AAUP Report on the Economic Status of the Profession

AAUP recently released the results of the 2004-05 annual report on the "economic status of the profession" entitled, Inequities Persist for Women and Non-Tenure-Track Faculty. This report draws particular attention to the inequities that female and non-tenure-track faculty continue to experience, including but not limited to lower salaries and less job security. Overall, the 2004-05 picture was fairly dim for all faculty members, with "real salary levels'lower than 2003-04 levels," marking the first time since 1996 that "overall salaries failed to keep pace with inflation." While salary increases vary widely across rank and type of institution, continuing faculty in general received lower salary increases than last year. Also, the disparity in pay between average faculty salaries at public institutions and those at private, non-church-based institutions continues to widen.

The AAUP study also shows discrepancies between rates of president salary increases versus rates of full-time faculty salary increases, leading the authors to conclude that 1) more research is needed to further investigate the disparities in salary increases between these two populations, and 2) higher education does seem to be moving toward a more corporate, rigidly hierarchical model in which the "CEO" receives a disproportionately higher salary. The report also examines the status of contingent faculty, concluding that the percentage of faculty with contingent positions is increasing. Also, the report states that contingent faculty "not only earn less overall than traditional tenure-track faculty, but they are also paid less per class section and per hour." The authors call for more research not only on the disparities in pay, but also into non-salary related concerns, such as the effect the growing percentage of contingent faculty has on teaching and student learning.

As for gender equity in the professoriate, the data indicate a continued, if very slow-moving trend toward equity. However, the data also indicate persistent inequities in pay, tenure, and status, and AAUP asserts that myriad other concerns'including the higher percentages of women in part-time positions and the (un)satisfactoriness of environment/climate'continue to persist, despite not appearing in the data presented in this report. In general, the greatest disparities in every equity index--Proportion of Full-Time Faculty, Proportion of Full-Time Faculty on the Tenure Track or Tenured, Proportion of Full-Time Faculty at the Rank of Full Professor, and Overall Average Salary (All Ranks)--exist at doctoral universities, while the greatest equity is experienced at associate degree colleges. In terms of salary disparities, it should be noted that women hold far more lower-ranked faculty positions than men (including non-tenure-track positions) and are more likely than men to work at associate and baccalaureate degree institutions, which contributes to the inequity in salary.

The AAUP report concludes by recommending more research in several discrete areas such as the persistent gender inequities in position, salary, and type of institution, the larger effects of a steadily increasing percentage of contingent faculty, and the disparities in pay not only between faculty and presidents, but among presidential salaries by type of institution. To read more, go to www.aaup.org/surveys/05z/zrep.htm.

World Economic Forum Report on Women's Empowerment

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has issued a new report, Women's Empowerment: Measuring the Global Gender Gap, which identifies five areas of critical importance in the struggle for gender equity and ranks countries based on levels of equity in each area. The areas include, "economic participation, economic opportunity, political empowerment, educational attainment, and health and well-being." Data is drawn from 58 countries. The WEF approaches gender equity from the position of holistic success and economic potential, arguing that, "Countries that do not capitalize on the full potential of one half of their societies are misallocating their human resources and undermining their competitive potential."

The report emphasizes the importance of looking at gender in connection with ethnicity, race, class, and age, as well as the need to move away from viewing gender equity and equality as a zero-sum game in which women gain and men lose. In addition, the WEF highlights three converging areas of importance as determined by the UN and other global organizations advocating gender equity: (1) "strengthening women's economic capacity," (2) more fully involving women in political processes and actively encouraging women's leadership, and (3) "eliminating violence against women."

The report is based primarily on quantitative data drawn from published national statistics and data from international organizations, though qualitative survey data from the annual Executive Opinion Survey of the WEF is also used. The WEF sees these rankings and comparisons as useful policy tools and strategies, as well as solid indicators of strengths and weaknesses. The WEF is concerned primarily with the extent to which a country is drawing on its full potential and thus calculates scores, "by combining raw figures on the national economy, politics and education with the perceptions of the business community on the employment of women in their respective countries."

The U.S. ranked 17th overall, 19th in economic participation, 46th in economic opportunity, 19th in political empowerment, 8th in educational attainment, and 42nd in health and well-being. The discrepancy in economic participation and economic opportunity is definitional, as the WEF describes economic participation as women's "presence in the workforce in quantitative terms" and economic opportunity as the "quality of women's economic involvement, beyond their mere presence as workers." Economic opportunity therefore encompasses factors such as possibility for advancement, types of employment, attitudes, and legal and policy systems such as maternity laws. It should also be noted that the economic participation category does not take into account the intentional decision some women make not to work. Sweden ranked first overall, as well as first in educational attainment and health and well-being. All of the Scandinavian countries ranked in the top five overall, with Denmark also being ranked first in economic opportunity. New Zealand ranked first in political empowerment and Thailand first in economic participation.

The WEF encourages nations to learn from other countries' successful strategies and policies, and also to remember that, currently, "true models of gender equality do not exist." It hopes that by quantifying the inequalities in key areas, we can begin to make progress toward true equality of participation and representation. To read the full report, visit www.weforum.org/gendergap.

National Center for Education Statistics Releases New Report on Gender Differences within Higher Education

In February 2005, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released, Gender Differences in Participation and Completion of Undergraduate Education and How They Have Changed over Time. This report compiles, analyzes, and summarizes data from several studies, including the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Current Population Survey (CPS), three administrations of the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:90, NPSAS:96, NPSAS:2000), the High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 1988 (data for this report drawn from two high school cohorts, one graduating in 1982, the other in 1992), two administrations of the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (drawing from cohorts who began postsecondary education in 1989-90 and 1995-96), and two cohorts of college graduates from the Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Studies (1992-93 and 1999-2000). The report makes three major points: ·

• between 1970 and 2001, the percentage of women enrolled in undergraduate education increased from 42 percent to 56 percent;
• women account for the majority of associate's and bachelor's degrees conferred (60 percent of associate's degrees, 57 percent of bachelor's degrees);
• though women are enrolled in and attaining bachelor's degrees at higher rates than men, closing the gender gap in higher education participation has not translated into decreased pay disparities or increased full time employment for women, as a whole, in the labor market.

The increased percentages of women enrolled in and attaining undergraduate degrees holds true across all racial and ethnic groups. There is also an increasing percentage of women who are enrolled full time, and who fall under the "traditional" student rubric (18-23 years old, dependent on parents, or independent but unmarried and without children). However, women continue to be overrepresented in student populations who face the greatest barriers to degree attainment. Women comprise

• 60 percent of students in the lowest 25 percent income level;
• 62 percent of students age 40 and older;
• 62 percent of students with children or dependents;
• 69 percent of single parent students.

Women and are also making significant gains in closing the gender gaps in levels of high school preparation. By 1992, both men and women entering postsecondary education were more likely to have taken advanced math and to hold a 3.5 or higher GPA than the 1982 cohort. Women in this cohort closed the gender gap around highest level of math taken, and are in fact more likely than their male counterparts to have GPAs of 3.5 or higher. In addition, women are now more likely to attain a bachelor's degree within five years of enrollment than their male counterparts, even when both groups are considered to have the same level of preparedness.

However, as mentioned above, disparities in the labor market persist. Though the majority of bachelor's degree recipients from 1999-2000 were employed one year after graduation, men were more likely than women to be employed full time (81 percent versus 74 percent) and women were more likely than men to be employed part time (13 percent versus 9 percent). In addition, in 2001, among full time employees, across more than half the fields studied, women earned lower salaries than their male counterparts, and were less likely to be making salaries of $45,000 or higher. Therefore, the NCES concludes that, while women are making significant gains in postsecondary education (and often reversing the gender gap), many gaps still remain, "indicating that some of the gains women made in postsecondary education may not be realized off campus." To read the full report, go to nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2005169.

U.S. Department of Education Releases Report on Community Colleges

Clifford Adelman, in the Office of Vocational and Adult Education at the U.S. Department of Education, and team released a report entitled, Moving Into Town and Moving On: The Community College in the Lives of Traditional-age Students, in February 2005. According to Moving Into Town, 42 percent of all credit-seeking community college students are under 22 years old; nearly 75 percent of all first-time community college students are under 24 years old. As such, it is becoming increasingly important both to analyze the connections and intersection of secondary and postsecondary education and to treat the "traditional-age" (18-24) community college students as distinct from those students with families and full-time jobs. Though the report rarely disaggregates data according to gender, its findings are particularly relevant to women, who comprise around 58% of total students enrolled in community colleges (from data found on the American Association of Community Colleges website). The report is organized around the metaphor of a "town," through which students move into and away from; the three portraits'the "'Event' Portrait: Starting Out in a Community College," "Residence History," and "Community College 'Graduates'"' that comprise this report reflect a continuation of this metaphor.

The first portrait examines who the students are entering community college directly from high school and why they chose to start out at a community college. They found, among other things, that the percentage of recent high school graduates enrolling in community colleges is slightly higher than it was in the 1970s, that these students are entering with higher level math education than in the 1980s, and that socioeconomic status (not race, ethnicity, first generation status, or second-language background) is the primary demographic factor that contributes to explaining who attends community college. The importance of secondary/postsecondary intersections are highlighted here, both in the math preparation and the high transfer rates found in this portrait.

The second portrait encompasses those students whose undergraduate education was significantly impacted by community college work; the students portrayed here earned at least 30 credits from a community college. A little over half of the traditional-age students who attend community college fall into this portrait, which creates a stable base population that can be useful in determining indicators of success and achievement. The report divides students in this portrait into three groups:

1. Homeowners, who earned 60 percent or more of all their credits at a community college. (Homeowners represent 37 percent of people who start in and go on to earn credits from a community college. 51.9 percent of homeowners are women.),
2. Tenants, who earn less than 60 percent of their credits from community college. (Tenants represent 18 percent of people who start in and go on to earn credits. 47.6 percent of tenants are women.)

3. Visitors, who earn 1-29 credits from a community college. (Visitors represent 45 percent of students who start in and go on to earn credits. 49.6 percent of visitors are women.)

The Tenant group represents the highest percentage of students entering community college directly following high school, and also displayed stronger "academic momentum," as well as the highest educational expectations of all three groups. In addition, the authors identified two markers of attainment within this portrait: (1) transfer to a four-year institution and (2) completion of a terminal associate's degree.

The third portrait looks at those students who have earned the highest degree possible from a community college and have moved into the labor market. The authors divide the associate's degrees awarded into two categories: occupationally oriented and academic. The focus within this portrait is on "(1) continuity of employment and (2) congruence between course of study and occupation as potential markers of success." It was found that, among other factors, conferred credentials are more meaningful in terms of securing and sustaining employment than the number of credits completed, and graduates earning occupationally-oriented associate's degrees were more likely to be employed in their major field than students earning academic associate's degrees, which has significant impact on workforce development. The authors concluded this portrait by asserting that research must begin to examine credentials and content of study in addition to years in school in order to truly evaluate and assess an institution's mission and progress.

In summary, the researchers identified "six distinct traditional-age populations served by the community college." Among these six, the community college is completely responsible for three: (1) those moving through an identified academic or occupational path that involves transferring to a four-year institution, (2) those moving toward attaining "intermediate occupational credentials" possible at a community college, and (3) those who had less secondary academic preparation and struggle toward achieving a few community college credits and then leave. Because age plays a significant factor in postsecondary achievement and process, the authors call on community colleges to treat traditional-age students as a distinct population to track and monitor. To read the Executive Summary of this report, go to www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/comcollege/index.html. It is also possible to order reprints of the entire report from this page.