Duke faculty Thursday learned of plans for a statistical deep dive into faculty compensation to explore why there were different results from last year’s faculty salary survey and a prominent external review of the data.
Professor of Statistics Merlise Clyde, professor of statistics and chair of the Faculty Compensation Committee (FCC), will lead the review, which comes after last year’s survey showed there was no significant statistical evidence of a systematic salary gap between male and female faculty at Duke. At the time of the report, faculty asked for a follow-up study to explain why it differed from a recent Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE) study that showed female assistant professors were paid 80 cents on the dollar compared to male assistant professors.
While salary reviews are usually conducted every other year, last year's results led faculty leaders to use this off-year to take a closer look at the results and the methodology. Clyde told the Academic Council that her panel will use the opportunity “to drill down and take a look at a finer scale of the data.”
“We want to be transparent about what goes into the survey,” said Clyde, who helped conduct last year’s review as a member of the FCC.
In addition, the review will expand the survey to include for the first time non-tenure track, regular-rank faculty, such as professors of the practice. The panel will also look to improve the survey methodologies and attempt to compare Duke salaries at the divisional level with those at peer institutions.
Last year’s different results could be a matter of the CHE using bulk data, Clyde said. Some schools and divisions average higher salaries than others, and if women are more prevalent in the lower salary schools and divisions, the CHE survey results would reflect that unequal distribution.
“In that case, it’s not a salary equity issue as much as it is a diversity issue,” Clyde said. The Duke survey last year did attempt to take division pay scales into account, but a more granular assessment of the data would provide better information.
Other factors such as time from completing the Ph.D. and time at Duke will be considered, as well as race and ethnicity.
All information will be confidential, and Clyde and others on the FCC will not know the names attached to the individual data points. However, if the review finds outliers who deserve salary adjustments, Provost Sally Kornbluth will identify the candidates and work with the deans of the appropriate schools.
Clyde said the study of non-tenure track faculty will use the same methodology as for tenure-track faculty. “For now we’re just trying to look at them within the institution and looking across departments,” she said.
New Joint Ph.D. Degree
In other action, the Academic Council heard about a proposal to expand the Duke-NUS partnership in Singapore to add Duke as a joint sponsor of NUS’s five-year-old Ph.D. in integrated biology and medicine. The proposed program is closely modeled on Duke biomedical Ph.D. programs, and students will be held to the same requirements and standards as Ph.D. students in the Duke Graduate School.
The council also heard a proposal to change the name of the master’s Historical and Cultural Visualization program to Digital Art History/Computational Media. Proponents said the name change would better reflect the innovative work by students in the program.
Both proposals will be voted upon in the council’s February meeting.