K-State Faculty Salary Data Analysis by College, Department, and Discipline
Summary Overview
2013 - 2014
I. Introduction
Competitive compensation is key to recruiting and retaining the talented and high performing,
diverse workforce envisioned in K-State 2025. In summer 2012, the President and Provost
requested faculty salary analyses by college, department, discipline, and rank to aid in
evaluating K-State's competitive compensation in comparison to our peer institutions. The first
report, K-State Faculty Salary Data Analysis by College, Department, and Discipline, was
completed in September 2012 based on data reported in November 2011.
At the administration’s request, this report has been updated annually. This third annual report
provides the Fall 2013 faculty salary data by rank, college, department, and discipline. The
analyses reported here were prepared by the Office of Educational Innovation and Evaluation
(OEIE) to support further K-State 2025 planning and reporting and are made available at
(http://www.k-state.edu/2025/progress-reports/faculty-salary-data-analysis/2013-2014/).
The overall report is organized by the Summary Overview and three additional sections
providing the following information.
Section 1: Summary Overview. This overview includes an explanation of the methodology
used to compile the report, considerations and limitations of the data, and the
notable highlights from the past three years.
Section 2: Peer Salary Comparison Charts by Rank. This section includes four charts: the peer
salary comparison charts by all ranks for this year (2013-2014) and the charts from
the previous years (2012-2013 and 2011-2012). Due to the change in reporting
requirements in the Oklahoma State University Faculty Salary Survey for 20122013, a table for overall rank comparisons without instructors was also presented in
last year’s report. This table has been updated with the 2013-2014 data and is
included in this section. In addition, a new table has been added this year to report
the overall rank comparisons for Tenured/Tenure Track faculty only.
Section 3: K-State Faculty Mean Salary Comparison by Department and Rank. This chart
identifies departments in which K-State faculty mean salary by rank meets or
exceeds the mean salary of K-State’s peer comparison institutions.
Section 4: Peer Salary Comparison Data by College, Department, Discipline and Rank. This
section represents the bulk of the report as it provides salary comparison data
tables by rank and discipline for the majority of the departments at K-State. Caveats
related to this data reporting are included in the “Definitions and Considerations”
section, as well as in the footnotes for each chart by discipline, where appropriate.
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 1
II. Process
The data tables in this report present faculty salary data by rank and discipline as reported in
November 2013 by K-State and 10 peer comparison institutions.
The peer institutions are:










Auburn University
Clemson University
Colorado State University
Iowa State University
Louisiana State University
North Carolina State University
Oklahoma State University
Oregon State University
University of Massachusetts – Amherst
Washington State University
These peer comparison institutions were chosen by the university in 2012 using the following
criteria:




must be a land grant institution without a Medical School or a Law School,
with Undergraduate FTE between 14,000 – 25,000,
with Graduate FTE between 3,000 – 7,000, and
represent broad geographic distribution as a group.
Data in this report come from the Faculty Salary Survey by Discipline, a special project directed
by Oklahoma State University’s Office of Institutional Research and Information Management
(OSU-IRIM). The survey is widely used as a respected source for national institutional salary
comparisons. Accordingly, the results from the annual survey can serve as a tool to discuss and
examine salary budgets. The Oklahoma State University Faculty Salary Survey utilizes the
Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) structure for data reporting. CIP codes were
developed by the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES) for use as a reference tool to
assist in the collection, reporting, and interpretation of data about instructional programs.
While the coding categories do provide consistent structure for reporting data, institutional
variations in reporting data by CIP codes make some comparisons difficult.
The CIP taxonomy is a hierarchy organized on 3 levels:



2-digit codes define the most general groupings of related programs. (XX)
4-digit codes define intermediate groupings of programs that have comparable
content and objectives. (XX.XX)
6-digit codes define specific instructional programs. (XX.XXXX)
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 2
For example, 01 is the code for Agriculture, 01.11 is the code for Plant Sciences as a subset of
Agriculture, and 01.1103 is the code for Horticulture Science as a subset of Plant Sciences. For
the Faculty Salary Study, institutions have the option to report CIP data at the 2-, 4- or 6-digit
level, although OSU-IRIM encourages reporting at the 6-digit codes.
The 2013-2014 analysis includes a set of tables by college, department, and discipline. In many
cases, K-State and our peers are using different CIP codes when reporting discipline data. In
order to most accurately reflect salary data from all of the institutions, the tables were
generated by first starting with the CIP code reported by K-State (typically a 6-digit CIP). After a
review of data from the other institutions, it was sometimes possible to “roll up” to the 4-digit
CIP for more complete reporting. For example, K-State reported CIP 010901 – Animal Sciences,
General, which is a subset of CIP 010900 – Animal Sciences. By choosing the 4-digit CIP, the
tables include all 10 peer institutions, presenting a more comprehensive view of the data. In
those cases, notes have been added to the tables to identify the codes that are used by K-State
and our peer institutions.
As part of the data request process for this year’s project, K-State needed to obtain permission
from each of the peer institutions to release their faculty salary data through the Oklahoma
State University survey. All peer institutions agreed to release their data; however, Washington
State University approved the use of their data in reports only for the President and Provost.
Therefore, the Washington State University data have been suppressed in the tables included in
this report, but their values were calculated in the ranking of institutions as part of the overall
analysis.
In 2012, instructions from Oklahoma State University changed how institutions could report
their data in the 2012-2013 Faculty Salary by Discipline Survey. The change allowed institutions
to separate their tenured/tenure-track faculty members from their non-tenure track faculty
members. The 2013-2014 survey again had this reporting option. However, this reporting
feature was not required. While K-State did report both tenured/tenure-track and non-tenuretrack faculty, not all of our peer institutions submitted data with these designations.
III. Considerations and Definitions

Faculty salary data in this report were collected in fall 2013 for the 2013-2014 academic
year. Therefore, it does not reflect the changes in the number of faculty or salary
adjustments made since November 2013. It should also be noted that the data in this
report reflects only the first six months implementation of the three-year faculty salary
compensation improvement plan announced by the President in June 2013. These data
do not reflect changes in salaries resulting from Targeted Faculty Salary Enhancements,
Merit Raises, or 2/3 of the Faculty Promotion Enhancement (Backfill). Those changes will
be reflected in next year’s report for 2014-2015.
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 3

All salaries which are reported in the survey are based on a 9-10 month academic year
salary. Twelve-month employees’ salaries are converted to 9 months for comparison
purposes. Any compensation for summer academic work, add pay, and fringe or other
benefits is not included in the salary data.

Only full-time employees (professor to instructor rank, 50% or more time allocated to
instruction or research) are reported in the survey. For details regarding how K-State
reported these data, please refer to page7.

Departmental names and college structures differ across institutions; faculty within the
same discipline might command different salaries in different departments or colleges.

Salary data is reported to Oklahoma State by CIP code (discipline) rather than by
department. Because institutions may use differing CIPs for similar departments, some
reports aggregate data from multiple CIPs.

Oklahoma State only provides CIP codes where more than one institution reported a
particular CIP. The following departments are not included in the faculty salary report
as two or more institutions did not report to the associated CIP or CIPs:
o
o
o
o
Agriculture – Communications and Agricultural Education (AGCOM)
Agriculture – Grain Science and Industry
Engineering – Architectural Engineering and Construction Science
Arts and Sciences – Dance (School of Music, Theatre and Dance – Music and
Theatre are reported)

In many cases, K-State and our peers are using different CIP codes when reporting
discipline data. This results in tables that appear to have incomplete data. In those
cases, notes have been added to identify the codes that are used by our peer
institutions.

In order to present the most comprehensive data available, tables from the following
departments were created with different CIP codes from last year. In all cases, this
required the report to “roll-up” the CIP codes to a broader category. For example, in AY
2013, Human Nutrition was reported using CIP 190501 (Foods, Nutrition, and Wellness
Studies, General) and CIP 301901 (Nutrition Sciences). For AY 2014, the table was
generated using the next higher category resulting in five institutions captured in the
report instead of just four peers.
o Arts & Sciences – Communication Studies: 090101 was used in AY 2013 and
090100 in AY 2014
o Education – Educational Leadership: 130401 was used in AY 2013 and 130400 in
AY 2014
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 4
o Education – Special Education, Counseling and Student Affairs: 131101 was used
in AY 2013 and 131100 in AY 2014
o Human Ecology – Human Nutrition: 190501, 301900 was used in AY 2013 and
190500, 301900 in AY 2014
o Human Ecology – Kinesiology: 310501, 310505 was used in AY 2013 and 310500
in AY 2014

The Arts, Sciences and Business faculty at K-State Salina have been reported under CIP
240100 (Liberal Arts and Sciences/liberal studies). While three other peer institutions
also report this CIP code, this may result in a broad comparison. As programs continue
to develop at the K-State Salina campus, additional review of this classification may be
helpful.

K-State reported CIP 512401 Veterinary Medicine, while some of our peers reported CIP
512500 – Veterinary Biomedical and Clinical Sciences. Both numbers are reported in the
data table for the College of Veterinary Medicine.

Faculty in interdisciplinary units at K-State, the Global Campus (formerly Division of
Continuing Education), the Graduate School, and K-State Olathe are typically associated
with a particular department or college and are included in those CIP codes as assigned.
As a result, the following interdisciplinary units at K-State are not uniquely identified in
the faculty salary data:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Agriculture – Food Science Institute
Arts & Sciences – American Ethnic Studies
Arts & Sciences – International and Area Studies
Arts & Sciences – Women’s Studies
Human Ecology – Gerontology
Human Ecology – General Human Ecology
Leadership Studies – School of Leadership Studies

The ROTC programs at K-State in Aerospace Studies (Air Force ROTC) and Military
Science (Army ROTC) are not included in the analyses as typically these course credits go
as electives towards another degree/program.

The Oklahoma State University’s Faculty Salary Survey only includes library faculty at
universities with library schools. Therefore, K-State library faculty are not included in the
Survey. K-State Libraries maintains its own faculty comparison data.

K-State Research and Extension faculty are not included in the data because universities
do not report extension faculty to the Oklahoma State University’s Faculty Salary
Survey.
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 5
Data columns, rows, and notes reported in the tables:

“Count” refers to the number of faculty members whose salary was included to
compute the average salary.

“Average salary” is the mean of the salaries for all of the faculty in a given academic
rank at a particular institution.

“Rank” orders the average salaries by institution from highest to lowest. Please note
that the salaries shown by rank do not always include 11 institutions as some schools do
not report faculty in a particular CIP code or academic rank.

The row titled “Average w/o K-State” shows the average salary for all of the comparison
institutions reporting a particular CIP code. K-State’s data are not included in these
calculations.

The row titled “Median w/o K-State” shows the 50th percentile of the average salaries
for the comparison institutions. This means that half of the average salaries fall below
this value, and the other half are above it. K-State’s data are not included in these
calculations.

“New Assistant Professor” is a subset of the “Assistant Professors” reported, reflecting
those faculty members hired between November 1, 2012 and October 31, 2013.
IV. Limitations of the Data
There are many factors that may contribute to differences in salary statistics, making it difficult
to draw inferences from these data. Market forces, non-monetary compensation and benefits,
and cost of living differences are often not reflected in the data.
Comparisons across institutions or across units within institutions can be complicated by
unequal distributions in key dimensions such as discipline, rank, length of time in rank, and
length of employment. For example, the use of the average salary as a reported statistic is
susceptible to the influence of extreme distributional differences in rank or discipline in the
population.
Institutional differences in categorizing faculty and reporting procedures may also impact the
comparisons across schools. For example, some institutions may report adjunct faculty or
clinical research faculty, while others do not. There may also be differences in what is
considered “full time” or “part time” across the institutions.
In addition, differences in the groups reported can change over time. For example, before Fall
2012, K-State included tenured/tenure-track faculty, clinical faculty, visiting faculty, and
instructors in the numbers reported to the Oklahoma State study. Beginning Fall 2012 with the
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 6
additional options for reporting, K-State added research assistant and research associate
professors, reporting all of the following groups in the data to the Oklahoma State study:




Tenure/tenure-track faculty
Clinical faculty
Visiting faculty
Non-tenure track faculty (including)
o Research assistant professors
o Research associate professors
o Instructors
The number of faculty reported by institution continues to fluctuate impacting average salaries
and overall rankings. For example, Oklahoma State University reported 304 fewer faculty this
year and Washington State reported 390 fewer faculty. With fewer faculty reported, Oklahoma
State’s overall average increased from $77,728 in 2012-2013 to $90,218 in 2013-2014.
Accordingly, their ranking went from 8 out of 11 in 2012-2013 to 5 out of 11 in 2013-2014.
This example illustrates how aggregate (all ranks) data can fluctuate, limiting the value of the
comparison information, particularly looking at only a single year.
V. Data Highlights – Academic Years 2011-2012 to 2013-2014
The data tables in this report, while with limitations described above, can still provide a useful
context for informing faculty compensation discussions and decision-making at K-State. In
comparing the aggregate Peer Salary Comparison Charts by Ranks reports for Academic Years
2011-1012 through 2013-2014, a few highlights can be noted.
1. The number and rank of faculty at K-State increased at every level from the previous
years, as presented in the table below.
2. For K-State, the average salaries for all ranks showed a slight increase from 2011-2012.
Faculty
Rank
2011-2012
Number
Professor
Associate
Assistant
Instructor
Total
372
321
281
134
1108
Avg.
Salary
$104,384
$73,628
$64,418
$46,274
$78,310
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
2012-2013
Number
381
323
327
149
1180
Avg.
Salary
$104,610
$74,592
$63,765
$46,726
$77,765
2013-2014
Number
394
331
337
161
1223
Avg.
Salary
$105,633
$76,405
$65,220
$47,031
$78,872
Changes since 2011 - 2012
Change in
Number
+ 22
+ 10
+ 56
+ 27
+115
Change in
Salary
+$1,249
+$2,777
+$802
+$757
+$562
Page 7
3. K-State’s placement in the overall rank order table, Peer Salary Comparison by Rank,
went down from 7 in 2012-2013 to 10 in 2013-2014. Without instructors, K-State’s rank
order went from 10 in 2012-2013 to 11 in 2013-2014. However, unlike many of the peer
institutions, K-State has increased the number of faculty in all ranks over this three year
period. For 2013-2014, K-State was one of only three institutions showing an increase in
the number of faculty (up by 13) at the Professor rank from 2012-2013.
The following table represents the changes at each faculty rank level in comparison to
the previous year. Fluctuations occur within the faculty ranks and vary at each level with
some levels reporting a higher rank than K-State’s overall rank and others reporting a
lower rank. For example, Instructors rank 5 out of 11 among the peers and Assistant
Professors rank at the bottom, 11 out of 11.
Faculty Rank
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
Change in Rank
8
11
11
4
8
10
11
5
11
10
11
5
Lower by 3
Stayed the Same
Stayed the Same
Stayed the Same
Professor
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
Instructor
4. As noted previously, with the additional reporting options allowed, K-State began
reporting a broader range of faculty in the non-tenure-track category, such as research
assistant or research associate faculty. As many of the initiatives related to salary have
been targeted to tenured/tenure-track faculty, the following table presents just these
data. Non-tenure-track faculty are not included in these numbers. For K-State, the
average salaries for all ranks of tenured/tenure-track faculty showed some increase
from 2011-2012. In addition, there were increases in the number of tenured/tenuretrack faculty at every rank, (e.g. professor, associate, and assistant professor) from
2011-2012.
Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty Only
Faculty Rank
Professor
Associate
Assistant
Total
2011-2012
2013-2014
Number
Avg. Salary
Number
Avg. Salary
372
318
230
920
$104,282
$73,655
$65,225
$83,932
390
322
237
949
$106,043
$76,380
$67,820
$86,433
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Changes since
2011 - 2012
Change in
Number
+ 18
+4
+7
+ 29
Change in
Salary
+$1,761
+$2,725
+$2,595
+$2,501
Page 8
5. In comparing the K-State Faculty Mean Salary Comparison by Department and Rank for
the past two years, the number of departments in which K-State faculty mean salary by
rank meets or exceeds the mean salary of peers decreased in 2013-2014.
K-State Departments
FY 2014 Totals:
FY 2013 Totals:
Professor
6 / 50
10 / 48
Associate
Professor
7 / 49
11 / 49
Assistant
Professor
11 / 51
13 / 49
Instructor
18 / 38
21 / 38
New Assistant
Professor
7 / 31
9 / 31
These highlights demonstrate why it can be helpful to look at the departmental/disciplinary
data included in this report as opposed to only the average comparisons when determining
strategies to implement competitive compensation for all faculty. It is hoped that deans and
department heads will find the more detailed information within the department/discipline
charts in Sections 3 and 4 helpful as they make plans to address faculty salary issues within
their areas, such as salary compression and inversion.
K-State Faculty Salary Analysis 2013-2014
Page 9