Representation of women in CS: how do we measure a program's success?

ABSTRACT

This paper presents an analysis of the data on representation of women in US liberal arts computer science departments, using 10 years' worth of IPEDS data. What began as a search for departments with exemplary representation ended with the conclusion that the representation data is too unstable to be a useful measure of success: The correlation between average representation values in consecutive five-year periods is small, only r=0.156, and not significantly different from zero (p=0.143, t=1.477) for this set of institutions. Other metrics and sample populations are considered with similar results. This result has important implications for studies assessing the impact of departmental interventions on the representation of women, as well as research on the factors that influence representation.

REFERENCES

• 1: Integrated postsecondary education data system. http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/. Last checked August 2008.
• 2: Antonio M. Lopez, Jr. , Marguerite S. Giguette , Lisa J. Schulte, Large dataset offers view of math and computer self-efficacy among computer science undergraduates, Proceedings of the 44th annual Southeast regional conference, March 10-12, 2006, Melbourne, Florida [doi>10.1145/1185448.1185484]
• 3: Antonio M. Lopez, Jr. , Lisa J. Schulte, African American women in the computing sciences: a group to be studied, Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, February 27-March 03, 2002, Cincinnati, Kentucky
• 4: Antonio M. Lopez, Jr. , Lisa J. Schulte , Marguerite S. Giguette, Climbing onto the shoulders of giants, Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, February 23-27, 2005, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
• 5: C. Ashcraft and A. Breitzman. Who invents IT? an analysis of women's participation in information technology patenting. Technical report, The National Center for Women & Information Technology, December 2006.
• 6: Jon Beck, Forming a women's computer science support group, Proceedings of the 38th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 07-11, 2007, Covington, Kentucky, USA
• 7: GianMario Besana , Lucia Dettori, Together is better: strengthening the confidence of women in computer science via a learning community, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, v.19 n.5, p.130-139, May 2004
• 8: Sylvia Beyer , Kristina Rynes , Julie Perrault , Kelly Hay , Susan Haller, Gender differences in computer science students, Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, February 19-23, 2003, Reno, Navada, USA
• 9: Valerie A. Clarke , G. Joy Teague, A psychological perspective on gender differences in computing participation, Proceedings of the twenty-fifth SIGCSE symposium on Computer science education, p.258-262, March 10-12, 1994, Phoenix, Arizona, United States
• 10: J. McGrath Cohoon, Toward improving female retention in the computer science major, Communications of the ACM, v.44 n.5, p.108-114, May 2001 [doi>10.1145/374308.374367]
• 11: J. McGrath Cohoon, Must there be so few?: including women in CS, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, May 03-10, 2003, Portland, Oregon
• 12: Marcia Seivert Entwistle, Augustana women in computer science (AWCS): a program to encourage women in the pursuit of technical education and careers, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, v.17 n.5, p.206-215, April 2002
• 13: Carol Frieze , Lenore Blum, Building an effective computer science student organization: the Carnegie Mellon women@SCS action plan, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.34 n.2, June 2002 [doi>10.1145/543812.543835]
• 14: Sandy Graham , Celine Latulipe, CS girls rock: sparking interest in computer science and debunking the stereotypes, Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, February 19-23, 2003, Reno, Navada, USA
• 15: Denise Gürer , Tracy Camp, An ACM-W literature review on women in computing, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.34 n.2, June 2002 [doi>10.1145/543812.543844]
• 16: Kathy Howell, The experience of women in undergraduate computer science: what does the research say?, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.25 n.2, p.1-8, June 1993 [doi>10.1145/152751.152752]
• 17: Sandra Katz , David Allbritton , John Aronis , Christine Wilson , Mary Lou Soffa, Gender, achievement, and persistence in an undergraduate computer science program, ACM SIGMIS Database, v.37 n.4, Fall 2006 [doi>10.1145/1185335.1185344]
• 18: Mei-Ling Liu , Lori Blanc, On the retention of female computer science students, Proceedings of the twenty-seventh SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, p.32-36, February 15-17, 1996, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
• 19: J. Margolis and A. Fisher. Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing MIT Press, 2002.
• 20: Lisa Meeden , Tia Newhall , Doug Blank , Deepak Kumar, Using departmental surveys to assess computing culture: quantifying gender differences in the classroom, Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, June 30-July 02, 2003, Thessaloniki, Greece
• 21: Laurie Murphy , Brad Richards , Renée McCauley , Briana B. Morrison , Suzanne Westbrook , Timothy Fossum, Women catch up: gender differences in learning programming concepts, Proceedings of the 37th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 03-05, 2006, Houston, Texas, USA
• 22: Joan Peckham , Lisa L. Harlow , David A. Stuart , Barbara Silver , Helen Mederer , Peter D. Stephenson, Broadening participation in computing: issues and challenges, Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, June 25-27, 2007, Dundee, Scotland
• 23: Lauren Rich , Heather Perry , Mark Guzdial, A CS1 course designed to address interests of women, Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 03-07, 2004, Norfolk, Virginia, USA
• 24: Eric S. Roberts , Marina Kassianidou , Lilly Irani, Encouraging women in computer science, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.34 n.2, June 2002 [doi>10.1145/543812.543837]
• 25: Greg Scragg , Jesse Smith, A study of barriers to women in undergraduate computer science., Proceedings of the twenty-ninth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, p.82-86, February 26-March 01, 1998, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
• 26: Linda Selby , Ken Ryba , Alison Young, Women in computing: what does the data show?, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.30 n.4, p.62-67, Dec. 1998 [doi>10.1145/306286.306318]
• 27: Joy Teague, A structured review of reasons for the underrepresentation of women in computing, Proceedings of the 2nd Australasian conference on Computer science education, p.91-98, July 1997, The Univ. of Melbourne, Australia [doi>10.1145/299359.299374]
• 28: B. C. Wilson. A study of factors promoting success in computer science including gender differences. Computer Science Education 12(1 & 2):141--164, March 2002.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.3 COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
      K.3.2 Computer and Information Science Education
          Subjects: Computer science education

General Terms:
Human Factors, Measurement

Keywords:
correlation, representation, undergraduate education, women in computing