The salary data for all Ladder Rank Faculty in the School of Biological Sciences are plotted below.
As a function of rank, step, and gender:
As a function of rank, step, and ethnicity:
Multiple Linear Regression Analysis
Multiple regression analysis of salary vs rank/step. As indicated in Table 1, the simplest model with only demographic variables shows that relative to white male faculty, women earn salaries that are around 11% lower, Asian faculty 12% and URM faculty 16% lower. Only 11% of salary variation is explained by this model. After all control factors are added, 93% of salary variation is explained by a model with demographic, experience, field, and rank variables. After adjusting for covariates, relative to white male faculty, salaries are around 2% lower for faculty who are women, 1% lower for Asian, and 5% higher for URM faculty. In the final model, URM faculty earning 5% more than white faculty is statistically significant. The final model predicted salaries within plus or minus 17.4%. (For technically-minded readers, the RMSE on the log base 10 scale is 0.035.)
Progression Analysis
The progression data for all Arts Ladder Rank Faculty, are plotted below. Normative progression is defined in the Progression Matrix.
Progress by gender:
Progress by ethnicity:
Progress Rate Analysis
Using a simple t-test, the results indicate that there is no statistically significant difference in progression rate means between white males and women or URM faculty. However, Asian faculty progressed at a rate that is 2.34 years slower than White males. After using multivariate regression to adjust for experience, discipline, and initial rank, there was no statistically significant difference in rates of progression between men and women, or White and URM faculty. Asian faculty progressed at a slower rate than white faculty (b = -2.50, p = 0.017). Normative progression is defined in the Progression Matrix.
