Archive for September 15, 2017
British girls “logging off” from CS: What’s the real problem?
The BBC reports (in the article linked below) that the “revolution in computing education has stalled.” The data from England (including the Roehampton Report, discussed in this blog post) do back up that claim — see the quotes at the bottom.
In this post, I’m reflecting on the response from the British Computer Society. “We need to do more with the curriculum to show it’s not just a nerdy boys’ subject. We’ve got to show them it’s about real problems like climate change and improving healthcare.” There are some interesting assumptions and warrants in these statements. Do girls avoid CS because they think it’s a boys’ subject, or because it’s not about real problems? How does the curriculum “show” that it is (or isn’t) a “nerdy boys’ subject”? If the curriculum emphasized “real problems,” would it no longer be a “nerdy boys’ subject”? Are these at all connected? Would making CS be like “climate change and improving healthcare” attract more female students?
First, I’d like to know if the girls choosing ICT over CS are actually saying that it’s because CS is “a nerdy boys’ subject,” and if the girls know anything about the curriculum in CS. In our research, we found that high school students know very little about what actually happens in undergraduate CS, and undergraduate students in CS don’t even know what’s in their next semester’s classes. Changing the curriculum doesn’t do much good if the girls’ decisions are being made without knowing about the curriculum. The former claim, that CS is perceived by girls as a “nerdy boys’ subject,” is well-supported in the literature. But is that the main reason why the girls aren’t enrolling?
Do we know that this a curriculum issue at all? The evidence suggests that there are other likely reasons.
- Maybe it’s not the curriculum’s “problem” focus, but the “learning objective” focus. Do the girls percieve that the point of the course is to become part of the Tech industry as a professional programmer? Maybe girls are more interested in broadening their potential careers and not limiting their options to IT? ICT can be used anywhere. CS might be perceived as being about being a software developer.
- Are the girls seeing mass media depictions of programming and deciding that it’s not for them? A 2016 ICER paper by Colleen Lewis, Ruth Anderson, and Ken Yasuhara explored the reasons why students might not feel that they have a good “fit” with CS (see ACM paper link here). But are those the reasons why women might not even try CS? Maybe they have had experiences with programming and decided that they didn’t fit? Or maybe the decided that syntax errors and unit tests are just tedious and boring?
- Are the girls seeing mass media depictions of the Tech industry and deciding that they’d rather not be a Googler or work at Uber? They are probably hearing about things like the Damore memo at Google. Whether they think he’s right or not, maybe girls are saying that they just don’t want to bother.
- Do the girls have more choices, and CS is simply less attractive in comparison? It may be that girls know that CS is about solving real problems, but they’d rather solve real problems in law, medicine, or business.
- Do the girls perceive that wages are not rising in the Tech industry? Or do the girls perceive that they can make more money (perhaps with fewer negative connotations) as a lawyer, doctor, or businessperson?
I have heard from some colleagues in England that the real problem is a lack of teachers. I can believe that having too few teachers does contribute to the problem, but that raises the same questions at another level. Why don’t teachers teach computer science? Is it because they don’t want to be in the position of being “vocational education,” simply preparing software developers? Or are teachers deciding that they are dis-interested in software development, for themselves or for their students? Or are the teachers looking at other areas of critical need for teachers and decide that CS is less attractive?
Bottom line is that we know too little, in the UK or in the US (see Generation CS), about what is influencing student and teacher decisions to pursue or to avoid classes in computing. The reality doesn’t matter here — people make decisions based on their perceptions.
In England, entries for the new computer science GCSE, which is supposed to replace ICT, rose modestly from 60,521 in 2016 to 64,159 this year. Girls accounted for just 20% of entries, and the proportion was a tiny bit lower than last year.
ICT entries fell from 84,120 to 73,099, which you would expect as the subject is disappearing from the national curriculum. But it had proved more attractive to girls. Even there, the proportion of female entries fell from 41% to 39%.
Combine the two subjects, and you find that the number studying either subject has fallen by over 7,000 in the past year. Back in 2015 more than 47,000 girls were getting some kind of computing qualification, and that has fallen to about 41,000 – just 30% of the total.
Recent Comments