By DONOVAN HARRELL

A recent report on Pitt women faculty shows that the University continues to make steady improvements in gender parity.

Amanda Brodish, director of Data Analytics & Pathways for Student Success, presented the Economic Status of Women Faculty at Pitt 2018-2019 report to the Budget Policies Committee on Jan. 17.

The report, produced by the Office of the Provost every three years, analyzes the percentage of women faculty and the ratio of average women’s salary compared to average men’s and compares Pitt to the public Association of American Universities.

Its internal measurements included the percentage of women faculty by rank and tenure status; the ratio of the average woman’s salary to the average man’s salary by rank, controlling for tenure-status, school and department; and percentage of various leadership roles held by women.

The data was gathered from the annual report on the economic status of the profession from the American Association of University Professors.

The people included in the report are all full-time appointment stream and tenured faculty with any instructional responsibilities. It excludes part-time instructional faculty, non-instructional faculty, administrators, graduate student instructors and faculty in the School of Medicine.

A member of the Budget Policies committee asked Brodish why part-time faculty weren’t included in the report.

It is something that her office has attempted to collect data from, Brodish said, but it’s difficult to benchmark the responsibilities for part-time faculty since they vary wildly. 

AAU comparison

When compared to 33 other AAU public schools, including Penn State and the University of Virginia, Pitt stood in second place with 46 percent of all faculty being women in 2018-2019, up from 44 percent in 2015-2016. 

Brodish said these figures don't include faculty from the school of medicine and faculty who don't have instructional duties. But it pulls data from all Pitt professors, regardless of their department or school. The salaries vary widely across the disciplines, Brodish said, leaving the results more complex than they may appear.

Pitt is also near the top of the schools in percent of women as associate professors, 47 percent in 2018-2019, up from 43 percent in 2015-2016. Percent of women as assistant professors was 51 percent in 2018-2019, down from 52 percent in 2015-2016; and percent of women as lecturers and instructors was 61 percent, up from 58 percent.

Pitt is also near the top of the schools in the ratio of women’s to men’s salary in three categories:

• Associate professors, 95 percent in 2018-2019, down from 97 percent in 2015-2016

• Assistant professors, 94 percent in 2018-2019, up from 90 percent in 2015-2016

• Lecturers and instructors, 93 percent in 2018-2019, up from 92 percent in 2015-2016.

Pitt remains in the middle of the group when it comes to the percentage of women as full-time professors at 28 percent, up from 26 percent in 2015.

When it comes to the ratio of women’s to men’s salary among all faculty in the AAU, Pitt was near the bottom of the schools at 77 percent in 2018-2019, down from 79 percent in 2015-2016. It was also near the bottom for full-time professors at 89 percent, up from 86 percent in 2015-2016.

Internal comparisons

The 2018-19 report shows there have been steady improvements in parity for the percentage of women faculty by rank and tenure status, the ratio of the average woman’s salary to the average man’s salary by rank and percentage of leadership roles held by women.

Among the many findings, the report revealed that the most dramatic improvement was the percentage of deans and campus presidents — 44 percent in 2019, up from 20 percent in 2017.

Salary ratios on the Pittsburgh campus remain around 100 percent. The regional campuses have more variability in salary ratios, the report found, but they still are around 100 percent.

The only decline was in the percentage of women department and division chairs, which has fluctuated in the Dietrich School, the provost area and the Health Sciences. The percentage of department chairs in the Dietrich School dropped from 39 percent in 2017 to 14 percent in 2019; in the provost area, it dropped from 29 percent in 2017 to 14 percent in 2019; and in the Health Sciences, it rose from 23 percent in 2017 to 24 percent.

Brodish said there are a few areas Pitt needs to take a deeper look at, including the lower salary ratio for appointment-stream, full-time faculty on the Pittsburgh and regional campuses and the decline in the percentage of women in the department/division chairs.

Deans will review these findings to address inequities, Brodish added.

Revenue report

Controller Thurman Wingrove gave a breakdown of the University’s $2.4 billion in revenue in fiscal year 2019 following Brodish’s report.

Unrestricted educational and general revenue funds, or E&G, including tuition and commonwealth appropriation, make up the bulk of the University's income, Wingrove said. Research funding from grants and contracts in the School of Medicine Division provides the second-largest stream, while unrestricted revenue for the School of Medicine Division makes up the third-largest stream. 

Donovan Harrell is a writer for the University Times. Reach him at dharrell@pitt.edu or 412-383-9905.  

Correction: An earlier version of this article said the report compared Pitt to 65 other AAU public schools, including the University of South Carolina. It also said grants and contracts make up the bulk of Pitt’s educational and general revenue sources, non-endowed gifts and endowment distributions are the second-largest stream, while revenue from room and board, the Pitt Bookstore and parking are third. And tuition, commonwealth appropriation and general quasi-endowment distribution provide the third-highest amount of revenue. The article has been corrected to reflect that Pitt was compared to 33 other AAU public schools and that the University of South Carolina is not among them. And that unrestricted educational and general revenue funds, or E&G, including tuition and commonwealth appropriation, make up the bulk of the University's income; Research funding from grants and contracts in the School of Medicine Division provides the second-largest stream, while unrestricted revenue for the School of Medicine Division makes up the third-largest stream. 

Grants and contracts make up the bulk of Pitt’s educational and general revenue sources, Wingrove said. Non-endowed gifts and endowment distributions are the second-largest stream, while revenue from room and board, the Pitt Bookstore and parking are third. Tuition, commonwealth appropriation and general quasi-endowment distribution provide the third amount of revenue.

Have a story idea or news to share? Share it with the University Times.

Follow the University Times on Twitter and Facebook.