[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
research-article

Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of the Impact of Pre-College Computing Activities on Choices of Major

Published: 09 June 2016 Publication History

Abstract

A lack of diversity in the computing field has existed for several decades, and although female participation in computing remains low, outreach programs attempting to address the situation are now quite numerous. To begin to understand whether or not these past activities have had long-term impact, we conducted a systematic literature review. Upon discovering that longitudinal studies were lacking, we investigated whether undergraduate students believed that their participation in computing activities prior to college contributed to their decision to major in a computing field. From the 770 participants in the study, we discovered that approximately 20% of males and 24% of females who were required to participate in computing activities chose a computing or related major, but that males perceived that the activity had a greater affect on their decision (20%) than females (6.9%). Females who participated in an outreach activity were more likely to major in computing. Compared with females who chose to major in computing, females who did not were less likely to indicate that the majority of students participating in activities were boys and that they were a welcome part of the groups. Results also showed that female participants who do not ultimately major in computing have a much stronger negative perception of the outreach activities than male participants who also chose a non-computing major. Although many computing outreach activities are designed to diversify computing, it may be the case that, overall, boys receive these activities more favorably than girls, although requiring participation yields approximately the same net positive impact.

References

[1]
ACM-W. 2015. Home Page. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://women.acm.org/.
[2]
Bebras. 2015. Home Page. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.bebraschallenge.org/.
[3]
Lenore Blum and Carol Frieze. 2005. In a more balanced computer science environment, similarity is the difference and computer science is the winner. Computing Research News. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://archive.cra.org/CRN/articles/may05/blum.frieze.html.
[4]
Sarah Buhr. 2014. Girls Who Code expands to get more young women in computer science majors. TechCrunch. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/14/girls-who-code-expands-to-get-more-young-women-in-computer-science-majors/.
[5]
D. Campbell and J. Stanley. 1963. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Rand-McNally, Chicago, IL.
[6]
Code.org. 2015. Home Page. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.code.org.
[7]
Code Week Eu. 2015. Home Page. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://codeweek.eu/.
[8]
CompuGirls. 2015. COMPUGIRLS: Awakening Girls’ Passion for Social Justice and Technology. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from https://universitydesign.asu.edu/db/compugirls-awakening-girls2019-passion-for-social-justice-and-technology.
[9]
J. W. Creswell. 2008. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
[10]
Orpheus S. L. Crutchfield, Christopher D. Harrison, Guy Haas, Daniel D. Garcia, Sheila M. Humphreys, Colleen M. Lewis, and Peter Khooshabeh. 2011. Berkeley foundation for opportunities in information technology: A decade of broadening participation. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 11, 3, Article No. 15. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2037276.2037279.
[11]
Teresa Dahlberg, Tiffany Barnes, Kim Buch, and Audrey Rorrer. 2011. The STARS alliance: Viable strategies for broadening participation in computing. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 11, 3, Article No. 18. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2037276.2037282.
[12]
Peggy Doerschuk, Jiangjiang Liu, and Judith Mann. 2010. INSPIRED broadening participation in computing: Most successful strategies and lessons learned. In Proceedings of the 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. T2H1--T2H6. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=5673333.
[13]
Exploring Computer Science. 2015. Home Page. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.exploringcs.org/.
[14]
European Commission. 2014. Massively Expanded EU Code Week, 11--17 October 2014. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14--1117_en.htm.
[15]
Rachel Feltman. 2015. Gender gap: Women welcome in ‘hard working’ fields, but ‘genius’ fields are male-dominated, study finds. Washington Post. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/01/15/gender-gap-women-welcome-in-hard-working-fields-but-genius-fields-are-male-dominated-study-finds/.
[16]
Gary J. Gates. 2011. How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender? Williams Institute. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf.
[17]
GraphPad. 2015. Testing for Equivalence with confidence intervals or P values. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.graphpad.com/guides/prism/6/statistics/index.htm?stat_testing_for_equivalence_with_c.htm.
[18]
Mark Guzdial, Barbara J. Ericson, Tom McKlin, and Shelly Engelman. 2012. A statewide survey on computing education pathways and influences: Factors in broadening participation in computing. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’12). ACM, New York, NY, 143--150. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2361276.2361304.
[19]
Mark Guzdial, Barbara Ericson, Tom McKlin, and Shelly Engelman. 2014. Georgia computes! An intervention in a US state, with formal and informal education in a policy context. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 14, 2, Article No. 13. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2602488.
[20]
Phil Johnson. 2015. Female programmers are less confident than male programmers. IT World. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.itworld.com/article/2867838/article.html.
[21]
Khalid S. Khan, Regina Kunz, Jos Kleijnen, and Gerd Antes. 2003. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 96, 3, 118--121. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539417/.
[22]
Maria Klawe. 2015. MOOCs aim to strengthen computer science and physics teaching in middle and high schools. Forbes. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/mariaklawe/2015/01/13/moocs-aim-to-strengthen-computer-science-and-physics-teaching-in-middle-and-high-schools/.
[23]
Selena Larson. 2014. Why so few women are studying computer science. Readwrite.com. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://readwrite.com/2014/09/02/women-in-computer-science-why-so-few.
[24]
Carrie Liston, Karen Peterson, and Vicky Ragan. 2008. Evaluating Promising Practices in Informal Information Technology (IT) Education for Girls. Phase III: Women in IT—Survey Results. Available at https://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/resources/ncwit-gsusaphaseiiireport_final.pdf.
[25]
Mark Hugo Lopez and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera. 2014. Women's college enrollment gains leave men behind. Pew Research Center. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/womens-college-enrollment-gains-leave-men-behind/.
[26]
Jane Margolis. 2008. Stuck in the Shallow End. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
[27]
Elizabeth Martin. 2006. Survey Questionnaire Construction. Research Report Series (Survey Methodology #2006-13). Available at https://www.census.gov/srd/papers/pdf/rsm2006-13.pdf.
[28]
Monica M. McGill, Adrienne Decker, and Amber Settle. 2015. Does outreach impact choices of major for underrepresented undergraduate students? In Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’15). ACM, New York, NY.
[29]
Alvarado E. Monge, Cameron L. Fadjo, Beth A. Quinn, and Lecia J. Barker. 2015. EngageCSEdu. ACM Inroads 6, 1.
[30]
Alison Derbenwick Miller. 2014. Transforming the conversation on women in computer science. TechCrunch. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/20/transforming-the-conversation-on-women-in-computer-science/.
[31]
National Center for Women and Information Technology. 2015. Home Page. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from https://www.ncwit.org/.
[32]
National Public Radio. 2014. Planet Money: When Women Stopped Coding. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding.
[33]
National Science Foundation. 2011. Science and Engineering Degrees: 1966--2010. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/content.cfm?pub_id=4266&id==2.
[34]
National Science Foundation. 2013. Increasing Accessibility to Computer Science Education Across the U.S. Retrieved April 26, 2016 from http://www.nsf.gov/mobile/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=129882.
[35]
Linda J. Sax, Shannon K. Gilmartin, and Alyssa N. Bryant. 2003. Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in Web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education 44, 4, 409--432.
[36]
C. Simard, C. Stephenson, and D. Kosaraju. 2010. Addressing core equity issues in K-12 computer science education: Identifying barriers and sharing strategies. Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.csta.acm.org/Communications/sub/DocsPresentationFiles/ABI-CSTAEquityFinal.pdf.
[37]
Jennifer Wang, Hai Hong, Jason Ravitz, and Marielena Ivory. 2015. Gender differences in factors influencing pursuit of computer science and related fields. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’15). ACM, New York, NY, 117--122.
[38]
S. Wellek. 2002. Testing Statistical Hypotheses of Equivalence. Chapman & Hall, London, England.
[39]
P. Wessa. 2014. Chi-Squared Test, McNemar Test, and Fisher Exact Test (v1.0.8) in Free Statistics Software (v1.1.23-r7). Office for Research Development and Education. Retrieved April 26, 2016, from http://www.wessa.net/rwasp_chi_squared_tests.wasp/.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Reaching Black Women Interested in Computing: The Importance of Organizational TiesProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3626252.3630914(151-157)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
  • (2024)Empfehlungen für gendersensible MINT-Angebote für Schülerinnen am Beispiel der SchweizTeaching Gender in MINT in der Pandemie10.1007/978-3-658-43375-8_5(97-128)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
  • (2023)Why Women Go ElsewhereHandbook of Research on Exploring Gender Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Through an Intersectional Lens10.4018/978-1-6684-8412-8.ch015(311-329)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of the Impact of Pre-College Computing Activities on Choices of Major

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Transactions on Computing Education
    ACM Transactions on Computing Education  Volume 16, Issue 4
    October 2016
    120 pages
    EISSN:1946-6226
    DOI:10.1145/2954340
    Issue’s Table of Contents
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 09 June 2016
    Accepted: 01 February 2016
    Revised: 01 January 2016
    Received: 01 February 2015
    Published in TOCE Volume 16, Issue 4

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Education
    2. computing outreach
    3. diversity
    4. gender
    5. pipeline

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)43
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
    Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Reaching Black Women Interested in Computing: The Importance of Organizational TiesProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3626252.3630914(151-157)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
    • (2024)Empfehlungen für gendersensible MINT-Angebote für Schülerinnen am Beispiel der SchweizTeaching Gender in MINT in der Pandemie10.1007/978-3-658-43375-8_5(97-128)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
    • (2023)Why Women Go ElsewhereHandbook of Research on Exploring Gender Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Through an Intersectional Lens10.4018/978-1-6684-8412-8.ch015(311-329)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2023
    • (2023)Pre-College Computing Experiences: Lessons Learned from Expansive and Inclusive Options in Surveys2023 Conference on Research in Equitable and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT)10.1109/RESPECT60069.2023.00033(137-141)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2023
    • (2022)CONVERSATIONS: Conversation with a prominent propagatorACM Inroads10.1145/352404513:2(14-18)Online publication date: 17-May-2022
    • (2022)A Decade of Demographics in Computing Education Research: A Critical Review of Trends in Collection, Reporting, and UseProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3501385.3543967(323-343)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2022
    • (2022)A Sociocultural Perspective on Computer Science Capital and Its Pedagogical Implications in Computer Science EducationACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/348705222:4(1-23)Online publication date: 15-Sep-2022
    • (2020)Light-weight student-driven workshops for positive attitude change towards programming in early collegeJournal of Computing Sciences in Colleges10.5555/3417626.341763235:7(61-73)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2020
    • (2020)Computer science club for girls and boys – a survey study on gender differencesComputer Science Education10.1080/08993408.2020.183241231:4(431-461)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2020
    • (2019)Student perceptions of computing and computing majorsJournal of Computing Sciences in Colleges10.5555/3306465.330647134:3(22-30)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2019
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    Full Access

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media