Kai Marquardt
ABSTRACT
In computer science education (CSEd) it is a well-known challenge to create learning environments in which everyone can experience equal opportunities to identify themselves with the subject, get involved, and feel engaged. Especially for underrepresented groups such as girls or not computer enthusiasts, CSEd seems to lack sufficient opportunities at its current state. In this paper, we present a novel approach of using interdisciplinary online courses in the context of bee mortality and discuss the possibilities of such courses to enhance diverse learning in CSEd. We report summarized findings from a one-year period, including 16 workshops where over 160 secondary school students (aged 10-16) have participated in our online courses. Pre-test-post-test surveys have been conducted to gain insights into students' perceptions and attitude changes. The results show the potential of such interdisciplinary approaches to spark interest in computer science (CS) and to raise positive feelings toward programming. Particularly striking are the results from differentiated analyses of students grouped by characteristics such as low initial self-efficacy, coding aversion, or less computer affinity. We found multiple significant effects of our courses to impact students of those groups positively. Our results clearly indicate the potential of interdisciplinary CSEd to address a more diverse audience, especially traditionally underrepresented groups.
- Efthimia Aivaloglou and Felienne Hermans. 2019. Early programming education and career orientation: the effects of gender, self-efficacy, motivation and stereotypes. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM technical symposium on computer science education. 679--685.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Valerie Barr. 2016. Disciplinary thinking, computational doing: Promoting interdisciplinary computing while transforming computer science enrollments. ACM Inroads, Vol. 7, 2 (2016), 48--57.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Anette Bentz and Bernhard Standl. 2022. Identification of pupils' preferences of patterners and dramatists in secondary school computer science education. Discover Education, Vol. 1, 1 (2022), 1--16.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sylvia Beyer. 2014. Why are women underrepresented in Computer Science? Gender differences in stereotypes, self-efficacy, values, and interests and predictors of future CS course-taking and grades. Computer Science Education, Vol. 24, 2--3 (2014), 153--192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jilana S Boston and Andrei Cimpian. 2018. How do we encourage gifted girls to pursue and succeed in science and engineering? Gifted Child Today, Vol. 41, 4 (2018), 196--207.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lena Boström and Liv M Lassen. 2006. Unraveling learning, learning styles, learning strategies and meta-cognition. Education Training (2006).Google Scholar
- Caelin Bryant, Yesheng Chen, Zhen Chen, Jonathan Gilmour, Shyamala Gumidyala, Beatriz Herce-Hagiwara, Annabella Koures, Seoyeon Lee, James Msekela, Anh Thu Pham, et al. 2019. A middle-school camp emphasizing data science and computing for social good. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. 358--364.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barbora Buhnova and Lucia Happe. 2020. Girl-friendly computer science classroom: Czechitas experience report. In European Conference on Software Architecture. Springer, 125--137.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sapna Cheryan, Allison Master, and Andrew N Meltzoff. 2015. Cultural stereotypes as gatekeepers: Increasing girls' interest in computer science and engineering by diversifying stereotypes. Frontiers in psychology (2015), 49.Google Scholar
- Ingrid Maria Christensen, Melissa Høegh Marcher, Paweł Grabarczyk, Therese Graversen, and Claus Brabrand. 2021. Computing Educational Activities Involving People Rather Than Things Appeal More to Women (Recruitment Perspective). In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. 127--144.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Marie DesJardins and Michael Littman. 2010. Broadening student enthusiasm for computer science with a great insights course. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. 157--161.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dimiter M Dimitrov and Phillip D Rumrill Jr. 2003. Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, Vol. 20, 2 (2003), 159--165.Google Scholar
- Adisa Ejubovic and Adis Puska. 2019. Impact of self-regulated learning on academic performance and satisfaction of students in the online environment. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, Vol. 11, 3 (2019), 345--363.Google Scholar
- Michael Goldweber. 2018. Strategies for Adopting CSG-Ed In CS 1. In 2018 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT). IEEE, 1--2.Google Scholar
- Michael Goldweber, John Barr, Tony Clear, Renzo Davoli, Samuel Mann, Elizabeth Patitsas, and Scott Portnoff. 2013. A framework for enhancing the social good in computing education: a values approach. ACM Inroads, Vol. 4, 1 (2013), 58--79.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pawel Grabarczyk, Alma Freiesleben, Amanda Bastrup, and Claus Brabrand. 2022. Computing Educational Programmes with more Women are more about People & less about Things. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 1. 172--178.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Catrina Tamara Grella, Thomas Staubitz, Ralf Teusner, and Christoph Meinel. 2017. Can MOOCs support secondary education in computer science?. In International conference on interactive collaborative learning. Springer, 478--493.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Patricia Haden. 2019a. Descriptive Statistics. Cambridge University Press, 102--132. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108654555.006Google ScholarCross Ref
- Patricia Haden. 2019b. Inferential Statistics. Cambridge University Press, 133--172. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108654555.007Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lucia Happe and Barbora Buhnova. 2022. Frustrations Steering Women Away From Software Engineering. IEEE Software, Vol. 39, 4 (2022), 63--69. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2021.3099077Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lucia Happe, Barbora Buhnova, Anne Koziolek, and Ingo Wagner. 2021. Effective measures to foster girls' interest in secondary computer science education. Education and Information Technologies, Vol. 26, 3 (2021), 2811--2829.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lucia Happe and Kai Marquardt. 2023. RockStartIT: Authentic and Inclusive Interdisciplinary Software Engineering Courses. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: Workshops Proceedings.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Spencer E Harpe. 2015. How to analyze Likert and other rating scale data. Currents in pharmacy teaching and learning, Vol. 7, 6 (2015), 836--850.Google Scholar
- Kathryn Holmes, Jennifer Gore, Max Smith, and Adam Lloyd. 2018. An integrated analysis of school students' aspirations for STEM careers: Which student and school factors are most predictive? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 16, 4 (2018), 655--675.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andreas Krapp. 2007. An educational--psychological conceptualisation of interest. International journal for educational and vocational guidance, Vol. 7, 1 (2007), 5--21.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniël Lakens. 2013. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in psychology, Vol. 4 (2013).Google Scholar
- Kai Marquardt, Ingo Wagner, and Lucia Happe. 2023. Engaging Girls in Computer Science: Do Single-Gender Interdisciplinary Classes Help?. In ICSE '23: Proceedings of the 45th International Conference on Software Engineering Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, United States. accepted.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wan Ng and Jennifer Fergusson. 2020. Engaging high school girls in interdisciplinary STEAM. Science Education International, Vol. 31, 3 (2020), 283--294.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jonathan Plucker and Dasha Zabelina. 2009. Creativity and interdisciplinarity: One creativity or many creativities? Zdm, Vol. 41, 1 (2009), 5--11.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jerome I Rotgans and Henk G Schmidt. 2017. Interest development: Arousing situational interest affects the growth trajectory of individual interest. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 49 (2017), 175--184.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mariam Salloum, Daniel Jeske, Wenxiu Ma, Vagelis Papalexakis, Christian Shelton, Vassilis Tsotras, and Shuheng Zhou. 2021. Developing an interdisciplinary data science program. In Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. 509--515.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Miwa A Takeuchi, Pratim Sengupta, Marie-Claire Shanahan, Jennifer D Adams, and Maryam Hachem. 2020. Transdisciplinarity in STEM education: A critical review. Studies in Science Education, Vol. 56, 2 (2020), 213--253.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Una Tellhed, Fredrik Björklund, and Kalle Kallio Strand. 2022. Sure I can code (but do I want to?). Why boys' and girls' programming beliefs differ and the effects of mandatory programming education. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 135 (2022), 107370.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Russell Tytler, Gaye Williams, Linda Hobbs, and Judy Anderson. 2019. Challenges and opportunities for a STEM interdisciplinary agenda. Interdisciplinary mathematics education (2019), 51--81.Google Scholar
- Fanny Vainionpaa, Marianne Kinnula, Netta Iivari, and Tonja Molin-Juustila. 2019. Gendering and segregation in girls' perceptions of IT as a career choice--A nexus analytic inquiry. (2019).Google Scholar
- E. Vidal, E. Castro, S. Montoya, and K. Payihuanca. 2020. Closing the Gender Gap in Engineering: Students Role Model Program. In 2020 43rd International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO). 1493--1496. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO48935.2020.9245186Google ScholarCross Ref
- Roel Wieringa and Maya Daneva. 2015. Six strategies for generalizing software engineering theories. Science of computer programming, Vol. 101 (2015), 136--152.Google Scholar
- Jeanna R Wieselmann, Emily A Dare, Elizabeth A Ring-Whalen, and Gillian H Roehrig. 2020. ?I just do what the boys tell me": Exploring small group student interactions in an integrated STEM unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 57, 1 (2020), 112--144.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Caro C Williams-Pierce. 2011. Five key ingredients for improving student motivation. (2011).Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Saving Bees with Computer Science: A Way to Spark Enthusiasm and Interest through Interdisciplinary Online Courses
Recommendations
Diversity Barriers in K-12 Computer Science Education: Structural and Social
SIGCSE '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationAs computer science (CS) education expands at the K-12 level, we must be careful to ensure that CS neither exacerbates existing equity gaps in education nor hinders efforts to diversify the field of CS. In this paper, we discuss structural and social ...
Improving computer science diversity through summer camps
SIGCSE 08Summer camps offer a ripe opportunity for increasing computer science diversity. This panel provides several examples of summer camps that specifically recruit from traditionally underrepresented demographics. The panelists run camps at a community ...
Engaging Girls in Computer Science: Do Single-Gender Interdisciplinary Classes Help?
ICSE-SEET '23: Proceedings of the 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and TrainingComputing-driven innovation cannot reach its full potential if only a fraction of the population is involved. Without girls and their non-stereotypical contribution, the innovation potential is severely limited. In computer science (CS) and software ...
Comments