Content uploaded by Peter Mozelius
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Peter Mozelius on Apr 12, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Itisgettingbetter,alittlebetter–femaleapplicationtohighereducation
programmesonInformaticsandSystemscience
PeterMozelius,DepartmentofComputerandSystemsSciences,MidSwedenUniversity,
Sweden
Withtheongoingdigitalisation,theSwedishITindustryisrapidlyexpanding.Ithasbeen
estimatedbytheLabourofficethataround40000newsystemdevelopersneedtobe
recruitedonlyinthecomingfouryears.Salariesarehighandcompaniesaskforfemalesystem
developers,butinhighereducationthemajorityofstudentsoncomputerscience
programmesaremale.UniversityprogrammesonInformaticsandSystemscienceareless
technicalandhaveatraditionofahigherfemalepercentage.Inearlierdiscussions,colleagues
fromuniversitiesinthenorthofthecountrybroughtupthattheapplicationfigureshasgone
down,whilepersonsworkingatotheruniversitiesclaimthatthenumberoffemalestudents
applyingactuallyhasincreased.Whoareright,whoarewrong?
Theaimofthestudyistoanalyseanddiscusstheofficialapplicationstatisticsthatare
publishedbytheSwedishCouncilforHigherEducation.Applicationstatisticsfrom2012to
2017havebeenanalysedandcomparedfortenprogrammesateightuniversities.The
selectionofuniversitieshasanation‐widespreadbutwasmainlybasedontheiroutlineof
programmesonInformaticsandSystemscience.
Findingsshowthatbothopinionsseemtoberight,butthemaintendencyisanincreasein
femaleapplicationsforthemadeselection.Ontheotherhand,aslightdecreasecanbefound
forthenorthernuniversitieswheretheprogrammesaregiveninadualmode.Theon‐campus
groupshaveasurprisinglyhigherpercentageofmalesthanthedistanceversions,when
programmeswithidenticalsyllabuseswerecompared.Moretechnicalcomputerscience
programmeshavefewerfemalestudentswhilethehighestpercentagesoffemalestudents
canbefoundinprogrammesonWebdevelopment,WebdesignandInteractiondesign.
Keywords:Highereducation,Genderdifferences,Informatics,Systemscience,Computer
science
1. Introduction
InanarticleintheSwedishjournalÖstersundsposten(2017)itishighlightedthatthereis,
today,alackofaround30.000systemdevelopersandIT‐expertsintheSwedishIT‐industry.
Theneedforprogrammersandsystemdevelopersinthecomingfouryearsisestimatedto
around40000persons.Furthermore,thearticleishighlightingthefactthatfartoofewgirls
enroltouniversityprogrammesonSoftwareengineering,SystemdevelopmentorInformatics.
SwedishIT‐expertspointsoutthatitisimportanttochangethecurrentsituationwhereonly
25%ofthestudentsonprogrammesthatinvolveprogrammingarefemale.Theinterviewed
programmerAroshineMunasinghesaysthatshewantstoinspiremoregirlstoapplyforthe
maledominatedITprogrammesatuniversitylevelthatopenuprichcareeropportunities
(Östersundsposten,2017).
ComputerscienceatuniversitylevelisanimportantgatewaytotheIT‐industry,andoverhalf
ofthetop25highestpayingin‐demandjobstodayrequireprogrammingskills(Cooper&
Dierker,2017).Atthesametime,theunderrepresentationoffemalesonprogrammes
involvingprogrammingandsystemdevelopmentiswelldocumentedinresearchstudies
(Dryburgh,2000;Charles&Bradley,2006;Leeetal.,20015). Onediscussedreasonisthe
culturalidentificationoftechnologywithmasculinitybuttheexplanationisprobablymore
complex(Pechtelidisetal.,2015).Mostexpertsagreethatifthereexistgenderdifferences,in
thefieldsofMathematicsandEngineering,theyaresmallandmoreplausibleexplanations
havesocialandculturalorigins(Ybarra,2016).
ComparedtopureComputerscienceandSoftwareengineeringuniversityprogrammeson
informaticsandSystemsciencearelesstechnicalandhaveatraditionofahigherfemale
percentage.Thisstudyhavecomparedtheapplicationpercentagesfortenuniversity
programmesonInformaticsandSystemscienceatnineuniversities.Inearlierdiscussions,
colleaguesfromuniversitiesinthenorthoftheSwedishnationhavementionedthatthe
applicationfigureshasgonedown,whilepersonsworkingatotheruniversitieshaveclaimed
claimthatthenumberoffemalestudentsapplyingtouniversityprogrammesinvolving
Computerscienceactuallyhasincreased.Whoareright,whoarewrong?
1.1 Aimofthestudy
Theaimofthestudyistoanalyseanddiscusstheofficialapplicationstatisticsthatare
publishedbytheSwedishCouncilforHigherEducation.Isthenumberoffemalestudents
applyingforIT‐relateduniversityprogrammesdecreasingorincreasingandwhichtypesof
programmeshavebeenmostsuccessfultoattractfemalestudents?
2. Extendedbackground
ThefindingsfortheprogrammesatDalarnaUniversity,LuleåUniversityofTechnologyandthe
MidSwedenUniversityarefilteredthroughtheconceptofblendedsynchronouslearning.A
teachingandlearningdesignthatisbasedontheideaofblendedlearningwheretraditional
teachingmethodsareblendedwithtechnologyenhancedlearning.
2.1 Blendedlearning
Highereducationhasrapidlyincreasedtheuseofblendedlearningduringthelastdecades
andashighlightedbyGarrison&Kanuka(2004)theinvolvementofblendedlearningdesignis
inevitableatuniversitylevel.Startingoutasanexperimentalideaindistanceeducationco,
blendedlearningaretodayfrequentlyusedinmainstreameducation.Inabroaderdefinition
blendedlearningcouldbedescribedasthecontinuumbetweenthetraditionalrostrum
teachingandtechnologyenhancedonlinedistanceeducation(Watson,2008),butthereisalso
morecomplexdefinition,includingtheintegrationofsynchronousandasynchronouslearning
activitiesinacarefuldesign(Garrison&Kanuka,2004).
Amoremediarichmultimodalmodelincludingsynchronousaswellasasynchronousteaching
andlearningdesignwasdescribedinPicciano's(2009)conceptualblendedlearningmodel.
Thereisnoobviousrecipeforblendedlearning,andalongthecontinuumfromfullyonlineto
fullyface‐to‐faceextremesthereexistmanyvariations.Campuscoursescaninvolve
asynchronousonlineactivities,atthesametimeasdistancecoursescanincludeface‐to‐face
teachingcomponents(Watson,2008).Inthiswidevarietyofblendedlearningdesignthere
havebeensuccessstoriesreported,butatthesametherehavealsobeenseverefailuresin
thedesignandimplementationofblendedlearning
2.2Blendedsynchronouslearning
Blendedlearningcouldbeimplementedasblendedsynchronouslearningwithablendof
virtualclassroomsandtraditionalphysicalclassrooms(Hastieetal.,2010).Thiseducational
designwiththeblendofon‐campusanddistancestudentshassometimesalsobeenreferred
toashybridlearning(Stewartetal.,2011),butinthisstudytheusedtermisalwaysblended
synchronouslearning.Inblendedsynchronouslearningteachingandlearningactivities,
distancestudentsparticipateinon‐campusface‐to‐facesessionsthroughtheuseofrich‐
mediasynchronoustechnologiessuchasvideoconferencingsystemsandvirtuallearning
environments(Boweretal.,2015).
Blendedsynchronouslearningenvironmentshavebeendescribedwithhaveapotentialto
increasestudentflexibilityaswellasenablingrichopportunitiesforstudent‐teacher
interaction,regardlessthestudents’location(Senn,2008).Ontheotherhandthereareother
studiesthathavepointedoutthatthepossibilitiesforinteractionaredifferentforthetwo
studentgroups(Popov,2009;Gill&Mullarkey,2015).Severalstudieshavefoundthatthetwo
differentstudentgroupsequallyachievethegivenlearningoutcomes,butthatthedistance
studentsaremoresatisfiedwiththeirlearningexperience(Szeto,2014;Said,2015).Thestudy
byStewartetal.(2011)alsoindicatesthatthissynchronousblendmightaffecttheon‐campus
studentsnegatively.Therearefewstudiesongenderdifferencesinblendedsynchronous
learning,butatSwedishuniversityprogrammesfemales,andespeciallyfemaleswithchildren,
tendtochoosethedistanceprogrammes.
3. Method
Thisstudyhasbeenconductedasacross‐sectionalstudybasedonopendatafromThe
SwedishCouncilforHigherEducation(2017a)and(2017b).Adisadvantagewithcross‐
sectionalstudiesarethattheymeasurethesituationatagiventimelikeasnapshot,buton
theotherhandtheycanbeusefulatidentifyingassociationsthatcanbefollowed‐upandmore
thoroughlystudied(Mann,2003).Thechosencross‐sectionalsnapshotwastocomparethe
applicationpercentagesfortheautumnsemesterof2012withtheapplicationpercentagesof
theautumnsemesterof2017tomeasurethechangefortenselecteduniversityprogrammes.
DatahasbeencollectedfromtheSwedishCouncilforHigherEducation(2017a)toinvestigate
whichIT‐relateduniversityprogrammesthatattractthehighestnumberoffemalestudents.
FurthermoredatafromtheSwedishCouncilforHigherEducation(2017b)hasbeenusedfor
lookingattheactualchangeinapplicationtrendsforthe2017autumnsemester.
4. Findingsanddiscussions
InthelatesttrendreportfromtheSwedishCouncilforHigherEducationthatapproximately
60percentoftheapplicantsarefemale(SwedishCouncilforHigherEducation,2017b).This
clearlyindicatesthattheredonotexistanygeneralbarriertouniversitystudiesforwomenin
Sweden.Justafewdecadesago,Swedishuniversitiesweredominatedbymen,buttoday
nearlytwo‐thirdsofalluniversitydegreesinSwedenareawardedtowomen.Furthermore,an
equalnumberofwomenandmenarenowtakingpartinpostgraduateanddoctoralstudies
(GenderequalityinSweden,2017).
However,intherealmofInformaticsanduniversityprogrammesonSystemsciencethe
figureslookdifferentandthereisnomajorchangeduringthelastfiveyears.Table1below
presentsthenumberofapplicantsandthefemalepercentageforthenineprogrammesthat
weregiveninthefieldofInformaticsandSystemsciencein2012.
SemesterProgrammeProgramme
code
Educational
institution
Numberof
Applicants
Female
percentage
Autumn
2012
SystemscienceHDA‐H2GW3Dalarna
University
18921.1%
Autumn
2012
System
science,IT,
humansand
organisations
GU‐19736Universityof
Gothenburg
80626.1%
Autumn
2012
SystemscienceLIU‐50008Linköping
University
84617.7%
Autumn
2012
Systemscience
(Campus)
LTU‐87339Luleå
Universityof
Technology
15416.2%
Autumn
2012
Systemscience
(Distance)
LTU‐87340Luleå
Universityof
Technology
22428.1%
Autumn
2012
Systemscience
‐ information
systems
LU‐80420Lund
University
56221.2%
Autumn
2012
Informaticsfor
system
development
MIU‐27011MidSweden
University
25939.3%
Autumn
2012
Computerand
systemscience
SU‐43913Stockholm
University
170724.8%
Autumn
2012
SystemscienceUU‐P2202Uppsala
University
79717.0%
Table1.Applicationstatisticsforthe2012autumnsemester
Consideringthenorth–southperspective,theyoungeruniversitiesinthenorthernpartof
Swedenhavethehighestfemalepercentageswith39.3%womenfortheMidSweden
Universityand28.1%forLuleåUniversityofTechnology(distanceprogram).Inthesemore
sparselypopulatedregionsbothuniversitiestodayhaveamixofcampusanddistance
studentswithcoursesgivenasblendedsynchronouslearning.Consideringtheyoung–old
perspective,thetwooldestuniversities,Lund(21.2)andUppsala(17.0)haverelativelylow
percentagesoffemales.TheverylowestpercentagewasfoundforLuleåUniversityof
Technology(campusprogram)withonly16.2%,butwiththetwoprogrammesaggregated
(campus+distance)thepercentageforLuleåUniversityofTechnologywas23.2%.
SemesterProgrammeProgramme
code
Educational
institution
Numberof
Applicants
20122017
Female
percentage2012
2017
Autumn
2017
System
scienceHDA‐H2V9G Dalarna
University
18931621.1%20.2%
Autumn
2017
System
science,IT,
humansand
organisations
GU‐19740University
of
Gothenburg
806106326.1%30.3%
Autumn
2017
System
scienceLIU‐50008Linköping
University
846104017.7%22.2%
Autumn
2017
System
science
(Campus)
LTU‐87398Luleå
University
of
Technology
15427116.2%15.2%
Autumn
2017
System
science
(Distance)
LTU‐87397Luleå
University
of
Technology
22464628.1%32.0%
Autumn
2017
System
science‐
information
systems
LU‐80435Lund
University
56291421.2%31.9%
Autumn
2017
Informatics
forsystem
development
MIU‐C4391
(campus)
MIU‐C4381
(distance)
Mid
Sweden
University
259
159
563
39.3%
22.0%
37%
Autumn
2017
Computer
andsystem
sciences
SU‐43017Stockholm
University
1707 2238 24.8%27,8%
Autumn
2017
System
science
UU‐P2202Uppsala
University
7971126 17.0%24.5%
Table2.Applicationstatisticsforthe2017autumnsemester
Firstly,itisobvioushowthegeneralintakehasincreasedduringthefiveyearperiodaclearly
higherintakeforalltheselectedprogrammes.Secondly,therewasahigherpercentageof
femaleapplicantsfor5ofthe8universities,andespeciallyfortheolduniversitiesLundand
Uppsala.Thirdly,therewasaslightdecreasefortheyoungeruniversitiesmoretothenorthin
Swedenandinparticularfortheircampusprogrammes.15.2%ofwomenatthecampus
programmeattheLuleåUniversityofTechnologycomparedtothe32.0%forthedistance
students.AttheMidSwedenUniversitythedifferencewasevenhigherwith22.0%femalesin
thecampusgroupandwiththehighestpercentageofallprogrammeswith37.0%femaleson
thedistanceprogramme.Therewasalsoaslightdecreasefortheprogrammegivenatthe
DalarnaUniversity.
Anexplanationforthedifferencesbetweenthecampusandthedistancestudentsmightbe
theclearlyhigheraverageageamongdistancestudents.Anotherexplanationcouldbethe
commondenominatorforDalarnaUniversity,LuleåUniversityofTechnologyandtheMid
SwedenUniversity,theyallgiveprogrammesinblendedsynchronousmodewithamixof
campusanddistancestudents.Ablendwherebothstudentgroupscanperceive
disadvantages,andthatitisachallengingtasktoteachindualmode(Popov,2009).On‐
campusprogrammesshowclearlylowerfemalepercentagesthantheirdistancecounterparts.
Comparedwiththegeneral60%offemalestudentsatSwedishuniversitiesthepartsoffemale
applicantsforprogrammesonInformaticsandSystemsciencelooksurprisinglylow.
Furthermore,thepercentagesareevenlowerwhenlookingatmoretechnicalprogrammes
onSoftwareengineeringandComputerscience.Engineeringhasamasculinetradition
(Pechtelidisetal.,2015),butitishardtoseethisasthemainexplanationforpercentagesof
femaleapplicantsdowntoaround10%.
InastudybyCooper&Dierker(2017)thesuggestionistodecreaseemphasisontraditional
didacticapproachestointroductoryprogramming,andinsteadincreaseinterdisciplinarywith
opportunitiestoworkwithrealworldproblemstoattractfemalesaswellasstudentsfroma
widerrangeofeducational,socialandeconomicbackgrounds.Theirsuggestionseemssound
andthehighestfemalepercentagescanbefoundonmoreinterdisciplinaryprogrammes
whereITandprogrammingarecombinedwithsubjectssuchasGraphicaldesign,Interaction
designandWebdevelopment.
SemesterProgrammeProgramme
code
Educational
institution
Numberof
Applicants
Female
percentage
Autumn
2017
Graphical
designandweb
development
HJ‐52205
Jönköping
University
104049,3%
Autumn
2017
Web
development
MIU‐F2231MidSweden
University
111744,7%
Autumn
2017
Interaction
designSU‐43014Stockholm
University
87046,3%
Table3.Universityprogrammeswithahighpercentageoffemaleapplicants
Alltheseprogrammeshaveahighnumberofapplicantsandfemalepercentagesabove45%.
Whenwillweseethesamepercentagesonthemoretraditionalprogrammes?Thereareno
obviousbarrierswhengirlstendtoperformbetterinnationaltests,andwithagreater
proportionofgirlscompletinguppersecondaryeducation(GenderequalityinSweden,2017).
Apossiblewaytochangethecurrentsituationcouldbetosupportfemalerolemodelsand
organisationslikeWomengineer(2017).
Thegendergapthathasbeenreportedtostartathome(Fisheretal.,1997),seemtoremain
atuniversityprogrammes(Carter,2007),andalsolateratworkplaces(VonHellensetal.,
2000).Recommendationsthatmightmakeachangeareearlyaccesstocomputersforgirls
(Adya&Kaiser,2005),mentorshiptoimprovethefemaleparticipation(VonHellensetal.,
2001),gameconstruction(Beltrán,etal.,2015)andpair‐programming(Werneretal.,2004).
5.Conclusion
Swedenisacountrywithamajorityoffemaleuniversitystudents,butstillwithasurprisingly
lowpercentageofwomentakingprogrammesonInformaticsandSystemscience.However,
thepercentageofwomenonprogrammesonInformaticsandSystemsciencehasincreased
duringthelastfiveyearsandonmoreinterdisciplinaryprogrammesthepercentagecanreach
above45%.Inblendedsynchronouslearningwomentendtoenrolforthedistance
programmesandtheon‐campusgroupshaveahighmalepercentage.
Toattractmorefemalesandalsomorestudentsfrommorediverseeducational,socialand
economicbackgroundstherecommendationseemstobemoreinterdisciplinaryIT‐
programmeswheretraditionalComputerscienceiscombinedwithgraphicaldesignandreal
worldapplications.Whatmightgiveamorerapidchangeofthecurrentsituationisthe
recentlystarteddigitalisationofprimaryandsecondaryschool.Ifcomputationalthinkingand
programmingareintroducedatayoungerage,andwithnewdidacticideastheremightbea
morediversegroupofapplicantstotheuniversityprogrammes.Thefirstconductedpilot
projectsseempromising(Mozelius&Öberg,2017),butwillgirlsbeincludedorexcluded?
6.Futurework
Aninterestingnextstepwouldbetoexplorehowcomputationalthinkingandprogramming
willbeimplementedinprimaryschoolcurriculainSweden.Whichdidacticalapproachescould
attractgirlstodivedeeperintoprogrammingandcomputerscience?
References
Adya,M.,&Kaiser,K.M.(2005).EarlydeterminantsofwomenintheITworkforce:amodel
ofgirls'careerchoices.InformationTechnology&People,18(3),230‐259.
Beltrán,M.E.,Ursa,Y.,Petri,A.,Schindler,C.,Slany,W.,Spieler,B.,...&Arredondo,M.T.
(2015,August).Inclusivegamingcreationbydesigninformallearningenvironments:“girly‐
girls”usergroupinNoOneLeftBehind.InInternationalConferenceofDesign,User
Experience,andUsability(pp.153‐161).SpringerInternationalPublishing.
Bower,M.,Dalgarno,B.,Kennedy,G.E.,Lee,M.J.,&Kenney,J.(2015).Designand
implementationfactorsinblendedsynchronouslearningenvironments:Outcomesfroma
cross‐caseanalysis.Computers&Education,86,1‐17.
Carter,L.(2006).Whystudentswithanapparentaptitudeforcomputersciencedon't
choosetomajorincomputerscience.ACMSIGCSEBulletin,38(1),27‐31.
Charles,M.,&Bradley,K.(2006).Amatterofdegrees:Femaleunderrepresentationin
computerscienceprogramscross‐nationally(pp.183‐203)
Cooper,J.,&Dierker,L.(2017).IncreasingExposuretoProgramming:AComparisonof
DemographicCharacteristicsofStudentsEnrolledinIntroductoryComputerScience
ProgrammingCoursesvs.aMultidisciplinaryDataAnalysisCourse.InternationalResearchin
HigherEducation,2(1).
Dryburgh,H.(2000).Underrepresentationofgirlsandwomenincomputerscience:
Classificationof1990sresearch.Journalofeducationalcomputingresearch,23(2),181‐202.
Fisher,A.,Margolis,J.,&Miller,F.(1997).Undergraduatewomenincomputerscience:
experience,motivationandculture.InACMSIGCSEBulletin(Vol.29,No.1,pp.106‐110).
ACM
Garrison,D.R.,&Kanuka,H.(2004).Blendedlearning:Uncoveringitstransformative
potentialinhighereducation.Theinternetandhighereducation,7(2),95‐105.
GenderequalityinSweden(2017)."Genderequalityatschool"Retrieved(09/11/2017)from:
https://sweden.se/society/gender‐equality‐in‐sweden/
Gill,T.G.,&Mullarkey,M.T.(2015).TakingaCaseMethodCapstoneCourseOnline:A
ComparativeCaseStudy.JournalofInformationTechnologyEducation,14.
Hastie,M.,Hung,I.C.,Chen,N.S.,&Kinshuk.(2010).Ablendedsynchronouslearningmodel
foreducationalinternationalcollaboration.InnovationsinEducationandTeaching
International,47(1),9‐24.
Lee,S.B.,Kastner,S.,&Walker,R.(2015).MendingtheGap,GrowingthePipeline:
IncreasingFemaleRepresentationinComputing.InASEESEAnnualConference.
Mann,C.J.(2003).Observationalresearchmethods.ResearchdesignII:cohort,cross
sectional,andcase‐controlstudies.Emergencymedicinejournal,20(1),54‐60.
Mozelius,P.,&Öberg,L.M.(2017).Play‐basedlearningforprogrammingeducationin
primaryschool:TheÖstersundmodel.InEuropeanConferenceone‐Learning‐ECEL2017(Vol.
16,pp.375‐383).AcademicConferencesandPublishingInternationalLimited.
Pechtelidis,Y.,Kosma,Y.,&Chronaki,A.(2015).Betweenarockandahardplace:women
andcomputertechnology.GenderandEducation,27(2),164‐182.
Picciano,A.G.(2009).Blendingwithpurpose:Themultimodalmodel.Journalof
asynchronouslearningnetworks,13(1),7‐18.
Popov,O.(2009).Teachers’andstudents’experiencesofsimultaneousteachinginan
internationaldistanceandon‐campusmaster’sprogrammeinengineering.TheInternational
ReviewofResearchinOpenandDistributedLearning,10(3).
Said,H.,Kirgis,L.,Verkamp,B.,&Johnson,L.(2015).On‐linevs.Face‐to‐FaceDeliveryof
InformationTechnologyCourses:Students’Assessment.JournalofInformationTechnology
Education:Research,14,297‐312.
Senn,G.(2008).Comparisonofface‐to‐faceandhybriddeliveryofacoursethatrequires
technologyskillsdevelopment.JournalofInformationTechnologyEducation:Research,7(1),
267‐283.
Stewart,A.R.,Harlow,D.B.,&DeBacco,K.(2011).Students’experienceofsynchronous
learningindistributedenvironments.DistanceEducation,32(3),357‐381.
SwedishCouncilforHigherEducation(2017a)."Sökaantagningsstatistik"(Seekapplication
statistics),Retrieved(06/11/2017)from:https://www.uhr.se/studier‐och‐
antagning/Antagningsstatistik/soka‐antagningsstatistik/
SwedishCouncilforHigherEducation(2017b)"Fewerapplicantsbutmoreacceptedto
highereducationinSweden",Retrieved(06/11/2017)from:
https://www.uhr.se/en/start/about‐the‐council/news/fewer‐applicants‐but‐more‐accepted‐
to‐higher‐education‐in‐sweden2/
Szeto,E.(2014).Acomparisonofonline/face‐to‐facestudents’andinstructor'sexperiences:
Examiningblendedsynchronouslearningeffects.Procedia‐SocialandBehavioralSciences,
116,4250‐4254.
Ybarra,M.E.(2016).STEMEducation‐AnExplorationofItsImpactonFemaleAcademic
SuccessinHighSchool(Doctoraldissertation,ChapmanUniversity).
Watson,J.(2008).BlendedLearning:TheConvergenceofOnlineandFace‐to‐FaceEducation.
PromisingPracticesinOnlineLearning.NorthAmericanCouncilforOnlineLearning.
Werner,L.L.,Hanks,B.,&McDowell,C.(2004).Pair‐programminghelpsfemalecomputer
sciencestudents.JournalonEducationalResourcesinComputing(JERIC),4(1),4.
VonHellens,L.A.,Pringle,R.,Nielsen,S.H.,&Greenhill,A.(2000).People,businessandIT
skills:TheperspectiveofwomenintheITindustry.InProceedingsofthe2000ACMSIGCPR
conferenceonComputerpersonnelresearch(pp.152‐157).ACM.
VonHellens,L.A.,Nielsen,S.H.,&Trauth,E.M.(2001).Breakingandenteringthemale
domain.WomenintheITindustry.InProceedingsofthe2001ACMSIGCPRconferenceon
Computerpersonnelresearch(pp.116‐120).ACM.
Womengineer(2017).Retrieved(10/11/2017)from:"Aboutus"
http://womengineer.org/we‐are‐womengineer/
Östersundsposten(25/02/2017,p.16)."Jagvillinspireratjejerattsöka"(Iwanttoinspire
girlstoapply)http:///www.op.se/