Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Utilizing qualitative data gleaned from focus groups with adolescent girls participating in a cybersecurity summer program (N = 38, mean age = 16.3), this study examines the following research questions: (a) How do adolescent girls perceive the cybersecurity field? (b) What are the promising practices that engage girls in cybersecurity education? Guided by ecological and social role theories, findings reveal that single-sex collaborative settings with encouraging and supportive teachers and female mentors are practices that contribute to girls’ increased interest in the field of cybersecurity. Findings also suggest that an emphasis on creative and collaborative problem-solving processes and the real-world application inherent to cybersecurity are likely to increase girls’ engagement in the field. Results have implications for educators, researchers, and policy makers aiming to close gender gaps in the field of computer science and build interest in cybersecurity, an area of critical national need.

Keywords

qualitative learning environments gender cybersecurity adolescence

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amo

(2016) Addressing gender gaps in teens’ cybersecurity engagement and self-efficacy. IEEE Security & Privacy 14(1): 72–75. doi: 10.1109/MSP.2016.12.

Ashcraft, C., Eger, E., & Friend, M. (2012). Girls in IT: The facts. Retrieved from National Center for Women and Information Technology Website: https://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/resources/girlsinit_thefacts_fullreport2012.pdf.

Bagchi-Sen

Rao

H. R.

Upadhyay

Chai

(2010) Women in cybersecurity: A study of career advancement. IEEE IT Professional 12(1): 24–31. doi: 10.1109/MITP.2010.39.

Bashir, M., Lambert, A., Wee, J., Rounds, J., & Memon, N. (2015). Exploring the vocational interests of cybersecurity competition participants. Paper presented at the Proceedings from CISSE 2015, Las Vegas, USA.

Bronfenbrenner

(1979) The ecology of human development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cheryan

(2012) Understanding the paradox in math-related fields: Why do some gender gaps remain while others do not? [Commentary]. Sex Roles 66: 184–190. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011.

Cheryan

Drury

B. J.

Vichayapai

(2013) Enduring influence of stereotypical computer science role models on women’s academic aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly 37: 72–79. doi: 10.1177/0361684312459328.

Cheryan

Siy

J. O.

Vichayapai

Drury

B. J.

Kim

(2011) Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM? Social and Personality Science 2: 656–664. doi:10.1177/1948550611405218.

Christensen

Knezek

Tyler-Wood

(2014) Student perceptions of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) content and careers. Computers in Human Behavior 34: 173–186. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.046.

10.

Cooper

(2006) The digital divide: The special case of gender. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 22: 320–334. doi: 10.1145/2538862.2538934.

11.

Cybersecurity Act. (2009). S.773, 111th congress (2009–2010). Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/senate-bill/773.

12.

Department of Homeland Security. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://niccs.us-cert.gov/home/women-minorities.

13.

Diekman

A. B.

Brown

Johnston

Clark

(2010) Seeking congruity between goals and roles: New look at why women opt out of STEM careers. Psychological Science 21: 1051–1057. doi:10.1177/0956797610377342.

14.

Dweck

(2006) Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In: Ceci

S. J.

Williams

(eds) Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 47–55.

15.

Eagly

A. H.

(1987) The analysis of sex differences in social behavior: A new theory and a new method. In: Eagly

A. H.

(ed.) Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation, New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, pp. 7–41.

16.

Eagly

A. H.

Diekman

A. B.

(2005) What is the problem? Prejudice as attitude-in context. In: Dovidio

J. F.

Glick

Rudman

L. A.

(eds) On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport, Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 19–35.

17.

Eccles

J. S.

Midgley

Wigfield

Buchanan

C. M.

Reuman

Flanagan

(1993) Development during adolescence: The impact of stage environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families. American Psychologist 48: 90–101. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.48.2.90.

18.

Grover

Pea

Cooper

(2014) Remedying misperceptions of computer science among middle school students. SIGCSE 45: 343–348. doi: 10.1145/961290.961564.

19.

Halpern

Aronson

Reimer

Simpkins

Star

Wentzel

(2007) Encouraging girls in math and science (NCER 2007–2003), Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of EducationRetrieved from http://ncer.ed.gov.

20.

Huang

H. Y.

Bashir

(2015) Examining the gender gap in information assurance: A study of psychological factors. HCI International 2015-Posters’ Extended Abstracts 528: 117–122. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21380-4_21.

21.

Ing

Aschbacher

Tsai

(2014) Gender differences in the consistency of middle school students’ interest in engineering and science careers. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER) 4(2): 2. doi: 10.7771/2157-9288.1090.

22.

ISACA. (2014). The growing cybersecurity skills crisis: Addressing the conflict of too many threats, too few skilled professionals. Retrieved from http://www.isaca.org/cyber/Documents/Cybersecurity-Report_pre_Eng_0414.pdf.

23.

Koch

S. C.

Muller

S. M.

Sieverding

(2008) Women and computers: Effects of stereotype threat on attribution failure. Computers and Education 51(4): 1795–1803. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.05.007.

24.

Light

Littleton

Bale

Joiner

Messer

(2000) Gender and social comparison effects in computer-based problem solving. Learning and Instruction 10: 483–496.

25.

Liston

Peterson

Ragan

(2008) Evaluating promising practices in informal information technology education for girls: Women in IT- survey results, Boulder, CO: National Center for Women and Information TechnologyRetrieved from https://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/resources/ncwit-gsusaphaseiiireport_final.pdf.

26.

Logel

Peach

Spencer

(2011) Threatening gender and race: Different manifestations of stereotype threat. In: Inzlicht

Schmader

(eds) Stereotype threat: Theory, process and application, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 159–172.

27.

Margolis

Fischer

(2002) Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

28.

Massey

O. T.

(2011) A proposed model for the analysis and interpretation of focus groups in evaluation research. Program Evaluation and Planning 34(1): 21–28. doi: 10.1037/a0036060.

29.

Master

Cheryan

Meltzoff

(2015) Computing whether she belongs: Stereotypes undermine girls’ interest and sense of belonging in computer science. Journal of Educational Psychology 108(3): 424–437. doi: 10.1037/edu0000061.

30.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

E. M.

(1994) Qualitative data analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

31.

Miller

Hayward

(2006) New jobs, old occupational stereotypes: Gender and jobs in the new economy. Journal of Education and Work 19(1): 67–93. doi: 10.1080/13639080500523000.

32.

Modi, K., Judy, S., & Salmond, K. (2012). Generation STEM: What girls say about science, technology, engineering and math. Girl scouts of USA. Girls Scout Research Institute. Retrieved from http://www.girlscouts.org/content/dam/girlscouts-gsusa/forms-and-documents/about-girl-scouts/research/generation_stem_full_report.pdf.

33.

Moorman

Johnson

(2003) Still a stranger here: Attitudes among secondary school students towards computer science. SIGCSE 35: 193–197. doi: 10.1145/961290.961564.

34.

Office of Press Secretary. (2009). Remarks by the President on securing our nation’s cyber infrastructure. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-securing-our-nations-cyber-infrastructure.

35.

Raty

Vanska

Kasanen

Karkkainen

(2002) Parents’ explanations of their child’s performance in mathematics and reading: A replication and extension of Yee and Eccles. Sex Roles 46(3/4): 121–128. doi: 036O.O025/02/020(W)I21/.

36.

Rhodewalt

Tragakis

(2002) Self-handicapping and school: Academic self concept and self protective behavior. In: Aronson

(ed.) Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 111–135.

37.

Roeser

R. W.

Eccles

Sameroff

(2000) School as a context of early adolescents’ academic and social-emotional development: A summary of research findings. Elementary School Journal 100: 443–471. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002279.

38.

Rosenquist, M. (2015). Higher education must save cybersecurity. Intel securities executive perspectives blog. Retrieved from https://blogs.mcafee.com/executive-perspectives/higher-education-must-save-cybersecurity/.

39.

Shapiro

Williams

(2012) The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles 56: 175–183. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0.

40.

Shoemaker

(2014) Proceeding of the colloquium for information system security education. CISSE 2(1): 4–7.

41.

Shumba

Ferguson-Boucher

Sweedyk

Taylor

Franklin

Turner

Hall

(2013) Cybersecurity, women and minorities: Findings and recommendations from a preliminary investigation. ACM ITiCse Conference Working Group. 1–14. doi: 10.1145/2543882.2543883.

42.

Stout

J. G.

Dasgupta

Hunsinger

McManus

(2011) STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept and professional goals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100: 255– 270. doi: 10.1037/a0021385.

43.

Turner

Deemer

Tims

Corbett

Mhire

(2014) Cyber value and interest development: Assessment of a STEM career intervention for high school students. Electronic Journal of Science Education 18(1): 1–15. Retrieved from http://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/11946/8546.

44.

U.S. Department of Labor. (2014). Computer and information technology occupations. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/Computer_information_technology_2014.htm.

45.

Werner

Denner

(2009) Pair programming in middle school: What does it look like? Journal of Research on Technology in Education 42(1): 29–49.

46.

Wilson

(2006) Gender differences in types of assignments preferred: Implications for computer science instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research 34(3): 245–255. doi: 10.2190/7FLU-VKJL-86RM-5RQG.

“I Can Actually Be a Super Sleuth”

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References