







































Abstract: When observing representation and compensation within college of business faculty in Texas public 
universities, what disparities exist? Further, do the compensation and representation of University faculty re!ect 
higher education’s intent of promoting equality and diversity within its institutions? Research has demonstrated 
improvements in representation and wage rates throughout the last several decades; however, concerns regarding 
a disparity in the business industry exist today. To investigate the range of the disparity, this study will conduct 
statistical analyses on three public universities in Texas. "ese universities include the University of North Texas, 
the University of Texas at Arlington, and Texas Tech University. Data will be collected on the annual salaries and 
the gender of the college business faculty members in attempts to determine whether or not gender is a statistical 
determinant of salary in higher education. "e study will further suggest potential attempts to close the gap in 
modern day higher education, as well as within the business industry at large.

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  202023

What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and 
Representation of Faculty in the Colleges of Business at 
Texas Public Institutions?

by Jayden Delanoy

Introduction & Overview
 As thousands of public universities nationwide 
attempt to diversify and provide equal opportunities 
among their student body, it is worth examining 
whether or not the higher education faculty body 
resembles the same diversity and equality. In 
response to this question, this study investigates the 
representation and compensation of business faculty 
at three public Texas institutions. Representation 
in this study is de#ned as the percentage makeup 
of male faculty members compared to female 
faculty members at the universities investigated. 
"e universities investigated in this study are the 
University of North Texas, the University of Texas 
at Arlington, and Texas Tech University. "ese 
institutions have been selected to participate in this 
study as a result of the following commonalities: a 
comparable undergraduate enrollment size (31,000-
34,000), a similar faculty size (1,200-3,500), and 
the bene#t that they are public universities lawfully 
required by the Higher Education Act of 1965 to 
overtly display the annual data needed for this 
study.1 Each of the selected universities additionally 
holds an R1 research status from the Carnegie 
Classi#cation of Institutions of Higher Education, 
1 "e Carnegie Classi#cation of Institutions of Higher Ed-
ucation. (n.d.). http://carnegieclassi#cations.iu.edu/clas-
si#cation_descriptions/basic.php

positioning them as “very high” on research activity 
and advancement.2

 Existing literature expresses concern that 
a disparity exists in both compensation and 
representation, favoring Caucasian male faculty. "is 
is a concern reinforced by the historical opposition 
faced by women and minorities in society, as well 
as the barriers faced in times of desired success or 
advancement dating back to the colonial era in the 
United States.3 "e present study provides a history 
of the roles and advancement of women in higher 
education from the 17th to the 21st century. "is 
historical overview will be presented in attempts to 
explore possible remuneration and representation 
disparities of university faculty within the colleges of 
business at the respective universities. Following the 
collection, an analysis of data will be performed to 
reach an understanding of any existing disparities, 
similarities amongst the colleges in the universities 
studied, and trends across the industry in its entirety. 
A conclusion is integrated in this study in attempts 
to suggest ways to approach the gender gap within 
the higher education system as well as the business 
industry at large. 

2 Ibid.
3 Solomon, B. M. (1985).$In the company of educated wom-
en: A history of women and higher education in America. 
Yale University Press.



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  202024

Literature Review
 Prior to performing a data collection and 
analysis, it is essential to identify factors that have 
contributed to representation and compensation in 
higher education today. "ese factors include the 
evolution of gender roles, socio-economic status, 
and the history of impediments to obtainable 
opportunities. 
 "e discussion of pay gaps, types of occupations 
held, underrepresentation, and organizational 
hierarchy pertaining to women is largely tied to the 
gender roles that have persisted in American society 
for centuries.4 Beginning in the 1600s, women 
were expected to be the unchanging element in a 
changing world.5 Females were believed to have had 
a “God-given talent” to be a mother, wife, caregiver, 
homemaker, religious example, domestic laborer, 
and the embodiment of purity and delicacy for their 
families and society.6 In attempts to preserve this 
role, females were largely excluded from education, 
business, and other opportunities that could 
potentially exceed the socially accepted subordinate 
role a female was expected have in relation to their 
male spouse.7 A notable advancement of the 18th 
century is the growth of female representation in 
small urban businesses and institutions, a direct 
result of men leaving home to #ght in the Civil 
War and the need for women to support the open 
positions men le% behind. "is was a pivotal 
moment in history as women began not only 
investing in their own education, managing family 
businesses, developing authority in the household, 
and establishing organizations that advocated for 
the rights of women, but were extending this new 
knowledge to their children of both sexes.8 With an 
open opportunity for societal change, female activists 
caught the attention of a multitude of male leaders, 
businesses, governments, and institutions while 
paving the way for what would be the beginning of 
women’s education in America.9

4 Solomon, B. M. (1985).$In the company of educated wom-
en: A history of women and higher education in America. 
Yale University Press. 
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid. 
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.

 "ough coeducation provided new learning 
opportunities for women, they were not treated as 
equals in these institutions. Women’s education was 
viewed as bene#cial by many in society, as it allowed 
females to educate their sons (creating stronger 
male leaders), mature in their domestic roles, and 
potentially provide support for those females who 
never married.10 While attending these institutions, 
women maintained their societal roles as they darned 
socks for the male students, cleaned classrooms, 
and cooked meals, while men did #eld work and 
performed repairs to the property.11 Additionally, 
women were faced with a con!ict in the late 18th 
and 19th century when they graduated from these 
institutions, as they struggled with living up to their 
education while maintaining their female role in a 
society that still embraced traditional gender roles.12 
Despite the developing urban lifestyle and increasing 
opportunities across multiple industries, the image 
of the domestic woman was still an expectation.13 
For those women who were fortunate enough to 
secure a position in the occupational realm, it was 
common for them to hold a role in the organization 
that was considered to be more feminine or of less 
importance to the success of the company, thus 
creating the foundation of “sex-typi#ed” jobs.14

 For decades, this struggle for advancement 
and opportunity in education and occupational 
roles persisted and can potentially be considered a 
contributing factor to the discussion surrounding 
the gaps and shortcomings some females experience 
today. A recent 2019 research study by Cornell 
University indicates that women who enter male-
dominated careers today are subject to experience 
a “lack of support, lower income, a perception of 
incompetence, mistreatment and unfairness in their 

10 Ibid.
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid.
13 Elson, D., & Pearson, R. (1981). “Nimble #ngers make 
cheap workers”: An analysis of women’s employment in 
third world export manufacturing.$Feminist Review,!7, 87-
107. doi:10.2307/1394761
14 Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. (2014). Business and So-
ciety: Stakeholders, Ethics, Public Policy (15th ed.). Mc-
Graw-Hill.



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  202025

role, and an overall lack of voice.”15 Additionally, a 
2006 study from "e Gender Gap in College suggests 
that only 52% of female #rst-year college students 
rate themselves as having “above average intellectual 
self-con#dence” in their abilities.16  

Table 1: Gender Di&erences in Major Selection Among 
First-Year Students17

A third 2006 study displays the desired major 
selections of #rst-year students.18 "is data suggests 
that women tend to select more social, educational, 
and liberal arts roles, while males largely selected 
majors with a focus in STEM careers, all of which 
typically average a higher annual income than those 
majors selected by women.19 "ough this study seeks 
to explain gender disparities through the lens of 
higher education, it is essential to acknowledge that 
a gender gap exists on a far greater scale than simply 
the academic dominion.
 Women are generally expected to attend a 
university, select a major that #lters into a female-
dominated occupation, and hold a sex-typi#ed 
role within the occupation, arguably maintaining 

15 Cornell HR Review. (2019, August 30). Women in 
male-dominated careers. http://www.cornellhrreview.
org/women-in-male-dominated-careers/
16 Sax, L. J. (2008).$"e gender gap in college: Maximizing 
the developmental potential of women and men. Jossey-
Bass.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Powers, A. (2017, December 14). Some of the highest 
paying jobs of 2017 were in STEM #elds. Forbes. https://
www.forbes.com/sites/annapowers/2017/12/02/highest-
paying-jobs-of-2017/#bc7a68e1c1e8

wage gaps, gender roles, and a lower self-esteem in 
females.20 "e question is raised as to why women 
are selecting these types of majors, how the outlook 
of “sex-typi#ed” jobs continue to persist, and what 
factors allow these trends to endure over two 
centuries past women’s arrival in higher education.21

 While all of this research supports that 
normalization of current gender roles is a large 
contributor to the divisions among males and 
females in education and the workplace, it is essential 
to recognize the role that biological characteristics 
among men and women play in this discussion 
as well. Niaro Shah conducted a research study 
at Stanford Medicine concerning the correlation 
between genes and the di&erences in behaviors 
among the sexes.22 "is study found that as a direct 
result of the biological composition of males and 
females (speci#cally due to testosterone in men and 
estrogen in women), “there are inherent di&erences 
in how men and women’s brains are wired and how 
they work.” Further, these di&erences can be observed 
in the #rst two to three months of a baby’s life. For 
example, female infants respond more readily to 
faces, begin talking earlier, and develop a stronger 
coordination between the two hemispheres of the 
brain. "e study states that male infants, on the other 
hand, “react earlier in infancy to experimentally 
induced perceptual discrepancies in their visual 
environment and possess a greater physical strength 
than females.” "ese same di&erences were observed 
in adulthood, as “women remained more oriented 
to faces, men to things.” "e biological di&erences 
between the sexes results in di&ering physical and 
psychological behaviors among men and women 
and can arguably be a contributing factor to the 
gender roles that have persisted in society. 
 It is important to note, however, that these 
di&erences do not suggest either sex is incapable of 

20 Solomon, B. M. (1985).$ In the company of educated 
women: A history of women and higher education in Amer-
ica. Yale University Press.
21 Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. (2014). Business and So-
ciety: Stakeholders, Ethics, Public Policy (15th ed.). Mc-
Graw-Hill.
22 Goldman, B., & DuBois, G. How men’s and women’s 
brains are di&erent. Stanford Medicine. https://stanmed.
stanford.edu/2017spring/how-mens-and-womens-
brains-are-di&erent.html



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  202026

performing certain tasks or possessing certain skills. 
For example, women were historically favored (and 
are currently favored in many third world countries) 
for employment in factories as their “small, nimble 
#ngers” were more #t for the tedious work of 
manufacturing.23 "is does not infer that males are 
incapable of successfully performing this same task, 
but rather, that the job became “typi#ed” in the favor 
of women and consequently rid this industry of male 
representation.24 
 Similarly, in Pink Brain Blue Brain, neuroscientist 
Lise Eliot explores the di&erences in the biological 
composition of the sexes and suggests that the 
largest contributor to the gender di&erences 
prevalent today are the stereotypes, presumptions, 
and predispositions adopted by society, all of which 
have previously been imposed on ourselves and 
consequently imposed onto others.25 Eliot suggests 
that “by appreciating how sex di&erences emerge – 
rather than assuming them to be #xed biological facts 
– we can help all children reach their fullest potential, 
close the troubling gaps between boys and girls, and 
ultimately end the gender wars that currently divide 
us.”26 In providing examples such as transgenderism, 
neuroplasticity, and the brain as a unisex organ, 
Eliot proposes !uidity between the sexes. Arguably, 
the biological di&erences between males and females 
result in di&ering behaviors, personalities, and 
physiques; however, Eliot challenges us to question 
if these di&erences are truly as big as the gaps that 
separate them today.
      According to an article published by the American 
Association of University Women, on average, 
women earn less than 80 cents for every dollar a man 
makes, and the pay gap widens as women grow older, 
regardless of an educational background. Females 
carry more student debt than men, and mothers 

23 Elson, D., & Pearson, R. (1981). “Nimble #ngers make 
cheap workers”: An analysis of women’s employment in 
third world export manufacturing.$Feminist Review,!7, 87-
107. doi:10.2307/1394761
24 Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. (2014). Business and So-
ciety: Stakeholders, Ethics, Public Policy (15th ed.). Mc-
Graw-Hill.
25  Eliot, L. (2012).$Pink brain, blue brain: How small dif-
ferences grow into troublesome gaps--and what we can do 
about it. Oneworld.
26 Ibid.

(including those who never le% the workforce) 
receive less compensation than women.27 "ese facts 
highlight some of the major barriers to equality 
faced by women in society and open the doors to 
answer the question: What disparities exist, if any, in 
the representation and compensation of university 
faculty at public institutions? 

Research Methodology Statement
 "e following research methodology will 
describe the potential theory-based data analysis 
types, the chosen theory-based data analysis 
method, the sample size parameters of the study 
being conducted, the contextual framework in which 
data is explained, and the quantitative statistical 
measurement techniques used in analysis for shaping 
a conclusion. 
 As stated in "eory Based Data for the Social 
Sciences, the potential candidates for a data 
analysis method include exploratory, descriptive, 
elaborative, or explanatory research, each supported 
by qualitative, quantitative, or a combination of the 
two types of data presentations.28 In this study, I have 
chosen to implement an explanatory research model 
supported by quantitative statistical data published 
by the universities investigated. "is model supports 
causes that “share a connective contribution to an 
e&ect.”29 Further, this approach questions if “an 
independent variable in!uences the dependent 
variable in the manner presently envisioned by 
theory.”30 "e independent variable in this study is 
the gender of the college of business faculty member. 
"e dependent variable is the respective salaries 
of these faculty members. Extraneous variables 
that can potentially be a contributing factor to the 
dependent variable include total publications of 
faculty members, industry experience, educational 
background, position held within the department, 
gender representation, ethnic representation, or 
number of years employed by the current university.

27 American Association of University Women [AAUW]. 
Eight facts about the gender pay gap. https://www.aauw.
org/2019/04/02/8surprising-facts-about-the-gender-pay-
gap/
28 Aneshensel, C. S. (2013).$"eory-based data analysis for 
the social sciences. Sage Publications.
29 Ibid. 
30 Ibid.



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  202027

 As my research identi#es the variables that have 
contributed to the phenomenon of the gender-gap in 
present day society, my data analysis seeks to explain 
this “connective contribution” between gender and 
salary in the realm of higher education through a 
feminist theory framework. Additionally, this study 
will further explain whether the factor of the type of 
position held within the college of business by a faculty 
member of a respective gender has an in!uence on 
salary. It is necessary to acknowledge the subjectivity 
of this type of analysis. Such subjectivity includes, 
but is not limited to, the following: all data collected 
is secondary to prior researchers; understanding the 
weight of each independent variable in terms of its 
contribution e&orts to the causation of the issue at 
hand is unclear; secondary data can be scarce; other 
potential contributing factors to salary (such as total 
publications, experience, degree type, etc.) are not 
accounted for in this analysis; and data is not drawn 
from large-scale data sets, potentially hindering my 
ability to make generalized statements pertaining to 
the industry at large.31 
 "e samples used for statistical analysis in this 
study include faculty in the Colleges of Business of 
the following Universities: University of North Texas, 
University of Texas at Arlington, and Texas Tech 
University. All data sampled from these universities 
are derived from the University publications, the 
Chronicle of Higher Education, and the National 
Center for Education Statistics, the leading source 
for rigorous, independent education research, 
evaluation, and statistics, as stated by the US 
Department of Education.32 "e data in the samples 
are pulled from 2017-2018 publications. 
 "e analysis #rst takes into account the overall 
mean salaries of the colleges of business at each 
university, as well as the upper and lower control 
limits around each mean salary. Next, the mean, 
upper control limit (UCL), and lower control 
limit (LCL) of the gender-speci#c salaries are 
derived. In attempts to understand the strength of 
the correlation between gender and salary, a two 
sample means z-test at a 95% con#dence interval is 
performed. In this test, the null hypothesis, which 

31 Aneshensel, C. S. (2013).$"eory-based data analysis for 
the social sciences. Sage Publications.
32 National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home 
Page, part of the U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved 
from https://nces.ed.gov/.

states that male salaries are not always greater than 
female salaries, will either be rejected or failed to be 
rejected depending on the relationship between the 
calculated z-score and the z-critical value. Following 
this evaluation, a t-test will be performed to discover 
whether or not the consideration of position held 
by a faculty member of each gender in the College 
of Business changes the rejection or failed rejection 
results. 

Data Analysis
 Data analysis was conducted to quantitatively 
analyze the relationship between gender and salary. 
"e overall data set includes information collected on 
individual faculty position, salary, and gender within 
the colleges of business at the speci#ed universities. 
For each university, a statistical analysis was run 
on the overall data of both sexes to determine the 
mean salary, upper control limits (UCL), and lower 
control limits (LCL) of the salaries in the data set (for 
both males and females inclusively). In calculating 
this information, a statistical analysis can then be 
performed on male and female speci#c salaries 
to be compared to the overall faculty statistical 
analysis. Table 2 demonstrates the statistical analysis 
of all faculty members in the respective colleges of 
business. 

Table 2: Total COB Faculty Statistical Analysis
Total COB Faculty Statistical Analysis

From the data set, a composite average salary of 
$106,627 with a mean standard deviation of +/-
$50,276 is calculated among the three universities 
examined. "e average UCL of the overall data 
collected is $158,971, while the average LCL of the 
data collected is $58,417. "is implies that across 
the universities in the study, within one standard 
deviation from the mean, 68% of faculty members 
lie within the bounded limits of a salary of $58,417 
to $158,971. "is is a fairly wide distribution. A 
contributing factor to the wide distribution is the 
range between salaries of the positions held within 
the colleges of business. For example, a part-time 
lecturer could have an income of <$60,000, while a 
full-time professor maintains an annual salary over 



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  202028

six #gures. With an understanding of the overall 
salary distribution across the colleges of business 
at the respective universities, data was divided into 
male and female salaries for each of the universities 
in attempts to derive a statistical analysis that is 
speci#c to gender. Table 3 demonstrates the #ndings 
of this analysis.

Table 3: COB Gender Salaries- Statistical Analysis

$

"ough the means of female salaries at two of the 
universities fall in the le%-most half of the average 
normal distribution of the total faculty analysis, 
and the female salaries average a lower rate than 
male salaries for all three universities, a conclusive 
statement regarding the strength of the in!uence of 
gender on salary cannot yet be determined. "is is 
due to the need to account for the variety of positions 
held by faculty members as well as the disproportions 
among gender representation.
 In attempts to statistically determine a more 
precise reasoning surrounding the strength of a 
correlated relationship between gender and salary, a 
two sample means z-test at a 95% con#dence interval 
was performed. "is test seeks to either reject or fail 
to reject a null hypothesis. If, in the analysis, the z 
value is less than the z critical value, we fail to reject 
the null hypothesis. In this study, the null hypothesis 
(to either be rejected or failed to be rejected) states 
that male salaries are not always greater than female 
salaries. "e alternative hypothesis states that male 
salaries can always be assumed to be greater than 
female salaries. "e following tables display the 
results of the analysis for each of the universities. 

Table 4: Texas Tech University

$

Table 5: University of Texas at Arlington

$

$Table 6: University of North Texas

$
$

      

As seen from each of the analyses presented above, 
the z critical value is greater than the z-value at all 
three universities; therefore, we fail to reject the null 
hypothesis, and we arguably conclude that male 
salaries are not always greater than female salaries at 
these universities.  
 "ough the z-test attempts to understand the 
relationship between gender and salary, it does not 
take into account the in!uence of factors such as the 
position a faculty member holds in the college of 
business, their total publications, prior experience, 
or years served at the current university. Working 
within the limits of resources in the data set, this 
study will attempt to account for the factor of 
positions held by faculty members as an in!uence 
on the conclusion reached in the z-test. To assure 
that department position is taken into account in the 
analysis, salaries have been further sorted into faculty 
positions by gender within the colleges of business 
for evaluation through a two-sample t-test with 
unequal variances. Data on faculty positions at Texas 



Table 9: UNT COB Gender Rep

Table 10: UTA COB Gender Rep

Table 11: Texas Tech COB Gender Rep

What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  2020

Tech University is not accounted for in the t-test, as 
this resource is not publicly published. A t-test with 
gender and faculty position as independent variables 
determining salary is conducted for the other two 
universities below. 
                                                                    

Table 7: University of North Texas

Table 8: University of Texas at Arlington

 In the conducted t-tests, the t statistic is less 
than the t critical value, so we fail to reject the 
null hypothesis that position held in the college of 
business of a faculty member of a speci#c gender is 
not always a statistical determinant of salary.
 "e data analysis concerning the relationship 
between the gender of faculty members and 
compensation also o&ers insight into the 
relationship between gender and representation. "e 
relationship between gender and representation is of 
relevance as it too is a potential factor of in!uence 
on the conclusions made in the statistical analysis 
previously performed. "e percentage makeup of 
the sexes in accordance with the colleges of business 
of the investigated universities was researched and is 
presented in the following bar charts. In observance 
of the College of Business at the University of North 
Texas, females make up 40.97% of the 134 College 
of Business faculty members researched, while males 
make up 59.03% of this population. A fairly similar 
observation has been seen through researching the 
faculty in the College of Business at the University 
of Texas at Arlington. "is university ratio includes 
a 35.32% female representation and a 64.66% male 

representation out of the 131 researched faculty 
members. Lastly, the most widespread ratio observed 
regarding gender representation in the College 
of Business is Texas Tech University, maintaining 
32.04% female representation and 67.96% male 
representation of the total 118 faculty members 
researched. "rough an overall observation of 
the female to male representation in Texas public 

29



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  2020

colleges of business, representation of females to 
males is arguably maintaining an approximate 2:3 
ratio. 

Research Findings & Conclusion
 "e #ndings of the statistical analysis performed 
suggest that male salaries are not always greater 
than female salaries. "is implies that the analysis 
could not determine a statistical correlation between 
gender and salary. "e analysis also explains that the 
study fails to reject the null hypothesis that position 
held in the college of business of a faculty member of 
a speci#c gender is a statistical determinant of salary. 
Despite these #ndings, it is impossible to ignore the 
fact that female salaries average a lower rate than male 
salaries, and females are underrepresented in college 
of business faculty positions by an approximate 
2:3 ratio across the three universities. If it is not 
statistically proven in this study that the gender of 
an individual determines their salary, the question 
is raised as to what contributors have caused the 
average female salary to be lower than males and led 
to female underrepresentation in these universities. 
Potential reasons that the null hypothesis in both of 
the statistical analyses resulted in a “failure to reject” 
test score include the historical sex typi#cation of 
education, the history of gender roles, and the idea 
that colleges of business may display progressive 
hiring practices as compensation experts abound in 
this #eld.
 A 2018 Stanford study on the occupational 
segregation in higher education across the nation 
states that “among millennials, a college-educated 
woman who works 40 hours a week and has average 
years of experience has a predicted hourly wage that 
is $2.74 less (about 7.4%) than a man with similar 
attributes.”33 On average, this aggregates to women 
making nearly $5,700 less per year, as compared to 
men with similar attributes. Taking into account the 
positions held by faculty members of a respective 
gender in higher education, the Stanford study 
further states that “this gap decreases to $1.98 a%er 
adjusting for occupation,” implying that occupations 
33 Weeden, K. A. (2018, May 1). Occupational segrega-
tion. Stanford Center on Policy and Inequality. https://
inequality.stanford.edu/publications/media/details/
state-union-2018-occupational-segregation-dafna-gelb-
giser. 

explain about 25 percent of the gender gap.34 "is 
study suggests that a greater amount of males, rather 
than females, tend to hold higher positions within 
the business industry, resulting in higher wage 
rates for a largely represented male population. 
"ough this could be a large contributor to the 
disparities observed in average compensation of 
males compared to females, it does not explain the 
underrepresentation of females in higher education 
faculty. 
 According to Hargens and Long (2002), women 
obtained nearly 62% of baccalaureate degrees, as well 
as 45% of doctoral degrees in 2017.35 Speci#cally, 
of these doctoral degrees, for those focused in 
education, women represented 69.4% of the degree 
recipients (for a ratio of 226.8 females per 100 
males).36 Of master’s degrees in education, women 
accounted for 76.3% (a ratio of 321.9 females per 100 
males) of education degrees.37 It is clear that women 
are maintaining a prominent student representation 
in higher education, dominating in representation 
of education majors by 69%+, graduating with 
prestigious degrees, and yet are still falling short 
of the representation and compensation in higher 
education faculty positions. What is it that is 
deterring quali#ed women from obtaining the high-
paid positions they are eligible for? "e 2017 report 
from the Council of Graduate Schools further notes 
that women are more inclined to assume they are not 
skilled enough to get into the top programs or that they 
will ultimately be unsuccessful in those programs.38 
It also may be the case that women who consider or 
visit these programs #nd the environment within 
the program itself unfriendly or unsupportive.39 "is 
research arguably calls for an investigation of gender 
disparities in the business industry at large, hiring 

34 Ibid. 
35 Hargens, L. L., & Long, J. S. (2002). Demographic iner-
tia and women’s representation among faculty in higher 
education.$ "e Journal of Higher Education,! 73(4), 494-
517. 
36 Ibid. 
37 "e Council of Graduate Schools. 2017 reports.  https://
cgsnet.org/2017-reports. 
38 "e Council of Graduate Schools. 2017 reports.  https://
cgsnet.org/2017-reports.
39 Ibid. 

30



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  2020

processes in higher education, con#dence levels of 
females compared to males, and an understanding of 
the transition from receiving a degree to obtaining a 
full-time position. 
 As this study focuses on faculty in the college 
of business, it is acceptable to consider the gender 
disparities in the business industry at large. "e 
gender disparities in CEO salaries are the largest pay 
gaps in the industry. Of the Fortune 500 list in 2019, 
only 24 of the 500 CEOs are female.40 "is number is 
25% less than the record-breaking 32 female CEOs 
on the list in 1995. In relation to the average worker 
in the United States, a CEO makes 278 times the 
salary.41 With females accounting for less than 5% of 
some of the highest paid positions in the world by a 
multiple of 278, the gender gap across the industry at 
large is not surprising. As Hargens and Long’s (2002) 
study states, it is possible that majority of females 
in the business industry feel unsupported, view the 
environment as unfriendly, simply do not have the 
con#dence to ask for a raise or a promotion, or do 
not have the con#dence to even apply for a high 
position.42 According to Kim Elsesser, “women’s 
reluctance to negotiate for higher salaries has 
long been considered a major factor in the gender 
pay gap.”43 Women are less likely to ask for a raise, 
become persistent about a promotion, or negotiate 
position/salary in an interview.44 Additionally, Sax’s 
(2008) self-survey on the personality of college 

40 Mejia, Z. (2018, May 21). Just 24 female CEOs lead the 
companies on the 2018 Fortune 500-fewer than last year. 
CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/21/2018s-for-
tune-500-companies-have-just-24-female-ceos.html 
41 Cox, J. (2019, August 16). CEOs see pay grow 1,000% in 
the last 40 years, now make 278 times the average worker. 
CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/16/ceos-see-pay-
grow-1000percent-and-now-make-278-times-the-aver-
age-worker.html.
42 Hargens, L. L., & Long, J. S. (2002). Demographic iner-
tia and women’s representation among faculty in higher 
education.$ "e Journal of Higher Education,! 73(4), 494-
517.
43 Elsesser, K. (2016, September 8). Research stating 
“women ask for pay raises as much as men” is mislead-
ing. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsess-
er/2016/09/07/research-stating-women-ask-for-pay-rais-
es-as-much-as-men-is-just-wrong/#299003093983.
44 Ibid. 

students states that 13.9% more males than females 
believed they could be successful if they owned their 
own business.45 "is survey also states that 78.1% 
of males rate themselves as having “above average” 
intellectual self-con#dence compared to only 59% of 
females. Taking into account the history of women 
in education, the historical barriers to opportunities 
obtainable for women entering the workforce, the 
disparities in con#dence and personality among 
genders, and the current underrepresentation and 
under-compensation of females in the industry, it is 
understandable that women entering the workforce 
may be at a disadvantage. "e Council of Graduate 
Schools Organization states that “gender segregation 
is still so extreme that it will take another 125 birth 
cohorts to reach full integration (if one projects out 
the pace of change observed between the oldest and 
youngest millennials).”46 As a conclusion to this 
study, suggestions for attempts at closing the gender 
gap are presented as well as directions for further 
research. 
 In attempts to close the gender gap in higher 
education, this study raises four propositions. First, 
organizations should reevaluate recruiting practices, 
as current statistics demonstrate a disparity in 
male-to-female representation. Potentially opening 
recruitment to new demographic areas could 
increase the number of quali#ed females that take 
on leadership roles and further balance the average 
gender pay rates. As the leadership gap widens for 
women as they advance further in their career, 
this re-direction of recruitment strategies could 
in!uence more females to feel less inclined to take 
on sex-typi#ed jobs and more inclined to take a 
risk by applying for male-dominated or leadership 
roles.47 Second, organizations should put forth 
e&orts to create an environment that is comfortable 
and inviting to individuals of all backgrounds. "e 

45 Sax, L. J. (2008).$"e gender gap in college: Maximizing 
the developmental potential of women and men. Jossey-
Bass.
46 "e Council of Graduate Schools. 2017 reports.  https://
cgsnet.org/2017-reports.
47 Tarr, T. (2018, April 6). How these two things could 
close the gender gap permanently. Forbes. https://www.
forbes.com/sites/tanyatarr/2018/04/05/how-these-
two-things-could-close-the-gender-gap-permanent-
ly/#33415b67bf02. 

31



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  2020

previously mentioned re-evaluation of recruitment 
strategies could be a large contributor to this goal, 
as it increases the diversity of representation. 
Another contributor to this idea could be upholding 
a'rmative action in hopes of creating a tolerant 
community that provides an equal playing #eld for a 
greater number of individuals. "ough debate exists 
around the arguments for and against a'rmative 
action, the idea of targeting an underrepresented 
or under-compensated range of quali#ed prospects 
could result in a signi#cant e&ect on the identi#ed 
disparities. "ird, schools and universities should 
implement programming to help women achieve 
their goals in any industry. A%er reaching an 
understanding of the di&erences in con#dence 
levels amongst young females compared to males, 
it is necessary to attempt to advance female 
con#dence early in the system. In raising personal 
expectations, females can raise workplace, and 
further, societal expectations for women. Fourth, 
potentially requiring the transparency of salaries of 
an organization could have positive ethical impacts. 
"is would require government assistance to prevent 
organizations from fearing retaliation, but it could 
encourage organizations to place a large focus on the 
equality of their compensation and representation. 
 It is necessary to acknowledge the potential 
limitations of this study. First, only three out of the 
5,300+ public universities in the United States are 
accounted for in the research conducted; therefore, 
my #ndings cannot speak for the industry at large. 
Further, the three universities selected are all located 
in Texas, where the political values and economic 
conditions may di&er from other parts of the country. 
Second, this study is limited to R1 institutions, 
potentially resulting in all data to be collected 
from some of the most advanced institutions in the 
country (excluding liberal arts colleges). "ird, all 
data collected in this study relies on the information 
published by the selected universities through the 
National Center for Education Statics (NCES), 
resulting in a variety of presented formats, samples 
of data, and selective information (in favor of the 
universities) shared by the university publishers. 
In attempts to overcome the stated limitations, 
institutions have been selected with variability in size 
and location, and data is gathered from university 
policies, the U.S. Census Bureau, NCES, "e Texas 
Tribune, and several works on the history of women 

in higher education, gender gaps in college, and data 
analyses in the social sciences. 
 "is study concludes with directions for further 
research. To increase the reliability of this study 
as well as to provide a national analysis, further 
research could potentially investigate and analyze 
other universities across the United States. "is 
research could also seek to investigate universities of 
larger population. In doing so, future research could 
account for diverse political and economic factors 
outside of the state of Texas. Future research could also 
attempt to take into account the extraneous variables 
previously speci#ed to potentially have an e&ect on 
the dependent variable (salary). During the statistical 
analysis process, inquiries regarding the disparity 
within both gender and ethnic representation were 
additionally raised. "ough this was acknowledged 
in the study, further investigation of hiring processes 
could be discovered to be a potential contributor to 
the compensation and representation gaps. Lastly, 
future research should seek to understand ways to 
empower females during the transition process from 
being a student to obtaining a full-time leadership 
position. 

References
American Association of University Women 

[AAUW]. Eight facts about the gender pay gap. 
https://www.aauw.org/2019/04/02/8surprising-
facts-about-the-gender-pay-gap/ 

Aneshensel, C. S. (2013).$ "eory-based data 
analysis for the social sciences. Los Angeles: Sage 
Publications.

"e Carnegie Classi#cation of Institutions of Higher 
Education. (2017). Basic classi#cation 
description. http://carnegieclassi#cations.iu.edu/
classi#cation_descriptions/basic.php

Chronicle Data. (2019). Texas Tech University 
faculty salaries [Data set]. "e Chronicle of 
Higher Education. https://data.chronicle.
com/229115/Texas-Tech-University/faculty-
salaries/.

Chronicle Data. (2019). University of North Texas 
faculty salaries [Data set]. "e Chronicle of Higher 
Education. https://data.chronicle.com/227216/
University-of-North-Texas/faculty-salaries/

32



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  2020

Chronicle Data. (2019). University of Texas at 
Arlington faculty salaries. [Data set]. "e 
Chronicle of Higher Education. https://data.
chronicle.com/228769/University-of-Texas-at-
Arlington/faculty-salaries/.

Cornell HR Review. (2019, August 30). Women in 
Male-Dominated Careers. http://www.
c o r n e l l h r r e v i e w. o r g / w o m e n - i n - m a l e -
dominated-careers/

"e Council of Graduate Schools. 2017 reports.  
https://cgsnet.org/2017-reports. 

Cox, J. (2019, August 16). CEOs see pay grow 1,000% 
in the last 40 years, now make 278 times 
the average worker. CNBC. https://www.
cnbc.com/2019/08/16/ceos-see-pay-grow-
1000percent-and-now-make-278-times-the-
average-worker.html.

Eisenberg, R. (2019, April 10). Closing the gender 
pay gap: What women, employers and 
government can do. Forbes. https://www.forbes.
com/sites/nextavenue/2019/04/04/closing-the-
gender-pay-gap-what-women-employers-and-
government-can-do/#78f9550c6c73.

Eliot, L. (2012).$ Pink brain, blue brain: How small 
di$erences grow into troublesome gaps—and what 
we can do about it. Oneworld.

Elsesser, K. (2016, September 8). Research stating 
“women ask for pay raises as much as men” is 
misleading. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/
sites/kimelsesser/2016/09/07/research-stating-
women-ask-for-pay-raises-as-much-as-men-is-
just-wrong/#299003093983.

Elson, D., & Pearson, R. (1981). “Nimble #ngers 
make cheap workers”: An analysis of 
women’s employment in third world export 
manufacturing.$ Feminist Review,! 7, 87-107. 
doi:10.2307/1394761

Goldman, B., & DuBois, G. How men’s and women’s 
brains are di&erent. Stanford Medicine. https://
stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-mens-
and-womens-brains-are-di&erent.html

Hargens, L. L., & Long, J. S. (2002). Demographic 
inertia and women’s representation among 
faculty in higher education.$"e Journal of Higher 
Education,!73(4), 494-517.

Hartman, D. W. (2019). Lives of women. Conner 
Prairie. https://www.connerprairie.org/educate/
indiana-history/lives-of-women/

Hauke, J., & Kossowski, T. (2011). Comparison 
of values of Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation 
coe'cients on the same sets of data.$Quaestiones 
geographicae,!30(2), 87-93.

Hesse-Biber, S. N. (Ed.). (2013).$ Feminist research 
practice: A primer. Sage Publications.

Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. (2014). Business and 
society: Stakeholders, ethics, public policy (15th 
ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Mejia, Z. (2018, May 21). Just 24 female CEOs lead 
the companies on the 2018 Fortune 500-fewer 
than last year. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.
c o m / 2 0 1 8 / 0 5 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 8 s - f o r t u n e - 5 0 0 -
companies-have-just-24-female-ceos.html

National Center for Education Statistics [NCES]. 
Home Page, part of the U.S. Department of 
Education. https://nces.ed.gov/.

Powers, A. (2017, December 14). Some of the 
highest paying jobs of 2017 were in STEM 
#elds. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/
annapowers/2017/12/02/highest-paying-jobs-
of-2017/#bc7a68e1c1e8

Sax, L. J. (2008).$ "e gender gap in college: 
Maximizing the developmental potential of 
women and men. Jossey-Bass.

Solomon, B. M. (1985).$In the company of educated 
women: A history of women and higher education 
in America. Yale University Press.

Tarr, T. (2018, April 6). How these two things 
could close the gender gap permanently. 
Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/
t any at ar r / 2 0 1 8 / 0 4 / 0 5 / h ow - t h e s e - t wo -

33



What Disparities Exist in the Compensation and Representation of Faculty?

Aisthesis      Volume 11,  2020

t h i n g s - c o u l d - c l o s e - t h e - g e n d e r - g a p -
permanently/#33415b67bf02.

University of North Texas University Policy O'ce. 
(2020). Policy manual. University of North Texas. 
https://policy.unt.edu/policy-manual

Weeden, K. A. (2018, May 1). Occupational 
segregation. Stanford Center on Policy and 
Inequality. https://inequality.stanford.edu/
publications/media/details/state-union-2018-
occupational-segregation-dafna-gelbgiser.

34


