An Examination of Gender in Higher Education Sport Administration Faculty

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the gender distribution of faculty in sport management and sport administration programs, in addition to investigating faculty ranks of female and male faculty members.The research sought to discover frequencies in gender and rank of female faculty members in sport administration programs.

Methods: A list of both undergraduate and graduate sport management and sport administration programs in American colleges and universities was obtained from the NASSM (North American Society for Sport Management) website. Of the 232 programs on the NASSM list, 137 posted information about their faculty with regard to gender and rank, and were therefore included in the study (N=137). Websites were examined for gender (male and female faculty members) and faculty rank (professor, associate professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, and "other") and data were recorded. Descriptive statistics were calculated for number of male and female faculty members, rank of faculty members, and gender by rank percentages. In addition, gender distribution by faculty rank by program was calculated.

Analysis/Results: Results revealed that gender distribution of the 137 sport administration and sport management programs is heavily imbalanced in favor of males. There are more male than female faculty members in all categories across all positions. Of the 137 programs included in the study, 33 programs had no female faculty members. The mean faculty size of programs studied was 4.82, and 69% of those faculties were male. In addition, while men still outnumbered women in all positions examined, there were more women in the part time and lower ranking positions. This could be an indication of a type of gender discrimination among women in sport administration faculty positions.

Conclusions: According to this research, women are under-represented on faculties of sport administration programs. The reasons for this disparity need to be examined and further research needs to be conducted. While the limitations of websites is acknowledged, perhaps follow up research would confirm (or deny)these results.