Paper detail

Female Students in Computer Science Education: Understanding Stereotypes, Negative Impacts, and Positive Motivation

Although female students engage in coding courses, only a small percentage of them plan to pursue computer science (CS) as a major when choosing a career path. Gender differences in interests, sense-of belonging, self-efficacy, and engagement in CS are already present at an early age. This article presents an overview of gender stereotypes in CS and summarizes negative impressions female students between 12 and 15 experience during CS classes, as well as influences that may be preventing girls from taking an interest in CS. The study herein draws on a systematic review of 28 peer-reviewed articles published since 2006. The findings of the review point to the existence of the stereotypical image of a helpless, uninterested, and unhappy "Girl in Computer Science". It may be even more troubling a construct than that of the geeky, nerdy male counterpart, as it is rooted in the notion that women are technologically inept and ill-suited for CS careers. Thus, girls think they must be naturally hyper-intelligent in order to pursue studies in CS, as opposed to motivated, interested, and focused to succeed in those fields. Second, based on the review, suggestions for inclusive CS education were summarized. The authors argue that in order to make CS more inclusive for girls, cultural implications, as well as stereotypization in CS classrooms and CS education, need to be recognized as harmful. These stereotypes and cultural ideas should be eliminated by empowering female students through direct encouragement, mentoring programs, or girls-only initiatives.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.

Institutions

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.