| Course | MSW 549 Structural Inequality in Race, Class, and Gender |
|---|---|
| Week | 5 |
| Paper type | Pay gap analysis |
| Length | About 540 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | Master of Social Work (MSW) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MSW 549 Week 5
Pay Gap Analysis With Both Figures on the First Page: Women's Hourly Wages at 79.3 Percent of Men's Before Controls and 91.6 Percent After, the Control List Printed, Where Each Control Came From and What the Remainder Is Worth
Student Name
Chamberlain University
MSW 549: Structural Inequality in Race, Class, and Gender
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Pay Gap Analysis With Both Figures on the First Page: Women's Hourly Wages at 79.3 Percent of Men's Before Controls and 91.6 Percent After, the Control List Printed, Where Each Control Came From and What the Remainder Is Worth
Both Figures
In 2010 data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, women's average hourly wages were 79.3 percent of men's. After adjusting for the full set of measured characteristics, the ratio was 91.6 percent (Blau & Kahn, 2017). Both figures come from the same study, sample and year.
The Control List, Printed
The human capital specification controls for education, years of actual labor market experience, race and ethnicity in four categories, three Census regions and metropolitan residence. With these controls, the ratio was 82.1 percent. The full specification adds 14 industry categories, 20 occupation categories, government employment and union coverage. The study did not control for marital status or children.
Controls Have Histories
Occupation and industry explain the largest share of the gap. But these controls are not neutral. Occupational sorting reflects which jobs women were steered toward, which were open to them and which are compatible with care for children. Experience reflects years out of work for caregiving. Controlling for occupation removes from the "unexplained" part a difference that may itself be shaped by discrimination or by unequal care work. The adjusted figure therefore measures the gap among people already in the same jobs, not the gap that discrimination could have produced.
An example makes the point. If women were channeled into lower-paid occupations, controlling for occupation treats that channeling as a neutral difference between workers. The adjusted gap then looks small precisely because the occupational difference has been counted as explained.
What a Remainder Is Worth
The 8.4-point gap left after the full controls is not proof of discrimination. It is what the measured factors do not account for, which may include unmeasured skills, preferences or discrimination. The authors note that the unexplained gap stopped shrinking after the 1980s.
Instruments You Can Point At
Several mechanisms act on the controls themselves. Salary history bans, such as California's law barring employers from asking applicants about past pay, stop a starting salary from carrying forward a past gap. Pay transparency laws require employers to post pay ranges. The federal Equal Pay Act of 1963 bars paying women less than men for jobs that demand equal skill, effort and responsibility at the same workplace.
Each of these acts on a step in the chain, the starting offer, the posted range or pay for the same job, rather than on the gap as a whole, which is why they can be evaluated one at a time.
What the Analysis Shows
The raw gap is what women earn; the adjusted gap is what remains after accepting where women work. Both are true, and a policy aimed only at the remainder would leave most of the raw gap untouched.
References
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2017). The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(3), 789-865. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20160995
MSW 549 Week 5 instructions, in plain terms
The pay gap analysis reports two figures together: the raw gap across workers and the gap remaining after controls, both from the same source, population and year. Print the control list in full, because what is controlled determines what is left. Explain where each major control comes from, such as occupational sorting or years out of work for caregiving, and how controlling for it may remove part of a difference that discrimination shaped. Treat any remaining gap as unexplained, not as proof of discrimination. Name instruments that act on particular steps, such as salary history bans. Avoid hours explained as preference without a source, and avoid advice on asking for a raise. Give the year and population for both figures.
How this MSW 549 Week 5 example is built
The figures section reports 79.3 and 91.6 percent from Panel Study of Income Dynamics data for 2010, citing Blau and Kahn (2017). The control section prints the human capital specification and its 82.1 percent, then the full specification's added industry, occupation, government and union controls, and notes no controls for marital status or children. The histories section explains how occupational sorting and caregiving shape the controls, with an example. The remainder section calls the 8.4-point gap unexplained and notes it stopped narrowing after the 1980s. The instruments section names salary history bans, pay transparency laws and the Equal Pay Act. The final section separates raw and adjusted gaps.
Reading the MSW 549 Week 5 grading rubric
Markers look for both figures printed together from one source. A paper that reports only the adjusted figure, presented as the real gap, loses the most. Credit goes to both figures with their source and population, the control list printed, histories given for major controls, the remainder labeled unexplained and instruments named. Calling the remainder discrimination without a named route loses marks. One APA citation for the study is enough if both figures come from it. Figures taken from studies of different populations and set side by side are penalized because the comparison cannot be checked. Explaining how a control can absorb part of a discriminatory difference shows real understanding of the method.
MSW 549 Week 5 help from the desk
Pay gap papers most often slip by reporting one figure and treating it as the whole story. Another frequent gap is a control list summarized rather than printed, so the reader cannot see what was removed. Some papers treat women's hours as a choice without evidence. Others combine figures from different surveys. If your source reports several specifications, print each with its figure. A paper that shows how the adjusted gap depends on which differences are counted as explained helps a reader understand why both numbers are true. Copy the control list from the study's methods section, then explain the two or three controls that matter most.
Get a MSW-549 Week 5 example written to your instructions
Send the assignment sheet with any required source, and say whether your section fixed the comparison or left the choice open. A custom analysis gets written with both figures reported, the control list printed in full and every control traced back to something documented. It reaches you inside 24 to 48 hours and the first example is free.
More MSW 549 papers and MSW samples
- MSW 549 Week 1: The Rescission Test Post
- MSW 549 Week 2: SSI Resource Limit Mechanism Paper
- MSW 549 Week 3: Wichita Redlining Case Study
- MSW 549 Week 4: Racial Wealth Gap Write-Up
- MSW 549 Week 6: Intersectional Case Analysis
- MSW 549 Week 7: School Funding Analysis
- MSW 549 Week 8: Structural Analysis Paper
- MSW 553 Week 5: Explanatory Power Write-Up
- MSW 548 Week 5: Unemployment Financing Comparison
- MSW 554 Week 5: Family Meeting Facilitation Plan
- MSW 547 Week 5: Code Application to a Closure Order
MSW 549 Week 5 questions, answered
Which figure should the analysis lead with?
Lead with the uncontrolled one and introduce the controlled figure as an answer to a narrower question, because that ordering matches how the two are produced. Opening on the controlled number leaves a reader assuming it is the true measure and the other an exaggeration. Whichever order your section requires, the example states in one sentence what each figure is a measure of.
Does the analysis have to cover one occupation or the whole workforce?
Both are workable and they answer different questions. A single occupation lets you name the actual pay rules, the ladder, the premium, the posted range, which usually produces the stronger paper. A whole workforce lets you show occupational segregation doing its work. Sections that leave the choice open tend to reward the narrower one, since it can be evidenced from documents rather than from national tables.
Is it acceptable to end with a difference the analysis cannot explain?
Yes, so long as the paper names the measures it could not obtain. A remainder reported alongside the variables nobody had data for, and alongside the evidence that would shrink it further, is a real result. A remainder handed a name it has not earned is not, and markers on this course are consistently harder on the overclaim than on an honest hole in the evidence.
Where can I find a free MSW 549 Week 5 sample paper?
This page holds the complete MSW 549 Week 5 pay gap analysis with the raw and adjusted figures and the full control list.
What is the remainder worth in the MSW 549 Week 5 sample?
The 8.4-point gap left after all controls is unexplained, not proof of discrimination; it may include unmeasured skills, preferences or discrimination, and it stopped narrowing after the 1980s.