Paper detail

Educating Educators to Integrate Inclusive Design Across a 4-Year CS Degree Program

How can an entire CS faculty, who together have been teaching the ACM standard CS curricula, shift to teaching elements of inclusive design across a 4-year undergraduate CS program? And will they even want to try? To investigate these questions, we developed an educate-the-educators curriculum to support this shift. The overall goal of the educate-the-educators curriculum was to enable CS faculty to creatively engage with embedding inclusive design into their courses in "minimally invasive" ways. GenderMag, an inclusive design evaluation method, was selected for use. The curriculum targeted the following learning outcomes: to enable CS faculty: (1) to analyze the costs and benefits of integrating inclusive design into their own course(s); (2) to evaluate software using the GenderMag method, and recognize its use to identify meaningful issues in software; (3) to integrate inclusive design into existing course materials with provided resources and collaboration; and (4) to prepare to engage and guide students on learning GenderMag concepts. We conducted a field study over a spring/summer followed by end-of-fall interviews, during which we worked with 18 faculty members to integrate inclusive design into 13 courses. Ten of these faculty then taught 7 of these courses that were on the Fall 2021 schedule, across 16 sections. We present the new educate-the-educators curriculum and report on the faculty's experiences acting upon it over the three-month field study and subsequent interviews. Our results showed that, of the 18 faculty we worked with, 83% chose to modify their courses; by Fall 2021, faculty across all four years of a CS degree program had begun teaching inclusive design concepts. When we followed up with the 10 Fall 2021 faculty, 91% of their reported outcomes indicated that the incorporations of inclusive design concepts in their courses went as well as or better than expected.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.