Posts tagged ‘BPC’
A useful report when trying to make an argument for the importance of Broadening Participation in Computing efforts:
Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering provides statistical information about the participation of these three groups in science and engineering education and employment. Its primary purpose is to serve as a statistical abstract with no endorsement of or recommendations about policies or programs. National Science Foundation reporting on this topic is mandated by the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (Public Law 96-516).This digest highlights key statistics drawn from a wide variety of data sources. Data and figures in this digest are organized into five topical areas—enrollment, field of degree, occupation, employment status, and early career doctorate holders.
Code.org just blogged that we have set a record in the number of BS in CS graduates.
University CS graduates have set a new record, finally surpassing the number of degrees earned 14 years ago.With a 15% increase in computer science graduates (49,291 bachelor’s degrees), 2015 had the largest number of CS graduates EVER! The previous high point was over a decade ago, in 2003.
But look at the female numbers there — they are less than what they were in 2003. We are graduating 2/3 as many women today as in 2003. (Thanks to Bobby Schnabel for pointing this out.) We have lost ground.
My most recent Blog@CACM is on the new CRA “Generation CS” report, and about the impacts the rise in enrollment are having on diversity. One of the positive messages in this report is that departments that have worked to improve their diversity have been successful. As a national statistic, this doesn’t feel like a celebration when CS is becoming less diverse in just 12 years.
Sepehr Vakil appointed first Associate Director of Equity and Inclusion in STEM Education at U. Texas-Austin
I just met Sepehr at an ECEP planning meeting. Exciting to meet another CS Ed faculty in an Education school! He won the Yamashita Prize at Berkeley in 2015 for his STEM activism.
Dr. Vakil’s research revolves around the intersection of equity and the teaching and learning of STEM, particularly in computer science and technology. This focus has led Dr. Vakil to conduct participatory design research projects in several contexts. These efforts include founding and directing the Oakland Science and Mathematics Outreach (OSMO) program—an after school program serving youth of color in the city of Oakland. Dr. Vakil also has experience teaching and conducting research within public schools. During graduate school, he co-taught Introductory Computer Science Courses for 3 years in the Oakland Unified and Berkeley Unified School Districts. As part of a university-research collaboration between UC Berkeley and the Oakland Unified School District, he worked with students and teachers in the Computer Science and Technology Academy at Oakland Technical High School to design an after school racial justice organization named SPOCN (Supporting People of Color Now!) Dr. Vakil’s work at the intersection of equity, STEM, and urban education has also led to publications in prestigious journals such as Cognition & Instruction, Equity and Excellence in Education, and the Journal of the Learning Sciences.
Following up on the brief that Google did last month on Blacks in CS, this month they’ve prepared a brief on the state of girls in CS.
Computer science (CS) education is critical in preparing students for the future. CS education not only gives students the skills they need to succeed in the workforce, but it also fosters critical thinking, creativity, and innovation. Women make up half the U.S. college-educated workforce, yet only 25% of computing professionals. This summary highlights the state of CS education for girls in 7th–12th grade during 2015–16. Girls are less likely than boys to be aware of and encouraged to pursue CS learning opportunities. Girls are also less likely to express interest in and confidence in learning CS.
Expanding the Pipeline: Characteristics of Male and Female Prospective Computer Science Majors – Examining Four Decades of Changes – CRN
Interesting report from CRA that offers a nuanced view about gender differences in goals for STEM education and how those interact with pursuing a degree in CS.
Another example of a variable becoming more salient over time relates to one’s scientific orientation. Students of either gender who express a stronger commitment to making a “theoretical contribution to science” are more likely to pursue a computer science major, but over time this variable has become a significantly stronger predictor for women while remaining a steady predictor for men. In other words, it is increasingly the case that computer science attracts women who see themselves as committed to scientific inquiry. While at face value that seems like positive news for the field of computer science, the fact is that women are much less likely than men to report having a strong scientific orientation upon entering college; thus, many potential female computing majors may be deterred from the field if they simply don’t “see” themselves as the scientific type.
Still, there is some positive news when it comes to attracting women to computing. The first relates to the role of mathematical self-concept. Specifically, even though women rate their math abilities lower than men do—and perceptions of one’s math ability is one of the strongest predictors of a major in computer science—the fact is that the importance of mathematical self-concept in determining who will pursue computer science has weakened over time. Thus, despite the fact that women tend to have lower math confidence than men do, this differential has become less consequential over time in determining who will major in computer science.
There was interest in our slides from the 2017 SIGCSE Panel, “The Role of CS Departments in The US President’s “CS for All” Initiative.” They are linked above, and summarized below.
In January 2016, US President Barack Obama started an initiative to provide CS for All – with the goal that all school students should have access to computing education. Computing departments in higher education have a particularly important role to play in this initiative. It’s in our best interest to get involved, since the effort can potentially improve the quality of our incoming students. CS Departments have unique insights as subject-matter experts to inform the development of standards. We can provide leadership to inform and influence education policy. In this session, we will present a variety of ways in which departments and faculty can support CS for All and will answer audience questions about the initiative. Our goal is to provide concrete positive actions for faculty.
Barbara Ericson spoke on influencing our incoming students and using outreach to improve the number and diversity of students and to improve the number and quality of teachers.
Rick Adrion spoke on CS faculty providing subject-matter expertise to standards efforts. A key role for CS faculty is to help teachers, administrators, and public policy makers to understand what CS is.
Megean Garvin spoke on how CS faculty can provide a leadership role. Faculty have a particular privileged position to draw together diverse stakeholders to advance CS Education.
Carol Frieze and Jeria Quesenberry’s book on women in computing at CMU, Kicking butt in computer science, has been in my Kindle archive for several months now. Dan Zingaro’s review in this month’s ACM Inroads is moving it up my to-read queue.
For me, the edgy title of the book promised a fiery romp through the halls of Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), wherein the stories of butt-kicking women in computer science (CS) are told. Anecdotes of successful women in CS, chronicles of their rise to butt-kicking status—this is what I expected. This is not what I got. What I got was more useful—a careful academic treatise of women in CS at CMU, and a cache of food-for-thought for anyone hoping to improve the women and computer science (women-CS) fit at their schools.
The book’s thesis is simple, if contentious—a focus on gender differences does not work; a focus on culture does.
Source: ACM Inroads: Archive