Status of Women in Social Work Education: A Follow-up Study

Research on sex differences in the social work academy is inadequate. The most recent study was Sakamoto et al. (2008) who used secondary data collected by CSWE in 2003. CSWE continues to conduct annual program surveys, but data are collected in aggregate making individual comparisons impossible. This study was guided by Sakamoto, asking: Are there sex differences in leadership, status-related positions and institutional characteristics, workload, and salary? Are there differences in how men and women perceive campus climate?   

A cross-sectional electronic survey was used to gather data from full-time social work faculty. A stratified random sample was derived from all CSWE-accredited programs. Stratification occurred within 9 divisions of 4 US regions. Two states were randomly selected per division. Faculty from 230 BSW and 94 MSW programs in those 18 states were included (n=535), resulting in a 21% response rate.

The 115-item survey included items reported by Sakamoto (2008), including salary, leadership, status-related items, and workload. A 34-item climate scale contained seven subscales: positive climate, work/life climate, cohesion, sexual harassment, gender discrimination, gender insensitivity, and additional discrimination. The scale has good reliability and content and factorial validity (Nolan et al., 2012, Tower et al., 2011). A limitation to the study is the 21% response rate did not allow comparisons between important demographic characteristics (e.g., race). Respondents, however, are representative of faculty associated with CSWE-accredited programs (CSWE, 2016).

Unlike Sakamoto (2008), no significant differences in leadership or tenure status were found, indicating some disparities declined. Men were more likely to be full professor (X²=10.90,df=4,p=0.03). Respectively, women and men worked on average 50 and 49 hours a week. Men spent more time on leisure activities (t=2.6;df=490,p=0.02) and less time caring for a child (t=-2.2;df=491,p=0.02) or older adult (X²=7.39,df=1, p=0.01). On all seven climate measures women perceived climate to be significantly worse than faculty men.

Men’s salaries were higher than women’s, with a mean difference in base salary of $5,937 (t=2.48,df=422,p=0.01). Separate regression analyses for men’s and women’s salaries (Men: R²=0.66,F=25.31; df=6,79,p=0.001; Women:R²=0.53,F=20.75;df=13,243,p=0.001) showed differences in variables predicting salary. For all faculty, years at their current institution led to higher salaries; the effect was stronger for men. For men, the following variables had a positive effect: number of universities worked, having a PhD, and working at a large RI Carnegie Institution. Burnout negatively affected men’s salaries.

Variables that positively influenced women’s salaries were: age, being White Non-Hispanic, administrative work, tenure-track, public university and not in BSW-only program, and working more hours overall and on research. Schools that promoted work/life climate offered higher salaries to women; but, more hours of housework negatively influenced women’s salaries.

Accreditation guidelines must go farther to eliminate discrimination within the professorate by adding more substance to the implicit curriculum. Despite difficulties in obtaining robust membership data, CSWE must take leadership to do it anyway! This research relates directly to SSWR’s 2018 Annual Conference theme: there is still work to be done to achieve equity and justice within the social work academy.