The salary data for all Ladder Rank Faculty in the School of Medicine – Clinical 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 earned salaries that are 10.9% less, Asian faculty earned 1.4% less and URM faculty earned 1.6% less. The proportion of salary variation explained by this model was 2%. After all control factors are added, 72% 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 about 7.4% lower for faculty who are women, 14.7% higher for Asian, and 21.7% higher for URM faculty. Asian and URM faculty earned significantly more than white faculty. The final model predicted salaries within plus or minus 53.2%. (For technically-minded readers, the RMSE on the log base 10 scale is 0.093.)
Progression Analysis
The progression data for all School of Medicine (Clinical Sciences) 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 for URM or Asian faculty when compared to white male faculty. However, Female faculty progressed at a rate which is faster than white male faculty. See note to Table 2 for additional analysis. Normative progression is defined in the Progression Matrix.
