Content uploaded by Crystal Eney
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Crystal Eney
Content may be subject to copyright.
26 computer Published by the IEEE Computer Society 0018-9162/13/$31.00 © 2013 IEEE
Gender diversity in ComputinG
Broadening Participation:
The Why and the How
Crystal Eney, Ed Lazowska, Hélène Martin, and Stuart Reges, University of Washington
There are many reasons for striving to
increase the representation of women in
the computing field, but the most com-
pelling one is the enhanced quality of
the solutions diverse contributors can
achieve.
W
e are honored to have been invited to address
the “how” of broadening participation in com-
puting by describing our experiences at a large,
research-intensive public university.
We begin, though, by addressing the “why,” because
having the right motivation is of critical importance. As
eminent computer scientist Bill Wulf stated nearly 15
years ago, when he was president of the National Acad-
emy of Engineering:
1
A lot of people argue for diversity in terms of fairness. We
Americans are very sensitive to issues of fairness, but that’s
not my argument. Others argue in terms of simple numer-
ics: Male caucasians will be the minority in the 21st century,
and so to meet the need for engineers we will have to attract
women and underrepresented minorities. That’s true too, but
that’s not my argument, either.
I believe there is a far deeper reason why we require a diverse
work force. Let me give you the argument in a nutshell, and
then I’ll try to draw it out more carefully.
First, engineering is a very creative profession. That is not the
way it is usually described, but down to my toes I believe that
engineering is profoundly creative. Second, as in any creative
profession, what comes out is a function of the life experiences of
the people who do it. Finally, sans diversity, we limit the set of life
experiences that are applied, and as a result, we pay an opportu-
nity cost—a cost in products not built, in designs not considered,
in constraints not understood, in processes not invented …
Every time we approach an engineering problem with a pale,
male design team, we may not find the best solution. We may
not understand the design options or know how to evaluate
the constraints. We may not even understand the full dimen-
sion of the problem.
In other words, while there are many reasons for striv-
ing to increase the representation of women in our field,
the selfish reason is the most compelling one: the quality
of the solutions we achieve is enhanced by the diversity of
the individuals contributing to these solutions.
Having nailed the incentive angle with Wulf’s help, we
can now focus on ideas that are broadly applicable and
less obvious—describing what we’re doing at the Univer-
sity of Washington.
UW is a large research-intensive public university
located in the heart of one of the nation’s most vibrant
software industries. UW’s 28,000 undergraduate stu-
dents have a range of interests and abilities, and they can
choose from a broad array of technology-related majors.
This differs significantly from the environment at smaller,
march 2013 27
more elite institutions. In this context, we feel that we do
well, although certainly not nearly as well as we aspire
to do: women comprise roughly 25 percent of both our
undergraduate and graduate student populations in com-
puter science.
DUPLICATING OUR PROGRESS
Our efforts have three key components: outreach to
K-12 teachers and students, enhancements to our introduc-
tory course sequence, and community-building to make
our program more welcoming to all students.
Outreach to K-12
Our K-12 outreach program, DawgBytes (www.
cs.washington.edu/dawgbytes), introduces both teachers
and students to computing. Importantly, the vast majority
of colleges and universities—including UW—have largely
regional student bodies; changing the perception of the
field in a relatively small number of K-12 schools can sig-
nificantly impact the student population.
Historically, our outreach efforts have focused on teach-
ers because of their influence on many generations of
students. We provide professional development opportu-
nities for teachers ranging from CS4HS (Computer Science
for High School), a Google-sponsored summer workshop
where math and science teachers learn about integrating
computer science ideas into their classes, to workshops for
advanced placement computer science teachers. All of our
professional development opportunities offer strategies for
attracting and retaining female students.
Providing recognition to teachers who send us strong
students pays dividends in recruitment. When students
enter our program, we ask them to nominate a teacher at
a previous institution (secondary school or community
college) who particularly inspired them. We then invite the
teachers, their partners, and their nominating students to
a dinner where they become reacquainted and learn a bit
about computer science. Because young women are more
likely to nominate teachers, this event provides a great
opportunity to reach teachers who inspire strong female
students. Year after year, we hear from new students that
the teachers we previously recognized had encouraged
them to aspire to our program.
Our student-targeted initiatives seek to increase diver-
sity in our field with a specific focus on exposing young
women to computing early on. We host the Washington
State National Center for Women & Information Technol-
ogy Aspirations in Computing Award, which honors young
women at the high school level for their computing-related
achievements and interests. During the award event, we
introduce winners to UW students doing interesting re-
search and lead the recipients through hands-on activities.
Last year’s two NCWIT national winners from Washington
state both entered UW as computer science majors this fall.
We also host “STEM Out!,” an event where girls can
learn about science, technology, engineering, and math
(STEM) careers. This event is organized in collaboration
with our local Computer Science Teachers Association
chapter and Amazon’s Hoppers group of women engineers.
Additionally, during the summer in 2012, we hosted three
week-long day camps for secondary school students; our
advertising aggressively targeted girls, and there was a
female majority in all of the sessions. We organized aca-
demic year follow-up activities with these students to keep
them engaged in computing—some at UW, some hosted
by local companies.
Course sequence enhancements
Our two-quarter introductory course sequence serves
many purposes, including acting as an attraction factor
for our major. (Most students arrive at UW as pre-majors
and choose majors after fulfilling prerequisites.) We’ve
been philosophically committed to a single pathway—in
our view, when it’s taught well, just about everyone loves
programming.
Enrollment in our introductory courses decreased after
the dot-com bubble burst, dropping to 1,200 students a year
in our first course and 650 in our second course. We sub-
sequently redesigned the courses, and enrollments have
now expanded to record levels. We serve more than 2,000
students a year in our first course and 1,300 in our second
course (increases of more than 65 and 100 percent, respec-
tively). In the same period, female enrollment has expanded
at twice that rate, increasing approximately 120 percent
in the first course and 180 percent in the second course
(with 600 women taking the first course and 300 taking the
second course in the most recent academic year).
The disproportionate success with women is due pri-
marily to three factors that were central in the course
redesign: instilling confidence, emphasizing community,
and showing the breadth of computer science applications.
Most young women who take our introductory courses
didn’t have a chance to explore computer science in high
school. They find it intimidating when they overhear
male students talking about computer technologies they
haven’t heard of, leaving them with the impression that
they’re already behind the curve and can’t succeed. We
combat this by providing a tight course structure with inte-
grated resources (textbooks, lectures, discussion sections,
notes, online practice, videos), intellectually challenging
The quality of the solutions
we achieve is enhanced by the
diversity of the individuals
contributing to these solutions.
28 computer
Gender diversity in ComputinG
assignments, and an elaborate support structure. Con-
sequently, women learn that the greatest predictors of
success in the course and in our field are hard work and
organization—not esoteric knowledge of currently popular
technologies or some innate gift.
We emphasize community in several ways. We offer a
seminar that explores women in computing that students
can take in parallel with the introductory courses. We offer
small-group honors sections where students interact closely
with a faculty member to explore computer science issues
in greater depth. We also have a group of 40 to 50 under-
graduate teaching assistants who staff our introductory
courses. The introductory TA community is very strong,
with five to 10 applicants for every available spot. Women
make up 40 percent of our undergraduate TAs even though
we give no special preference to them in hiring.
We find that to “seal the deal” and convince talented
young women to major in computer science, we must use
every opportunity to show them the breadth of the field.
In the women’s seminar, they might visit Microsoft to see
for themselves that a career in computing involves more
than just programming. In a programming assignment,
they might see that computer science is used in linguis-
tics and biology. In an honors section, they participate
in deep discussions about the interdisciplinary nature of
computer science and its links to mathematics, statistics,
linguistics, philosophy, biology, chemistry, and so on. We
recently added a series of optional exploration sessions in
which students in the introductory courses can learn about
specific applications of computer science; we’ve found that
women participate in these sessions more often than their
male counterparts.
Building up a community
UW has an active ACM-W chapter that provides a sup-
portive community for women. ACM-W hosts social,
academic, and career-oriented events to encourage net-
working with other students, faculty, and industry. ACM-W
also provides leadership opportunities for women who
serve as officers. The student ACM chapter helps to build
a strong sense of community among all of our students.
We regularly send 15 to 20 undergraduate and gradu-
ate students to the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women
in Computing, a conference where they can network and
form a community with their peers and women already
working in the field from across the country. The expe-
rience boosts confidence, provides role models, informs
women about the field, and encourages involvement in the
computer science department.
We are fortunate to live in a region where there are
many leading technology companies that have a strong in-
terest in increasing the participation of women in the field.
Microsoft and Google, in particular, run multiple events
each year for our female students.
TIMING
We often hear from women who eventually apply to our
major that they had no idea they would be interested in
computer science until they took one of our introductory
courses. This anecdotal evidence is borne out by a survey
students took at the start of the first introductory course.
At that time, only 40 percent of the women who are now in
our major agreed with the statement that they intended to
apply to the major. Most of the rest said that they were “not
sure/undecided” whether they would apply to the major,
and 24 percent disagreed with the statement entirely; they
had plans to major in a different field.
We’re particularly frustrated when we find that a
woman who is a junior or senior has only recently discov-
ered an interest in computer science because such students
often concludes that they can’t rearrange their plans by
switching majors. These students invariably say that they
wish they had discovered computer science earlier so they
could have majored in it. This is why so many of our efforts
revolve around early exposure to computer science either
in K-12 or the freshman year.
COST
We’ve devoted significant resources to broadening par-
ticipation, assisted by the generosity of alumni, friends,
and companies. We don’t want to minimize the importance
of this. However, many of the changes we’ve introduced
aren’t particularly expensive, and help is available—focus
is at least as critical as finances.
For example, we initiated CS4HS while working with
colleagues at Carnegie Mellon and the University of Cali-
fornia, Los Angeles, but Google now funds the program
at more than 100 colleges and universities. Hosting the
NCWIT awards requires a bit of organization, but working
with NCWIT makes it easy. There’s overhead in planning
the first offering of a summer day camp, but these events
can be made self-supporting in steady state. Switching to
undergraduate TAs in introductory courses can actually
save money.
2
Honors sections require additional teach-
ing cycles, but instructors often volunteer to teach them
because they enjoy working in a small-group setting with
highly motivated students. Undergraduate TAs who are
The disproportionate success with
women enrolled in the introductory
courses is due primarily to three factors
that were central in the course redesign:
instilling confidence, emphasizing
community, and showing the breadth
of computer science applications.
march 2013 29
interested in motivating their younger peers staff explo-
ration sessions. Scholarships are available for attendance
at the Grace Hopper conference. In short, where there’s a
will, there’s a way.
N
either UW nor the field as a whole is where it needs
to be, but many of us are working hard to get there.
Hopefully, the experiences we’ve described here
offer some ideas that you can use in your own institution.
There’s no silver bullet. Sometimes, it’s one woman at
a time—a student who has made a connection with an
advisor, an instructor, or an undergraduate TA, or who
gets hooked because of an honors section, the women’s
seminar, a cool assignment, or a great exploration session.
Progress comes from a multiplicity of efforts, and every
little bit helps.
Ultimately, remember why we are engaged in this effort:
for fairness, yes; for workforce, yes. But, most importantly,
because the diversity of the contributing individuals en-
hances the quality of the solutions we achieve.
References
1. W.A. Wulf, “Diversity in Engineering,” The Bridge, vol.
28, no. 4, Winter 1998; www.nae.edu/Publications/
Bridge/CompetitiveMaterialsandSolutions/
DiversityinEngineering.aspx.
2. S. Reges, “Using Undergraduates as Teaching Assistants
at a State University,” Proc. 34th SIGCSE Tech. Symp.
Computer Science Education (SIGSE 03), ACM, 2003;
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=611892.611943.
Crystal Eney is the lead undergraduate academic advisor
in the Department of Computer Science & Engineering
at the University of Washington. Contact her at ceney@
cs.washington.edu.
Ed Lazowska is the Bill & Melinda Gates Chair in the
Department of Computer Science & Engineering at the
University of Washington. Contact him at lazowska@
cs.washington.edu.
Hélène Martin is a lecturer in the Department of Computer
Science & Engineering at the University of Washington.
Contact her at ln@cs.washington.edu.
Stuart Reges is a principal lecturer in the Department of
Computer Science & Engineering at the University of Wash-
ington. Contact him at reges@cs.washington.edu.
Selected CS articles and columns are available
for free at http://ComputingNow.computer.org.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
CLOUD COMPUTING
The IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing will publish peer reviewed
articles that provide innovative research ideas and applications results
in all areas relating to cloud computing. Topics relating to novel theory,
algorithms, performance analyses and applications of techniques relating
to all areas of cloud computing will be considered for the transactions.
The transactions will consider submissions specically in the areas of cloud
security, tradeoffs between privacy and utility of cloud, cloud standards, the
architecture of cloud computing, cloud development tools, cloud software,
cloud backup and recovery, cloud interoperability, cloud applications
management, cloud data analytics, cloud communications protocols, mobile
cloud, liability issues for data loss on clouds, data integration on clouds, big
data on clouds, cloud education, cloud skill sets, cloud energy consumption,
cloud applications in commerce, education and industry. This title will also
consider submissions on Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a
Service (PaaS), Software as a Service (SaaS), and Business Process as a Service
(BPaaS).
For more information please visit: http://www.computer.org/portal/web/tcc
COMING SOON
IN 2013