dr. amy burkman & dr. derek lester - dr. william allan kritsonis, editor-in-chief, national...

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNALVOLUME 31, NUMBER 1, 2013

Superintendent Salary Study: Is There Gender Equity in Texas?

Amy BurkmanAmerican Public University System

Derek LesterTexas A&M University-Commerce

ABSTRACT

Crucial In Texas public schools approximately 17% of superintendents are women (TEA, 2011), which is slightly below the national average of 24% (Kowalski, McCord, Petersen, Young, & Ellerson, 2010) but which is still up from the early 21st centuries average of 12% (Dianis, 2000; Shakeshaft, 2000; Dana & Bourisaw, 2006a). While this is a positive sign that the glass ceiling is cracking, there is still a discrepancy between practice and national averages. One important factor in the perceptions of success is the equity of pay between genders. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a significant difference in the salaries of women superintendents in Texas and their male counterparts. While national studies show no gender discrepancy, Texas has lagged behind in number of superintendents and the hypothesis was that they lagged behind in salary equity as well; however, the findings of this study indicate that there is no discrepancy in the salary between men and women in traditional K-12 organizations in Texas. In a few regions, findings show that women actually make higher salaries than male counterparts.

38

39 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Introduction

he glass ceiling in educational leadership is cracking with approximately 24% of the superintendents in the United States being women (Kowalski, McCord, Petersen, Young, &

Ellerson, 2010), which is up from the early 21st centuries average of approximately 12% (Dianis, 2000; Shakeshaft, 2000; Dana & Bourisaw, 2006a). With the number of women superintendents in the United States growing from 21% in 2006 (Glass & Franceschini) to 24% in 2010 (Kowalski, et. al.), the fissures in the glass ceiling are growing at staggering rates. Although fissures are weakening the structure of male-dominated leadership, research is necessary to increase cultural awareness and to bring awareness to the continued struggles of women to gain access to high level positions within education. According to Dana and Bourisaw (2006b), perceptions, not reality, determine the leadership opportunities and success for women in leadership. Attention to women’s retention in the superintendency is as important to improving women’s numerical representation and integration into the role of superintendent as understanding how women attain the leadership position (Tallerico, 1999). An important factor in retention is the equity of pay, which has historically been a problem, but recent studies have shown to have equaled out (Meier & Wilkins, 2002).

T

Historical Aspects of Female Leadership

Women have always been an active part of the educational system. Prior to the suffrage movement, women held approximately 30% of district level superintendent positions. While the women’s suffrage movement increased the availability of educational training to women, it also caused a whiplash of executive decisions that decreased the opportunities for women to take leadership positions (Blount, 1999; Dana & Bourisaw, 2006a). This whiplash reduced the number of women superintendents to 11% of the total by the 1930s. Very little changed for almost three decades.

BURKMAN & LESTER 40

By the 1960s, two major workplace issues still existed; access to equity of benefits and access to leadership positions (Dana & Bourisaw, 2006a). Blount’s (1998) research showed that

women have not enjoyed easy access to the local district superintendency…In 1910 women served in 327 out of 5,284 local school districts. By 1970 women superintended only 73 out of 10,431 local districts, producing a steady decline in representation from 6.19% to only .70%. (p. 183)

While approximately 24% of superintendents in the United States are women over 65% of the workforce in education are women (Kowalski, et. al., 2010; Shakeshaft, 2000).

Glass & Franceschini’s (2006) Superintendent Study shows that 55% of women in the superintendency are in small rural districts, 35% in suburban districts and only 9% are in urban districts. Growe and Montgomery (2002) previously found the majority of female superintendents either started in or occupied positions in small districts with few central administration officers and declining enrollment. This imbalance effects perceptions of women in the superintendency and has impact on the salary structure for women.

Finding a superintendency job presents the greatest challenge to women, although they are the majority gender entering superintendent preparatory programs (Bjork, 2000). Kamler (1999) presented evidence that search consultants historically do not select women. Seven reasons were identified as part of this research:

1. The ratio of male vs. female applicants is still disproportionate; 2. Women are more satisfied holding highly visible, responsible

administrative positions; 3. Women rarely have secondary leadership experience; 4. Men typically have more superintendency experience;5. Few consultants search for women applicants;


6. Women lack an interest in the superintendency due to an avoidance of failure;

7. Boards perceive women as weak.

These identified reasons, as well as a lack of women working as search consultants, stymie the access women have to superintendent positions. Dana and Bourisaw (2006a) verified that “all too frequently, women leaders are viewed through the lens of male leadership and face confounding biases toward them” (p. 67).

Gender Studies

Female public school superintendents are described by the U.S. Department of Labor as working in the most gender stratified executive position in the country (Bjork, 1999). Skrla (2000a) found that within the context of public school superintendency the role of the superintendency is socially constructed. Social constructs, such as the assumption that males are more effective leaders than women, create the apparent realities of societal roles. While studies have been done to reflect on the experiences of superintendents, male superintendents are the dominant participants in these studies (Marshall, 1997) creating a skewed view of the superintendency. Skrla (2000a) believed that policy initiatives will only take place if women hear and understand women with similar experiences.

Understanding the equity of salary between men and women can influence districts when hiring a superintendent. Women’s public declaration of interest in the superintendent position, and their increasing success in gaining the position will have a prevailing effect on the next generation of women educators (Grogan, 2005). In a study of Texas superintendents in 2000, Meier and Wilkins found that women superintendents that replace male superintendents receive lower salaries than their predecessors, but salary discrepancies overall were more subtle. In actuality, the study found that women received less compensation in only one situation. For each 1% increase in local

BURKMAN & LESTER 42

funding men were paid .11% more in salary while women were only paid .06% more. All other variables being equal, women actually made 7.5% more than men.

Texas Leadership

In Texas public schools the probability of having a woman in the superintendency is slightly under the national average of 24% (Kowalski, et. al., 2010) at approximately 17% in the 2009-2010 school year (TEA, 2011). The demographics of Texas mirror those of the country through demographics and socioeconomic status, showing that schools across the country can successfully increase the number of women in leadership. This statistic leads to the question of salary equity. Does Texas have a salary equity discrepancy?

Texas women superintendents suffer through sexism and discrimination in the daily leading of school districts (Skrla, 2000b). In a study of former Texas superintendents, Skrla found that deep policy initiatives are needed to overcome gender specific challenges. Mandatory annual training for school board members needs to include discussions of gender and the role of superintendents. Skrla also established that school boards need to be held accountable for the employing and evaluation of superintendents based on clearly established priorities and goals. Finally, she showed that universities and state education agencies need to make feminist discourse more accessible to female leaders (2000b).

Meier and Wilkins (2002) did a study similar to the one proposed here on superintendent salaries in Texas using salaries 1995-1998. While they found that “there is some evidence of discrimination in salaries in specific situations” (p. 409), there was some question as to whether the salary difference was due to a difference in the district size and wealth of the districts hiring women or whether there was overt discrimination. Further research is required to determine the


reasons why there might be salary discrepancies in order to correct any existing equity issues.

This study proposes to analyze salary based on district size and geographic location throughout the state, which should better allow for a comparison of districts with similar demographics and financial resources.

Implications of Current Research

The proposed study holds particular interest due to the potential impact on the current practices of school boards across the country. Research in the area of salary equity and women in the superintendency can help all women better prepare to obtain equitable treatment in hiring practices. Brunner (2000) reveals that “the presence of women in the superintendency has tremendous potential to change the specific common perceptions that have, in the past, disallowed women the position” (p. 36).

Statement of the Problem

This study focuses on analyzing the salaries of superintendents in Texas using demographic factors, such as district size and location, in addition to gender. Because the demographics of Texas K-12 institutions represent demographic populations from a large portion of the United States, this study could be easily generalized to the larger population of the United States. This study operates as a pilot study that will be extended to include first the region, then the entire country.

Research Questions

Seven questions of descriptive statistics define the study

BURKMAN & LESTER 44

population:

1. What is the salary range and mean for full-time female and male superintendents in the State of Texas?

2. What is the mean salary of women superintendents in districts with less than 1000 students?

3. What is the mean salary of women superintendents in districts with 1001 to 5000 students?

4. What is the mean salary of women superintendents in districts with more than 5000 students?

5. What is the mean salary of male superintendents in districts with less than 1000 students?

6. What is the mean salary of male superintendents in districts with 1001 to 5000 students?

7. What is the mean salary of male superintendents in districts with more than 5000 students?

Methods

The research questions of this study examine salary differences between and among the 918 full time male and female superintendents of Texas school districts. Superintendent data was gathered the Texas Education Agency, which collects and reports superintendent salaries annually. The demographic data collected by the state identifies the name of the district, size of district, superintendent salary, monetary amount of additional benefits, and superintendent name. The gender of each superintendent was identified based on personal information made available on each school district website.

Once the data were accessed from the public information, districts that had a less than full time superintendent, that were charter schools, or that served students K-8 instead of K-12 were removed to ensure that all data met specified criteria. Districts are divided into three categories according to student population size: Small (>1000), medium (1001 - 5000), and large (5001+). Females of different sized


districts are compared among each other. Likewise, male superintendents of different sized districts are compared among each other. Finally, female and male superintendents of similarly sized districts are compared between each other.

Following the analysis between various sized districts, comparisons were also made between men and women in various regions of Texas. The state identifies 20 educational service center areas. These service center areas were grouped into regions:

Region 1-- North Central: Educational Service Areas10, 11, 9; predominately urban and suburban districts; major cities include Dallas, Fort Worth, and Mount Pleasant

Region 2 -- Central: Educational Service Areas13, 14, 15, 12; equal urban, suburban and rural; major cities include Austin, Abilene, Waco and San Angelo

Region 3 -- East: Educational Service Areas 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; equal urban, suburban and rural; major cities include Houston, Beaumont, Huntsville

Region 4 -- West: Educational Service Areas 19, 18, 17, 16; predominately rural districts; large cities include El Paso, Midland/Odessa, and Lubbock

Region 5 -- South: Educational Service Areas 1, 2, 3, 20; mostly rural with one major metropolitan area (San Antonio); major cities include San Antonio, Corpus Christi, Edinburg (see graphic 1.1)

The analyses for district size were also run based on regional areas of Texas.

BURKMAN & LESTER 46

Analysis Results

Descriptive Statistics

The mean salary for a superintendent in the state of Texas is $118,990 with a mean district size of 5030. The mean salary of a female superintendent is $117,749 with a salary range of $56,840 to $328,950. The mean salary of a male superintendent is $119,240 with a salary range of $50,000 to $346,778 (See Tables 1 and 2).

Table 1

Mean and Salary Range for Full-Time Female and Male Superintendents

Female$117,749

Male$119,240

% Difference 1.25%

The mean salary of women superintendents in districts with less than 1000 students is $87, 813.

The mean salary of women superintendents in districts with 1001 to 5000 students is $115, 225.

The mean salary of women superintendents in districts with more than 5000 students is $189,304.

The mean salary of male superintendents in districts with less than 1000 students is $88,834.

The mean salary of male superintendents in districts with 1001 to 5000 students is $120, 469.

The mean salary of male superintendents in districts with more than 5000 students is $197, 771.


Table 2

Mean Salary of Female Superintendents by District Size

Small District(>1000)

Medium District (1001-5000)

Large Districts(5001+)

Female $87,813 $115,225 $189,304

Male $88,834 $120,469 $197,771

% Difference 1.15% 4.35% 4.28%

Inferential Statistics

Comparison of mean salary of superintendents in Texas. A one-way ANOVA found no statistically significant difference between male (M = $119,240) and female (M = $117,749) superintendents within the State of Texas, F (1, 917) = 0.128, p = .721.

Comparison of female and male superintendents mean salary by district size. A one-way ANOVA found no statistically significant difference between male superintendents within small sized districts (M = $88,834) and female superintendents within small sized districts (M = $87, 813.68), F (1, 436) = 0.356, p = 0.551. A one-way ANOVA found no statistically significant difference between male superintendents within medium sized districts (M = $120, 469) and female superintendents within medium sized districts (M = $115,225), F (1, 311) = 2.455, p = 0.118. A one-way ANOVA found no statistically significant difference between male superintendents within large districts (Mean = $197, 771) and female superintendents within large districts (Mean = $189,304), F (1, 168) = 0.768, p = .382.

Comparison of female superintendents mean salary by district size. Main effects of a one-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between females of small, medium,

BURKMAN & LESTER 48

and large districts, F (2, 151) = 164.102, p = .0001. Analysis of comparisons revealed statistically significant differences between all three of the district sizes: Small (M = $87, 813) and medium ($115, 225) (p. > .0001), medium ($115, 225) and large (M = $189,304) (p. > .0001), small (M = $87, 813) and large (M = $189,304) (p. > .0001).

Comparison of male superintendents mean salary by district size. Main effects of a one-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between males of small, medium, and large districts, F (2, 761) = 858.079, p = .0001. Analysis of the findings revealed statistically significant differences between all three of the district sizes: Small (M = $88,834) and medium (M = $120, 469) (p. > .0001), medium (M = $120, 469) and large (M = $197, 771) (p. > .0001), small (M = $88,834) and large (M = $197,771) (p. > .0001).

Comparison of superintendent mean salary by region. This study analyzed data from 918 male and female superintendents from five regions within Texas: North central, central, east, west, and south. There is no statistically significant difference among the mean salary of superintendents of the five Texas regions.

Analysis of the simple effects revealed statistically significant differences between regions. Region 1 demonstrated a statistically significant difference between all other regions: regions 2, 3, 4, and 5. Analysis of the findings revealed no statistically significant difference among two sets of regions: Regions 4 and 5 demonstrated no statistically significant difference between each other; the same for Regions 2 and 3. Regions 2 and 3 (a homogeneous subset with no statistical difference) each demonstrated a statistically significant difference between regions 4 and 5 (also a homogeneous subset). See Table 3 for a listing of regional mean salaries.

Comparison of female and male superintendents mean salary by region. There is no statistically significant difference among the mean salary of male and female superintendents of the five Texas


regions. Analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between male and female salaries within Region 3. There is no demonstrated statistical difference between superintendent salaries of the other four regions. There is, at times, a considerable real dollar difference between female and male salaries.

In Region 1, male (n = 150) and female (n = 21) mean salaries demonstrated no statistically significant difference: F (1, 169) = 2.493, p = .116. The female mean salary ($155,878) is higher than male ($135,229) salaries.

Region 2 males (n = 212) and females (n = 45): There is NO statistically significant difference: F (1, 255) = 1.761, p = .186. The male salary mean ($123,256) is higher than female salary mean ($112,681).

Region 3 males (n = 113) and females (n = 37): There is a statistically significant difference: F (1, 148) = 12.057, p = .001. The male salary mean ($130, 051) is higher than the female salary mean ($102,560).

Region 4 males (n = 131) and females (n = 15): While there is NO statistically significant difference: F (1, 144) = 1.860, p = .175. The male salary mean ($103,750) is lower than the female salary mean ($118, 197).

Region 5 males (n = 158) and females (n = 36): While there is NO statistically significant difference: F (1, 192) = 3.854, p = .051. The male salary mean ($103, 785) is lower than the female salary mean ($117,268).

The mean salary of males in Region 2 demonstrated a statistically significant difference over the mean female salary, and by a margin of 27% higher salary than females. However, females have a higher average mean salary than males in Regions 1, 4, and 5. See Table 3 for the side-by-side regional comparison of male to female salary and percentage difference.

Table 3

BURKMAN & LESTER 50

Salary Difference by Region

RegionMean Salary

Female Salary Mean

Male Salary Mean

$ Difference

% Difference

1$137,76

5 $ 155,878 $135,229 $20,649 13.25%

2$121,40

5 $ 112,681 $123,256 $10,575 8.58%

3$123,27

0 $ 102,560 $130,051 $27,491 21.14%

4$105,23

4 $ 118,197 $103,750 $14,447 12.22%

5$106,28

6 $ 117,268 $103,785 $13,483 11.50%

Findings

Analysis results revealed no statistically significant difference between the salaries of males and females employed by similarly sized school districts. There was found statistically significant differences among the salaries of superintendents employed in districts of different sized student populations. Also, analysis results that compared salary differences among five Texas regions found females have a higher average mean salary than males in Regions 1, 4, and 5. The implication of this data is that competitively paid female superintendents are grouped into Region 1—North Central, Region 4 -- West and Region 5 –South. These findings also suggest these regions compensate female superintendents competitively.

Future Implications

Future studies include a look at national salary trends and further analysis of rural versus urban superintendent salaries with


additional variables. A look at national salary trends based on regional attributes could help pinpoint areas of need in terms of gender equality. Additional attention needs to be given to the gender stratification of rural school districts (if any) and the search process for superintendents.

Conclusion

The implications of this study are positive: gender alone does not impact superintendent salary in the State of Texas. With salary being equivalent across groups, the new question is why does Texas have only 17% female superintendents, approximately 3% less than the national average? This question brings to mind even more questions:

Are women in the superintendency more likely to work in large urban and suburban districts than rural?

Does the lack of rural female superintendents negatively impact the availability of jobs for women entering the superintendency?

What other variables impact the salary negotiation process?

The lack of gender bias shown in the research shows positive growth in narrowing the leadership gap but there are still miles to go before true equality is evidenced in educational leadership.

BURKMAN & LESTER 52

References

Bjork, L.G. (1999). Collaborative research on the superintendency. AERA Research on the Superintendency SIG Bulletin, 2(1), 1-4.

Bjork, L. G. (2000). Introduction: Women in the superintendency—Advances in research and theory. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 5-17.

Blom, D. (2002). Superintendent Tenure. CUBE Survey Report. National School Boards Association: Alexandria, VA.

Blount, J. (1998). Destined to rule the schools: Women and the superintendency, 1973-1995. New York, NY: State of University of New York Press.

Blount, J. (1999). Chapter One: Turning out the ladies: Elected women superintendents and the push for the appointive system, 1900-1935. In C.C. Brunner’s, Sacred dreams: Women and the superintendency. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Borja, R. (2002). Study: Urban school chiefs’ tenure is 4.6 years. Education Week, 21(21), 5.

Brunner, C. (2000). Principles of power: Women superintendents and the riddle of the heart. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.

Coleman, M. (2003). Gender and the orthodoxies of leadership. School Leadership & Management, 23(3), 325-339.

Czaja, M., & Harman, M. (1997). Excessive school district superintendent turnover: An explorative study in Texas. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 1(6). Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/iejll/czaja_harman

Dana, J., & Bourisaw, D. (2006a). Women in the superintendency. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Dana, J., & Bourisaw, D. (2006b, June). Overlooked leaders. American School Board Journal, 193(06), 27-30.


Eaton, W., & Sharp, W. (1996). Involuntary turnover among small-town superintendents. Peabody Journal of Education, 71(2), 78-85.

Glass, T.E., & Franceschini, L.A. (2006). State of the American superintendency: A mid-decade study. Lanham, MD: American Association of School Administrators and Rowman & Littlefield.

Grogan, M. (2005). Echoing their ancestors, women lead school districts in the United States. ISEA, 33(2), 21-30.

Growe, R., & Montgomery, R. (2002). Women and the leadership paradigm: Bridging the gender gap. National Forum Journal. Retrieved from http://www.nationalforum.com

Hewitt, P. (2002). Rapid change? Only the name on your office door. School Administrator, 59(9), 40-41.

Kamler, E., & Shakeshaft, C. (1999). Chapter three: The role of search consultants in the career paths of women superintendents. In C.C. Brunner’s, Sacred dreams: Women and the superintendency. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2002). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kowalski, T.J., McCord, R.S., Petersen, G.J., Young, I.P, & Ellerson, N.M. (2010). The American school superintendent: 2010 decennial study. Alexandria, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

Lips, H.M. (2003). A new psychology of women. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.

Marshall, C. (1997). Preface. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (ix-xi). London, England: Flamer.

Meier, K., & Wilkins, V. (2002). Gender differences in agency head salaries: The case of public education. Public Administration Review, 62(4), 405-411.

Metzger, C. (1997). Involuntary turnover of superintendents. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 26(4), 20-24.

BURKMAN & LESTER 54

Natkin, G, Cooper, B., Fusarelli, L., Alborano, J., Pailla, A. & Ghosh, S. (2002). Myth of the revolving-door superintendency. School Administrator, 59(5), 28-31.

Shakeshaft, C. (2000). Foreword. In Brunner, C. C., Principles of power: Women superintendents and the riddle of the heart. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Skrla, L. (2000). Mourning silence: Women superintendents (and a researcher) rethink speaking up and speaking out. Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(6), 611-628.

Skrla, L. (2000b). The social construction of gender in the superintendency. Journal of Education Policy, 15(3), 293-316.

Skrla, L., Reyes, P., & Scheurich, J. (2000). Sexism, silence and solutions: Women superintendents speak up and speak out. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 44-75.

Tallerico, M. (1999). Chapter two: Women and the superintendency: What do we really know? In C.C. Brunner’s, Sacred dreams: Women and the superintendency. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Texas Education Agency. (2011). Superintendent salary lists. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/adhocrpt/adpea.html

http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/adhocrpt/adpea.html

http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/adhocrpt/adpea.html

dr. amy burkman & dr. derek lester - dr. william allan kritsonis, editor-in-chief, national...

Documents