Female, Black, Latinx, Native American, low-income, and rural students remain underrepresented among computer science undergraduate degree recipients. Along with student, family, and secondary school characteristics, college organizational climate, curricula, and instructional practices shape undergraduates’ experiences that foster persistence until graduation. Our quasi-experimental project, Improving the Persistence and Success of Students from Underrepresented Populations in Computer Science (I-PASS), is designed to augment students’ persistence until they earn their computer science degree. Drawing on prior research, including Tinto's model of effective institutional actions for retention, I-PASS Scholars—all low-income, female and/or members of underserved demographics groups— receive a four-year scholarship; mentoring, tutoring, advising; and opportunities to integrate into the academic and social life of the campus. Students’ written reflections and attitude surveys suggest I-PASS's components foster their retention by, among other mechanisms, enhancing their computer science identity development and sense of belonging in the major.
ArcherL.DawsonE.DeWittJ.SeakinsA.WongB. (2015). “Science capital”: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922–948. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21227
2.
ArcherL.DeWittJ.OsborneJ.DillonJ.WillisB.WongB. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20399
3.
AzmitiaM.SyedM.RadmacherK. (2008). On the intersection of personal and social identities: Introduction and evidence from a longitudinal study of emerging adults. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2008(120), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.212
4.
BarkerL. J.McDowellC.KalaharK. (2009). Exploring factors that influence computer science introductory course students to persist in the major. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1145/1539024.1508923
5.
BottiaM. C.StearnsE.MickelsonR. A.MollerS.ValentinoL. (2015). Female math and science high school faculty and the participation of students in STEM. Economics of Education Review, 45, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.01.002
6.
CarloneH. B.JohnsonA. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187–1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20237
CheryanS.MasterA.MeltzoffA. N. (2015). Cultural stereotypes as gatekeepers: Increasing girls’ interest in computer science and engineering by diversifying stereotypes. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 49. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00049
9.
CheryanS.PlautV. C.DaviesP. G.SteeleC. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1045–1060. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016239
10.
Code.org, CSTA, & ECEP Alliance. (2021). 2021 State of computer science education: Accelerating action through advocacy. http://advocacy.code.org/stateofcs
CromleyJ. G.PerezT.WillsT. W.TanakaJ. C.HorvatE. M.AgbenyegaE. T.-B. (2013). Changes in race and sex stereotype threat among diverse STEM students: Relation to grades and retention in the majors. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(3), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.04.003
13.
DahlbergT.BarnesT.BuchK.BeanK. (2010). Applying service learning to computer science: Attracting and engaging under-represented students. Computer Science Education, 20(3), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2010.492164
14.
DasguptaN. (2011). Ingroup experts and peers as social vaccines who inoculate the self-concept: The stereotype inoculation model. Psychological Inquiry, 22(4), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2011.607313
15.
DavisM.Dias-BowieY.GreenbergK.KlukkenG.PollioH. R.ThomasS. P.ThompsonC. L. (2004). “A fly in the buttermilk”: Descriptions of university life by successful Black undergraduate students at a predominately White southeastern university. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(4), 420–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2004.11772266
16.
DeechuayN.KoulR.ManeewanS.LerdpornkulratT. (2016). Relationship between gender identity, perceived social support for using computers, and computer self-efficacy and value beliefs of undergraduate students. Education and Information Technologies, 21(6), 1699–1713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9410-8
17.
D’SouzaM. J.ShumanK. E.WentzienD. E.RoeskeK. P. (2018). Working with the Wesley College Cannon Scholar Program: Improving retention, persistence, and success. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 19(1), 31. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182945/.
18.
DunlapS. T.BarthJ. M. (2019). Career stereotypes and identities: Implicit beliefs and major choice for college women and men in STEM and female-dominated fields. Sex Roles, 81(9), 548–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-1013-1
19.
EcclesJ. (2011). Gendered educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles, et al. Model of achievement-related choices. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(3), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025411398185
20.
EcclesJ. S.WangM.-T. (2016). What motivates females and males to pursue careers in mathematics and science?International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(2), 100–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025415616201
21.
Forrest-BankS. S.CuellarM. J. (2018). The mediating effects of ethnic identity on the relationships between racial microaggression and psychological well-being. Social Work Research, 42(1), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svx023
22.
GilbertP. N.O’BrienL. T.GarciaD. M.MarxD. M. (2015). Not the sum of its parts: Decomposing implicit academic stereotypes to understand sense of fit in math and English. Sex Roles, 72(1–2), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0428-y
23.
GoodC.RattanA.DweckC. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026659
24.
Google, Inc. & Gallup, Inc. (2017, December). K-12 computer science education state reports 2017. https://goo/g;/m7bZLs
25.
GrossmanJ. M.PorcheM. V. (2014). Perceived gender and racial/ethnic barriers to STEM success. Urban Education, 49(6), 698–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085913481364
26.
HazariZ.SadlerP. M.SonnertG. (2013). The science identity of college students: Exploring the intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 82–91. https://www.jstor.org/staable/43631586
27.
HurtadoS.CarterD. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus racial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education, 70(4), 324–345. https://doi.org/10.2307/2673270
28.
HurtadoS.EaganM. K.TranM. C.NewmanC. B.ChangM. J.VelascoP. (2011). “We do science here”: Underrepresented students’ interactions with faculty in different college contexts. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 553–579. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01714.x
29.
HurtadoS.NewmanC. B.TranM. C.ChangM. J. (2010). Improving the rate of success for underrepresented racial minorities in STEM fields: Insights from a national project. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.357
30.
IraniL. (2004). Understanding gender and confidence in CS course culture [Paper presentation]. The 35th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 195–199), Norfolk, Virginia, USA.
31.
KapoorA.Gardner-McCuneC. (2018). Understanding professional identities and goals of computer science undergraduate students [Paper Presentation]. The 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 191–196), New York, New York, USA.
32.
KimA. Y.SinatraG. M. (2018). Science identity development: An interactionist approach. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0097-9
33.
KuchynkaS. L.SalomonK.BossonJ. K.El-HoutM.KiebelE.CoopermanC.ToomeyR. (2018). Hostile and benevolent sexism and college women’s STEM outcomes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(1), 72–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684317741889
34.
LewisK. L.StoutJ. G.PollockS. J.FinkelsteinN. D.ItoT. A. (2016). Fitting in or opting out: A review of key social-psychological factors influencing a sense of belonging for women in physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 020110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020110
35.
MargolisJ. (2010). Stuck in the shallow end: Education, race, and computing. MIT Press.
36.
MooneyC.BeckerB. A.SalmonL.ManginaE. (2018). Computer science identity and sense of belonging: A case study in Ireland [Paper presentation]. The 1st International Workshop on Gender Equality in Software Engineering, Gothenburg, Sweden.
37.
MurphyM. C.SteeleC. M.GrossJ. J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18(10), 879–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x
38.
OsbornJ. M.KarukstisK. K. (2009). The benefits of undergraduate research, scholarship, and creative activity. In BoydM.WesemannJ. (Eds.), Broadening participation in undergraduate research: Fostering excellence and enhancing the impact (pp. 41–53). Council on Undergraduate Research.
39.
PerezT.CromleyJ. G.KaplanA. (2014). The role of identity development, values, and costs in college STEM retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 315. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034027
40.
RaineyK.DancyM.StearnsE., Mickelson, R., & MollerS. (2018). Race and gender differences in how sense of belonging influences decisions to major in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0115-6
41.
RaineyK.DancyM.StearnsE., Mickelson, R., & MollerS. (2019). A descriptive study of race and gender differences in how instructional style and perceived professor care influence decisions to major in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 6–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0159-2
42.
RedmondK.EvansS.SahamiM. (2013). A large-scale quantitative study of women in computer science at Stanford University [Paper presentation]. SIGCSE ‘13: Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 439–444). https://doi.org/10.1145/2445196.2445326.
43.
Riegle-CrumbC.MooreC.Ramos-WadaA. (2011). Who wants to have a career in science or math? Exploring adolescents’ aspirations by gender and race. Science Education, 95(3), 458–476. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20431
44.
RobnettR. D.NelsonP. A.ZurbriggenE. L.CrosbyF. J.ChemersM. M. (2018). Research mentoring and scientist identity: Insights from undergraduates and their mentors. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0139-y
45.
SeyranianV.MadvaA.DuongN.AbramzonN.TibbettsY.HarackiewiczJ. M. (2018). The longitudinal effects of STEM identity and gender on flourishing and achievement in college physics. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(40), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0137-0
46.
SingerS. R.NielsenN. R.SchweingruberH. A.(Eds.). (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. The National Academies Press. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13362
47.
SmythF. L.NosekB. A. (2015). On the gender–science stereotypes held by scientists: Explicit accord with gender-ratios, implicit accord with scientific identity. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(6), 415. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00415
48.
StarrC. R. (2018). “I’m not a science nerd!” STEM stereotypes, identity, and motivation among undergraduate women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(4), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318793848
49.
StoutJ. G.DasguptaN.HunsingerM.McManusM. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 255. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021385
50.
TaoK. W.GloriaA. M. (2019). Should I stay or should I go? The role of impostorism in STEM persistence. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318802333
51.
TintoV. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. University of Chicago Press.
52.
TintoV. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. University of Chicago Press.
53.
UcheA. R. (2015). The retention of first-generation college students in STEM: An extension of Tinto’s longitudinal model [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. UNC Charlotte.
54.
University of North Carolina at Charlotte College of Computing and Informatics. (2018). Reflections on the First Two Years of CCI’s Curriculum. Author, White Paper.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2018). American Community Survey (ACS) One-year public use microdata sample (I-PUMS).
57.
Vincent-RuizP.SchunnC. D. (2018). The nature of science identity and its role as the driver of student choices. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0140-5
58.
ZwebenS.BizotB. (2016). Representation of women in postsecondary computing: Disciplinary, institutional, and individual characteristics. Computing in Science & Engineering, 18(2), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2016.21
59.
ZwebenS.BizotB. (2019). 2018 Taulbee survey. Computing Research Association. cra.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/2018_Taulbee_Survey_pdf
