Through the Looking Glass: Computer Science Education and the Unintended Consequences of Broadening Participation Policy Efforts

Zarch, Rebecca; Dunton, Sarah; Childs, Joshua; Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Anne

doi:10.1109/respect49803.2020.9272480

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Policies at the local, state, and national level regarding teacher credentialing, curriculum standards, and funding can impact the quality and reach of CS learning. However, despite the power school leaders have in allocating resources and supports, school administrators are often overlooked in CS expansion efforts (Zarch et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing School Leaders to Advance Equity in Computer Science Education

Flapan

Ryoo

Hadad

et al. 2021

JCSI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Context: Most large-scale statewide initiatives of the Computer Science for All (CS for All) movement have focused on the classroom level. Critical questions remain about building school and district leadership capacity to support teachers while implementing equitable computer science education that is scalable and sustainable. Objective: This statewide research-practice partnership, involving university researchers and school leaders from 14 local education agencies (LEA) from district and county offices, addresses the following research question: What do administrators identify as most helpful for understanding issues related to equitable computer science implementation when engaging with a guide and workshop we collaboratively developed to help leadership in such efforts? Method: Participant surveys, interviews, and workshop observations were analyzed to understand best practices for professional development supporting educational leaders. Findings: Administrators value computer science professional development resources that: (a) have a clear focus on “equity;” (b) engage with data and examples that deepen understandings of equity; (c) provide networking opportunities; (d) have explicit workshop purpose and activities; and (e) support deeper discussions of computer science implementation challenges through pairing a workshop and a guide. Implications: Utilizing Ishimaru and Galloway’s (2014) framework for equitable leadership practices, this study offers an actionable construct for equitable implementation of computer science including (a) how to build equity leadership and vision; (b) how to enact that vision; and (c) how to scale and sustain that vision. While this construct applies to equitable leadership practices more broadly across all disciplines, we found its application particularly useful when explicitly focused on equity leadership practices in computer science.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing School Leaders to Advance Equity in Computer Science Education

Flapan

Ryoo

Hadad

et al. 2021

JCSI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As CSEd opportunities have grown, the BPC movement has worked to ensure that every student not only has access to, but is recruited and retained in computing classes [1], [19], [20]. The CAPE framework [4] is a holistic guide that has the potential to bolster BPC efforts by addressing four key components of CSEd: the Capacity for, Access to, Participation in, and Experience (CAPE) of CSEd (See Fig.…”

Section: Theoretical Framing: the Cape Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A facilitated exercise has the states explore the definitions of CS that they have utilized formally (in state policy), or informally (shared between districts, or in state-led professional development). Three commonly-used definitions 1 are shared and teams are asked to agree to one, or build a new common-enough definition. Each of the cohorts has had different responses to this exercise, with the first (and now also the third) cohort arriving at the definition in the K-12 Framework as common enough, and the second cohort continually revisiting the definitions.…”

Section: Creating "Common Enough" Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Building off prior efforts to understand the evolution of measurement approaches in the K-12 broadening participation in computing (BPC) movement [1], this work provides a detailed look into collaborative processes for examining state-based data within and across states in support of equity in computer science education (CSEd). The BPC movement was initiated with the goal of significantly increasing the number of students pursuing post-secondary degrees in computing disciplines, focusing on demographic diversity [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With increased BPC-focused education policy, pedagogical practices and programs are scaling rapidly, and knowing what works and for whom [10] is an important component for developing strategies and monitoring progress against those approaches [10]- [12]. Equity-focused measurement can also help shift the deficit perspectives of minoritized students and communities that have historically been misrepresented within educational data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Common Metrics: Lessons from Building a Collaborative Process for the Examination of State-level K–12 Computer Science Education Data

Zarch,

Dunton,

Warner

et al.

2023 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The broadening participation in computing (BPC) movement has evolved from a focus on increasing the number and diversity of students who participate in computing education to addressing the systemic barriers that prevent equity in computing education. Data has historically played a significant role in the BPC movement, however it is not neutral and can be used to both mask and perpetuate the systemic inequities in computing education. One strategy for ensuring equitable computing experiences is to develop a data infrastructure that democratizes data. This research paper presents the early results of how two cohorts of multi-state teams focused on BPC in K-14 through equity-explicit changes in policy, pathways and practices have worked to develop state-specific data infrastructure that can help safeguard against these potential harms. Research Questions: What are the components of a data infrastructure that supports equity driven computer science education efforts? And, how feasible is it to create cross-state data systems in support of the national BPC movement?Eleven states participated in a four-phase, facilitated process over 9 months to build a multi-state data infrastructure, uncovering state-specific needs as they worked the project. Teams learned from their neighbors, held each other accountable and uncovered the opportunities and barriers within their unique data context. The process involved framing of the BPC goals, assessing current data systems for points of vulnerability and opportunity, a data request from the state systems, data visualization, utilization and reflection.Data was drawn from reflective team journals; notes, collaborative materials and observations made during collaborative meetings; and the technical assistance requests made during the project.When developing data infrastructure in support of BPC, diverse teams matter. Teams needed representation from people who can access institutional or state data, understand the practical context of the data to support interpretation, and help tie data to broader advocacy efforts. Ongoing team engagement, both within and across states, allowed the space to consider the complexity of issues and maintain sustained engagement and commitment to the topic in an environment with competing educational priorities.Teams uncovered assumptions many states had about the access to and quality of their data. Issues with course alignment across and within states about how courses are identified and entered into the data systems; the software systems data storage; and access in a politically charged climate all emerged. Data suppression rules and the implications for invisibilizing populations were apparent. Finally, common-enough definitions for computer science seem possible and desirable but also challenging based on state policy contexts.This project leads to clear implications for creating data infrastructure; most importantly data needs to be clearly tied to equity driven questions and purpose; data cannot be examined in a void and data systems should be r...

show abstract