research-article

Gender and Engagement in CS Courses on Piazza

Authors:

Adrian Thinnyun,

Raymond Pettit,

John R. HottAuthors Info & Claims

SIGCSE '21: Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Pages 438 - 444

https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432395

Published: 05 March 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Online discussion forums are being increasingly used in classrooms as a way to encourage collaborative learning and community. Piazza is one such forum that was built specifically for academic institutions, and has been widely adopted. Students have the opportunity to ask questions and seek answers from peers and instructors alike online, allowing them to find the information they need even if they do not know fellow students in the class or if they cannot make an instructor's office hours. However, recent analysis of the popular online discussion site Stack Overflow, suggests that women are more likely than men to withdraw from such a community if they do not identify other members of the same gender. Women are often a minority in computer science courses and may express difficulty interacting with or seeking help from their peers who are predominantly men. Considering the importance of providing equal access to students regardless of gender and the value of resources like Piazza in one's education, it is imperative to assess the representation and impact of gender on Piazza. We analyzed data from over 2,500 Piazza users across three computer science courses at the University of Virginia and found that women on Piazza post more questions than men, spend more time on the discussion site, and achieve higher reputation scores on average. However, they are more likely than men to both ask and answer questions anonymously and less likely to receive responses from members of the same gender.

References

[1]

2015. STEM Confidence Gap. https://web.archive.org/web/20170623181749/http://blog.piazza.com/stem-confidence-gap/. Accessed: 2020-08-16.

[2]

2019. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_325.35.asp?current=yes. Accessed: 2020-08-16.

[3]

2019. Which Colleges Are Best and Worst at Enrolling and Graduating Women in Computer Science and Engineering? https://www.chronicle.com/article/which-colleges-are-best-and-worst-at-enrolling-and-graduating-women-in-computer-science-and-engineering/. Accessed: 2020-08-17.

[4]

2020. All Sites - Stack Exchange. https://stackexchange.com/sites?view=list#users. Accessed: 2020-08-16.

[5]

David J Barnes. 1999. Public forum help seeking: the impact of providing anonymity on student help seeking behavior. Computer Based Learning in Science(CBLIS'99) (1999).

[6]

Sapna Cheryan, Victoria C Plaut, Paul G Davies, and Claude M Steele. 2009. Ambient belonging: how stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 97, 6 (2009), 1045.

[7]

Barry H Cohen. 2008. Explaining psychological statistics .John Wiley & Sons.

[8]

Jacob Cohen. 2013. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences .Academic press.

[9]

Janice Cuny and William Aspray. 2002. Recruitment and retention of women graduate students in computer science and engineering: results of a workshop organized by the computing research association. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 34, 2 (2002), 168--174.

Digital Library

[10]

Allan Fisher, Jane Margolis, and Faye Miller. 1997. Undergraduate women in computer science: experience, motivation and culture. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 29, 1 (1997), 106--110.

Digital Library

[11]

Denae Ford, Alisse Harkins, and Chris Parnin. 2017. Someone like me: How does peer parity influence participation of women on stack overflow?. In 2017 IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing (VL/HCC). IEEE, 239--243.

[12]

Denae Ford, Justin Smith, Philip J Guo, and Chris Parnin. 2016. Paradise unplugged: Identifying barriers for female participation on stack overflow. In Proceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 846--857.

Digital Library

[13]

Karen A Frenkel. 1990. Women and computing. Commun. ACM, Vol. 33, 11 (1990), 34--46.

Digital Library

[14]

Denise Gürer. 2002. Pioneering women in computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 34, 2 (2002), 175--180.

Digital Library

[15]

Adrienne B Hancock and Benjamin A Rubin. 2015. Influence of communication partner's gender on language. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 34, 1 (2015), 46--64.

[16]

Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Carolyn Buck Luce, Lisa J Servon, Laura Sherbin, Peggy Shiller, Eytan Sosnovich, and Karen Sumberg. 2008. The Athena factor: Reversing the brain drain in science, engineering, and technology. Harvard Business Review Research Report, Vol. 10094 (2008), 1--100.

[17]

Bin-Shyan Jong, Chien-Hung Lai, Yen-Teh Hsia, and Tsong-Wuu Lin. 2012. Effects of anonymity in group discussion on peer interaction and learning achievement. IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 56, 3 (2012), 292--299.

Digital Library

[18]

Maria Klawe and Nancy Leveson. 1995. Women in Computing: Where are we now? Commun. ACM, Vol. 38, 1 (1995), 29--35.

Digital Library

[19]

Catherine G Krupnick. 1985. Women and men in the classroom: Inequality and its remedies. On teaching and learning, Vol. 1, 1 (1985), 18--25.

[20]

Sophie L Kuchynka, Kristen Salomon, Jennifer K Bosson, Mona El-Hout, Elizabeth Kiebel, Claudia Cooperman, and Ryan Toomey. 2018. Hostile and benevolent sexism and college women's STEM outcomes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol. 42, 1 (2018), 72--87.

[21]

Karyn L Lewis, Jane G Stout, Noah D Finkelstein, Steven J Pollock, Akira Miyake, Geoff L Cohen, and Tiffany A Ito. 2017. Fitting in to move forward: Belonging, gender, and persistence in the physical sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pSTEM). Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol. 41, 4 (2017), 420--436.

[22]

Henry B Mann and Donald R Whitney. 1947. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. The annals of mathematical statistics (1947), 50--60.

[23]

Jane Margolis and Allan Fisher. 2002. Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing .MIT press.

[24]

Jane Margolis, Allan Fisher, and Faye Miller. 2000. The anatomy of interest: Women in undergraduate computer science. Women's Studies Quarterly, Vol. 28, 1/2 (2000), 104--127.

[25]

Anna May, Johannes Wachs, and Anikó Hannák. 2019. Gender differences in participation and reward on Stack Overflow. Empirical Software Engineering, Vol. 24, 4 (2019), 1997--2019.

Digital Library

[26]

Savannah Morgan. 2017. How are programming questions from women received on stack overflow? a case study of peer parity. In Proceedings Companion of the 2017 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Systems, Programming, Languages, and Applications: Software for Humanity. 39--41.

Digital Library

[27]

Mary C Murphy, Claude M Steele, and James J Gross. 2007. Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological science, Vol. 18, 10 (2007), 879--885.

[28]

Scott E Page. 2019. The diversity bonus: How great teams pay off in the knowledge economy. Princeton University Press.

[29]

Paul De Palma. 2001. Why women avoid computer science. Commun. ACM, Vol. 44, 6 (2001), 27--30.

Digital Library

[30]

Vreda Pieterse, Derrick G Kourie, and Inge P Sonnekus. 2006. Software engineering team diversity and performance. In Proceedings of the 2006 annual research conference of the South African institute of computer scientists and information technologists on IT research in developing countries. 180--186.

Digital Library

[31]

William Rau and Barbara Sherman Heyl. 1990. Humanizing the college classroom: Collaborative learning and social organization among students. Teaching Sociology (1990), 141--155.

[32]

Eric S Roberts, Marina Kassianidou, and Lilly Irani. 2002. Encouraging women in computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 34, 2 (2002), 84--88.

Digital Library

[33]

Pooja Sankar. 2020. Our Story. https://piazza.com/about/story. Accessed: 2020-08--16.

[34]

Pooja Sankar, Jessica Gilmartin, and Melissa Sobel. 2015. An examination of belongingness and confidence among female computer science students. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, Vol. 45, 2 (2015), 7--10.

Digital Library

[35]

Jessi L Smith, Karyn L Lewis, Lauren Hawthorne, and Sara D Hodges. 2013. When trying hard isn't natural: Women's belonging with and motivation for male-dominated STEM fields as a function of effort expenditure concerns. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 39, 2 (2013), 131--143.

[36]

Melissa Sobel, Jessica Gilmartin, and Pooja Sankar. 2016. Class size and confidence levels among female STEM students [Impact]. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Vol. 35, 1 (2016), 23--26.

[37]

Joy Teague and Val Clarke. 1996. Improving gender equity in computing programmes: some suggestions for increasing female participation and retention rates. In Proceedings of the 1st Australasian conference on Computer science education. 164--170.

Digital Library

[38]

Bogdan Vasilescu, Andrea Capiluppi, and Alexander Serebrenik. 2012. Gender, representation and online participation: A quantitative study of stackoverflow. In 2012 International Conference on Social Informatics. IEEE, 332--338.

Digital Library

[39]

Bogdan Vasilescu, Andrea Capiluppi, and Alexander Serebrenik. 2014. Gender, representation and online participation: A quantitative study. Interacting with Computers, Vol. 26, 5 (2014), 488--511.

Cited By

Ko SStephens-Martinez KZahn MVelasco YBattestilli LHeckman SStone JYuen TShoop LRebelsky SPrather J(2025)Student Perceptions of the Help Resource LandscapeProceedings of the 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3641554.3701851(596-602)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641554.3701851
Ramirez Osorio VZavaleta Bernuy ASimion BLiut MStone JYuen TShoop LRebelsky SPrather J(2025)Understanding the Impact of Using Generative AI Tools in a Database CourseProceedings of the 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3641554.3701785(959-965)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641554.3701785
Chen HShi NChen LLee R(2024)Enhancing educational Q&A systems using a Chaotic Fuzzy Logic-Augmented large language modelFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence10.3389/frai.2024.14049407Online publication date: 8-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1404940
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Gender and Engagement in CS Courses on Piazza
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing
    1. Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing
2. Social and professional topics
  1. User characteristics
    1. Gender

Recommendations

Project-Based and Assignment-Based Courses: A Study of Piazza Engagement and Gender in Online Courses
ITiCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1

Project-based (PB) learning has become increasingly popular in computer science education, particularly as studies have found that the teaching style better prepares students for future careers and improves learning outcomes through increased student ...
Paradise unplugged: identifying barriers for female participation on stack overflow
FSE 2016: Proceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering

It is no secret that females engage less in programming fields than males. However, in online communities, such as Stack Overflow, this gender gap is even more extreme: only 5.8% of contributors are female. In this paper, we use a mixed-methods ...
Intersections of gender and sexual minority status

The present study refined existing bullying literature by examining differences in risk of three types of bullying victimization (offline only, cyberbullying only, and co-occurring victimization) for four different gender-sexual minority status groups ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SIGCSE '21: Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

March 2021

1454 pages

ISBN:9781450380621

DOI:10.1145/3408877

General Chairs:
Mark Sherriff
University of Virginia, USA
,
Laurence D. Merkle
Air Force Institute of Technology, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Pamela Cutter
Kalamazoo College, USA
,
Alvaro Monge
California State University, Long Beach, USA
,
Judithe Sheard
Monash University, Australia

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

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. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGCSE: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 05 March 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

SIGCSE '21

Sponsor:

SIGCSE

SIGCSE '21: The 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

March 13 - 20, 2021

Virtual Event, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,787 of 5,146 submissions, 35%

Upcoming Conference

SIGCSE TS 2025

Sponsor:
sigcse

The 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

February 26 - March 1, 2025

Pittsburgh , PA , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

19
Total Citations
View Citations
513
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)60
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6

Reflects downloads up to 18 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ko SStephens-Martinez KZahn MVelasco YBattestilli LHeckman SStone JYuen TShoop LRebelsky SPrather J(2025)Student Perceptions of the Help Resource LandscapeProceedings of the 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3641554.3701851(596-602)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641554.3701851
Ramirez Osorio VZavaleta Bernuy ASimion BLiut MStone JYuen TShoop LRebelsky SPrather J(2025)Understanding the Impact of Using Generative AI Tools in a Database CourseProceedings of the 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3641554.3701785(959-965)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641554.3701785
Chen HShi NChen LLee R(2024)Enhancing educational Q&A systems using a Chaotic Fuzzy Logic-Augmented large language modelFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence10.3389/frai.2024.14049407Online publication date: 8-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1404940
Chatterjee AChoudhuri RSarkar MChattopadhyay SLiu DHedaoo SBurnett MSarma A(2024)Debugging for Inclusivity in Online CS Courseware: Does it Work?Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671117(419-433)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671117
Sibia NBernuy ASimovic THuang CTan YSeong ENobre CZingaro DLiut MPetersen A(2024)Exploring the Effects of Grouping by Programming Experience in Q&A ForumsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671107(206-221)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671107
Ko SStephens-Martinez K(2024)The Trees in the Forest: Characterizing Computing Students' Individual Help-Seeking ApproachesProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671099(343-358)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671099
Chen HShi NChen LLee R(2024)Chaotic Fuzzy Logic for Enhanced Educational Q&A System2024 IEEE 6th International Conference on Power, Intelligent Computing and Systems (ICPICS)10.1109/ICPICS62053.2024.10795881(604-608)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPICS62053.2024.10795881
Kovaleva YKasurinen JKindsiko EHapponen A(2024)State-of-the-Art Review on Current Approaches to Female Inclusiveness in Software Engineering and Computer Science in Higher EducationIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.334676712(1360-1373)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3346767
Albakri SAda MMorrison A(2023)The Roles of Confidence and Perceived Usefulness in Female Student Engagement in High School Computing ScienceProceedings of the 18th WiPSCE Conference on Primary and Secondary Computing Education Research10.1145/3605468.3605497(1-9)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3605468.3605497
Sibia NZavaleta Bernuy AWilliams JLiut MPetersen ALaakso MMonga MSimon Sheard J(2023)Student Usage of Q&A Forums: Signs of Discomfort?Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3587102.3588842(33-39)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3587102.3588842
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten