the respondent s area of academic specialization rather than the discipline or disciplines in which instruction was offered They have been grouped where the original response categories received too few responses The disciplines captured in these responses reflect the organizations participating in the coalition and are thus weighted heavily toward the humanities and social sciences Salaries reported for faculty members in business disciplines are generally higher as is the case when data for all full time faculty members are tabulated but the table does not include several disciplines that typically pay the highest salaries such as engineering or computer science The table also indicates that salaries within discipline categories do not necessarily increase with the level of degrees offered For example in several of the largest categories including English other modern languages and history the median salary in doctoral and research universities is lower than it is in associate s degree colleges Table E presents median salaries for full time nontenure track faculty members according to two individual characteristics gender and race or ethnicity The breakdown by gender indicates that men generally earn higher salaries except in baccalaureate colleges Women are more likely than men to hold non tenure track appointments and more women than men responded to the survey According to US Department of Education national data for fall 2009 44 percent of women in full time faculty positions were off the tenure track compared with 33 percent of men The breakdown of salaries by race or ethnicity does not show a clear pattern of differences A more detailed statistical analysis that controls simultaneously for the specific contributions of multiple individual and institutional factors to the differences in non tenure track salaries would be desirable and appropriate given the wide range of variables available in the CAW dataset but is beyond the scope of this report We should also note one additional survey item not shown in the tables about 35 percent of the full time non tenure track respondents reported that they could expect regular salary increases and the proportion was similar across institutional types This proportion seems low although we do not have comparable survey responses from tenure eligible faculty members for comparison The proportion among part time faculty members documented in the CAW report was 18 8 percent 4 Table F examines another characteristic of individual nontenure track respondents academic qualifications A majority of all survey respondents providing information about their academic training held a doctorate but that proportion varies considerably by institutional category Respondents teaching in associate s degree colleges most commonly held a master s degree the generally accepted qualification for the undergraduate teaching that comprises nearly all of the workload in those colleges Slightly more than a quarter of these respondents held a doctorate and 12 percent had completed other degrees that would be considered terminal for example an MFA MLS JD or MBA By contrast 56 percent of respondents employed at doctoral and research universities held a doctorate 24 percent a master s and 15 percent a terminal professional degree The CAW survey data also provide extensive information about the working conditions of full time non tenure track faculty members Unfortunately we do not have comparable data on the working conditions of other full time faculty members since with the demise of the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty there is no longer a comprehensive national survey that examines faculty working conditions and careers The CAW data do provide a strong indication however that for these respondents a contingent academic position is not simply a temporary way station on the road to a tenure track faculty career Seventy nine percent of the respondents who provided their ages were thirty six or older and a majority were at least forty six Eighty seven percent had been teaching in a contingent position for at least three years and 39 percent had been teaching off the tenure track for ten years or more This finding among the CAW survey respondents confirms the careful analysis of mobility between non tenure track and tenure track positions by Jack Schuster and Martin Finkelstein in their authoritative 2006 book The American Faculty based on 1998 data The preliminary evidence suggests that for the most part these fixed term full time appointments seem to constitute a discernibly different career track from that of traditional tenure eligible appointments 5 Perhaps the most significant characteristic of full time nontenure track employment is that it extends only for a specified number of semesters or years these positions are frequently referred to as term or contract appointments Respondents to the survey were asked the length of their current appointment one year was by far the most common period reported by 57 percent Three years was the second most common length of appointment 17 percent and 9 percent of respondents were employed only for a single term An additional 6 percent reported five year appointments and 4 percent were employed for longer terms Appointments of less than a year covering only one quarter or semester were far more common in associate s degree colleges where they were reported by a quarter of respondents In doctoral and research universities three year appointments were more frequently reported than elsewhere But for the majority of non tenure track faculty members there is no formal guarantee of job security beyond the current academic year Although we know from anecdotal reports that one year appointments are frequently renewed year after year it is the lack of a longer term commitment by the employing institution that makes these appointments contingent and that constrains the academic freedom and undermines the effectiveness of the individuals holding them Survey respondents were asked about the mode of instruction employed in the courses they were teaching in fall 2010 and a large majority 77 percent taught only on site courses as opposed to those offered at a distance or with both on site and distance components 6 However respondents from associate s degree colleges were more than twice as likely to teach at least some courses where they were not on site with their students Owing to the difficulty in defining main versus branch campus or satellite locations the questionnaire did not pursue this distinction The CAW questionnaire also collected detailed information about the number and level of courses that non tenure track respondents taught only a portion of which is tabulated here The largest numbers of respondents were teaching two three or four courses during the fall 2010 term in which the survey was conducted As would be expected the teaching load varied by institution type Nearly half of respondents from associate s degree colleges were teaching five courses or more a far higher proportion than in other categories of institutions The most common teaching load in baccalaureate colleges and doctoral and research universities was three courses while four courses was the teaching load reported most frequently by respondents at master s degree universities A frequent criticism regarding the overuse of contingent appointments is that the instructors with the lowest levels of institutional support and academic freedom protections bear the brunt of undergraduate teaching which forms the core of the academic enterprise This translates into a less rich academic experience for those students who are still at an early stage in developing their interests and the skills of independent inquiry Analysis of the CAW data regarding the level of courses full time non tenure track respondents taught provides some support for this criticism The level of courses taught by respondents from associate s degree colleges is obviously constrained by the courses that are offered there but the most common response from non tenure track faculty members across all categories of institutions with the exception of baccalaureate colleges was that they taught only lower division undergraduate courses In fact the proportion of respondents who taught exclusively lower division undergraduate or developmental precollegiate courses was 88 percent in associate s colleges and 38 percent in other institutional categories combined We cannot emphasize enough that the threat to academic freedom and to the quality of instruction from the increasing use of contingent appointments is rooted in the conditions of employment in those positions not in any shortcomings of the individuals who hold the appointments As last year s reports from CAW and the Center for the Future of Higher Education document with regard to part time appointments a key challenge facing contingent faculty members is a lack of institutional support Table G presents tabulations for four of the 2010 CAW survey items measuring the institutional support for instruction provided to full time non tenure track respondents The first item listed participation in departmental meetings refers simultaneously to two aspects of faculty work teaching and governance Departmental meetings are the locus for discussions and decisions about curriculum consideration of pedagogical and student affairs issues dissemination of information about instructional technology and other aspects of institutional operations and participation in financial decision making Contingent faculty members who are excluded from participation in

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/report/heres-news-annual-report-economic-status-profession-2012-13 (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • It's Not Over Yet: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2010-11 | AAUP
    mechanism for guaranteeing freedom in research and an open exchange of ideas It represents a commitment on the part of a college or university to a faculty member that he or she will have the support necessary to do the job well Tenured faculty members have a greater stake in the success of their institutions and their graduates than do those without tenure being a tenured faculty member at an institution that is failing is worth very little Faculty members serving in contingent appointments on the other hand do not have the protections of academic freedom that come with tenure They do not have institutional support for pursuing the scholarship that serves as continuing education for college and university professors and often do not have the freedom or the time to research controversial topics Contingent faculty members find that renewal of their appointments depends more on their ability to please students than their ability to conduct rigorous classes that force students to think critically about the material they are learning As sociologists Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa noted in their recent study Academically Adrift students cognitive performance is on average mediocre and the major predictor of cognitive performance is rigorousness of instruction We are not surprised by a lack of rigor in a system where 75 percent of the instructors are off the tenure track and therefore constantly worried about losing their jobs if they push their students too hard And we take the opportunity to remind legislators administrators trustees and regents that the path to global competitiveness requires rigor in the classroom and rigor requires investing in the faculty members expected to provide it Salary Inequality The recession has also had the effect of widening salary inequalities that already existed The immediate impact is evident when looking at real inflation adjusted salary changes by institutional category and by region during the recessionary period It is also evident in updated tables on the long term trend in salaries by discipline and it is perhaps most strikingly evident in our analysis of increases in presidential salaries during the last three years Table C shows the change in real average salaries for institutions providing data for both 2007 08 and 2010 11 The combined result for faculty members of all ranks at all institutions is a 1 7 percent increase in salary beyond inflation This overall figure conceals strong differences between public and private institutions however While overall average salaries in public colleges and universities rose 1 percent above the rate of inflation the increase in privateindependent institutions was nearly three times as high The gap was particularly wide at doctoral universities a category dominated by state flagship universities that are larger in terms of faculty size than other types of institutions The pattern did not hold among baccalaureate institutions where there is a concentration of smaller colleges many of them religiously affiliated that have struggled with losses in tuition revenue and declines in charitable giving and investment returns Table D details the striking real differences in average full time faculty salaries by region The division into four regions is based on the categorization used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics which is the source for the regional inflation indices used to produce these calculations Analysis including the regional consumer price index does not allow for a comparison of the purchasing power a specific salary has in different regions of the country at a given point in time 2 But incorporating the regional inflation factor does highlight regional differences in the recession s impact across the country Although the CPI U increase over three years was greatest in the Northeast the increase in average salary beyond inflation was also much greater there Overall net salary growth in the Midwest was only about half the rate in the Northeast but was still markedly better than the 1 percent real growth in the West and the barely perceptible 0 2 percent increase in the South In the Midwest South and West there was also a substantial public private gap with real salary increases much lower at public colleges and universities The opposite was true in the Northeast however Figures 2 and 3 depict the widening gap in average salaries between faculty members employed in the public and private independent sectors over four decades Figure 2 tracks salaries for the full professor rank and figure 3 shows the assistant professor trend Each graph shows the average salary in public institutions by category as a percentage of the average salary in the private sector Thus a point below 100 indicates a disadvantage for the public sector with a downward trend documenting a widening gap Associate s degree colleges are not included because so few private colleges from that category submit data Figure 2 shows a relatively rapid decline in public sector professor salaries relative to those at private independent institutions Since 1980 the public sector disadvantage has widened to 16 percent at baccalaureate colleges 11 percent at master s universities and a full 24 percent at doctoral universities Such a wide gap affects the ability of public institutions to recruit and retain an excellent faculty Bear in mind that these percentages represent the salary differential for each year in a faculty member s career This significant gap is one that junior faculty members notice as well They know that if they settle in at midcareer in a public college or university they are likely to experience a significant cumulative earnings disadvantage over time compared with their private sector colleagues That creates a strong disincentive for moving to or remaining at a public college or university The pattern of assistant professor salaries displayed in figure 3 is generally the same as that for full professors albeit with one interesting difference Until the mid 1990s average salaries for assistant professors at public baccalaureate and master s institutions were equal to or higher than those in private independent institutions The public sector disadvantage at this rank has also not grown as rapidly currently standing at 4 percent at master s universities and 5 percent at baccalaureate colleges In doctoral universities however public salaries did not reach parity in the early part of this period and they are a full 19 percent lower on average this year Both figures give some indication of an increased separation at doctoral universities during the most recent five year period which might reasonably be attributed to the effect of the recession This finding reinforces the three year analysis presented above Another aspect of the growing salary inequality during the recessionary period is reflected in table E which compares growth in presidential salaries with growth in faculty salaries The table is based on data from the 678 colleges and universities that submitted presidential and faculty salary information in both 2007 08 and 2010 11 The figures in this table are the average mean of the percentage salary increases earned by presidents and faculties across all institutions in each category Some institutions did reduce presidential salaries over this three year period but the average change was a substantial increase The result depicted in the table is striking During this recessionary period the average salary increase for presidents was more than twice the average faculty salary increase at public institutions and nearly three times the faculty salary increase at private institutions Presidential salaries in all categories of institutions were already several times higher than the average salary for faculty members at the beginning of this period and the gap widened considerably even in the space of only three years As we have argued repeatedly in these annual reports such a disproportionate increase in compensation for a single individual is an indication of misplaced priorities This is especially true in a period when faculty members and other higher education employees have been faced with involuntary unpaid furloughs hiring and salary freezes and cuts to benefits Retirement Contributions As documented in last year s report we have received numerous indications of college and university administrations reducing the contributions they provide to faculty retirement funds Our standard aggregate analysis of itemized benefits survey report table 10 does not reflect a drop in the rate of institutional retirement expenditures as a percentage of salary However when we analyze the rate of retirement contribution by each institution we find that fluctuations have in fact occurred during the recessionary period Table F documents the direct impact of the recession on contributions expressed as the change in the institutional contribution rate as a percentage of salary The majority of institutions maintained the rate of retirement contributions unchanged over three years About a quarter of institutions raised the retirement contribution rate most of these only slightly However a substantial proportion in each category decreased the contribution rate by more than half a percentage point This proportion was highest 27 percent among baccalaureate colleges the category with the largest representation of private institutions Based on survey data we are also able to identify at least thirty two institutions that provided an institutional contribution toward full time faculty members retirement in either 2007 08 or 2008 09 and then dropped retirement contributions to zero in a subsequent year Thirty of these institutions are private colleges and institutions twenty four of them private baccalaureate colleges One community college eliminated institutional retirement contributions in 2008 09 and has not submitted data subsequently Twenty three institutions eliminated their retirement contributions beginning in 2009 10 of these nine did not resume institutional contributions for 2010 11 and four did not provide subsequent data Of the remaining ten institutions that did resume retirement contributions in 2010 11 seven have done so at a rate substantially lower than was previously the case An additional eight colleges suspended institutional retirement contributions beginning this year Nearly all of the institutions that have eliminated retirement contributions are relatively small which is why their missing institutional expenditures did not affect the national aggregate statistics As described in last year s report a reduction of one or two percentage points in the rate of retirement contributions may not seem dramatic It will likely not result in tremendous savings for the institution But a small reduction in retirement contributions today compounds into a large decrease in the amount of funds an individual will have available for retirement Disciplinary Divergence One form of inequality in faculty salaries stems from disciplinary differences Economic theory predicts that faculty members in disciplines for which there are alternative higher paying private sector job opportunities will require higher than average salaries if they are to choose careers in the professoriate Although some full time faculty positions offer nonmonetary benefits such as tenure and control over one s schedule for many individuals these benefits are not sufficient to compensate for the income lost in taking a faculty job Thus higher salaries are required in some disciplines to attract the most qualified faculty members in such cases the salary differentials are said to be market driven But morale problems can arise when faculty members who do essentially the same jobs teach classes advise students and conduct research receive substantially different salaries because of disciplinary differences As in previous reports we use the salaries of English professors as the base against which faculty members in other representative disciplines are compared Annual data collected by Oklahoma State University for larger public universities show a wide range of salaries by discipline for faculty members at the rank of full professor table G and assistant professor table H Disciplines where faculty members typically earn less than English professors include fine arts education foreign languages and communications Consistent with the predictions of economic theory the highest paid faculty members are in law business economics computer science and engineering The data in table G indicate that some but not all of the full professor salary differentials have widened substantially in thirty years Whereas senior law professors formerly earned about one third more in salary than senior English professors they now earn almost 60 percent more The gap between professors in other disciplines at the top of the pay pyramid engineering computer science economics and business and their colleagues in English has widened somewhat less rapidly Full professors in fine arts and foreign languages have experienced a widening gap in the other direction their average salaries have grown at a slower pace than salaries in English An analysis of the salary differentials in table H for assistant professors over the last thirty years shows a slightly different ordering of disciplines but is also consistent with theories about the operations of labor markets Business law economics computer science and engineering are again at the top of the pay scale As the private sector salaries for people in these fields have grown dramatically over the last three decades so has the premium paid to faculty members In fact the average assistant professor of business now earns more than double the salary of his or her assistant professor colleague in the English department The growth relative to English among assistant professors in social sciences health professions mathematics and library science has also been substantial but less than in the five disciplines at the top of the pay scale On the other hand average salaries for assistant professors in communications education foreign languages philosophy and fine arts have declined since 1980 relative to those of assistant professors in English The gap between disciplines has a compounding effect over the course of a faculty member s career Because of the disciplinary differences in base salary we can expect salary gaps among full professors in the future that are larger than those today even if all current assistant professors receive the same annual percentage salary increases in the future Another labor market phenomenon that sometimes affects faculty salaries is known as compression or inversion Labor economic theory predicts that people with more experience will earn higher salaries their experience gives them an edge in doing their jobs well Thus within a discipline we expect full professors to earn more than associate professors who in turn earn more than assistant professors This relationship between experience and pay can be overwhelmed in disciplines for which there is a shortage of individuals willing to complete a graduate degree when they could enter the private sector job market sooner at higher salaries In those cases the market makes the new PhD recipient so much in demand that universities have to pay him or her more than they pay more senior assistant professors and sometimes more than associate professors as well Compression refers to the situation where a more senior faculty member is paid only slightly more than the newly appointed colleague the extreme case of this is inversion where the more experienced individual is actually paid less than the newcomer From the perspective of economic theory compression or inversion are simply reflections of the operation of the labor market From an organizational perspective however these conditions can be destructive because of their potential negative effects on faculty morale Table I examines the disciplines considered in the previous section to determine whether inversion is a problem in the current faculty job market The first column of the table shows the earnings premium or penalty experienced by the average assistant professor relative to the average new assistant professor For example in library science the average assistant professor currently earns only 93 percent as much as the average new assistant professor an example of inversion Other disciplines where new assistant professors are currently paid more than their more experienced colleagues include philosophy business and economics For business professors inversion also affects faculty members in the next rank with the average associate professor earning slightly less than the average assistant professor For assistant professors in health sciences communications mathematics engineering and physical sciences the premium for experience is very small 2 percent or less which may be an indication of salary compression within these disciplines However there is no clear line demarcating cases of compression How much more should a faculty member in the more senior rank earn To a large extent salary compression is a matter of perceived fairness that cannot be exactly quantified Our findings do show some evidence of salary inversion and compression between the disciplines but in all likelihood the extent is lower than one would expect to find if the economy were more robust Once the economy has fully recovered salaries for attorneys businesspeople computer scientists economists and engineers in nonacademic jobs will increase rapidly forcing academic employers to compete for faculty members in these positions by raising their salaries as well However although labor markets affect salaries decisions about how much to pay faculty members for the important work they perform are not determined by an inexorable inanimate market On the contrary these decisions are ultimately up to individuals senior administrators and members of governing boards Colleges and universities should start planning now in order to keep the salaries of humanities and social science professors from falling even further behind their colleagues in law business and the natural sciences and to avoid the morale problems created by hugely disparate salaries for faculty members doing essentially the same work What s to Come Although the economic expansion began almost two years ago many individuals report feeling as if the economy is still in a recession One reason for this is that the terms recession and expansion do not apply to the level of current economic activity Instead they describe the economy s trajectory Think of a roller coaster At the top of a very steep incline the coaster cars are well above the boarding platform but the turning point from upward to downward marks the start of the plunge For our economy that point was December 2007 The Great Recession was a downward plunge that continued well below the boarding platform The nation stopped careening downward in June 2009 but the upward pitch of our current stretch of track is unusually gradual and

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2010-11salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • No Refuge: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2009-10 | AAUP
    institutions to withdraw from this aspect of their commitment to their faculty retirees This is an area that bears watching at both institutional and national levels Other Impacts Because many aspects of faculty careers and work are not documented in comprehensive national data sets it is difficult to measure the full impact on faculty work of reductions in college and university spending This section provides some examples of spending cuts made during the current academic year and the consequences of those cuts No central data source provides comprehensive coverage of the faculty hiring process but there are indications that new faculty appointments have been dramatically reduced during the 2009 10 academic year While not all academic positions are listed with respective disciplinary associations tabulations of their faculty job listings provide one gauge of the academic labor market The American Historical Association AHA reported in January 2010 that the number of jobs listed through its various outlets had fallen by 24 percent to 806 positions the smallest number in a decade 1 Further an AHA survey of those departments that did list faculty openings found that 15 percent of those searches were subsequently called off The American Economic Association AEA reported a decline of 19 percent in academic listings in its Job Openings for Economists in the past year In departments with PhD programs listings were down by 8 percent while in nondoctoral departments new position listings were down 31 percent The American Mathematical Society reported a decline in faculty job listings of 13 percent for 2009 compared with the previous year 2 The greatest reductions were reported by the Modern Language Association MLA 3 dvertised faculty openings in English language and literature decreased by 35 percent and MLA listings in disciplines other than English were down by 39 percent The two year total decline in position announcements amounts to 51 percent in English and 55 percent in foreign languages the largest decrease recorded by the MLA since it created the Job Information List thirty five years ago A fundamental mission of colleges and universities is to expand our range of knowledge through research and scholarship The traditional tripartite division of faculty work includes teaching research and scholarship and service to the profession Research is a form of continuing education for faculty members allowing them to teach students the most recent developments in their disciplines Despite its importance research related funding has not been spared the budget ax Library budgets for acquisition of periodicals and other resources are being slashed Professional travel budgets are being cut making attendance at academic conferences prohibitively expensive for many faculty members graduate students and academic professionals This is reflected in decreased attendance at some recent major professional conferences The AHA reported that attendance at its 2010 conference was 3 700 a 31 percent decline from the 5 400 attendees at the 2009 conference 4 The MLA reported that attendance at its late 2009 conference was down by about 1 000 a drop of about 12 percent and attendance at the January 2010 conference of the Allied Social Science Associations composed of the AEA and other economics related associations was 9 265 about 14 percent fewer than the 10 829 attending in 2009 5 These declines in conference attendance doubtless reflect a combination of the weakening academic job markets and reductions in budgets for faculty development Sabbatical leaves another form of continuing education for faculty are also being eliminated in the quest to slash spending In spring 2009 Kent State University in Ohio announced it was rejecting most sabbatical proposals submitted for the coming academic year denying sabbaticals to sixty professors Fitchburg State College in Massachusetts approved only two of eleven requests when normally it would have approved them all The University of Georgia reduced the number of sabbaticals granted during 2008 09 by two thirds relative to the previous year 6 Sabbaticals professional travel budgets and other areas of research support may be appealing targets for business officers trying to balance their institutional budgets because like deferred maintenance on a university s physical plant the harm done by cuts to these line items is not immediately apparent However the faculty is the human capital of an academic institution and deferred maintenance of human capital resources is even more dangerous to an institution s long term health than deferred building maintenance A building that is not being properly maintained will not pack up and move to another university Even in the current recession faculty members are much more mobile than is the college s physical plant Institutions that choose to defer maintenance of their faculties will see their best faculty members departing while those institutions that continue to invest in their faculty members will reap both short and long term rewards from their ability to recruit and retain committed individuals The Revenue Context As faculty members we must make investments as well One of the most important investments we can make is in the time and effort to understand both the expenditure and revenue sides of our institutional budgets Only if we understand the unique revenue streams of our individual colleges and universities can we successfully apply our efforts to both increasing the size of the revenue pie and allocating that pie in ways that maintain the primacy of academic functions The degree to which institutions rely on different revenue streams varies dramatically One of the most important distinctions is between public and private institutions According to recent data from the U S Department of Education tuition and fees account for 17 percent of the revenue of public institutions and 29 percent of the revenue of private institutions State appropriations were the largest single source of revenue for public institutions at 23 9 percent compared with only 1 percent of revenue for private institutions Federal appropriations grants and contracts were an important source of revenue for both types of institutions But while gifts and investment income made up only 5 9 percent of the revenue of public institutions they accounted for 35 3 percent of the income of private colleges and universities The current economic crisis is serious for higher education because with the exception of federal funds particularly those provided through the 2009 stimulus legislation virtually every revenue source has been negatively affected This section will explore the impact of the current economic situation on state appropriations tuition and fees charitable giving and endowment investments Faculty members who intend to exercise their legitimate role in determining their institutions spending priorities need to learn as much as possible about the true revenue situation at their own institutions State Appropriations State governments typically the largest source of revenue for public colleges and universities substantially reduced higher education appropriations in fiscal years 2009 and 2010 as their own revenue collections plummeted Principal revenue sources for states are personal income and general sales taxes accounting for approximately two thirds of total state tax revenue As the recession increased unemployment and lowered income it led to reductions in personal income tax revenue Additionally individuals whose income has fallen or who are afraid it will fall are spending less diminishing sales tax revenue Reductions in corporate profits also reduce corporate income tax receipts According to data collected by the National Conference of State Legislatures NCSL although states lowered their projected revenue forecasts for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 at the onset of the recession even those reduced forecasts regularly overpredicted revenue collections because the economic downturn has been so severe and of such long duration 7 A s a consequence most states have experienced budget deficits of unprecedented size In assembling their budgets for fiscal year 2010 the NCSL reported states were compelled to cut spending to raise taxes or to do both sufficiently to close a total forecasted budget gap of 145 9 billion Because of errors in budget forecasts that is overprediction of revenue or underprediction of spending thirty six states had to enact additional rounds of spending cuts or tax increases during the year to address an additional 28 2 billion in forecasted budget shortfalls An NCSL survey conducted in November 2009 found that thirty five states and Puerto Rico were projecting combined budget shortfalls of 55 5 billion in fiscal year 2011 which begins July 1 2010 Twenty three states and Puerto Rico currently project budget gaps totaling 68 8 billion in fiscal year 2012 These budget challenges have had great impact on higher education but that impact is not new to the current recession According to a 2008 report of the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges state appropriations for higher education when adjusted for inflation and enrollment had already declined between 1996 and 2006 8 According to the most recent State Higher Education Executive Officers report total state appropriations for higher education in fiscal year 2010 have fallen by a further 79 4 billion from the prior year 9 The overall reduction in state support totaled 3 5 percent When federal stimulus money provided through the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund is added however the net reduction in state appropriations to higher education was 1 1 percent One is led to ask what happens when federal stimulus funding ends a problem we may be confronting in future editions of this report An examination of the data for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 shows enormous variations in state funding and in the use of federal funds For example state appropriations for higher education declined 26 1 percent in Alabama 20 1 percent after inclusion of federal funds 19 2 percent in Nevada 4 3 percent after federal funds and 16 4 percent in Virginia 9 4 percent after federal funds At the same time appropriations in North Dakota increased 18 5 percent even though no federal stimulus funding went to higher education Appropriations for Montana higher education increased by 10 8 percent jumping 30 1 percent with the inclusion of supplemental federal funds Although a few signs of economic recovery began to appear in summer 2009 the data are not yet sufficient to conclude that the recession has ended Even a nascent recovery in late 2009 or sometime in 2010 will not eliminate state budget gaps because tax revenue generally lags behind economic recovery Thus state fiscal directors are predicting that state finances will not recover until fiscal year 2012 at the earliest suggesting that state appropriations for higher education will remain a target for spending cuts for another two years or more Tution and Fees Tuition and fees accounted for 17 percent of public college income For private colleges where the figure was 29 percent they were on average the largest source of revenue although significant differences exist in the degree of reliance on tuition revenue within each of the sectors The enrollment and tuition revenue situations of community colleges four year public colleges and universities and private baccalaureate colleges differ dramatically As cost conscious students and parents increasingly choose community colleges for some part of their education growing enrollments and rising tuition rates yield larger revenues Some four year public institutions are in a similar situation while for others higher tuition prices are offset by increased financial aid spending so that net tuition revenue is not rising at the rate one might expect Many private colleges are trying to keep tuition rate increases small but are having to raise discount rates to reach targeted enrollments Tuition discounting is the use of some portion of overall tuition revenue to fund institutional grants that offset higher tuition prices for some students as discount rates rise the net revenue generated from increased enrollment is reduced The recession has weakened the ability of parents and students to pay tuition and fees in three ways that are likely to have a continuing impact on college revenues for years to come declines in investment returns lower home values and unemployment Parents watched their college savings funds decline dramatically with the stock market in 2008 and 2009 Although investment values have recovered somewhat as of this writing they remain below fall 2007 levels meaning that parents have lost a full two years of investment returns as a source of college funding Home equity loans another source of funding for college tuition payments all but dried up following September 2008 and real estate foreclosures continue to challenge mortgage holders across the country Parents and students who have lost their jobs or experienced a reduction in their work hours are finding tuition bills increasingly hard to pay With unemployment expected to remain at high levels well into 2012 students and their parents are increasingly moving from contributing revenue to college and university coffers to besieging financial aid offices with requests for assistance In February and March 2009 Maguire Associates a higher education consulting firm conducted a survey of college enrollment decisions among high school students predominantly seniors and their parents Sixty nine percent of the students and 84 percent of parents reported that they were concerned or extremely concerned about the state of the U S economy More than 60 percent of parents and students indicated that their concerns about the economy had influenced the choice of schools to which the student was applying 10 More than one quarter of students who had initially planned to enroll at a private college decided to enroll at a public institution instead citing total cost or close to home as primary reasons for their decision The smaller proportion of students who enrolled in private rather than in public colleges gave scholarship or other financial assistance offers as a top reason for their choice In this context college and university admissions officers adjusted their admissions packages to meet enrollment targets and entice students to bring with them whatever tuition revenue they could A June July 2009 Maguire Associates survey of senior enrollment officers found that they accepted more students and increased financial aid offers 11 Fifty four percent of respondents increased their admissions acceptance rates and 50 percent enhanced aid packages Not surprisingly private colleges were more likely to increase financial aid than were public colleges At the same time public institutions in many states were raising tuition prices continuing a long term trend According to the College Board s annual Trends in College Pricing report published tuition and fees at public four year colleges and universities rose at an average annual rate of 4 9 percent per year beyond general inflation from 1999 2000 to 2009 10 more rapidly than in either of the previous two decades However the rate of growth of published tuition and fees at both private not for profit four year institutions and public two year colleges was lower from 1999 2000 to 2009 10 than in either of the previous two decades Published in state tuition and fees at public four year institutions averaged 6 5 percent higher in 2009 10 than in 2008 09 while the increase at public two year colleges averaged 7 3 percent and private not for profit four year colleges and universities raised prices an average of 4 4 percent However the report notes that the average estimated 2009 10 net price for full time students after considering grant aid and federal tax benefits is about 1 100 lower in 2009 dollars in the private sector and 400 lower in the public sector than it was five years ago 12 Enrollment figures for 2008 09 varied dramatically with some institutions reporting that they exceeded their enrollment goals and others reporting serious shortfalls Maguire s data indicate that 20 percent of respondents were below the targets set by their presidents and governing boards 43 percent were about where they were expected to be and 37 percent exceeded their enrollment targets Respondents at private colleges were more likely to report enrollment declines than were their public sector counterparts While increasing the enrollment of traditional age college students may partially or fully solve a particular institution s budget woes this strategy will not succeed at all institutions Without an increasing population of high school graduates higher enrollments and the tuition and fees they generate are a zero sum game At the national level increases in enrollment will have to come from populations currently underrepresented in higher education such as Hispanics and older students Given the wide variation in tuition dependence among institutions faculty members must be sure to examine closely any claims about the impact of changing enrollments on their institutions finances Charitable Giving According to the most recent Voluntary Support of Education survey compiled by the Council for Aid to Education CAE a total of 27 8 billion was given to higher education institutions in fiscal year 2009 13 That amount represents a decline of 11 9 percent from the preceding year the largest year to year drop in the more than thirty years CAE has been collecting data Figure 1 documents the recent trend When we examine the last ten years of CAE data we see that although giving did decline following the 2001 recession the decline was not nearly as large as the one colleges and universities are currently experiencing Development officers had foreseen that donations would fall in fiscal year 2009 but the declines far exceeded their expectations Declines in giving hit both gifts for current operations such as annual fund campaigns and gifts for capital purposes endowments property buildings and equipment although not in equal measure Gifts for operations fell just 0 7 percent in fiscal year 2009 and accounted for 61 percent of contributions Gifts for capital purposes made up a smaller share of giving 39 percent but giving in this category declined a full 25 percent likely as a result of the substantial declines in the stock market Another piece of bad news in the CAE report was that the proportion of alumni donating to their alma maters fell to 10 percent the lowest level ever recorded It is important to note the huge variation across different institutional categories in

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2009-10salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • On the Brink: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2008-09 | AAUP
    year however and decisions on future budgeting would be heavily dependent on the performance of the university s endowment Boston University implemented a hiring freeze at the end of September 2008 is seeking to reorganize some of its administrative and support services and has frozen salaries for employees earning more than 150 000 The fiscal year 2010 budget currently includes modest salary increases for faculty and a salary provision for current administrative employees A salary freeze may be implemented if economic conditions worsen says BU president Robert A Brown For employees on the University of Missouri s four campuses various media reports indicate that changes in benefits may be in the offing In addition to hiring and salary freezes for 2010 and potential furloughs in the future employees are being asked to contribute to their pension plan for the first time in the system s history Faculty advocates have questioned whether the financial decision making process has been sufficiently transparent whether faculty and staff were provided with an opportunity for input and whether other options were considered They have requested specific details of the financial projections used to support the proposed measures Wilberforce University in Ohio is among the institutions at which university administrations have apparently implemented actions unilaterally In November 2008 the interim president announced to faculty and staff members a series of drastic measures purportedly required to address a projected deficit in the current fiscal year brought on largely by the state of the economy The reductions in employee compensation include retroactive salary cuts involuntary furloughs of faculty and staff members immediate cessation of retirement contributions and the imposition of significant increases in health insurance premiums Faculty and staff representatives have charged that these draconian changes violate collective bargaining agreements and follow on years of financial mismanagement by the previous university administration In California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger s administration has proceeded despite legal challenges to implement a plan to furlough state workers well into 2010 Although it became clear that the plan does not apply to employees of the state s public colleges and universities the furloughs and other budget cuts to higher education have added to the climate of uncertainty California faculty members face In addition the funding for thousands of students who rely on state tuition grants remains insecure The Chronicle of Higher Education reported in early February on threats to shared governance resulting from the economic downturn citing the cases of the Tennessee Board of Regents institutions the University of South Florida and Ohio University Also in February Clark Atlanta University announced layoffs of at least seventy full time faculty and approximately thirty full time staff members these layoffs mandated by an enrollment emergency took effect in the middle of a semester The university s official statement asserted that the institution is not declaring financial exigency is not in financial trouble t here is absolutely no financial emergency and the University is not in a cash marginal position The layoffs however represent nearly one third of the university s full time faculty Value Added Higher education s contribution to an individual s earning power is well known see figure 2 The rewards of higher education are one reason why so many families and individuals make sacrifices to obtain a college degree Data reported by the U S Census Bureau show that on average a person who had completed a bachelor s degree earned almost twice the income of a person with only a high school diploma in 2007 Going on to earn a master s degree raises income again by more than 20 percent and obtaining a professional degree doubles the salary of a four year college graduate While doctoral education typically takes several more years than professional education the monetary return to the doctoral degree is substantially less As people increasingly recognize the enormous economic benefits higher education confers more and more are obtaining college degrees Between 1997 and 2007 the number of individuals with bachelor s or higher degrees increased by more than fourteen million and the proportion of individuals with this level of educational attainment rose from a quarter of the population to almost a third Although we cannot quantify the nonmonetary rewards of higher education the monetary rewards unquestionably are substantial The contributions of college and university faculty to national economic well being are equally dramatic Commonly cited indicators of economic health such as unemployment gross domestic product and personal income are all affected by national levels of educational attainment College graduates have unemployment rates substantially below those of individuals with less education during both economic expansions and recessions Figure 3 shows December unemployment rates in the United States between 1999 and 2008 During and after the 2001 recession the unemployment rate of college graduates rose less than that of people with lower levels of educational attainment And in the current recession while the unemployment rate of college graduates has increased in line with the overall trend it remains well below the unemployment rates of individuals with less education A college degree is not insurance against being unable to find work but it provides insulation from the pain of an economic downturn College professors are also responsible for generating an enormous amount of our national income Census Bureau data indicate that between 1997 and 2007 the proportion of total individual income earned by people with associate s or higher degrees rose from 49 to 57 percent Given that individuals with high school diplomas or less are taught by individuals who have earned at least bachelor s degrees virtually all of the individual income earned in the United States is tied at least indirectly to the work of college and university faculty the teachers of the college graduates and the teachers of everyone s teachers That is why the secretary of education is correct to argue that we need to increase our investments in higher education and we would argue especially in the faculty members who provide that education Crashing Endowments Faculty members brave enough to open their recent quarterly statements from TIAA CREF or other investment companies understand the meltdown in the value of their institutions endowment portfolios Just as smaller retirement nest eggs mean lower standards of living for future retirees smaller endowment portfolios mean lower levels of spending for those colleges and universities that rely on their endowments for a significant proportion of their operating budgets with the difference that the effects on those colleges and universities are immediate The effects are immediate because higher education institutions increasingly use endowment income to fund current operating expenses Standard operating procedure is to determine the average size of the endowment during the prior three fiscal years and spend approximately 4 5 percent of that amount each year So if XYZ University had an endowment worth 110 million in fiscal year 2008 100 million in fiscal year 2007 and 90 million in fiscal year 2006 in fiscal year 2009 it would put about 4 5 million from the endowment into the general operating budget While spending rates vary across institutions the range is remarkably small from about 4 2 to 5 0 percent Because the inflation adjusted average return on the stocks included in the Dow Jones Industrial Average was about 10 percent a year between 1929 and 2007 an institution spending 4 5 percent of its endowment each year could expect to see its total nest egg continue to grow even without seeking new gifts In the last few decades as colleges and universities increasingly emphasized fund raising and professional management of institutional investment portfolios dozens of endowments have increased dramatically The Chronicle of Higher Education lists seventy nine institutions that have engaged in fundraising campaigns of 1 billion or more with closing dates between 1992 and 2015 forty seven of which have already achieved their goal And while the skills of investment managers vary dramatically in the year ending June 30 2007 colleges and universities with endowments valued at 1 billion or more experienced average gains of 21 3 percent in their market value Between 1997 and 2007 charitable contributions to colleges and universities increased by an average of 6 5 percent a year according to the Council for Advancement and Support of Education And data collected by the Council for Aid to Education show that the combination of rising personal income and rising stock values allowed U S colleges and universities to raise 29 8 billion in the 2007 fiscal year the highest total ever recorded Additionally the proportion of total university budgets covered by state appropriations has declined pushing public institutions to join private colleges and universities in making concerted attempts to increase their endowments Indiana University Ohio State University the University of Kentucky the University of Michigan the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Virginia have all been engaged in capital campaigns of 1 billion or more The current economic downturn and financial crisis have weighed heavily on endowment returns bringing long term growth trends to a halt The Dow Jones Industrial Average peaked in October 2007 with a market close above 14 000 points Thirteen months later the Dow Jones closed well below 8 000 points and it has dipped even lower this spring According to the 2008 endowment survey conducted by the National Association of College and University Business Officers the average return on the endowments of the 791 responding colleges and universities was 3 0 percent in the year ended June 30 2008 still months before some of the most significant declines in investment returns A preliminary follow up survey of 435 institutions found that endowment values dropped an average of 22 9 percent between July and December 2008 Extrapolated to the entire sample this represents a disappearance of 94 5 billion in college and university wealth which at an average spending rate of 4 5 percent amounts to lost revenues of more than 4 25 billion The effects of lost endowment revenues will be most concentrated at private institutions which typically have the largest endowments per full time equivalent FTE student Additionally private colleges and universities typically do not have access to direct state funding and so rely more heavily on their endowments to finance spending Table B includes data on the size and contribution to the operating budget of endowments at some of the institutions with the largest endowments measured by endowment per FTE student While some public universities have enormous endowments for example the University of Texas system at 16 3 billion they also have large student bodies As table B illustrates the endowments at top private universities are typically ten times the size of those at the largest public universities when measured in the context of the number of FTE students At these wealthiest private institutions endowment income makes up between 18 and 51 percent of the operating budget Even though the majority of the institutions reporting endowment losses since June 30 have indicated they are not planning to reduce spending rates from their endowments at current spending rates each 10 million loss in endowment income translates into 450 000 of lost operating funds These are losses for which there will be few sources of replacement The small consolation for institutions that missed the opportunity to ratchet up their fundraising operations between the recessions of 2001 and 2007 09 is that endowment spending made up a tiny portion of their operating budgets so they will not be much affected by the market meltdown as they move through their budget planning processes in the next few fiscal years Contingency This annual economic report along with numerous other AAUP statements and reports has regularly documented and decried the increasing use and abuse of contingent faculty appointments The most recent comprehensive figures on faculty employment status from the U S Department of Education for fall 2007 are depicted in figure 4 These data show that the proportion of faculty members employed in contingent categories those in part or full time non tenure track positions has expanded dramatically over the last three decades The overuse of contingent faculty appointments deprives students of the highest quality learning experience The academic freedom of contingent instructors is compromised by the nature of their appointments and the low wages these instructors receive often mean that they are unavailable to students outside of class time Although they are qualified competent and caring teachers contingent faculty members generally are not compensated for participation in discussions about curriculum or pedagogy and are not provided with funding to enable them to keep current with developments in their disciplines let alone to support their own development as scholars With more than two thirds of the faculty now in insecure and temporary academic employment who will lead the future innovation so critical to our national economy and society The question for the moment however is what impact the current economic recession is having on faculty employment At the same time that colleges and universities are seeking to trim their spending in response to decreases in state funding or endowment income many institutions are facing increasing enrollments In early February the Associated Press reported spring semester enrollment increases at community colleges in New Hampshire Maine South Carolina Pennsylvania and Idaho The Los Angeles Times reports that cutbacks and enrollment caps at California public universities are shifting thousands of applicants into a community college system already swamped by newly unemployed adults and students priced out of other schools Applications for next fall also appear to be surging Both Duke University and the University of California system reported record numbers of applications and a popular college application website experienced unanticipated delays as a result of increased traffic on December 30 and 31 ahead of a January 1 deadline Even selective private institutions are seeing increased applications the New York Times reported in November on increases in early decision applications at Bowdoin College Dartmouth College Haverford College the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Middlebury College Northwestern University Pomona College Saint Olaf College Stanford University and Wesleyan University College and university administrators are taking divergent approaches to addressing this combination of decreasing revenues and increasing demand for instruction some are focusing on cutting expenditures others on meeting the increased demand as cheaply as possible Institutional administrators whose focus is on cutting costs are taking advantage of the contingent aspect of contingent appointments by dismissing or not renewing parttime faculty members Although the insecurity of contingent positions has always been a problem the effects of reliance on contingent faculty are redoubled in this time of widespread economic distress On the other hand college and university administrators focusing on the demand posed by rising enrollments may still be in the position of freezing or slowing their hiring of fulltime tenure track faculty and consequently may be increasing their use of part time faculty In some cases this means asking current part time faculty to teach more courses in others it means appointing more part time faculty Institutions releasing contingent faculty members now may very well move next to limit their instructional costs by replacing permanent faculty with lower paid and less secure contingent workers To the extent that they do so their approach will have the same negative effect as the approach of institutions that are decreasing their use of tenure track faculty continuing and even accelerating the trend depicted in figure 4 toward increased use of contingent faculty appointments Both approaches are based on the same fundamentally flawed premise mentioned earlier that faculty members represent only a cost rather than the institution s primary resource Both are bad for academia and represent adisinvestment in the nation s intellectual capital precisely at the time when innovation and insight are most needed The following sampling of media reports illustrates the varying impacts of the current economic situation on contingent faculty An early February article in the Tucson Citizen reported on the paradoxical situation at Arizona s three public universities which are facing both record enrollment and budget cuts The institutions are responding with a combination of larger classes heavier teaching loads for existing faculty and increases in contingent faculty hiring The newspaper quoted Fred Boice president of the board of regents as saying With the ever increasing student body and with declining state support we are restricted in the numbers of quality faculty that we can provide to those students We will therefore at some point either have to restrict enrollment in order to maintain quality of the educational process or we will be forced to reduce the quality of that product The County College of Morris in New Jersey will raise its tuition prices by 6 percent in the fall to help offset cuts in state and county aid for the 2009 10 academic year The college s budget also leaves vacant four needed full time faculty posts although a 2 percent increase in enrollment this semester is already pushing the college to appoint more part time faculty members In the Atlanta area in addition to the troubles at Clark Atlanta University Emory University s undergraduate College at Oxford is eliminating thirteen staff positions and cutting 2 million in nonpersonnel expenses and 2 million from the temporary faculty budget It will also eliminate or reduce funding for some specialized programs and institutes No full time faculty members will be laid off officials told the Atlanta Journal Constitution The same newspaper reported that Morehouse College officials had confirmed that twenty five adjunct professors about a third of the parttime faculty members employed there did not have their contracts renewed for the spring semester Full time Morehouse faculty and staff members were not affected Elsewhere in Georgia the Athens Banner Herald reported that the University of Georgia increased its cadre of part time faculty members by 40 percent between 2002 and 2008 as a result UGA students now spend less than half their class time in courses taught by full time professors University administrators say the move toward more

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2008-09salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Where Are the Priorities? The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2007-08 | AAUP
    priorities were Ostensibly the first priority of the universities with Division I A football programs is higher education 1 A review of the growing financial resources these universities sink into their football programs might however lead one to question the real priorities of the institutions USA Today sought to acquire the contracts of the 120 head football coaches leading Division I A teams during the 2007 08 academic year Table B compares the newspaper s data on coaches pay with faculty salary data collected by the AAUP 2 The base salaries and other income of fifty of the head coaches are at 1 million or higher While other income includes payments for apparel contracts public appearances football camps and items that may be paid by other sources universities typically guarantee most of this income The real number of millionaire coaches climbs substantially higher if one includes bonus payments for securing berths in bowl games or graduating certain percentages of the team s players and other perks such as vehicles country club memberships and free tickets for varsity sports events Table B presents two years of average salaries for head football coaches average salaries of full professors and the ratio of the two for the eleven Division I A football conferences In 2007 08 the average salary of the coaches is 1 040 863 a 12 4 percent increase over the 925 683 average paid in 2006 07 By contrast the average salary of full professors at these universities in 2007 08 is 104 523 3 5 percent more than the 100 998 paid in 2006 07 In 2006 07 the average head football coach earned 9 2 times the average full professor s salary that ratio increased to 10 this year What does this say about the priorities of Division I A universities Although head football coaches on average earn more than twice the salary of full professors in every conference the national averages do mask substantial differences between conferences In the Mid American Conference coaches this year are earning 2 4 times the average salary of full professors This ratio increased from last year because the average salary of full professors increased by only 2 3 percent while the average salary of head coaches increased by 14 8 percent By contrast this year head coaches in the Southeastern Conference are earning 18 6 times the salary of the full professors who carry out the primary functions of their institutions teaching and research Full professor average salaries are up 5 5 percent from last year but are dwarfed by the 36 4 percent increase in average head coach salaries As we reported last year new University of Alabama coach Nick Saban made headlines by securing a 3 5 million salary when he returned to the college ranks from the National Football League But four of his conference colleagues also garnered salaries of more than 2 million this year One argument for paying high salaries to head football coaches in Division I A is that the programs generate profits that can be shared with other university departments including academic programs Regarding football in particular National Collegiate Athletic Association NCAA data for 2002 03 indicated that 68 percent of Division I A programs reported profits 28 percent reported budget deficits and 4 percent reported breaking even While football on average helps to subsidize other sports at Division I A universities athletic programs as a whole ran budget deficits The average athletics deficit of 600 000 is a small amount when compared to a university operating budget in the hundreds of millions of dollars but even so NCAA data do not support the promise of football as a source of revenue for university academic programs 3 Instead it appears that any net revenues that may be raised by even the most successful football programs go to subsidize other athletic programs When asked by USA Today about the enormous salaries commanded by head football coaches Louisiana State University athletic director Skip Bertman said I go back to professional baseball and Alex Rodriguez making 25 million a year Or to Julia Roberts and 20 million for one movie Are those people worth it Of course not But if that s what the marketplace is and enough people are willing to watch Alex play or Julia Roberts in a movie they have a right to get that I don t think this is any different While analogies can be enormously useful learning devices they don t work if they aren t accurate Alex Rodriguez is paid 25 million by a professional baseball team that is a corporation whose function is to produce a winning team for profit When Julia Roberts is paid 20 million to make a movie she is being employed by a media company whose function is to produce entertaining films for profit By contrast most of the universities in Division I A are public and thus subsidized by taxpayers If the purpose of the institutions were to produce football entertainment for profit and serve as farm teams for the National Football League then arguments about letting market forces determine college coaches salaries would make sense Otherwise they don t In reality only a few of the college athletes on the field or of the students in the stands will find their future success in life determined by what they learned on Saturday afternoons at the game What will count most in the decades after graduation is what they learned from their professors in the classroom And it is thus the academic program and the faculty in which taxpayers and alumni and other donors should be investing Administrator Salaries In a November 2007 interview with the Chronicle of Higher Education Stephen J Trachtenberg recently retired after nineteen years as president of George Washington University said I have always thought it was a terrible mistake on the part of the AAUP and other faculty groups to deride the compensation of university presidents because it s not an issue of what you pay presidents It s an issue of what you pay people in the academy If the presidents are paid well it follows or it should follow that the professor will be celebrated and honored and also fairly compensated Paying your president reasonably is a good investment on the part of the faculty The AAUP and Trachtenberg are not in complete disagreement The AAUP doesn t deride presidents for their compensation packages On the contrary we believe that the point of salary analyses is not to pit one group in the academy against another But parsing Trachtenberg s statement yields important questions Are the terms paid well and fairly compensated synonymous Is there a direct causal relationship between presidential pay and faculty pay and if so how strong is it Does it strengthen the academy to increase the compensation of certain groups of employees while using growing numbers of contingent faculty postdoctoral fellows and graduate students to depress the compensation of another group of employees George Washington University did make a substantial investment in Trachtenberg In the most recent year for which we have data 2005 06 he was one of the eighty one presidents from private institutions who earned more than half a million dollars in total compensation with a pay and benefits package worth 706 133 4 The AAUP believes that the argument for paying faculty well is at least as strong as the argument for paying presidents well The faculty carry out the core missions of the institution teaching and creating knowledge This fact does not diminish the importance of the many nonfaculty employees who keep the wheels turning at their institutions but it does suggest that deploying resources to recruit and retain the best faculty is the most important investment a college or university can make One might wonder how it follows that if presidents are paid well faculty will also be paid well Trachtenberg s statement asserts correlation but doesn t explain the underlying causal mechanism Ultimately whether a well paid university president will result in well paid or fairly paid faculty is an empirical question Last year s report cast doubt on assertions of correlation between presidential and faculty salaries with a chart indicating that between 1995 96 and 2005 06 presidential salary increases were more than six times greater than faculty salary increases Figures 1 and 2 based on more recent data collected as part of the annual AAUP survey indicate that the gap in salaries between faculty and other top administrators is also widening Figure 1 shows the two year change in average salary for each senior administrative position at private independent and church related colleges and universities that submitted data to the AAUP At these institutions the average increase in presidential salary substantially exceeded both the inflation rate and the average salary increases earned by full professors For each institutional type the percentage change in faculty salaries over the two year period is approximately half of the percentage change in respective presidential salaries Salary growth rates for other chief administrators have also exceeded the rate of inflation and in all but one instance the chief financial officers at private doctoral universities have exceeded the growth rate in fullprofessor salaries Since average salaries for these top administrative positions are typically twice those of even senior professors the fact that they are also growing more rapidly indicates that salaries for administrators apparently have a higher priority than those for faculty At the public colleges and universities depicted in figure 2 the differences in the rate of recent salary increases are somewhat smaller As suggested in the first section of this report public institutions appear to have increased faculty salaries in the last two years in an effort to make up for smaller increases in previous years That effort coupled with somewhat smaller increases for top administrators than in the private sector has resulted in the less rapidly widening gap depicted in the figure Nonetheless the basic conclusion is the same a positive relationship between presidential and faculty salaries does not appear in the data for either public or private institutions There does seem to be a strong positive relationship between higher pay for presidents and higher pay for other top administrators across institutional categories and across the public private divide however As Trachtenberg pointed out in his Chronicle interview college presidents are paid more than professors of French But as he also noted the large and growing differences in compensation for senior administrators relative to their faculties have moral and ethical implications When market forces are widely offered as a reason why presidents administrative vice presidents and football coaches must be paid enormous salaries while at the same time market forces are blamed for the continuing suppression of contingent faculty wages the growing use of graduate students in undergraduate teaching and the increasing length of postdoctoral fellowships we would be remiss if we did not ask hard questions about priorities Specialization A college or university budget is a blueprint indicating where the institution s priorities lie Because higher education is a labor intensive venture the allocation of staff across different departments within a college or university has significant impact on how the institution operates The AAUP has long championed academic freedom and tenure because these conditions are necessary to ensure that faculty can consider a wide range of viewpoints in their teaching and research and are not restricted to whatever perspective happens to be popular or profitable at the moment Faculty participation in academic governance is an essential check and balance at a time when U S colleges and universities are embracing the operating strategies of for profit corporations with growing fervor Students are viewed as customers and faculty are coming under pressure to alter curricula to provide the courses that the customers want regardless of the value of those courses in contributing to the goals of a postsecondary education Colleges and universities increasingly conceptualize higher education as a commodity and attempt to provide it at the lowest cost They do so by reorganizing themselves as knowledge factories in which a variety of internal functions for example dining services and facilities maintenance are outsourced to for profit contractors who pay their workers minimum wages and in which the central teaching and research functions are outsourced to legions of poorly paid non tenure track adjunct faculty postdoctoral fellows and graduate students While faculty governance is necessary to ensure that the operating decisions of colleges and universities are pedagogically sound arguably the extent of governance that faculty exercise over their institutions is on the decline and has been for decades Former AAUP general secretary Mary Burgan comments on this troubling phenomenon in her recent book Whatever Happened to the Faculty For most of the history of U S higher education faculty members performed the key administrative functions The college president dean of faculty dean of students and director of admissions were professors who simultaneously wore faculty and administrative hats The bird s eye view of the institution s different functions that faculty administrators had gave them an advantage in understanding the pedagogical consequences of administrative decisions and their institutions benefited from their broad base of knowledge In the post World War II years however college and university enrollments grew dramatically and specialization increasingly characterized professional administrative staff positions This movement away from generalists and toward specialists has accelerated during the past twenty years creating a disconnect between administrations and academic programs As a result administrators sometimes do not appreciate the effects their decisions will have across other parts of the institution Today positions that previously would have been held by faculty members such as dean of students or dean of freshmen are held by student affairs professionals And hundreds of new positions have been created under the supervision of vice presidents for academic affairs admissions business affairs development and student affairs For example the February 1 2008 Careers section of the Chronicle of Higher Education lists advertisements for vice chancellor of student success study abroad director associate director for experiential learning director of financial aid director of counseling services assistant director of admissions communications and special events chief information officer assistant vice president for marketing and public relations and many other specialized administrative positions Under the umbrella of athletics alone the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources CUPA HR 2006 07 Administrative Compensation Survey lists associate and assistant director jobs in finance and business operations external affairs development academic affairs and compliance Some of the increasing demand for specialization among higher education administrators represents increased reporting requirements related to crime on campus environmental safety standards learning outcomes accreditation and nondiscrimination in employment Another factor driving the movement toward specialization is the increasing importance of technology for research teaching and managing overall university operations The CUPA HR survey report on the salaries of mid level managers includes the positions of Webmaster television station manager systems programmer database administration manager information systems security analyst and e mail administrator 5 To the degree that the movement toward specialization in higher education administration represents a redistribution of work formerly performed by faculty it also represents a diminished role for faculty in shared governance of the institution Shifts in Staffing Data collected through the U S Department of Education s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System provide a detailed picture of changes in staffing priorities between 1976 and 2005 a period that saw student enrollment increase by 60 percent The total growth in higher education personnel during this period was slightly larger than the growth in enrollment at 84 percent But as figure 3 illustrates the aggregate growth in higher education employment disguises enormous differences in growth rates across different categories of the higher education workforce Full time nonfaculty professional staff grew at the highest rate 281 percent between 1976 and 2005 This category includes many of the newly created positions in higher education referred to above Although the ranks of full time administrators in higher education grew less rapidly their numbers doubled between 1976 and 2005 The one exception to the tremendous growth rates in nonfaculty positions is the 20 percent growth in the number of full time nonprofessional staff This disproportionately small growth rate well below the rate of enrollment growth likely reflects an increased outsourcing of work in areas such as food services and maintenance of the grounds and physical plant Surprisingly and unfortunately the second and third largest growth rates in higher education personnel are in the categories of full and part time non tenure track faculty both of which increased by over 200 percent These two categories comprise the contingent faculty Contingent faculty are ostensibly hired to provide universities with a flexible labor pool that can be expanded or reduced when enrollments in particular programs fluctuate but the enormous growth in contingent faculty relative to full time tenured or tenure track faculty and relative to the growth in student enrollments is far greater than might be justified by an argument for flexibility Other factors are driving this trend Increasingly it appears that preferences for hiring contingent faculty stem from the fact that colleges and universities can hire them to teach many of the same courses that tenure track faculty teach at substantially lower pay rates For example based on the rates of pay for part time faculty calculated in the 2005 06 edition of this annual report and assuming a standard teaching load a typical master s degree university could have hired eight part time faculty each teaching three courses a year for approximately the same pay that one fulltime assistant professor would earn Although hiring eight part time faculty members to teach specific classes would be less expensive in the process the university would lose the capacity for advancing knowledge and contributing to the longterm development of curriculum that full time tenure track faculty bring Because most part time faculty do not have sufficient institutional support they are

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2007-08salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Financial Inequality in Higher Education: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2006-07 | AAUP
    endowments varies dramatically across institutions spending rates diverge by only a few tenths of a percent Together the institutional participants in the study had a total of more than 340 billion in endowment assets Given an average spending rate of 4 6 percent endowment assets contributed 15 6 billion toward their expenditures for the fiscal year that ended June 30 2006 The amount of revenue that a particular college or university gains from its endowment income varies dramatically between institutions with large endowments and those with smaller ones Table B depicts the market value of the ten largest university endowments on June 30 2006 6 According to the 2006 Endowment Study the sixty two institutional respondents that had endowment assets of 1 billion or more represented only 8 1 percent of the colleges and universities participating in the survey Yet those sixty two institutions owned 67 4 percent of all endowment assets Institutions that had endowments of 100 million or less represented more than half of the responding institutions but owned just 5 percent of total endowment assets Drawing on data from figure 1 and the 2006 Endowment Study we can estimate the amount of funds available to institutions from their endowments With an endowment of 28 9 billion and a spending rate of approximately 4 6 percent Harvard University had about 1 3 billion in revenue available to flow into its operating budget in fiscal 2006 These funds could help provide the highest quality learning facilities and offer faculty salaries that enable the university to recruit the most talented faculty away from other positions in academe government or the private sector By contrast Mount Ida College of Massachusetts reported an endowment of 8 7 million Assuming a spending rate of 4 4 percent that yields about 383 900 in funds to finance its educational programs in fiscal 2006 approximately 0 03 percent of what Harvard had to spend Large endowments also make possible investment opportunities that enable endowments to grow According to the 2006 Endowment Study institutions that had endowments of more than 1 billion invested an average of 36 percent of their endowments in alternative assets such as hedge funds which are more risky than other assets but potentially produce higher yields By contrast institutions that had endowments of less than 100 million invested an average of less than 10 percent of their endowments in alternative assets They favored traditional stock and bond assets which are less risky but also yield lower rates of return As figure 2 shows institutional respondents to the 2006 Endowment Study that had the largest endowments enjoyed an average one year rate of return of 15 7 percent nearly double the 7 8 percent average return rate for the institutions that had the smallest endowment This substantial difference in investment returns suggests that the gap in institutional wealth among colleges and universities is likely to grow larger For decades U S higher education has been a ticket to a more prosperous lifestyle for millions of American and international students But in the knowledge based economy in which we now operate education also contributes to income inequality Differences in the size and income of college and university endowments are worrisome because they yield significant differences in the amount of resources individual institutions have available to build top notch educational facilities and offer salaries and benefits that allow them to recruit and retain the most talented faculty We in the higher education community need to ask how the growing endowment gap will affect the desirability of an academic career at less well funded institutions and how in turn that will affect the quality of education available to students and income inequality among them Presidential Salaries Compensation for chief executives is another area in which academe mimics the broader economy In 1965 the average corporate chief executive officer earned twenty four times as much as the average worker 7 By 2005 average CEO pay was 262 times the pay of an average worker During the past decade chief executives of colleges and universities have also experienced extraordinary increases in their compensation As Figure 3 illustrates the inflation adjusted salaries of chief executives in higher education increased by more than 35 percent from 1995 96 to 2005 06 while the inflation adjusted salaries of faculty members increased a mere 5 percent Inflation adjusted endowments grew an average of 82 percent during that time These figures raise a question of priorities if institutional endowment funds and presidential compensation grew at substantial rates why should faculty compensation remain so depressed In its 2006 survey of executive compensation the Chronicle of Higher Education reported that 112 of the 853 chief executives surveyed had compensation packages totaling at least 500 000 8 In 1996 only one president received a compensation package in excess of 500 000 9 Five chief executives currently receive more than 1 million in compensation Data from the AAUP survey presented in survey report table 15 provide another indicator of the salaries of presidents relative to those of faculty This comparison is important because presidents are more commonly compared to corporate CEOs Such a comparison is inappropriate however as nearly all colleges and universities are still not for profit enterprises providing a benefit for society as a whole not just for shareholders The table shows a ratio of presidential salary to the average salary for a full professor on that campus The ratio for 2006 07 ranges from 1 24 at one private baccalaureate college to 6 82 at one private master s degree university The median figures representing the middle of the range from high to low in each category indicate that most presidents earn three times the salaries paid to their senior faculty members Why are these trends in executive compensation problematic Individuals who possess the motivation and the talent to obtain terminal degrees in their disciplines also have the ability to take highly paid positions in the corporate sector When a professor decides to forsake a higher salary in private industry for the less tangible rewards of educating generations of students he or she provides a public service College and university presidents are also engaged in public service Among other leadership duties they serve as role models for faculty staff and students at their institutions In years when budgets are tight presidents should lead by example and neither seek nor accept annual salary increases in excess of those awarded to other employees Likewise when the financial environment improves the generous compensation packages necessary to recruit and retain the most highly qualified chief executives should also be extended to the faculties they lead Some observers justify offering chief executives compensation in excess of that awarded to faculty by noting that the total cost to the university is relatively small when the CEO is highly compensated A 10 percent pay increase for a university president earning 500 000 requires just 50 000 in additional spending in the following year A 10 percent salary increase for five hundred faculty members earning the 2006 07 average salary of 73 207 see survey report table 4 would create 3 660 334 in additional expenditures Even a 1 percent faculty salary increase 732 for each person in this example would require 366 033 in additional spending It is often argued that when tight budgets permit only such a minimal increase which faculty would not miss it is said it is much better in terms of recruitment retention and morale to give a few large salary increases to senior administrators instead This argument is wrong for many reasons Although an additional 732 in pretax income may not be sufficient to finance a family vacation pay for new living room furniture or replace a twelve year old roof it is not an insignificant amount For this author and her children that 732 would buy takeout pizza two nights a month twenty four nights a year of not having to cook dinner It would also finance numerous other things that would make a professor s life easier and more enjoyable help with housekeeping or clothes for a child or for oneself Moreover a single percentage point salary increase for an average assistant professor see survey report table 4 earning 58 662 in 2006 07 would yield an additional 17 599 in pretax income over a thirty year career even before compounding through annual percentage salary increases Invested tax free in a 403 b retirement plan that negligible raise would ultimately yield hundreds of thousands of dollars Salaries of Coaches The January 2007 announcement that Nick Saban head coach of the Miami Dolphins professional football team would leave his position to coach at the University of Alabama rolled through academe like a tidal surge Saban s eight year contract guarantees him 32 million plus the opportunity to earn an additional 700 000 to 800 000 annually in bowl game bonuses James Duderstadt former president of the University of Michigan and a member of the U S Secretary of Education s Commission on the Future of Higher Education echoed the sentiments of many when he noted that the decision by a university that ranks near the bottom of state spending on higher education to pay its head football coach 4 million a year sends the wrong message about priorities According to the National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs the state of Alabama s entire budget for need based financial aid was just 3 35 million in 2004 05 10 ome people justify huge salaries for superstar coaches by arguing that high profile coaches produce winning seasons that result in additional alumni giving or net profits in the athletic budget Theoretically these additional revenues can then be used to support the academic mission of a university In their 2001 book The Game of Life College Sports and Educational Values higher education scholars James Shulman and William Bowen cite data from different sources to debunk these myths Surprisingly they find a correlation between winning and alumni giving only at co ed liberal arts colleges But these institutions rarely pay even six figure salaries to their athletic coaches Shulman and Bowen also report that athletic revenue including gate receipts revenue from bowl games and television contracts typically falls short of expenditures They estimate the annual net cost of a National Collegiate Athletic Association NCAA Division I A athletic program in the late 1990s to have been in the 7 to 8 million range In 2002 03 Revenue and Expenses of Divisions I and II Intercollegiate Athletics Programs the NCAA states that only 40 percent of Division I A universities reported profits in their athletic programs The other 60 percent ran average deficits of 4 4 million And no more than 11 percent of colleges and universities in other NCAA divisions reported a profit from their athletic programs Table C compares recent compensation provided to coaches at universities with Division I A athletic programs to that of full professors and university presidents Because the data vary considerably the table presents averages highs and lows Salary for full professors ranged from 63 030 at Marshall University to 136 374 at Duke University the weighted average for the sample was 101 744 University presidents earned 416 719 on average with the highest compensation going to the president of the University of Southern California and the lowest to the president of the University of Memphis Coaches compensation excluding bonuses but including salary plus other income averaged just under 1 million with substantial variation between the highest University of Oklahoma and the lowest paid football coach University of Louisiana Monroe If paychecks reflect the value of an individual to the university and its core educational mission then Division I A head football coaches are on average 9 4 times more valuable than their full professor colleagues By this metric the head football coach at the University of Oklahoma is 36 times more valuable than an average full professor at his university The data suggest that even university presidents are less valuable to these institutions than football coaches On average coaches earned more than twice as much as their institution s chief executive officer While Miami University of Ohio appears to place a greater premium on the skills of its chief executive than on its head football coach the University of Oklahoma apparently values its football coach eleven times as much as its president We might ask what message universities send to alumni taxpayers students faculty and staff when they pay such exorbitant salaries to their coaches The U S House Ways and Means Committee has reportedly asked the NCAA to explain why coaches are paid so much and whether athletic departments with millions of dollars in revenue deserve tax exempt status 11 Perhaps these congressional hearings will inspire university administrators and governing boards to rethink who is contributing to their core educational missions and reward the people who are teaching the students a bit more appropriately Inequality Among Faculty Income inequality in the broader U S economy far exceeds that observed among higher education faculty In 2005 the income of households at the twentieth percentile among all American households was just 11 6 percent of the household income at the ninety fifth percentile 12 Thus a household at the twentieth percentile took in total income that was only about one tenth as much as that available to a household at the ninety fifth percentile Figure 4 shows an equivalent measure of inequality in the average salaries of full professors comparing the average at the twentieth percentile to that at the ninety fifth by institutional type The closer the average at the twentieth percentile is to 100 percent of the ninety fifth percentile figure the smaller the amount of income inequality As salary differences increase between the least and best paid faculty members some qualified academics will probably leave academe or choose private sector jobs in the first place This phenomenon would directly affect the quality of higher education in the United States Although income differences among professors are smaller than those among American workers overall professorial income has varied substantially by institutional type in recent decades As figure 4 illustrates full professors at the twentieth percentile in 2005 06 received between 54 and 65 percent of the salary received by full professors at the ninety fifth percentile The ratio was smallest at baccalaureate colleges category IIB and highest at master s universities category IIA As the downward slope in most of the trend lines demonstrates the differential in compensation among full professors grew during the last twenty years Community colleges with academic ranks category III which exhibited the least variation in 1986 87 showed greater income differences by 2005 06 than either doctoral category I or master s universities Figure 5 compares assistant professor salaries by institutional type As the figure illustrates assistant professors experienced slightly less variation in income by institution in 2005 06 than full professors did Assistant professors at the twentieth percentile received between 66 and 73 percent of the average salary of assistant professors at the ninety fifth percentile The fact that assistant professors are more mobile than their senior colleagues may partly explain the smaller range in assistant professor salaries Colleges and universities must keep salaries for junior faculty competitive or risk losing them to better paying institutions Typically there are more junior than senior level job openings which also enhances the mobility of junior faculty Senior faculty may also have deeper roots in their communities thus increasing the non monetary costs of moving Given such differences in the academic job markets for junior and senior faculty even institutions under budgetary pressure would feel obliged to pay competitive salaries to recruit and retain junior faculty The limited mobility of senior professors can lead to salary compression which occurs when experienced faculty are paid only slightly more than their junior colleagues and may also result in larger salary variation between more wealthy and less wealthy institutions The smaller range in assistant professor salaries may also arise because faculty members just beginning their careers may resemble one another in their demonstrated research and teaching skills to a greater degree than they will later in their careers Certainly the difference in scholarly production between the most and the least published full professors exceeds that between the most and least published assistant professors Differences in teaching ability may also be more marked at senior levels These larger skill differentials could contribute to the larger variation in salaries at the full professor level The range of salary variation among assistant professors expanded slightly over the past two decades Among assistant professors at community colleges however the distance between high and low salaries actually declined In 1986 87 assistant professors at the twentieth percentile at community colleges earned 67 percent as much as assistant professors at the ninety fifth percentile By 2005 06 however assistant professors at the twentieth percentile at community colleges earned almost 73 percent as much as those at the ninety fifth percentile It is possible that faculty have not experienced income inequality to the same degree as the average American partly because professors are highly educated Still income inequality is a matter of concern in higher education especially insofar as it decreases faculty members recognition of their shared professional interests Disciplinary Differences Over the past twenty years the AAUP has periodically analyzed differences in faculty salaries by discipline To do so the Association has drawn on data from an annual survey of faculty salaries conducted since 1974 by the Office of Institutional Research at Oklahoma State University Most of the institutions included in the sample belong to the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges many are the flagship doctoral granting universities of their states Although the sample is only a subset of the universities included in the AAUP s sample of doctoral granting universities primarily larger public universities the consistent membership of the Oklahoma State

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2006-07salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Devaluing of Higher Education: The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2005-06 | AAUP
    S faculty are employed by public colleges and universities and more than three fourths of postsecondary students are educated in this sector it is important to analyze faculty salary changes by public private affiliation 4 In 2005 06 the salaries of faculty at private colleges and universities increased by 0 5 percentage points more on average than the salaries of their counterparts at public institutions However the percentage salary increases varied across academic ranks and institutional types The gap in the salary increase between private and public institutions was greatest for faculty at the rank of instructor with much of the difference occurring at doctoral universities The private public difference shrinks to 0 7 percentage points for assistant professors and even less for those at higher ranks Survey report table 1 shows that the private public salary gap is largest at baccalaureate colleges where average faculty salary increases at private institutions were 1 1 percentage points above those at public baccalaureate colleges Average increases at private master s institutions were 0 5 percentage points higher than at public master s institutions And average increases at private doctoral institutions were 0 2 percentage points higher than at public universities Big Picture Anecdotal stories suggest that some private colleges and universities have been using their ability to pay higher salaries to raid public institutions of their tenured faculty but no empirical data yet exist on how widespread this phenomenon may be To the extent that the private public salary gap persists or grows even wider it will be harder for public colleges and universities to recruit and retain top quality faculty Figure 1 pdf compares the salaries of full professors at public and private institutions In 1970 71 full professors at public doctoral universities earned 91 percent as much as professors at private doctoral institutions But by 2004 05 professors at public doctoral universities earned just 77 percent of what their private institution counterparts did During the 1970s and early 1980s there was no significant private public salary gap at baccalaureate or master s institutions although baccalaureate colleges are disproportionately private and master s institutions are disproportionately public In the mid 1980s however a disparity in salaries at private and public baccalaureate colleges emerged and it continued to widen over the following twenty years By 2004 05 full professors at public baccalaureate colleges earned just 83 percent as much as their counterparts at private institutions In the 1970s and early 1980s full professors at public master s institutions typically earned more than their counterparts at private institutions By the mid 1990s however salaries at public master s institutions began to slip below those at private institutions Still the private public salary gap remains smaller at master s institutions than at any other institutional type full professors at public master s institutions earn approximately 91 percent as much as their counterparts at private institutions Over the last four years the size of the private public salary gap has remained relatively constant at doctoral master s and baccalaureate institutions Figure 2 pdf compares trends in the average salaries of assistant professors at public and private four year colleges and universities over the past thirty five years Because most tenure track faculty enter the profession at the rank of assistant professor significant differences in compensation at this level would seem to affect the ability of public institutions to attract top quality new PhDs to their faculties Public doctoral universities did not appear to have a financial disadvantage in recruiting new professors until the mid 1980s when the salary gap began to widen By 2004 05 assistant professors at public doctoral universities earned only 83 percent as much as their private university counterparts Assistant professors at public baccalaureate and master s institutions typically received higher salaries than their colleagues at private institutions until the mid 1990s Since then the salary gap has held relatively constant at 3 to 5 percentage points Compensation gaps at the assistant professor level likely compound as faculty advance through the professorial ranks which may partly explain why the private public salary gaps in figure 1 are larger than those in figure 2 Academia and Other Professions Although most faculty members probably do not choose a career in academe for the paycheck increasing disparities between the compensation of faculty and that of those with graduate degrees in other professions will no doubt make it harder to recruit the best undergraduates into academic careers For example a paper presented at the 2006 meeting of the American Economic Association examined the decisions of applicants who were admitted to one or more U S PhD programs in economics but chose not to enroll 5 The third most prevalent reason for not enrolling was that the applicants expected higher lifetime earnings in a different career such as finance public policy law or accounting Figure 3 pdf compares changes in the inflation adjusted salaries of full time faculty members physicians lawyers engineers and architects For most of the five year intervals between 1986 and 2005 faculty salary increases compare unfavorably to pay increases in these other professions Professionals and employees in many other occupations expect that as they spend more time in their chosen career and acquire more experience and competence their inflation adjusted salaries will increase AAUP salary data show that in any given year salaries rise with professorial rank So professors on average earn more than associate professors who earn more than assistant professors and so on But over the past twenty years average faculty salaries adjusted for inflation increased by only 0 25 percent In contrast physicians received inflation adjusted salary increases of 34 percent lawyers saw their salaries rise by 18 percent and engineers and architects received increases of 5 percent Reasons for Negative Salary Growth The ability of a college or university to invest in recruiting and retaining faculty through adequate salary growth depends on its fiscal position Key sources of revenue are tuition grants endowment returns and for public institutions appropriations by state governments For institutions with large endowments endowment growth can be a significant source of budget revenue Although public universities rely heavily on state appropriations they have increasingly focused on building endowments to finance expenditures At the end of fiscal 2005 eighteen of the fifty six colleges and universities with endowments of 1 billion or more were public according to the National Endowment Survey of the National Association of College and University Business Officers NACUBO 6 NACUBO reports that in the fiscal year ending June 30 2005 that is the 2004 05 academic year the institutions that responded to its survey had a total of 299 billion in endowment assets Doctoral universities owned 78 9 percent 235 1 billion of those assets baccalaureate colleges owned 13 1 percent 39 billion and master s institutions owned 6 4 percent 19 1 billion As table B pdf shows endowment returns have mostly recovered from the downturn in financial markets that occurred between 2000 and 2002 The median return on college and university endowments in fiscal 2005 was 9 1 percent with public institutions experiencing average returns of 9 1 percent and private institutions realizing returns of 9 4 percent 7 One three and ten year median returns adjusted for inflation ranged between 6 5 and 7 0 percent Median returns vary more by the total size of an institution s endowment than by institutional type Colleges and universities that had endowments of at least 1 billion performed much better than the full sample obtaining median returns of 13 8 percent for fiscal 2005 Table B makes it clear that low endowment growth rates do not explain the negative growth in faculty salaries between 2004 and 2006 Endowments performed well over all three time intervals covered by the table compared with both the rate of inflation and stock market returns as measured by Standard and Poor s 500 Index Moreover the Center for the Study of Higher Education Policy at Illinois State University which runs a national database tracking state tax support for higher education recently reported an overall increase of 6 percent in state appropriations for 2005 06 the largest increase since 2001 8 For public colleges and universities where two thirds of full time faculty work this increase offers an opportunity to reverse recent salary shortfalls Presumably colleges and universities that have weak fiscal positions would ask not only their faculty members but also their presidents to accept modest salary increases Figure 4 confirms recent anecdotal evidence however that presidential compensation packages have grown rapidly over the past decade and that the effects of this expansion have compounded 9 Between 1995 and 2005 median presidential salaries for chief executives of a single institution rose by almost 29 percent During the same period the salaries of fulltime faculty increased by only 9 percent 10 Further a recent report found that the median salary of administrators increased 3 5 percent for 2005 06 the ninth consecutive year that administrative increases have exceeded inflation 11 Governing board members have argued that given the pay opportunities available in the private sector high presidential salaries are needed to attract and retain highly qualified senior academic administrators The same argument however would seem to apply equally to faculty compensation For the first time in 2004 05 the AAUP surveyed the salaries of top administrators Because the level of response was encouraging a table on presidential salaries has been added to the roster of tables accompanying this report Survey report table 15 on page 50 compares presidential salaries to those of the average full professor by institutional type Presidential salaries do not however appear in the individual institutional listings in the appendices to this report Benefits Crunch As figure 5 pdf shows benefits are an important part of faculty compensation packages Unlike private industry colleges and universities have not decreased the relative size of their contributions to retirement benefits over the past twenty years Their contributions to other benefits both legally mandated benefits such as Social Security and worker s compensation and optional benefits such as long term disability insurance and tuition benefits also remained fairly constant On average the nonmedical retirement benefits that colleges and universities provide equal almost 10 percent of faculty salaries In contrast institutional contributions to medical insurance for full time faculty have doubled over the past twenty years when measured as a percentage of salary 12 It might seem that this doubling represents an increase in faculty compensation At the same time however that employer costs for medical insurance have grown the dollar amounts of deductibles copayments and health insurance premiums paid by faculty members have also risen Arguably the escalating costs of medical insurance shown in figure 5 represent budget lines that otherwise would have been available to augment faculty salaries Like other sectors of the U S economy higher education has had to grapple with rapidly rising health care costs Health insurance is one of the most important benefits in employee compensation packages In a 2003 survey of state employee benefits packages twenty six of the thirty nine state officials responding ranked health insurance as the most important benefit they offer presumably because of the importance of this benefit in recruiting and retaining employees 13 As health insurance costs throughout the United States have skyrocketed over the past two decades employees have increasingly opted out of their employers group health insurance plans because they cannot afford the premiums An important factor in determining the affordability of employer provided health insurance plans and the amount of compensation received by faculty who participate in such plans is the proportion of the premium the employer pays Table C pdf shows that in 2005 for both single employee only and family coverage the percentage of premiums that colleges and universities paid resembles on average those paid in private industry For both single and family coverage however the average subsidy provided by state government employers in 2003 the most recent year for which data are available exceeded the average subsidy provided for all employees in institutions of higher education There is significant overlap between the higher education and state government categories but it is worth noting the average difference in premium subsidy The average state subsidies for health insurance premiums reported in Table C however hide large variations in state costs for and contributions to the medical insurance premiums for state employees In 2003 twelve states Alabama Iowa Maine Michigan Minnesota New Jersey North Carolina North Dakota Oklahoma Oregon Texas and Wisconsin paid 100 percent of the medical insurance premiums for single coverage Five states New Jersey North Dakota Oregon South Carolina and Wisconsin paid 100 percent of the medical insurance premiums for family coverage Faculty working in public institutions in these states might want to compare their health insurance packages and premium subsidies to those offered to other state employees if they are not already included in the same plans On average the states of Kentucky Mississippi and North Carolina paid no more than 40 percent of employee health insurance premiums for family coverage For single coverage Colorado and New Mexico provided the smallest average subsidies only about 66 percent of the premium costs Part Time Faculty As figure 6 pdf shows since 1971 the proportion of faculty teaching part time has doubled from 23 percent in that year to 46 percent in 2003 With almost half of the faculty members in the United States in part time positions consideration of the economic status of the profession is incomplete without an analysis of the pay of part time faculty Part time faculty are a demographically diverse group Some have other full time employment and teach part time because they enjoy teaching Others derive all their income from multiple part time academic assignments but would prefer a single full time academic appointment 14 No matter why faculty members may teach part time however the adequacy or inadequacy of part time faculty salaries affects the quality of education our institutions can provide Table D shows the distribution of part time faculty pay using data from the U S Department of Education s 2004 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty NSOPF Because of how NSOPF data were available at the time of this report s publication the table shows two different rates of pay for two different groups of part time faculty those who are paid on a percourse basis and those who are paid on a per credit hour basis 15 Per course pay varies substantially by institutional type with doctoral universities typically paying their part time faculty 50 percent more than public associate colleges Per course pay also varies considerably within institutional types The percourse pay difference between the twenty fifth and ninetieth percentiles ranges from 100 percent for private master s institutions to more than 160 percent for private doctoral universities One way to evaluate the adequacy of salaries for part time faculty might be to ask how much a part time faculty member would earn if he or she taught on a full time schedule that is if the instructor combined multiple part time appointments According to the poverty thresholds computed by the U S Census Bureau one person living alone in 2003 with an annual income of 9 573 or less would have been classified as living in poverty 16 Using the median per course pay rate in table D and assuming an eight course annual load a part time professor at a public associate college would have earned 140 percent of the poverty level had he or she taught full time A part time instructor at a public master s university would have earned 150 percent of the poverty level and a part time professor at a private baccalaureate college or master s university would have earned between 163 and 178 percent of it The highest paid part time faculty members those teaching at doctoral universities would have earned between 245 and 251 percent of the poverty level for a household of one in 2003 if they had taught full time at their part time rate of pay Part time faculty members with families to support would find their incomes closer to or even below the poverty level which was 12 015 for a family of two in 2003 and 14 680 for a family of three The 2004 NSOPF per credit hour rates of pay for part time faculty also vary substantially across institutional types Private doctoral universities pay the highest per credit hour rates for part time faculty their median per credit hour pay is 150 higher than at corresponding public institutions Their median pay rate is 80 percent higher than at public two year colleges which offer the lowest median rate of pay to part time faculty members Median hourly wages computed by the U S Bureau of Labor Statistics are another benchmark for evaluating parttime faculty pay rates 17 As a conservative estimate let us assume that a professor spends two hours preparing for each credit hour of teaching Each single credit hour should thus result in about three hours of work each week Over a fourteen week semester the professor would spend a total of forty two hours for each credit hour Dividing per credit pay by forty two thus produces an estimate of the hourly wage of part time faculty members 18 Computed this way median hourly wages for part time faculty in 2003 range from a low of 11 19 at public two year colleges to a high of 20 24 at private doctoral universities By comparison the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that the median hourly wage for medical secretaries in fall 2003 was 12 53 for bookkeeping clerks 13 45 for auto mechanics 15 18 for paralegals 18 48 and for registered nurses 24 53 Without doubt part time professors who expected that their advanced educations would permit them to earn at least what they might have earned working in occupations requiring four

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2005-06salarysurvey (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •