@stevensPR, well, the Chronicle numbers were 17-18 while Insider Higher Ed are 18-19, though that seems like a big jump. Was there a merger?
There’s no merger - Chronicle data is poor at best. JHU was #10 in top faculty salaries 2 years ago:
@PurpleTitan Let me know if you’re able to find out how Chronicle sources its “Data”. It’s misleading at best. Hopefully they aren’t being lazy and just using glassdoor and payscale. Neither of which are as accurate as self-reported info from the institutions themselves. A bit of a shame all that copy pasting went to waste.
Looking at average salary surveys in a vacuum and without context is not telling. If a university’s faculty is located in an high-cost area (NYC, Bay area, LA, Chicago, DC, Boston etc…), and primarily engaged in professional programs (Medicine, Business, Law and Engineering), average salaries will be significantly higher than if a university’s faculty is located in a low-cost area (rural colleges and universities, or colleges and universities located in college towns) engaged primarily in the instruction of the liberal arts. If you adjust for cost of living, average salaries at the better colleges and universities is going to be somewhat proportional to the size of the faculty engaged in teaching professional programs relative to the size of the faculty engaged in teaching the liberal arts.
@Alexandre Yes, median salaries should be used in addition to low cost of living adjustments for places like Ithaca (Cornell) and Baltimore (JHU). But more importantly, the right data set needs to be used. Using the wrong data as happened in this case means garbage in = garbage out.
Remember too that public universities are funded by their respective states. That means the actual endowments at public schools are worth more than their face value as compared to private ones.
I agree with little that comes out of the current administration but I totally support their move to tax college endowments, especially those over say 1 billion dollars. Harvard having 38 billion dollars is absolutely ridiculous. Just my opinion.
Taxing endowments of one billion dollars or more is somewhat shortsighted. The endowment tax breaks it down to endowment of $500,000 or more per student.
Currently there are about 100 colleges & universities with endowments of at least $1 billion. Why tax them and ruin our most successful educational institutions if EPS is below $500,000 per student ?
Gotta get that money from some place, right? I’m sure it’s going to good use. sarcasm off
Not sure how dated the info is. But just checked the official fact book and full profs at boston college for 2018 230k and 180k for associates. Do not sure how the data above is calculated. But still good info for sure.
And endowment per student is 330k. Not listed on the posts above.
2.9b vs 8800 ug students.
I checked for another reason and it surprised me. That’s why it jumped out as not being listed.
The UC number is skewed. UCLA is just over 5 billion and UC Berkeley is over 4 billion. The other UCs are much lower.
Yes, I expressed similar caveats above.
“Context” may explain away some differences among the T31.
Which is not to say the salary differences between Stanford and Liberty University are all down to variations in COL and accounting practices.
As for the source of Chronicle faculty salary data:
https://data.chronicle.com/salaries/methodology/
So where does IPEDS get its data? See:
https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/IPEDSManual.pdf
Some of the data goes back to 2015. Do we know why there is such a lag and when Ipeds updates. Last year’s numbers aren’t captured yet?
The headline says 2018 figures, just wondering.
@10s4life: The UCs require a bit of extra work as does the University of Texas System & the Texas A&M System & Foundation.
In the past, I have broken down the entire University of Texas system schools by EPS. UT-Austin moves down dramatically on the list of overall endowments when the cumulative Texas System endowment is broken down by EPS & reassigned to a specific university based on number of total students.
UC-Berkeley has its own endowment but also benefits from a collective UC system endowment if I understand correctly.
My point in starting this thread was to get data info flowing & to start discussion of how to make this information more useful.
Thank you to all who have helped by posting information on this thread.
Some of the schools listed have tuition many times the value of the amount spent on student instruction. Villanova, with $15k for instructional expenses and $50k+ in tuition, really surprised me. Does anyone know what is considered a standard benchmark?
@privatebanker: The thread title is referring to the cumulative endowment figures posted in the first posts in this thread by me. (From NACUBO, not IPEDS.)
Is your question regarding those figures or regarding professor salaries ? This is IPEDS data generously contributed to this thread by other posters.
Oh ok. No just asking in general. Good stuff here. Thanks for posting.
Perhaps somehow the accounting pulls in the expenses from the medical school into that category?
@tk21769 unfortunately if you look at your link, salary is calculated using bizarre 9 month equivalent formula that makes no sense. It’s not reporting unfettered straight raw data from the schools. AAUP is the more reliable indicator in this case.
Even in 2011 the average salary for a full prof for JHU excluding Medicine was already almost $160k using this bizarre 9 month scale. So you’re telling me in 8 years, the salary is essentially unchanged?
http://web.jhu.edu/administration/provost/docs/JHU%20Fact%20Sheet%202011-12%20v8b%20NS.pdf
Literally impossible
And indeed it is. In 2015, JHU professors were making over $176k already.
@Publisher, I read somewhere that UT-Austin gets half (or more) of the UT endowment payout with the rest split by all the other UT’s.
Same is true for flagship TAMU and all the other A&M’s.