By Caroline Reed, higher-education labor reporter with 12 years covering faculty hiring, academic compensation, and university workforce data
Last reviewed: July 19, 2026
Johns Hopkins counted the equivalent of 3,700.15 full-time professorial faculty positions in fall 2023. Women represented 44% of that group, while faculty from the university’s defined underrepresented groups represented 11%, according to the “JHU Report on Faculty Composition,” published in 2024.
myJH is the institutional portal used by faculty, staff, students, and other affiliates. It is not an employer or a faculty category; the workforce behind the portal is divided by school, appointment type, academic rank, tenure status, and source of funding.
The faculty workforce is concentrated in medicine
The Johns Hopkins faculty population is not distributed evenly across its academic divisions.
Of the 3,700.15 full-time professorial faculty equivalents reported for fall 2023, 2,284.50 were assigned to the School of Medicine’s clinical faculty category. Another 134.05 were in School of Medicine basic science. Together, those two groups accounted for roughly 65% of the university total, based on the report’s divisional table.
That concentration changes how Johns Hopkins faculty statistics should be read.
A university-wide percentage is heavily influenced by medical faculty because that group is much larger than the faculty of any other division. The Bloomberg School of Public Health reported 333.25 full-time professorial faculty equivalents. Whiting School of Engineering reported 189.20, while the Krieger School’s humanities, natural sciences, and social sciences categories totaled 371.65 when their published counts are combined.
| Johns Hopkins division or group | Full-time professorial faculty equivalent, fall 2023 |
|---|---|
| School of Medicine, clinical | 2,284.50 |
| Bloomberg School of Public Health | 333.25 |
| Whiting School of Engineering | 189.20 |
| Krieger humanities | 134.25 |
| School of Medicine, basic science | 134.05 |
| Carey Business School | 98.15 |
| School of Nursing | 85.85 |
| Peabody Institute | 78.80 |
Source: “JHU Report on Faculty Composition,” 2024, Table 2.
The fractional counts require explanation. Johns Hopkins reports some faculty on a full-time-equivalent basis rather than treating every appointment as one whole position, so figures such as 3,700.15 do not represent a literal count of 3,700 people plus a fraction of one person.
Small detail. Big difference.
Women reached 48% of all faculty
The faculty report says women represented 48.4% of all Johns Hopkins faculty in fall 2023, up from 42.0% in 2015. Among full-time professorial faculty, women represented 44% in fall 2023.
Those percentages describe two different populations.
“All faculty” includes a wider set of full-time and part-time appointments. “Full-time professorial faculty” is a narrower group organized around professorial ranks and includes tenure-stream, teaching-rank, and practice-rank appointments under the university’s 2023 reporting methodology.
The distinction prevents a common error: stating that 48% of Johns Hopkins professors are women when the report’s full-time professorial figure is 44%.
Representation also varied sharply by division.
Women represented 94% of the School of Nursing’s full-time professorial faculty and 58% in the School of Education. The figure was 55% at the Bloomberg School of Public Health and 51% in Krieger humanities.
At the other end, women represented:
- 24% at the School of Advanced International Studies;
- 25% at Whiting School of Engineering;
- 31% in Krieger natural sciences;
- 34% at Carey Business School;
- 34% in School of Medicine basic science.
The university-wide figure therefore hides occupational and disciplinary sorting. Nursing, education, public health, engineering, business, medicine, and international studies do not draw from identical labor pools or promotion pipelines.
Where the gender headline misleads
A rise from 42.0% to 48.4% female representation between 2015 and 2023 shows a substantial change in the overall faculty population. It does not establish equal representation at every academic rank, in every tenure category, or across every department.
The Johns Hopkins report itself separates faculty by division, rank, tenure status, and appointment type because the aggregate number is too broad to explain the structure.
That analytical point becomes clearer when national salary data are added.
The American Association of University Professors’ “Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2024–25” found that average full-time faculty salaries for women were 83.2% of those for men nationally in 2024–25. Women earned less on average across every academic rank measured by the survey.
That national ratio is not a Johns Hopkins pay-gap estimate.
AAUP compares average salaries by gender across participating institutions. Differences in rank, field, discipline, appointment length, medical appointments, and seniority can affect the aggregate ratio. The Johns Hopkins composition report, meanwhile, focuses on headcount and representation rather than faculty salary equity.
The two reports answer separate questions:
- Johns Hopkins: Who is represented in the faculty workforce?
- AAUP: How do average faculty salaries compare by gender nationally?
Combining them does not prove a Johns Hopkins salary gap.
Underrepresented-group representation rose
Johns Hopkins reported that faculty from underrepresented groups represented 11.8% of all faculty in fall 2023, up from 8.0% in 2015. Among full-time professorial faculty, the fall 2023 figure was 11%.
The university uses “underrepresented groups,” or URG, as a combined reporting measure defined in the faculty report. The category is constructed from federally collected race and ethnicity data and should not be treated as a full description of individual identity.
Representation again differed by division.
The School of Education had the highest published full-time professorial URG percentage at 28%. Krieger humanities and the School of Nursing each reported 16%, while Bloomberg Public Health reported 15%.
The lowest published percentages included:
- 5% in Krieger natural sciences;
- 6% at Carey Business School;
- 6% in School of Medicine basic science;
- 8% in the School of Medicine’s “other” category.
Those variations matter more than the university-wide 11% because hiring pools, promotion patterns, and disciplinary histories differ by field.
A single percentage cannot show where representation improved or stalled.
Johns Hopkins compared favorably with Ivy Plus peers
The report uses fall 2022 IPEDS data to compare Johns Hopkins with Ivy Plus universities, AAU private institutions, and AAU public institutions.
Johns Hopkins reported that women represented 42.0% of its professorial faculty in that comparison year, compared with 38.5% for Ivy Plus institutions, 39.8% for AAU private universities, and 41.8% for AAU public universities.
The same peer table showed:
| Demographic category, fall 2022 | Johns Hopkins | Ivy Plus | AAU private | AAU public |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 42.0% | 38.5% | 39.8% | 41.8% |
| Asian | 20.4% | 16.6% | 16.6% | 16.6% |
| Black or African American | 5.3% | 4.8% | 4.6% | 3.7% |
| Hispanic or Latino | 4.0% | 4.6% | 4.9% | 5.6% |
| White | 60.9% | 65.3% | 65.9% | 63.6% |
Source: “JHU Report on Faculty Composition,” 2024, Table 8, using fall 2022 IPEDS data.
Johns Hopkins therefore reported higher proportions of women, Asian faculty, and Black faculty than its Ivy Plus comparison group. Its Hispanic or Latino percentage was lower than all three peer aggregates shown in the table.
The comparison is useful but lagged.
The faculty report notes that peer data are at least one year behind because institutions must submit information to IPEDS before it is released publicly.
It also compares university-level populations, not matched departments. A medical-heavy institution may differ structurally from a peer with a smaller clinical faculty footprint.
Method changes complicate the trend
Johns Hopkins changed its faculty-reporting methodology for fall 2023.
Teaching and practice-rank faculty who had previously been categorized outside the professorial group were reclassified as instructional professorial faculty according to rank. The report warns that some 2023 full-time professorial data cannot be compared directly with earlier reports.
This is one of the most important limitations in the document.
A reported increase can reflect real hiring and promotion changes, a revised definition, or both. The university says its all-faculty trend from 2015 to 2023 remains usable for the headline measures, but detailed professorial comparisons across report editions require caution.
The report’s November 1 census design creates another limitation. Faculty are counted based on their status on one date each year, making the data a point-in-time snapshot rather than a measure of everyone who taught, researched, joined, or left during the academic year.
No turnover rate appears.
The public report does not show how many faculty resigned, retired, were denied promotion, moved between ranks, or were hired during the period. Composition is an outcome measure, not a complete explanation of the personnel flows that created it.
What BLS faculty data actually shows
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported a $83,980 national median annual wage for postsecondary teachers in May 2024. The lowest 10% earned below $48,570, while the highest 10% earned above $199,520.
That range is exceptionally wide because “postsecondary teachers” includes many disciplines, institutions, appointment lengths, and academic ranks.
A professor in medicine, law, engineering, nursing, art, public health, or the humanities may face a different salary market. BLS data also combine institutions with different teaching loads, research expectations, and revenue structures.
The occupation is projected to grow 7% from 2024 to 2034, faster than the 3.1% total-employment growth projected by BLS over the same decade.
Growth does not mean equal demand across fields.
Johns Hopkins’ medical, public-health, engineering, and research emphasis gives it exposure to areas supported by healthcare demand and scientific funding. Yet faculty employment can also be constrained by grant availability, university budgets, clinical revenue, and federal policy.
The national projection is a baseline. It is not a Johns Hopkins hiring commitment.
Salary growth slowed nationally
AAUP’s preliminary 2025–26 Faculty Compensation Survey found that average salaries for full-time faculty members across all ranks increased 2.3%, following 3.8% increases in each of the prior two academic years. At private independent institutions, the preliminary 2025–26 increase was 1.5%.
The prior 2024–25 survey found that nominal average faculty salaries rose 3.8%, while inflation-adjusted salaries increased only 0.9% after a 2.9% rise in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Those figures provide industry context, not Johns Hopkins-specific raise data.
The AAUP survey measures averages across participating institutions. It does not establish the annual increase received by a Johns Hopkins faculty member, and its institution-level salary tables generally focus on full-time nonmedical instructional faculty. Medical faculty, which dominate the Johns Hopkins professorial count, can be excluded or treated differently in several national compensation datasets.
This creates a difficult comparison problem.
Johns Hopkins’ largest faculty segment is clinical medicine, while the most accessible national faculty salary products often center on nonmedical instructional positions. A broad salary average can therefore miss the defining feature of the Hopkins workforce.
Where the headcount number misleads
The figure of 3,700.15 full-time professorial faculty equivalents is real. It is not the total number of all Johns Hopkins employees, all faculty members, all instructors, or all people holding myJH access.
The report excludes several populations from that table or handles them separately:
- part-time faculty;
- nonprofessorial appointments;
- postdoctoral researchers;
- graduate teaching and research workers;
- staff employees;
- faculty paid outside the JHU system;
- faculty whose appointment does not fit the selected reporting definition.
The broader Johns Hopkins enterprise reportedly exceeds 70,000 employees, but that economic-impact figure combines the university and health system and cannot be compared directly with the faculty census.
Different source. Different denominator.
This is why a portal keyword such as myJH can be misleading in workforce analysis. The portal spans many populations whose employment terms, reporting systems, and labor markets are not interchangeable.
What the public data cannot establish
The faculty-composition report does not provide:
- faculty salary by demographic group;
- turnover or retention rates;
- application and selection rates;
- promotion success by demographic category;
- time from assistant to associate or full professor;
- department-level compensation;
- voluntary versus involuntary departures;
- a unified count of faculty across JHU and Johns Hopkins Medicine employment entities.
The AAUP salary report supplies national compensation context, but it does not fill those Hopkins-specific gaps. IPEDS improves comparability across universities, while using standardized categories that may not match how Johns Hopkins internally understands every appointment.
The available evidence is strongest on composition.
It shows where faculty were located, how representation changed, and how Johns Hopkins compared with selected peers. It does not explain every hiring, promotion, compensation, and retention process behind those outcomes.
Frequently asked questions
Is myJH a faculty employer?
No. It is an institutional portal.
How many full-time professors does Johns Hopkins have?
The 2024 faculty report counted 3,700.15 full-time professorial faculty equivalents in fall 2023. The fractional measure reflects the reporting method and is not a literal whole-person headcount.
What percentage of Johns Hopkins faculty are women?
Women represented 48.4% of all faculty and 44% of full-time professorial faculty in fall 2023.
Which Johns Hopkins school has the largest faculty group?
The School of Medicine’s clinical category, with 2,284.50 full-time professorial faculty equivalents in fall 2023.
How does Johns Hopkins compare with Ivy Plus universities?
Using fall 2022 IPEDS data, Johns Hopkins reported a higher share of women, Asian faculty, and Black faculty than the Ivy Plus aggregate. Its Hispanic or Latino share was lower.
What do postsecondary teachers earn nationally?
BLS reported a $83,980 median annual wage in May 2024, with the top 10% earning more than $199,520. Those figures are occupational averages, not Johns Hopkins salary bands.
Are faculty jobs expected to grow?
BLS projects 7% growth for postsecondary teachers from 2024 to 2034. The projection covers the national occupation and does not guarantee faculty expansion at Johns Hopkins.
The strongest conclusion is structural: Johns Hopkins has a faculty workforce dominated by clinical medicine, with improving overall representation but substantial differences among divisions and incomplete public data on salary, promotion, and retention.
