Changes in CS Students’ Attitudes Towards CS over Time: An Examination of Gender Differences Sylvia Beyer, Michelle DeKeuster, Kathleen Walter, Michelle Colar, Christina Holcomb University of Wisconsin-Parkside 900 Wood Road Kenosha, WI 53141 262 595-2353
[email protected] pipeline of women majoring in CS needs to widen in order to increase the number of women working in CS-related fields. An increased presence of women in CS is imperative if the field wants to benefit from women’s special skills and perspectives. We cannot afford to underutilize such a valuable and significant part of our workforce.
ABSTRACT Few women major in Computer Science (CS), which creates a serious bottleneck of women qualified to enter into the CS workforce. To address this bottleneck, this study examines gender issues in CS education. We assessed whether gender differences in CS students’ stereotypes of CS and attitudes towards CS classes and the CS program remain stable from one semester to the next. We found that gender differences in CS students are not temporally stable and conclude that one-time assessments of gender differences may lead to erroneous conclusions. We also found that concerns about future work-family conflicts and gender issues in the CS program (e.g., female CS students feeling that they are not being taken as seriously as male CS students) emerged as important concerns for female CS students.0The implications of these findings for increasing the representation of women in CS are discussed.
Why do so few women choose to major in CS? We have addressed three reasons for the small number of women majoring in CS in previous publications [1][3][4]. They include low computer confidence, lack of programming and hands-on computer experience, and negative stereotypes regarding the field. We have found similar results for another computer-related field, Management Information Systems (MIS) [1]. In this paper we will examine the stability of gender differences in CS students’ attitudes towards CS over time. That is, we will compare CS students’ attitudes towards CS in one semester to their attitudes in the following semester. We are especially interested in elucidating whether gender differences in attitudes towards CS remain stable over this time course. Rather than assuming that gender differences assessed at one point in time are set in stone, we propose that they might be fairly fluid: Gender differences in attitudes towards CS that are present when students take their first CS class might be augmented, reduced, or even disappear as students take more advanced CS courses. On the other hand, some differences in attitudes between men and women might not even emerge until students are more advanced in their major. We are not aware of research on CS that has empirically addressed this question. In our research on students in MIS we did find evidence that gender differences in attitudes towards MIS do not remain stable from one semester to the next [2].
Categories and Subject Descriptors K. 3 [Computers & Education]: Computer & Information Science Education – Computer Science Education.
General Terms Measurement, Experimentation, Theory.
Keywords Gender and CS, Gender Differences, Stereotyping, Attitudes towards CS.
1. INTRODUCTION This paper examines issues surrounding the question of why there are so few women in Computer Science (CS). We take the position that although structural barriers exist that keep women from advancement in CS careers, the dearth of women in the CS workforce is foremost a pipeline issue (cf. [5]). The most recent available statistics indicate that only 27.7% of Bachelor’s degrees in CS are conferred on women [12]. This severely restricts the number of women qualified to enter into the CS workforce. The
We believe that an examination of the temporal stability of gender differences is long overdue. If students’ attitudes towards CS change as they progress in the major, and especially if gender differences in attitudes change over time, one-time assessments of students’ attitudes might lead to erroneous conclusions. This could lead to premature recommendations for intervention. For example, an assessment of attitudes towards CS in the first required CS course might reveal large gender differences (e.g., male students having much more positive attitudes towards computers). This could prompt calls for intervention to increase the representation of women in CS. However, if gender differences in attitudes towards CS decrease over time, such interventions may not be necessary. On the other hand, if gender differences in attitudes remain stable or are augmented with time,
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. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. SIGCSE’05, February 23–27, 2005, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. Copyright 2005 ACM 1-58113-997-7/05/0002...$5.00.
392
this would indicate that intervention might be advisable to increase women’s representation in CS. Thus, our results might have important policy implications.
questions in surveys sent out in different semesters. Please note that when we refer to “CS students”, we mean both CS majors and non-majors. If the results apply only to either CS majors or nonmajors, we explicitly state that.
2. METHOD
3.1 Demographic Variables
This research was conducted at the University of WisconsinParkside, a small public university. In an initial assessment, 234 (81 females, 153 males) students enrolled in CS courses in 2001, 2002, or Spring 2003 returned our initial surveys. In a subsequent semester 94 (39 females, 55 males) of these students also responded to a follow-up survey. Thus, 48.1% of women who participated in our initial assessment completed the follow-up compared to 35.9% of men. (It has been our experience that women’s response rates are higher than men’s.) In this paper, we are reporting on only the 94 students who provided information at both the initial assessment and the follow-up. Thus, the comparison of initial responses to follow-up responses is based on the same students.
The sample consisted of 80.9% Caucasian, 5.3% Asian, 3.2% African American, and 3.2% Hispanic students, with 7.4% choosing not to identify their race. Fifty-six students were CS majors and 38 students were taking a computer literacy course not intended for CS majors (referred to as non-majors).
3.2 Experience with, and Attitudes towards, Computers Female students were somewhat older than male students when they first became interested in CS, F(1, 55) = 3.60, p = .06. They were much less likely than male students to have installed RAM into a computer, F(1, 91) = 23.15, p = .0001.
We surveyed two types of CS students: CS majors enrolled in CS1 and students enrolled in computer literacy courses not intended for CS majors. For simplicity we refer to students in these two CS course types as CS “majors” and “non-majors”, respectively.
Males had significantly more confidence in their ability to teach someone to use a computer software package than women at both assessment times, F(1, 91) = 9.06, p = .003. We found a significant interaction between time, major, and gender in students’ belief that computers are fun, F(1, 85) = 5.87, p = .02. Female non-majors and male majors increasingly felt that computers are fun, while female majors and male non-majors felt computers were less fun at the follow-up than at the initial assessment.
Students received $2 to fill out questionnaires assessing (among other variables not discussed here) their experience with and attitudes towards computers; stereotypes of CS; and attitudes towards CS courses and the program. We used a combination of existing instruments and items created specifically for our research. Following is a description of those items on which we report in the Results section.
These results suggest that female students have less computer experience, develop an interest in computers later, and have less confidence in their ability to teach computer skills to others. For these variables no effects of time were found. Gender differences remained stable from one semester to the next. For example, the experience gap in installing RAM did not narrow over time. However, female majors’ and male non-majors’ attitude towards computers as fun became more negative with time.
We constructed our own “Stereotypes of CS” scale by having students rate the personality characteristics of students majoring in CS. We used individual items from the Role Conflict Scale [7] to assess students’ opinions of the compatibility of work and family for women in CS. We asked questions measuring students’ general attitudes towards CS courses and the program (e.g., “the choice of CS courses here is too limited”, “Female CS students are not taken seriously by male faculty”).
3.3 Stereotypes of CS
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.3.1 Work-Family Issues
To understand gender differences in CS students over time, we performed 2 (student gender: female versus male) x 2 (major status: CS major versus non-major) x 2 (assessment time: initial assessment versus follow-up assessment one semester later) repeated measures analyses. Student gender and major status were between-subjects variables, whereas assessment time was withinsubjects.
Over time students became more convinced that female computer scientists who take time off to have children will never catch up again, F(1, 91) = 9.80, p = .002, and that it is difficult for a woman to combine a career as a computer scientist with family life, F(1, 91) = 8.55, p = .004. Female students estimated higher starting salaries than did male students at both times, F(1, 91) = 4.48, p = .04. However, they also estimated longer work hours than did male students at both times, F(1, 91) = 16.73, p = .0001.
Table 1 gives the means for the analyses. Because the issue of interest for this paper is gender, we will not report on significant main effects of major status. Significant interactions between gender and major status will of course be noted. Differences in N are either due to missing values or the addition or deletion of
393
SELECTED VARIABLES Age when I first became interested in CS
Initial assessment Non-CS Majors CS Majors Women Men Women Men 18.3 14.0 20.4 17.3
Percentage of participants who had opened a 38 computer to install RAM I am confident that I can teach someone to 4.2 use a computer software package**** Computers are fun**** 6.0 If female computer scientist takes time off for 2.2 children, she will never catch up again**** It is difficult for women to combine family 2.9 and career in CS**** Estimated starting salaries of computer 44083 scientists Average number of hours worked per week 49.7 by a computer scientist Having a career is more important than 2.9 having a family**** Students majoring in CS are popular**** 3.5 CS students are "nerdy"**** 4.9 Computer scientists are more interested in 3.5 numbers than people**** Computer scientists enjoy being around 3.6 people Choice of CS courses here is too limited for 3.4 my career goal**** CS major requires too many credits for 3.2 completion**** The rewards in a computer-related field are 4.7 worth the sacrifices**** I feel tense about my CS assignments**** 4.6 The atmosphere in the CS program is 3.2 impersonal**** There is gender discrimination in the CS 2.2 program**** Female CS students are not taken seriously 2.6 by male CS faculty**** The ability of female CS students is 4.1 underrated by others**** Faculty question the commitment of female 2.4 students Notes: Higher scores signify stronger endorsement of item.
Follow-up Non-CS Majors CS Majors Women Men Women Men 17.8 14.0 21.2 16.1
79
27
80
63
86
47
88
5.8
5.5
6.1
5.0
6.0
5.9
6.2
6.1 2.6
6.4 2.3
6.3 2.2
6.2 3.0
5.7 3.0
6.2 3.1
6.4 2.3
2.2
2.8
3.3
4.0
3.4
3.6
3.2
42929
49467
44329
46750
44286
49200
42.2
49.5
45.7
49.7
44.1
48.3
45.2
2.5
1.9
2.7
2.3
2.9
2.3
2.5
4.3 5.0 3.6
4.2 4.2 2.5
4.1 4.9 3.5
3.9 4.8 3.5
3.8 5.4 3.9
4.3 4.4 2.2
4.2 4.9 3.1
4.6
4.3
3.8
3.7
3.8
4.0
4.8
2.6
3.2
3.2
3.0
4.0
2.8
3.3
3.6
3.1
3.0
3.0
4.4
2.9
3.3
5.2
4.8
5.7
5.0
3.9
5.3
5.5
3.9 3.5
5.2 3.5
4.1 3.2
4.3 3.8
3.8 3.9
4.5 3.3
4.1 3.5
1.6
1.9
1.7
2.3
2.1
1.3
1.5
1.9
1.9
1.4
3.0
2.4
1.6
1.6
3.1
3.4
2.7
3.3
2.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.3
1.9
2.9
2.6
1.8
1.7
42576
* 1-4 scale, ** 1-5 scale, ***1-6 scale, ****1-7 scale
3.3.2 Stereotypes about CS Students and Computer Scientists
When we asked students if they thought that having a career is more important than having a family, we found a significant time x gender x major interaction, F(1, 90) = 5.77, p = .02. Female non-majors had the strongest career orientation of all the students in the initial assessment. By the follow-up one semester later, their scores had dropped sharply, making them the group that valued career over family the least. Female majors and male nonmajors, on the other hand, became more career-oriented over time. Male majors’ career orientation decreased slightly over time.
The interaction between time, major, and gender for the stereotype that students majoring in CS are unpopular was significant, F(1, 90) = 3.88, p = .05. While male and female majors’ stereotype about the popularity of CS students remained steady around the neutral point, male non-majors’ stereotype about how popular CS majors are became more negative while female non-majors’ stereotypes became more positive from the initial to the follow-up assessment one semester later.
394
At both assessment times male students were more likely than female students to believe that CS majors are “nerdy,” F(1, 91) = 6.63, p = .01, and were more likely to subscribe to the stereotype that computer scientists are more interested in numbers than people, F(1, 91) = 5.26, p = .02.
Students’ felt that the atmosphere in the CS program is impersonal more strongly in the follow-up assessment than in the initial assessment, F(1, 91) = 3.69, p = .06.
There was a significant interaction between time, major, and gender regarding the perception that people who choose careers in CS enjoy being around people, F(1, 90) = 6.24, p = .01. Over time male non-majors’ and female majors’ stereotype that computer scientists enjoy being around others became more negative. Female non-majors’ stereotype remained stable over time. Male majors’ stereotype that CS students enjoy being around people became more positive over time.
There was a time x major interaction for the belief that there is gender discrimination in the CS program, F(1, 89) = 6.38, p = .01. Female and male non-majors showed increasing perceptions of gender discrimination over time, whereas female and male majors alike felt that there was less gender discrimination at the follow-up than at the initial assessment in the previous semester.
3.4.2 Gender Issues in the CS Program
Female students believed more strongly than did male students that female CS students are not taken seriously by male CS faculty, F(1, 89) = 3.55, p = .06.
To summarize, some stereotypes showed a complex pattern of interaction between gender, major status, and time. This indicates that gender differences did not remain stable from one semester to the next. Female students espoused less negative stereotypes than male students. For example, female students were less likely than male students to believe that CS majors are “nerdy”. Still, there is reason for concern. Unfortunately, male and female students’ perceptions of women’s ability to combine family and career became more pessimistic over time. Furthermore, female students estimated longer work hours than did male students. Because women are still considered the primary caretakers of children, female CS students might anticipate greater work-family conflict. Furthermore, over time female CS majors became less convinced that computer scientists enjoy being around others which runs counter to women’s greater interpersonal orientation [6][11].
At the initial assessment compared to the follow-up, students felt more strongly that the ability of female CS students is underrated by others, F(1, 91) = 18.22, p = .0001. At both times women felt more strongly than did men that female CS students’ abilities are underrated, F(1, 91) = 4.04, p = .05. There was a significant time by major interaction in students’ belief that faculty question female Computer Science students’ commitment to their studies, F(1, 88) = 9.53, p = .003. Female and male non-majors became more likely to believe that faculty question women’s commitment, while female and male majors over time became less likely to believe that. To summarize, unfortunately female students felt more strongly than did male students that women are not taken seriously by male CS faculty and that instructors underestimate women’s abilities. These perceptions may have a chilling effect on both female CS majors and non-majors. They might increase the attrition rate for female majors and dissuade female non-majors from considering CS as a potential major. Two more troubling findings were that female students were tense about their assignments and both male and female students felt that the atmosphere had become more impersonal at the follow-up compared to the semester before. This should affect female students more negatively than male students because social support and faculty encouragement are even more important to women’s than men’s decision to enroll in or leave CS [7][10].
3.4 Attitudes towards CS Courses and the CS Program 3.4.1 General Attitudes toward the CS Program In analyzing students’ reactions to the statement “the choice of CS courses here is too limited for my career goal”, we found a significant time x gender x major interaction, F(1, 90) = 3.81, p = .05. Male non-majors showed a dramatic increase over time in their belief that the course choices were too limited. In contrast, male majors’ belief stayed relatively stable. Female majors and non-majors were less likely to believe that their choice of CS classes was limited at the follow-up compared to the initial assessment.
An encouraging finding was that over time CS majors were less likely to feel that there is gender discrimination in the department, to feel that female students are underrated by others, and to feel that female CS students’ commitment is questioned by faculty. Thus, more exposure to CS faculty had a beneficial effect for majors. Female CS majors also had fewer complaints about the CS program (e.g., choice of courses, credits required) at the follow-up than did male majors.
There was a significant interaction between time and gender regarding attitudes that the CS major requires too many credits for completion, F(1, 91) = 5.53, p = .02. Male majors and nonmajors alike became more negative over time, while female majors and non-majors became less negative over time in their perception that the CS major requires too many credits. There was a significant interaction between time and gender for students’ belief that the rewards in a computer-related field are worth the sacrifices, F(1, 90) = 6.27, p = .01. While both female majors’ and non-majors’ perceptions became more positive with time, by the follow-up male majors and non-majors alike felt more strongly that the sacrifices in pursuing a CS major were great.
4. CONCLUSIONS The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether gender differences in CS students’ attitudes towards CS remain stable from one semester to the next. We found that gender differences are less temporally stable than might be expected. In our study of MIS students we also found that gender differences did not remain stable from one semester to the next [2][1].
Female students were somewhat more tense about their CS assignments than were male students, F(1, 75) = 3.28, p = .07.
We conclude from our results that one-time assessments might lead to erroneous conclusions. In the future, researchers should be
395
careful not to jump to conclusions without examining the changing attitudes of both genders over time. It is possible that some gender differences in attitudes towards CS are reduced over time because those who are more involved and more advanced in their CS studies begin to feel assimilated i.e., they see themselves simply as CS students, instead of seeing themselves as male or female CS students. Of course, as with all longitudinal research, an alternative explanation is that other intervening factors (e.g., maturity) are responsible for changes across time.
7. REFERENCES [1] Beyer, S. and DeKeuster, M. Women majoring in Computer Science or Management Information Systems: A comparative analysis. Manuscript under review (2004). [2] Beyer, S., DeKeuster, M., Rynes, K., and DeHeer, J.. The Temporal Stability of Gender Differences in MIS Students. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the AMCIS Conference, New York, NY. i2004).
One limitation of our research is that students were re-contacted in the semester following their initial assessment. Follow-ups over longer periods of time would provide more in-depth information about the stability of gender differences over time. We are presently conducting additional follow-ups to address the stability of gender differences over a two-year period. Especially interesting would be a follow-up study of students entering the workforce. What happens to gender differences as individuals transition into the CS workforce?
[3] Beyer, S., Rynes, K., and Haller, S. Deterrents to Women Taking Computer Science Courses. IEEE Society and Technology, 23 (2004), 21-28. [4] Beyer, S., Rynes, K., Perrault, J., Hay, K., and Haller, S. Gender Differences in Computer Science Students. in Proceedings of the Thirty-fourth SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (2003), 49-53. [5] Camp, T. The Incredible Shrinking Pipeline. Communications of the ACM, 40 (1997), 103-110.
A further limitation is that most participants were Caucasian preventing us from conducting analyses by race. More research on minorities in CS is needed. Currently efforts are underway to study CS students at historically Black colleges [9]
[6] Cross, S. E. and Madson, L. Elaboration of Models of the Self: Reply to Baumeister and Sommer and Martin and Ruble. Psychological Bulletin, 122 (1997), 51-55.
We believe that this research has yielded intriguing results. The findings suggest avenues for recruiting and retaining female CS majors, thereby increasing the number of qualified women entering into CS careers. Concerns about possible future workfamily conflict and gender issues in the program (e.g., gender discrimination and not being taken as seriously as male students) seem to present problems.
[7] Cuny, J., Aspray, W., Cohoon, J., and Jesse, J. Factors Concerning Recruitment and Retention of Women Graduate Students in Computer Science and Engineering. Proceedings of the National Science Foundation’s ITWF & ITR/EWF Principal Investigator Conference (pp. 86-90), Albuquerque, NM. (2003).
While students’ (legitimate?) concerns about future work-family conflict may be intractable for CS departments, the finding that in our CS department greater exposure to CS faculty decreased perceptions of gender discrimination and other gender-related issues is very encouraging. It suggests that faculty and/or departments can greatly affect female students’ comfort level. The CS faculty at our institution is 43% female which might explain this result. Mentors and role models play an important role in the success of female students in male-dominated majors [1]. Thus, individual departments that address the issues we highlighted viz., work-family conflict and especially issues surrounding gender discrimination may have increased success in retention and recruitment of CS students.
[8] Lips, H. M. Gender- and Science-Related Attitudes as Predictors of College Students’ Academic Choices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 40 (1992), 62-81.
6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
[12] U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics, 20002001. (2002).
[9] Lopez, A. M., Jr. and Schulte, L. J. African American Women in the Computing Sciences: A Group to be Studied in Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (2002), 87-90. [10] Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. Unlocking the clubhouse. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (2001). [11] Markus, H. R. and Kitayama, S. Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation. Psychological Review, 98 (1991), 224-253.
This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (EIA-0089957) to the first author.
396
