=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3776/paper08
|storemode=property
|title=Female-inclusive practices for software engineering and computer science higher education: A literature review
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3776/paper08.pdf
|volume=Vol-3776
|authors=Yekaterina Kovaleva,Ari Happonen,Manuel B. Garcia,Jussi Kasurinen
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/tktp/KovalevaHGK24
}}
==Female-inclusive practices for software engineering and computer science higher education: A literature review==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3776/paper08.pdf
Female-inclusive Practices for Software Engineering and
Computer Science Higher Education: A Literature Review
Yekaterina Kovaleva1,†, Ari Happonen1,∗,† Manuel B. Garcia2,† and Jussi Kasurinen1,†
1 LUT University, Yliopistonkatu 34, 53850 Lappeenranta, Finland
2 FEU Institute of Technology, Padre Paredes St, Sampaloc, Manila, 1015 Metro Manila, Philippines
Abstract
There have been discussions about the gender gap in STEM majors. While some fields (e.g.,
Biomedical Sciences) have a high proportion of women workers, the Computer Science (CS) and
Software Engineering (SE) disciplines are lacking female specialists. Universities worldwide are
implementing different practices to attract more women to the CS and SE programs. This literature
review aims to collect literature on this topic, identify the research tendencies, and collect female-
inclusive practices. This paper presents the main findings from analyzing 143 selected papers from
five academic databases (IEEE, ACM, Web of Science, Science Direct, and Scopus). The analysis
revealed the need for inclusivity across all education stages, emphasizing practical studies beyond
the classroom. Twenty-eight gender-inclusive practices were identified.
Keywords
software engineering, computer science, ICT, gender, diversity, education, literature review 1
1. Introduction education and guide implementation and further
research. This study sought to answer the following
The low ratio of women in STEM interests researchers research questions:
around the world [10]. Special attention is paid to the RQ1: What is the state-of-the-art gender research in
fields that face higher gender imbalance: Mechanical and SE and CS tertiary education?
Electrical Engineering, Physics, Math, and Computer This question aims to provide an overview of the
Science [26, 33]. Gender balance in tech may bring many current state of gender research, specifically within
benefits to the field. Firstly, there is a growing demand Software Engineering and Computer Science higher
for ICT and high-tech technology specialists, and education. It sets the foundation for understanding this
bringing more women to the field may fill the workforce area's existing literature and knowledge base.
gap [42]. Secondly, diversity brings innovative ideas and RQ2: Which gender-inclusive practices are provided
stimulates knowledge-sharing and innovative thinking in the literature?
[89]. And thirdly, diverse teams have a better This question focuses on identifying existing
understanding of different users’ needs [25]. gender-inclusive practices documented in the literature.
The understanding of the gender challenges in SE It seeks to compile a comprehensive list of strategies and
and CS education, different students’ needs, and approaches that have been proposed or implemented to
practices that help to eliminate the gender gap may help promote inclusivity in SE and CS education.
universities and other tertiary educational institutions RQ3: To what extent have these practices been
to achieve a better balance in the programs. researched, and are they ready for implementation?
This study aims to summarize current knowledge This question delves deeper into the effectiveness
regarding gender-inclusive practices in Software and readiness of the identified gender-inclusive
Engineering (SE) and Computer Science (CS) higher practices. It seeks to assess the level of research and
TKTP 2024: Annual Doctoral Symposium of Computer Science, 10.- jussi.kasurinen@lut.fi (J. Kasurinen);
11.6.2024 Vaasa, Finland 0000-0002-8069-3905 (Y. Kovaleva); 0000-0003-0744-1776 (A.
∗ Corresponding author. Happonen); 0000-0003-2615-422X (M.B. Garcia), 0000-0001-9454-
† These authors contributed equally. 8664 (J. Kasurinen)
yekaterina.kovaleva@lut.fi (Y. Kovaleva); © 2023 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under
Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
ari.happonen@lut.fi (A. Happonen);
mbgarcia@feutech.edu.ph (M.B. Garcia);
CEUR
ceur-ws.org
Workshop ISSN 1613-0073
Proceedings
evidence supporting each practice and determine their 3. Method
feasibility for implementation in SE and CS higher
education settings. To build an understanding of existing knowledge, we
used the Scoping Literature Review that, by its nature,
2. Background attempts to build a comprehensive understanding of the
existing research activities [68]. The search was
Historically, labor division was explained by different performed systematically, and the sample is based on the
physical strength requirements and cultural beliefs search results from five academic publication databases
regarding gender roles. Nowadays, technologies have (Scopus, IEEE, ACM, Web of Science, Science Direct)
replaced humans in many physical tasks and allowed aiming to summarize current knowledge regarding
women to enter previously male-dominated professions. gender-inclusive practices in Software Engineering (SE)
However, the gender gap persists in many fields, and Computer Science (CS) higher education.
including Computer Science (CS), Software Engineering The review process started with literature selection,
(SE), physics, mathematics, etc. which consisted of the following stages: keyword
Social factors like the pressure of stereotypes, generation and tests, literature collection, and inclusion
dominant social norms, and habits currently explain the [72].
low female presence in tech [22]. For example, one Firstly, keywords were generated. Logically, they
sociocultural habit is encouraging boys to develop their were divided into three groups: “gender keywords,”
computer skills, while girls rarely play computer games “educational level,” and “SE and CS.” After several
or participate in advanced computer classes [55]. At search tests and modifications, we ended up with the
school ages, educators and parents may influence their following list of keywords, presented in Figure 1.
career decisions based on social norms [40, 85]. Young Considering the fast growth of SE and CS industries,
women who faced gender discrimination during their the search for publications was limited, starting from
childhood and adolescence most likely will feel less 2015 to 2022. The search was also limited to the
confident about entering the male-dominant field [22, literature in English. After the exclusion of duplicates,
33]. Even women already studying CS as their major rate the total number of found literature samples from the
their computer, mathematics, and intellectual skills selected five databases was 882 unique studies. Then, the
lower than male students [54]. Therefore, even if girls selection and exclusion processes were initiated. This
decide to enter engineering fields by choosing an process consisted of the following steps: inclusion
educational program in technology and later a criteria identification, title-based evaluation, abstracts-
technology-related career, there is still a considerable based evaluation, and finally, full text-based evaluation.
risk that they keep feeling discomfort and drop out of For the inclusion, we have identified the following
school or switch to another career path [14, 51] as criteria:
women are 2.5 times more likely to leave a computing
career than men [55]. • The study should be focused on a female
However, the feeling of belonging and self-efficacy experience or gender differences.
beliefs may be fixed by gender-inclusive interventions • The study must be related to higher education.
[9, 61]. For example, the study by Lewis et al. found that
• The study must focus on CS, SE, or ICT.
some students could easily reject the stereotypes about
computer science when they could provide an example During the evaluation, 143 publications were
of cases when the reality did not match these stereotypes selected for the final list. The full process is presented
[51]. Thus, even by sharing and promoting non- in Figure 1.
stereotypical stories, society can move forward to the Then, following the study goal, we performed a
gender balance in CS. Indeed, there are more complex literature analysis to understand the current state of
measures that could be implemented in different research, summarize gender-inclusive practices, and
institutions to close the gender gap. At the university define the focus of future research. The following
level, these activities could be introduced in enrollment, sections contain the main findings of this literature
learning processes, social activities, and more [43]. The analysis.
explanations of the current situation and possible
solutions for better gender balance are already presented
in the literature. This study will help to systematize the
body of knowledge about gender research in SE and CS
tertiary education and summarize the gender-inclusive
practices that researchers suggest.
Figure 1: Keywords and search process.
4. Results programming on male and female students. At the same
time, Al-Tahat et al. [3] assessed the impact of 3D visual
The included academic publications literature set practical implementations on female students'
consisted of 105 conference papers, 36 journal articles, performance in computer programming. The university-
and 2 book chapters. level group considers observations, activities, and
strategies that go beyond the classroom. Thus,
4.1. Literature overview Narayanan et al. [63] describe the recruitment process,
which emphasizes the opportunities for computing jobs
During analysis, the literature was grouped based on the
and their real-world impact, providing tutoring, building
following dimensions: research results, focus area, and
a learning community among students, and having
students’ experience. The literature distribution map is
internships during the program. Janzen et al. [35] , in
presented in Figure 2.
addition to special approaches to the courses, suggest
The “research results” dimension presents the main
supporting informal activities, clubs, and celebrations of
output of every research paper; it consists of
women in computing. From a broader perspective, we
“observations and explanations,” “proposals,” and
consider the papers that suggest a more complex
“practical implementations.” Literature from the
approach, requiring additional observations or
“observations and explanations” provides an
initiatives outside the university activities. Thus, for
understanding of the experiences of female students
instance, Main and Schimpf [55] , in their study,
from SE and CS and their main characteristics.
investigate different life stages of women in CS. Wang
“Proposals” suggest what could be done to improve the
et al. observe social factors that define female intentions
gender situation. And “practical implementations”
to study CS [85]. The analysis showed that the majority
provide the results of implementing gender-inclusive
(81) of papers focus on the University level in general,
initiatives. The total number of studies in each group is
46 study courses or initiatives, and only 16 overviews a
59, 35, and 49, respectively.
broader perspective.
Considering the “focus areas,” papers could be
The authors investigate female students’
grouped into those focusing on courses or initiatives,
experiences in the field: enrollment, learning process,
university-level activities, or broader perspectives. At a
interest and motivation, and persistence.
course level, researchers observed the student’s
behavior in class and suggested techniques to improve
the female experience in the course. For example, Ying
and colleagues [88] investigated the effect of pair
Figure 2: Literature map.
Most (64) publications consider the learning process However, most of them present initiatives
the main focus of the study. A little less common (47) are implemented in the learning process.
studies that study female interest and motivation in Therefore, more practical studies regarding
general, then enrollment (19) and persistence (13). enrollment, interest and motivation, and
The following observations addressing the RQ1 can persistence are needed.
be seen from this map:
4.2. Literature analysis
1. The smaller the focus area is, the more
practical tests researchers make. Testing the To answer the RQ2 and RQ3, further analysis was
measures and assessing their effectiveness in a focused on the “Research Results” dimension. To
classroom context is easier than in the understand which gender-inclusive activities
university or society. Meanwhile, observing researchers suggest, “Practical implementation” and
female behavior and feelings from the course “Proposals” were analyzed.
perspective could expand the understanding of Practical implementations present the results of
potential improvements that are needed in the actions that were tested and implemented in practice.
learning process. Proposals suggest ways to improve the CS and SE
2. From the students’ experience perspective, programs. They are based on literature, interviews,
only 13 of the studies consider female early-stage practical tests, and other promising results
persistence in the field. If society aims to have that suggest the need for more practical tests.
a gender balance in CS and SE education and Overall, the practices were combined into 28
the industry in general, there is a need to categories, as presented in Table 1. Not all the activities
ensure the inclusivity of all stages of the are specifically focused on gender. However, they
educational process not only to attract more proved to have a positive impact on female audiences.
women but also to lead them to graduation and Therefore, the practices were divided into gender-
employment. specific and gender-neutral [43] recommendations.
3. There is low interest in female enrollment.
Indeed, improving the learning environment
and female education experience in SE and CS
education is important. However, it is
impossible to achieve a gender-balanced
program without increasing the number of
women entering the university to study SE and
CS.
4. Overall, there is a quite high number of
practical studies investigating the phenomena.
Table 1
Gender-inclusive practices.
Gender-inclusive practice Practical Proposals Description
implementations
Gender-specific recommendations
Outreach activities [10, 12, 16, 24, 28, 39, 48, [2, 6, 11, 32, 37, 74, 77] Promotion of computing through
50, 60, 63, 65, 70, 71, 73,
79, 80] engagement: school visits, workshops,
hackathons, summer camps, etc.
Building female community [35, 45, 63, 64, 76, 86, 87] [2, 5, 7, 32, 36, 37, 47, 58, Arranging networking opportunities for
78, 84]
female students outside of classes
Female-focused marketing [28, 75] [2, 58, 59] Including female-inclusivity in marketing
activities and materials
Gender talks [24, 75] [27, 32, 34, 58, 84] Acknowledging gender issues in and outside
of the class and presenting successful female
speakers
Diverse teaching staff [75] [4, 34, 36, 47] Ensuring faculty diversity
Female-only environment [50, 87] Making female-only courses, events, and
programs
Targeted recruitment [38] [6, 36] Having quotas for women
Gender-inclusive materials [1, 62] [37, 52, 69] Ensuring that educational materials are free
from stereotypes and biases
Inclusive environment [56, 76] [4, 8, 13, 36, 58, 81, 84] Ensuring that the university has diversity-
supporting policies, zero tolerance for
discrimination; covering female needs, etc.
Creation of a diversity- [7] Creating separate department responsible for
focused action group diversity
Faculty training [7, 8, 18, 19, 34, 36, 53, Educating teaching staff about gender-
59, 69]
inclusive tactics and principles in education
Gender-neutral recommendations
Industry collaboration [15, 86] [27, 37, 47, 59, 77] Involving industry in education
Gamification [3, 38, 44, 66, 67] [27, 29] Using gamification in educational processes
Mentoring [10, 23, 38, 44, 45, 63, 64, [4, 7, 8, 19, 27, 32, 36, 37, Support students with mentors and tutors
76, 79, 86] 52, 53, 58, 77, 78, 84]
Preliminary training [10, 63, 75] [53, 74] Filling the educational gaps before the
program/course starts
Growth mindset [15] [41, 84] Encouraging students to focus on learning and
interventions expanding their knowledge
Practical focus [12, 30, 31, 35, 38, 41, 45, [2, 47] Focusing education on practical
63, 75]
implementations of knowledge
Teamwork/peer-learning [30, 35, 38, 44–46, 49, 50, [6, 37, 52, 78, 81, 84] Encouraging collaboration and working in a
75, 88]
team
Physical computing [12, 39, 80, 83] Using hardware, robots, etc. in studies
Flipped classroom [49, 79] [37] Combining in-class and self-learning
Focus on impact [1, 38, 57, 63, 67, 70] [5, 20, 82, 84] Demonstrating social effect of computing
Collaboration with parents [28, 64, 70] [6, 8] Educating parents and high school teachers
and high-school teachers about computing
Real-life focus [12, 17, 30, 35, 38, 41, 44, [36, 84] Providing relatable examples and tasks
67]
Use of social media [41] Using social media in education
Storytelling [67] Creating learning based on narrative
Interdisciplinarity [65] [37, 59, 84] Making cross-disciplinary tasks, courses, and
programs
Professional orientation [2, 5, 6, 37, 47, 77, 84] Educating students about their career
prospects; supporting their employment
Project/problem-based [31, 35, 45, 50] [27, 37, 81, 84] Engaging students in problem and project-
learning based tasks
Based on the frequency of appearance in the Physics, Math, and Computer Science, remains a
literature, the recommendations for researchers and significant concern globally. Achieving gender balance
practitioners were made and presented in Table 2. in technology fields holds immense potential benefits,
including addressing workforce shortages, fostering
Table 2 innovation through diverse perspectives, and
Recommendations for researchers and practitioners enhancing user-centric design.
Practically tested This study addresses the gender gap in Software
• Outreach activities
Engineering (SE) and Computer Science (CS) higher
• Mentoring education by summarizing current knowledge on
• Teamwork/peer-learning gender-inclusive practices and providing guidance for
• Practical focus implementation and further research.
• Real-life focus The methodology employed a Scoping Literature
• Building female community Review to comprehensively understand existing
• Focus on impact research activities regarding gender-inclusive
• Gamification
practices in Software Engineering (SE) and Computer
• Project/problem-based learning
• Physical computing
Science (CS) higher education. The review process
Needed to be introduced in practice
began with systematic searches across five academic
publication databases, namely ACM, IEEE, Scopus,
• Inclusive environment
• Gender talks Web of Science, and Science Direct, resulting in a final
• Industry collaboration selection of 143 unique contributing studies.
• Diverse teaching staff The analysis of the literature involved grouping
• Faculty training based on research results, focus areas, and stages of
• Professional orientation the educational process. Within the "research results"
Research needed dimension, literature was categorized into
• Preliminary training "observations and explanations," "proposals," and
• Collaboration with parents and high-school teachers "practical implementations," providing insights into
• Female-focused marketing
female experiences in SE and CS, suggestions for
• Gender-inclusive materials
improvement, and outcomes of gender-inclusive
• Flipped classroom
• Female-only environment initiatives. More practical tests were made on a course
• Interdisciplinarity or initiative level as it is easier to evaluate initiatives
• Growth mindset interventions and their effectiveness in a classroom setting
• Targeted recruiting compared to a university or society-wide context.
• Use of social media Meanwhile, observations from the course level are
• Storytelling quite limited. Considering female students’
• Creation of a diversity-focused action group experience, the emphasis was largely on the learning
process; fewer studies addressed enrollment,
Some practices were widely researched and tested motivation, and persistence. Observations from this
and proved to be effective in engaging female audiences. analysis highlight the need for inclusivity across all
Therefore, they can be actively introduced in university stages of education to achieve gender balance in SE
activities to boost diversity. Practices that were and CS, emphasizing the importance of practical
mentioned in practical implementations more
studies beyond the classroom setting, particularly in
frequently (four times or more) are considered
enrollment and persistence initiatives.
“practically tested” and suggested to be implemented for
With a deeper literature analysis, 28 gender-
improving diversity.
inclusive practices were identified. Some of the
On the other hand, some practices are frequently
practices are less researched than others, so they
proposed (four times or more) as effective ways to
engage female students in computing. These practices were grouped according to their frequency of
were grouped into “needed to be introduced in practice.” appearance in the literature.
The last group combines the most under-researched Tertiary education institutions are suggested to
practices and requires additional studies. implement outreach activities, mentoring,
teamwork/peer-learning, practical focus, real-life
focus, building female community, focus on impact,
5. Discussion and conclusion
gamification, project/problem-based learning, and
The underrepresentation of women in STEM fields, physical computing for improving gender diversity.
particularly in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering,
Studies encourage the introduction of an inclusive Richardson. 2020. Computing to Change the
environment, gender talks, industry collaboration, World for the Better: A Research-Focused
diverse teaching staff, faculty training, and Workshop for Women. In 2020 Research on Equity
professional orientation. and Sustained Participation in Engineering,
More research is needed for preliminary training, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT), 2020. 1–
collaboration with parents and high-school teachers, 4. h
female-focused marketing, gender-inclusive [6] Monica Babes-Vroman, Isabel Juniewicz, Bruno
materials, flipped classrooms, female-only Lucarelli, Nicole Fox, Thu Nguyen, and Andrew
environments, interdisciplinarity, growth mindset Tjang. 2017. Exploring Gender Diversity in CS at a
interventions, targeted recruiting, social media use, Large Public R1 Research University. In
storytelling, and the creation of a diversity-focused Proceedings Of The 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical
action group. Symposium on Computer Science Education
The authors acknowledge certain limitations of (SIGCSE’17), 2017. ACM, 51–56.
this study. Firstly, focusing exclusively on computer https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017773
[7] Anne Bartilla and Christian Koppe. 2016.
science and software engineering may not capture the
Organizational Patterns for Increasing Gender
complete spectrum of gender inclusivity challenges
Diversity in Computer Science Education. In
present across all STEM fields. This narrow focus
Proceedings of the 10th Travelling Conference On
might overlook valuable insights and practices from
Pattern Languages Of Programs
other STEM disciplines that could contribute to a
(VIKINGPLOP’16), 2016. ACM.
more comprehensive understanding of gender
https://doi.org/10.1145/3022636.3022646
inclusivity in education and the workforce. Limiting [8] N. Bencheva, N. Kostadinov, and I. Tsvetkova.
the study to higher education institutions may exclude 2018. Women in Information and Communication
potential insights from industry or non-traditional Technologies and How to Attract Them. In 2018
educational settings. Thus, while the paper provides 28th EAEEIE Annual Conference (EAEEIE), 2018.
valuable insights within its defined parameters, it is 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/EAEEIE.2018.8534291
essential to recognize these limitations and encourage [9] Jyoti Bhardwaj. 2017. In search of self-efficacy:
further research to explore gender inclusivity across development of a new instrument for first year
diverse STEM fields and educational contexts. Computer Science students. Computer Science
Education 27, 2 (2017), 79–99.
References [10] Valeria Borsotti. 2018. Barriers to Gender
Diversity in Software Development Education:
[1] Celia Fernandez Aller and Sara Roman Navarro.
Actionable Insights from a Danish Case Study. In
2018. Gender in software engineering degrees. In
2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on
ECSA 2018: Proceedings of the 12th European
Software Engineering: Software Engineering
Conference pn Software Architecture: Companion
Education and Training (ICSE-SEET), 2018. IEEE,
Proceedings, 2018. ACM.
146–152. https://doi.org/10.1145/3183377.3183390
[2] Amnah Alshahrani, Isla Ross, and Murray Wood I.
[11] Nuria Verges Bosch, Leon Freude, and Clara
2018. Using Social Cognitive Career Theory to
Camps Calvet. 2019. Service-Learning to Reflect
Understand Why Students Choose to Study
on Gender In Universities And Schools And Boost
Computer Science. In ICER’18: Proceedings of the
Women’s Presence In Ict. In 12th International
2018 ACM Conference on International
Conference of Education, Research And
Computing Education Research, 2018. ACM, 205–
Innovation (ICERI 2019), 2019. IATED-INT Assoc
214.
Technology Education & Development, 957–962.
[3] K. Al-Tahat, N. Taha, B. Hasan, and B. A. Shawar.
[12] C. Brady, K. Orton, D. Weintrop, G. Anton, S.
2016. The impact of a 3D visual tool on female
Rodriguez, and U. Wilensky. 2017. All Roads Lead
students attitude and performance in computer
to Computing: Making, Participatory Simulations,
programming. In 2016 SAI Computing Conference
and Social Computing as Pathways to Computer
(SAI), July 2016. 864–867.
Science. IEEE Transactions on Education 60, 1
[4] Christine Alvarado, Yingjun Cao, and Mia Minnes.
(February 2017), 59–66.
2017. Gender Differences in Students’ Behaviors in
https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2016.2622680
CS Classes throughout the CS Major. In
[13] M. Brigham and J. Porquet-Lupine. 2021. Gender
Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical
Differences in Class Participation in Core CS
Symposium on Computer Science Education
Courses. In Annual Conference on Innovation and
(SIGCSE’17), 2017. ACM, 27–32.
Technology in Computer Science Education,
[5] S. Asgari, B. Penzenstadler, A. Monge, and D.
ITiCSE, 2021. 478–483. (2017), 275–298.
[14] Amanda J. Brockman. 2021. “La Creme de la [23] Barbara Ericson and Tom McKlin. 2018. Helping
Creme”: How Racial, Gendered, and Intersectional Underrepresented Students Succeed in AP CSA
Social Comparisons Reveal Inequities That Affect and Beyond. In SIGCSE’18: Proceedings Of The
Sense of Belonging in STEM. Sociological Inquiry 49th ACM Technical Symposium On Computer
91, 4 (November 2021), 751–777. Science Education, 2018. ACM, 356–361.
[15] Jeni L. Burnette, Crystal L. Hoyt, V. Michelle [24] Francesco Faenza, Claudia Canali, Michele
Russell, Barry Lawson, Carol S. Dweck, and Eli Colajanni, and Antonella Carbonaro. 2021. The
Finkel. 2020. A Growth Mind-Set Intervention Digital Girls Response to Pandemic: Impacts of in
Improves Interest but Not Academic Performance Presence and Online Extracurricular Activities on
in the Field of Computer Science. Social Girls Future Academic Choices. Education
Psychological And Personality Science 11, 1 Sciences 11, 11 (November 2021).
(January 2020), 107–116. [25] Cordelia Fine, Victor Sojo, and Holly Lawford‐
[16] C. V. de Carvalho, Š Cerar, J. Rugelj, H. Tsalapatas, Smith. 2020. Why Does Workplace Gender
and O. Heidmann. 2020. Addressing the Gender Diversity Matter? Justice, Organizational Benefits,
Gap in Computer Programming Through the and Policy. Social Issues and Policy Review 14, 1
Design and Development of Serious Games. IEEE (January 2020), 36–72.
Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12064
Aprendizaje 15, 3 (August 2020), 242–251. [26] Carol Frieze and Jeria L. Quesenberry. 2019. How
[17] Yunjeong Chang, L. Cintron, J. Cohoon, J. Cohoon, computer science at CMU is attracting and
and L. Tychonievich. 2016. Instructional design retaining women. Commun. ACM 62, 2 (January
principles of diversity-focused professional 2019), 23–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3300226
development MOOC for community college [27] Alicia Garcia-Holgado, Andrea Vazquez-Ingelmo,
computing faculty: Lighthouse CC. In 2016 IEEE Sonia Verdugo-Castro, Carina Gonzalez, Ma Cruz
Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), October Sanchez Gomez, and Francisco J. Garcia-Penalvo.
2016. 1–5. 2019. Actions to Promote Diversity in Engineering
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2016.7757610 Studies: a Case Study in a Computer Science
[18] L. Cintron, Y. Chang, J. Cohoon, L. Tychonievich, Degree. In Proceedings of 2019 IEEE Global
B. Halsey, D. Yi, and G. Schmitt. 2019. Exploring Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON),
Underrepresented Student Motivation and 2019. IEEE, 793–800.
Perceptions of Collaborative Learning-Enhanced [28] Ludymila Lobo de Aguiar Gomes, Jose Reginaldo
CS Undergraduate Introductory Courses. In 2019 Hughes Carvalho, Tanara Lauschner, Fabiola G.
IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Nakamura, and Rosiane de Freitas. 2018.
October 2019. 1–6. Encouraging Women to Pursue a Computer
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE43999.2019.9028463 Science Career in the Context of a Third World
[19] Tanya L. Crenshaw, Erin W. Chambers, Cinda Country. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers In Education
Heeren, and Heather E. Metcalf. 2017. Ten Years Conference (FIE), 2018. IEEE.
toward Equity: Preliminary Results from a Follow- [29] Beatriz-Eugenia Grass, Mayela Coto, Cesar-
Up Case Study of Academic Computing Culture. Alberto Collazos-Ordonez, and Patricia
Frontiers in Psychology 8, (May 2017). Paderewski. 2020. Learning about Programming
[20] E. Dillon and K. L. Williams. 2020. Connecting and Epistemic Emotions: A Gendered Analysis.
with Computing: Exploring Black/African- Revista Facultad De Ingenieria, Universidad
American Women’s People-Centered Interests in Pedagogica Y Tecnologica De Colombia 29, 54
Computing Sciences. In 2020 Research on Equity (November 2020).
and Sustained Participation in Engineering, https://doi.org/10.19053/01211129.v29.n54.2020.12
Computing, and Technology (RESPECT), 2020. 1– 034
2. [30] Iris Groher, Barbara Sabitzer, Heike Demarle-
[21] Alice H. Eagly, Christa Nater, David I. Miller, Meusel, Lisa Kuka, and Alexander Hofer. 2021.
Michèle Kaufmann, and Sabine Sczesny. 2020. Work-in-Progress: Closing the Gaps: Diversity in
Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross- Programming Education. In Proceedings of the
temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls 2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education
from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist 75, 3 Conference (EDUCON), 2021. IEEE, 1455–1459.
(April 2020), 301–315. [31] H. A. Hallak, S. Ibrahim, C. Low, and A. El
https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000494 Mesalami. 2019. The Impact of Incorporating
[22] Naomi Ellemers. 2017. Gender Stereotypes. Vol. 69 Hands-on Raspberry Pi Projects with
Undergraduate Education in Boosting Students’ [41] Arshia Khan and Yichen Wei. 2017. Free Talk
Interest in Scientific/Engineering Majors and Zone: Inclusive Pedagogy to Encourage Women in
Encouraging Women and Minorities to Advance Computer Science. In Proceedings 2017
their Integration in Practical Fields. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Computational
Learning With MOOCS (LWMOOCS), 2019. 7–14. Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI),
https://doi.org/10.1109/LWMOOCS47620.2019.893 2017. IEEE, 1108–1114.
9622 https://doi.org/10.1109/CSCI.2017.193
[32] A. J. Hussain, L. Connell, H. Francis, D. Al-Jumeily, [42] Lisa Korrigane. 2019. A demographic snapshot of
P. Fergus, and N. Radi. 2016. An Investigation into the IT workforce in Europe. Commun. ACM 62, 4
Gender Disparities in the Field of Computing. In (March 2019), 32–32.
Proceedings - 2015 International Conference on https://doi.org/10.1145/3309915
Developments in eSystems Engineering, DeSE [43] Yekaterina Kovaleva, Ari Happonen, and Eneli
2015, 2016. 20–25. Kindsiko. 2022. Designing Gender-neutral
https://doi.org/10.1109/DeSE.2015.17 Software Engineering Program. Stereotypes,
[33] Janet Shibley Hyde. 2014. Gender Similarities and Social Pressure, and Current Attitudes Based on
Differences. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 65, 1 (January Recent Studies. IEEE/ACM 3rd International
2014), 373–398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev- Workshop on Gender Equality, Diversity and
psych-010213-115057 Inclusion in Software Engineering (GEICSE)
[34] L. Iftekhar, N. Ahmed, F. Chowdhury, and R. (2022), 43–50.
Rahman. 2015. Electrical and computer [44] C. Kröhn, I. Groher, B. Sabitzer, and L. Kuka. 2020.
engineering laboratory education for female Female Computer Scientists Needed: Approaches
undergraduate students: Challenges and solutions For Closing The Gender Gap. In 2020 IEEE
from an urban perspective of Bangladesh. In 2015 Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2020. 1–
10th International Conference on Computer 4. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273933
Science & Education (ICCSE), 2015. 389–394. [45] Anagha Kulkarni, Ilmi Yoon, Pleuni S. Pennings,
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSE.2015.7250276 Kazunori Okada, and Carmen Domingo. 2018.
[35] David S. Janzen, Sara Bahrami, Bruno C. da Silva, Promoting Diversity in Computing. In ITICSE’18:
and Davide Falessi. 2018. A Reflection on Diversity Proceedings of The 23rd Annual ACM Conference
and Inclusivity Efforts in a Software Engineering On Innovation and Technology in Computer
Program. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers In Education Science Education, 2018. ACM, 236–241.
Conference (FIE), 2018. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1145/3197091.3197145
[36] Nuria Jaumot-Pascual, Maria Ong, Christina Silva, [46] S. Kaur Kuttal, K. Gerstner, and A. Bejarano. 2019.
and Audrey Martinez-Gudapakkam. 2021. Women Remote Pair Programming in Online CS
of Color Leveraging Community Cultural Wealth Education: Investigating through a Gender Lens.
to Persist in Computing and Tech Graduate In 2019 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and
Education: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis. Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), October
Education Sciences 11, 12 (December 2021). 2019. 75–85.
[37] Naomi Johnson, Jonathon Garcia, and Kevin Seppi. https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2019.8818790
2019. Women in CS: changing the women or [47] Vivian Anette Lagesen, Ivar Pettersen, and Line
changing the world? In 2019 IEEE Frontiers In Berg. Inclusion of women to ICT engineering -
Education Conference (FIE 2019), 2019. IEEE. lessons learned. European Journal of Engineering
[38] Shahnaz Kamberi. 2017. Enticing Women to Education.
Computer Science with Es (Expose, Engage, https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2021.1983774
Encourage, Empower). In 2017 IEEE Women In [48] Catherine Lang, Annemieke Craig, and MaryAnne
Engineering (WIE) Forum USA EAST, 2017. IEEE. Egan. 2016. The Importance of Outreach Programs
[39] L. Keller and I. John. 2019. How Can Computer to Unblock the Pipeline and Broaden Diversity in
Science Faculties Increase the Proportion of ICT Education. International Journal of
Women in Computer Science by Using Robots? In Information and Communication Technology
2019 IEEE Global Engineering Education Education 12, 1 (January 2016), 38–49.
Conference (EDUCON), 2019. 206–210. [49] Celine Latulipe, Audrey Rorrer, and Bruce Long.
[40] Peter E. J. Kemp, Billy Wong, and Miles G. Berry. 2018. Longitudinal Data on Flipped Class Effects
2020. Female Performance and Participation in on Performance in CS1 and Retention after CS1. In
Computer Science: A National Picture. ACM SIGCSE’18: Proceedings of the 49th ACM
Trans. Comput. Educ. 20, 1 (February 2020), 1–28. Technical Symposium on Computer Science
https://doi.org/10.1145/3366016 Education, 2018. ACM, 411–416.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159518 2017. Broadening participation not border
[50] Grace Lawlor, Philip Byrne, and Brendan protection: how universities can support women
Tangney. 2020. “CodePlus”-Measuring Short- in computer science. Journal of Higher Education
Term Efficacy in a Non-Formal, All-Female CS Policy and Management 39, 4 (2017), 406–422.
Outreach Programme. ACM Transactions on https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2017.1330821
Computing Education 20, 4 (November 2020). [59] J. Miller and C. Jaiswal. 2018. Women in computer
https://doi.org/10.1145/3411510 science: A liberal arts perspective. In 2018 IEEE 8th
[51] Colleen M. Lewis, Ruth E. Anderson, and Ken Annual Computing and Communication
Yasuhara. 2016. “I Don’t Code All Day”: Fitting in Workshop and Conference (CCWC), 2018. 368–
Computer Science When the Stereotypes Don’t 374. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCWC.2018.8301709
Fit. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference [60] J. Miller, S. Raghavachary, and A. Goodney. 2018.
on International Computing Education Research Benefits of Exposing K-12 Students to Computer
(ICER’16), 2016. ACM, 23–32. Science through Summer Camp Programs. In 2018
[52] C. Lott, A. McAuliffe, and S. K. Kuttal. 2021. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE),
Remote Pair Collaborations of CS Students: October 2018. 1–5.
Leaving Women Behind? In 2021 IEEE Symposium https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8659101
on Visual Languages and Human-Centric [61] Catherine Mooney, Brett A. Becker, Lana Salmon,
Computing (VL/HCC), 2021. 1–11. and Eleni Mangina. 2018. Computer Science
https://doi.org/10.1109/VL/HCC51201.2021.957639 Identity and Sense of Belonging: A Case study in
4 Ireland. In 2018 IEEE/ACM 1st International
[53] Louise Ann Lyon and Jill Denner. 2019. Chutes and Workshop on Gender Equality in Software
Ladders: Institutional Setbacks on the Computer Engineering (GE 2018), 2018. IEEE, 1–4.
Science Community College Transfer Pathway. https://doi.org/10.1145/3195570.3195575
ACM Transactions on Computing Education 19, 3 [62] C. Murphy, A. Mushakevich, and Y. Park. 2021.
(June 2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3294009 Incorporating Readings on Diversity and Inclusion
[54] Jonathan Mahadeo, Zahra Hazari, and Geoff into a Traditional Software Engineering Course. In
Potvin. 2020. Developing a Computing Identity 2021 Conference on Research in Equitable and
Framework: Understanding Computer Science and Sustained Participation in Engineering,
Information Technology Career Choice. ACM Computing, and Technology (RESPECT), May
Transactions on Computing Education 20, 1 2021. 1–5.
(February 2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3365571 https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT51740.2021.96206
[55] J. B. Main and C. Schimpf. 2017. The 60
Underrepresentation of Women in Computing [63] Sathya Narayanan, Kathryn Cunningham, Sonia
Fields: A Synthesis of Literature Using a Life Arteaga, William J. Welch, Leslie Maxwell,
Course Perspective. IEEE Transactions on Zechariah Chawinga, and Bude Su. 2018. Upward
Education 60, 4 (2017), 296–304. Mobility for Underrepresented Students: A Model
https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2017.2704060 for a Cohort-Based Bachelor’s Degree in
[56] Sally Male, Melissa Marinelli, and Elaine Computer Science. In SIGCSE’18: Proceedings of
Chapman. 2021. Creating Inclusive Engineering the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer
and Computer Science Classes - the impact of Science Education, 2018. ACM, 705–710.
COVID-19 on student experiences and perceptions [64] N. Nesiba, J. Dana-Farley, N. Muhyi, J. Chen, N.
of gender inclusivity. In Proceedings of the 2021 Ray, and E. Pontelli. 2015. Young Women in
IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference Computing: Creating a successful and sustainable
(EDUCON), 2021. IEEE, 462–464. pipeline. In 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education
https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON46332.2021.94539 Conference (FIE), 2015. 1–9.
90 [65] P. Ordóñez, H. Ortiz-Zuazaga, and J. S. Ramírez-
[57] M. Hø Marcher, I. M. Christensen, P. Grabarczyk, Lugo. 2020. Broadening Participation in
T. Graversen, and C. Brabrand. 2021. Computing Computing through a Biology Summer Research
Educational Activities Involving People Rather Experience for Undergraduates. In 2020 Research
Than Things Appeal More to Women (CS1 Appeal on Equity and Sustained Participation in
Perspective). In ICER 2021 - Proceedings of the Engineering, Computing, and Technology
17th ACM Conference on International (RESPECT), 2020. 1–2.
Computing Education Research, 2021. 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT49803.2020.92724
https://doi.org/10.1145/3446871.3469761 17
[58] D Michell, A Szorenyi, K Falkner, and C Szabo. [66] F. R. Ortega, S. Bolivar, J. Bernal, A. Galvan, K.
Tarre, N. Rishe, and A. Barreto. 2017. Towards a Equality in Software Engineering (GE), 2018. 10–
3D Virtual Programming Language to increase the 13.
number of women in computer science education. [76] Diane T. Rover, Mani Mina, Alicia R. Herron-
In 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality Workshop on K-12 Martinez, Sarah L. Rodriguez, Maria L. Espino, and
Embodied Learning through Virtual & Augmented Brian D. Le. 2020. Improving the Student
Reality (KELVAR), 2017. 1–6. Experience to Broaden Participation in Electrical,
https://doi.org/10.1109/KELVAR.2017.7961558 Computer and Software Engineering. In 2020 IEEE
[67] S. Ouhbi and M. A. M. Awad. 2021. The Impact of Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 2020),
Combining Storytelling with Lecture on Female 2020. IEEE.
Students in Software Engineering Education. In [77] Diane Rover, Joseph Zambreno, Mani Mina, Phillip
2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education Jones, and Lora Leigh Chrystal. 2016. Evidence-
Conference (EDUCON), 2021. 443–447. Based Planning to Broaden the Participation of
[68] Guy Paré, Marie-Claude Trudel, Mirou Jaana, and Women in Electrical and Computer Engineering.
Spyros Kitsiou. 2015. Synthesizing information In 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
systems knowledge: A typology of literature (FIE), 2016. IEEE.
reviews. Information & Management 52, 2 (March [78] R. Ruttenberg-Rozen, K. Hynes, S. Habibi, S.
2015), 183–199. Cardoza, and J. Muchmaker. 2021. Towards a
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 community of care: Counterspaces for women in
[69] S. R. Pascual, M. P. Martínez, M. G. Pascual, I. P. sTem education. In 2021 IEEE International
Navarrete, and S. C. Yrurzum. 2021. Including Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS),
gender perspective in a Computer Engineering 2021. 1–4.
Degree. In 2021 XI International Conference on [79] S. Taneja, Y. Rawajfih, D. Gore, and D. Marghitu.
Virtual Campus (JICV), October 2021. 1–4. 2015. Educating the STEM Leaders of Tomorrow.
[70] Jamie Payton, Tiffany Barnes, Kim Buch, Audrey In 2015 Annual Global Online Conference on
Rorrer, Huifang Zuo, Kinnis Gosha, Kristine Information and Computer Technology
Nagel, Nannette Napier, Ebrahim Randeree, and (GOCICT), November 04, 2015. 11–15.
Lawrence Dennis. 2016. STARS Computing Corps: [80] D. Seo and M. Lawrence. 2019. Workshop to
Enhancing Engagement of Underrepresented Increase Women’s Enrollment in Technology
Students and Building Community in Computing. Discipline at the Community College. In 2019 IEEE
Comput. Sci. Eng. 18, 3 (May 2016), 44–57. Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC),
[71] J. Peña and M. B. Rosson. 2019. Reaching out to 2019. 160–164.
Diverse Learners with Non-Formal Workshops on https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2019.8881972
Computing Concepts and Skills. In Proceedings of [81] J. Sinclair and S. Kalvala. 2015. Exploring societal
IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and factors affecting the experience and engagement
Human-Centric Computing, VL/HCC, 2019. 193– of first year female computer science
197. undergraduates. In ACM International Conference
[72] Kai Petersen, Sairam Vakkalanka, and Ludwik Proceeding Series, 2015. 107–116.
Kuzniarz. 2015. Guidelines for conducting https://doi.org/10.1145/2828959.2828979
systematic mapping studies in software [82] M. D. Trim and H. Nishad. 2019. We Learn by
engineering: An update. Information and Software Doing: Modeling Inclusive Pedagogy in a Graduate
Technology 64, (August 2015), 1–18. CS Ethics Course. In 2019 Research on Equity and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007 Sustained Participation in Engineering,
[73] A. Petropulu and S. Lord. 2018. Improving the Computing, and Technology (RESPECT), February
diversity of faculty in electrical and computer 2019. 1–2.
engineering (iredefine ece[point of view]. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT46404.2019.89856
Proceedings of the IEEE 106, 2 (2018), 214–218. 98
[74] J. Raigoza. 2018. An Experience Report on Running [83] Milica Vujovic and Davinia Hernandez-Leo. How
a Pre-College Computer Science Summer Do Table Shape, Group Size, and Gender Affect
Program. In 2018 International Conference on On-Task Actions in Computer Education Open-
Computational Science and Computational Ended Tasks. IEEE Transactions on Education.
Intelligence (CSCI), December 2018. 655–658. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2022.3143715
[75] H. de Ribaupierre, K. Jones, F. Loizides, and Y. [84] Isabel Wagner. 2016. Gender and Performance in
Cherdantseva. 2018. Towards Gender Equality in Computer Science. ACM Transactions on
Software Engineering: The NSA Approach. In 2018 Computing Education 16, 3 (June 2016).
IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Gender [85] Jennifer Wang and Sepehr Hejazi Moghadam.
2017. Diversity Barriers in K-12 Computer Science
Education: Structural and Social. In Proceedings of
the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on
Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’17), 2017.
ACM, 615–620.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017734
[86] Rebecca N. Wright, Sally J. Nadler, Thu D. Nguyen,
Cynthia N. Sanchez Gomez, and Heather M.
Wright. 2019. Living-Learning Community for
Women in Computer Science at Rutgers. In
SIGCSE `19: Proceedings of the 50th ACM
Technical Symposium on Computer Science
Education, 2019. ACM, 286–292.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287449
[87] K. M. Ying, F. J. Rodríguez, A. L. Dibble, A. C.
Martin, K. E. Boyer, S. V. Thomas, and J. E. Gilbert.
2021. Confidence, Connection, and Comfort:
Reports from an All-Women’s CS1 Class. In
SIGCSE 2021 - Proceedings of the 52nd ACM
Technical Symposium on Computer Science
Education, 2021. 699–705.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432548
[88] Kimberly Michelle Ying, Lydia G. Pezzullo,
Mohona Ahmed, Kassandra Crompton, Jeremiah
Blanchard, and Kristy Elizabeth Boyer. 2019. In
Their Own Words: Gender Differences in Student
Perceptions of Pair Programming. In SIGCSE `19:
Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical
Symposium on Computer Science Education, 2019.
ACM, 1053–1059.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287380
[89] Elijah Zolduoarrati and Sherlock A. Licorish. 2021.
On the value of encouraging gender tolerance and
inclusiveness in software engineering
communities. Information and Software
Technology 139, (November 2021), 106667.