Gender Disparities in AP Computer Science Exams: Analysis of Trends in Participation and top Achievement

Abstract

Using the test scores of more than 1,000,000 students who participated in the Advanced Placement Computer Science (AP CS) exams from 1997 to 2020, this study examined the direction and magnitude of the trends in gender disparity in participation and top achievement in advanced exams. The findings indicated that the male-to-female ratio (MFR) among AP Computer Science (CS) exam participants declined from 4.87 to 2.26 between 1997 and 2020. Similarly, the MFR among top scorers (students who scored 5 out of 5) in any type of AP CS exams declined rapidly, in favor of female students, from 8.00 to 2.14 during the same period. Possible implications of these findings for educators, particularly for AP CS teachers and school counselors, were also discussed in the context of the underrepresentation of females in computing fields.

Keywords

AP Computer Science gender disparities Advanced Placement advanced academics excellence gaps top achievement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Babes-Vroman

Juniewicz

Lucarelli

Fox

Nguyen

Tjang

Haleman

Mehta

Chokshi

. (2017). Exploring gender diversity in cs at a large public R1 research university. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, ACM, 3017773, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017773

Bahar

A. K.

Maker

C. J.

(2020). Culturally responsive assessments of mathematical skills and abilities: Development, field testing, and implementation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(3), 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X20906130

Bahar

A. K.

(2021a). Trends in gender disparities among high-achieving students in mathematics: An analysis of the American Mathematics Competition (AMC). Gifted Child Quarterly, 65(2), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986220960453

Bahar

A. K.

(2021b). Will we ever close the gender gap among top mathematics achievers? Analysis of recent trends by race in Advanced Placement (AP) Exams. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 44(4), 331–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211044540

Barker

L. J.

Garvin-Doxas

Jackson

M. H

. (2002).Defensive climate in the computer science classroom. SIGCSE '02.

Benbow

C. P.

(1988). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11(2), 169–232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00049244

Benbow

C. P.

Stanley

J. C.

(1983). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: More facts. Science (New York, N.Y.), 222(4627), 1029–1031. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6648516

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, 24(2-3), 153–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2014.963363

Beyer

Rynes

Perrault

Hay

Haller

(2003). Gender differences in computer science students. Paper presented at the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Reno, NV. https://doi.org/10.1145/611892.611930

10.

Bhanot

R. T.

Jovanovic

(2009). The links between parent behaviors and boys’ and girls’ science achievement beliefs. Applied Developmental Science, 13(1), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888690802606784

11.

Boda

P. A.

McGee

. (2021). Broadening participation and success in AP predictive modeling from three years of data. Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 626–632. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432421

12.

Brown

(2020). The effect of advanced placement computer science course taking on college enrollment. West Coast Analytics.

13.

Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020). Employment Projections. https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/stem-employment.htm.

14.

Busch

(1995). Gender differences in self-efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(2), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.2190/H7E1-XMM7-GU9B-3HWR

15.

Ceci

S. J.

Williams

W. M.

(2007). Why aren’t more women in science debate the evidence. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11546-000.

16.

Cheryan

Plaut

V. C.

Handron

Hudson

(2013). The stereotypical computer scientist: Gendered media representations as a barrier to inclusion for women. Sex Roles, 69(1-2), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0296-x

17.

Christensen

I. M.

Marcher

M. H.

Grabarczyk

Graversen

Brabrand

(2021). Computing educational activities involving people rather than things appeal more to women (Recruitment Perspective). Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 127–144.

18.

Cohoon

J. M.

Cohoon

J. P.

(2006). Departmental factors in gendered attrition from undergraduate IT majors. NSF’s ITWF & ITR/EWF Principal Investigator Conference, 23–25.

19.

College Board (2021a). Course and exam description: AP Computer Science A. https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/series/strategies-for-teaching-ap-computer-science/general-suggestions-ap-computer-science-classroom.

20.

College Board (2021b). About AP Exams. https://apstudents.collegeboard.org/about-ap-exams.

21.

College Board (2021c). AP 2020-21 Updates. https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/about-ap-2021/updates.

22.

College Board (2008). AP Computer Science ab 2008 free-response questions. https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/apc/ap08_comp_sci_ab_frq.pdf.

23.

College Board (2020). AP score distributions. https://apstudents.collegeboard.org/about-ap-scores/score-distributions.

24.

Cummings

Anthony

Watson

Boone

(2021). Combating social injustice and misinformation to engage minority youth in computing sciences. Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 1006–1012. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432452.

25.

Dweck

C. S.

(2007). Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In Ceci

S. J.

Williams

W. M.

(Eds.), Why aren't more women in science?: Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11546-004.

26.

Ellison

Swanson

(2010). The gender gap in secondary school mathematics at high achievement levels: Evidence from the American Mathematics Competitions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.24.2.109

27.

Ericson

Guzdial

(2014). Measuring demographics and performance in computer science education at a nationwide scale using AP CS Data. Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1145/2538862.2538918.

28.

Ericson

McKlin

(2012). Effective and sustainable computing summer camps. Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education 289–294. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157223.

29.

Ericson

McKlin

(2018). Helping underrepresented students succeed in AP CS A and beyond. Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 356–361. https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159517.

30.

Ericson

B. J.

Parker

M. C.

Engelman

(2016). Sisters Rise Up 4 CS: Helping female students pass the Advanced Placement Computer Science. The 47th ACM Technical Symposium https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844623.

31.

Fletcher

C. L.

Warner

J. R.

(2021). CAPE. Communications of the ACM, 64(2), 23–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442373

32.

Gallagher

A. M.

De Lisi

Holst

P. C.

Mcgillicuddy-De Lisi

A. V.

Morely

Cahalan

(2000). Gender differences in advanced mathematical problem solving. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 75(3), 165–190. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1999.2532

33.

Georgia Department of Education . (2021). Downloadable Data Explained - AP Scores. https://gosa.georgia.gov/ap-scores-explained.

34.

Goode

Chapman

(2011). Exploring computer science: A high-school curriculum exploring what computer science is and what it can do. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 11(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/1993069.1993076

35.

Google Inc. & Gallup Inc . (2015). Searching for computer science: Access and barriers in the U.S. K-12 education. https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/searching-for-computer-science_report.pdf.

36.

Google Inc. & Gallup Inc . (2016). Diversity gaps in computer science: Exploring the underrepresentation of girls, Blacks and Hispanics. http://goo.gl/PG34aH.

37.

Gray

Odom-Bartel

Zelkowski

Hamner

Rodgers-Farris

(2020). A Pre-service pathway for preparing future AP CS Principles teachers. Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 1127–1132. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3366945.

38.

Guzdial

(2021). Teaching other teachers how to teach CS better. Communications of the ACM, 64(5), 8–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3453647

39.

Haller

Beyer

(2006). Gender differences and intragender differences in computer science students: Are female CS majors more similar to male to male CS majors or female nonmajors? Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12(4), 337–365. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v12.i4.50

40.

Halpern

Aronson

Reimer

Simpkins

Star

Wentzel

(2007). Encouraging girls in math and science: IES practice guide (NCER 2007–2003). Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/20072003.pdf

41.

Hamed

K. H.

(2008). Trend detection in hydrologic data: The Mann–Kendall trend test under the scaling hypothesis. Journal of Hydrology, 349(3-4), 350–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.11.009

42.

Howard

K. E.

Havard

D. D.

(2019). Advanced placement (AP) computer science principles: Searching for equity in a two-tiered solution to underrepresentation. Journal of Computer Science Integration, 2(1), 1–15. http://doi.org/10.26716/jcsi.2019.02.1.1

43.

Hyde

J. S.

Fennema

Lamon

S. J.

(1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.139

44.

Hyde

J. S.

Lindberg

S. M.

Linn

M. C.

Ellis

A. B.

Williams

C. C.

(2008). Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science (New York, NY), 321(5888), 494. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1160364

45.

Ing

(2014). Can parents influence children’s mathematics achievement and persistence in STEM careers? Journal of Career Development, 41(2), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845313481672

46.

Joseph

Thomas

J. O.

(2020). Designing STEM learning environments to support middle school black girls’ computational algorithmic thinking: A possibility model for disrupting STEM neoliberal projects. The International Conference of the Learning Science, Nashville, TN, United States.

47.

Kemp

Wong

Berry

(2019). Female performance and participation in computer science: A national picture. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 20(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3366016

48.

Kendall

(1975). Rank correlation measures. Charles Griffin.

49.

Lazear

E. P.

Rosen

(1990). Male-female wage differentials in job ladders. Journal of Labor Economics, 8(1, Part 2), 106–123. https://doi.org/10.1086/298246

50.

Lindberg

S. M.

Hyde

J. S.

Petersen

J. L.

Linn

M. C.

Hinshaw

S. P.

(2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1123–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021276

51.

Madkins

T. C.

Martin

Ryoo

Scott

K. A.

Goode

Scott

McAlear

. (2019). Culturally relevant computer science pedagogy: From theory to practice. Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT46404.2019.8985773

52.

Makel

M. C.

Wai

Peairs

Putallaz

(2016). Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: An update and cross-cultural extension. Intelligence, 59(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.09.003

53.

Mann

H. B.

(1945). Nonparametric tests against trend. Econometrica, 13(3), 245–259. https://doi.org/10.2307/1907187

54.

Marcher

M. H.

Christensen

I. M.

Grabarczyk

Graversen

Brabrand

(2021). Computing Educational Activities Involving People Rather Than Things Appeal More to Women (CS1 Appeal Perspective). Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1145/3446871.3469758.

55.

Margolis

Estrella

Goode

Holme

(2008). Stuck in the shallow end: education, race, and computing. The MIT Press.

56.

Master

Cheryan

Meltzoff

A. N.

(2016). Computing whether she belongs: Stereotypes undermine girls’ interest and sense of belonging in computer science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 424–437. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000061

57.

Master

Meltzoff

A. N.

Cheryan

(2021). Gender stereotypes about interests start early and cause gender disparities in computer science and engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(48). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100030118

58.

McAlear

Scott

Burge

J. D.

Koshy

(2019). Women and girls of color in computing: exploring current trends, emerging opportunities, and strategies for meaningful impact. Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287341.

59.

Medel

Pournaghshband

(2017). Eliminating gender bias in computer science education materials. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 411–416). https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017794.

60.

Mellström

(2009). The intersection of gender, race and cultural boundaries, or why is computer science in Malaysia dominated by women? Social Studies of Science, 39(6), 885–907. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709334636

61.

Michell

Szorenyi

Falkner

K. E.

Szabo

(2017). Broadening participation not border protection: How universities can support women in computer science. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 39(4), 406–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2017.1330821

62.

Miller

J. D.

Kimmel

L. G.

(2012). Pathways to a STEM profession. Peabody Journal of Education, 87(1), 26–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.642274

63.

National Academies Press (2021). Cultivating interest and competencies in computing: authentic experiences and design factors. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25912.

64.

National Science Board (2018). Science and engineering indicators. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report

65.

NCWIT (2021). Intersectionality in Tech 101. https://ncwit.org/resource/intersectionality101/.

66.

OECD (2011). Education at a glance 2011: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2011-en.

67.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Lee

S. Y.

(2011). Gender and other group differences in performance on off-level tests: Changes in the 21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(1), 54–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210382574

68.

Page

S. E.

(2008). The difference: how the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press.

69.

Pew Research Center (2021). STEM jobs see uneven progress in increasing gender, racial and ethnic diversity. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/

70.

Rae

. (2014). Trend analysis. In A.C.

Michalos

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_3062

71.

Robinson

J. P.

Lubienski

R. T.

(2011). The development of gender achievement gaps in mathematics and reading during elementary and middle school: Examining direct cognitive assessments and teacher ratings. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 268–302. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210372249

72.

Sax

Lehman

K. J.

Jacobs

J. L.

Kanny

M. A.

Lim

Monje-Paulson

Zimmerman

H. B.

(2017). Anatomy of an enduring gender gap: The evolution of women’s participation in computer science. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(2), 258–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2016.1257306

73.

Sax

Newhouse

Goode

Nakajima

Skorodinsky

Sendowski

(2022). Can computing be diversified on “principles” alone? Exploring the role of AP Computer Science courses in students’ major and career intentions. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 22(2):1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479431

74.

Sax

Newhouse

Goode

Skorodinsky

Nakajima

Sendowski

(2020). Does AP CS Principles broaden participation in computing?: An Analysis of AP CS A and AP CS P participants. Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 542–548. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3366826.

75.

Scott

Martin

McAlear

Koshy

(2017). Broadening participation in computing: Examining experiences of girls of color. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education https://doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3059054.

76.

Sen

P. K.

(1968). Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall's tau. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 63(324), 1379–1389. https://doi.org/10.2307/2285891

77.

Sonnert

(2009). Parents who influence their children to become scientists: Effects of gender and parental education. Social Studies of Science, 39(6), 927–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709335843

78.

Tillberg

H. K.

Cohoon

J. M.

(2005). Attracting women to the CS major. Frontiers: A Journal of Women's Studies, 26(1):126–140. https://doi.org/10.1353/fro.2005.0016

79.

Tsan

Boyer

K. E.

Lynch

C. F.

(2016). How early does the cs gender gap emerge? A study of collaborative problem solving in 5th grade computer science. Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, 388–393. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844605.

80.

U.S. Bureau of Census. (2021). Women making gains in stem occupations but still underrepresented. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/01/women-making-gains-in-stem-occupations-but-still-underrepresented.html.

81.

Vachovsky

M. E.

Chaturapruek

Russakovsky

Sommer

Fei-Fei

(2016). Toward more gender diversity in CS through an artificial intelligence summer program for high school girls. Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, 303–308. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844620.

82.

Wai

Cacchio

Putallaz

Makel

M. C.

(2010). Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30-year examination. Intelligence, 38(1), 412–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.006

83.

Wai

Hodges

Makel

M. C.

(2018). Sex differences in ability tilt in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 35-year. Intelligence, 67(1), 76–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2018.02.003

84.

Wai

Lubinski

Benbow

C. P.

(2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127

85.

Wang

Hejazi Moghadam

(2017). Diversity barriers in K-12 computer science education: structural and social. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 615–620. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017734.

86.

Wang

Hong

Ravitz

Ivory

(2015). Gender differences in factors influencing pursuit of computer science and related fields. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 117–122. https://doi.org/10.1145/2729094.2742611.

87.

Webb

D. C.

Miller

S. B.

(2015). Gender analysis of a large scale survey of middle grades students’ conceptions of computer science education. Proceedings of the Third Conference on GenderIT, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2807565.2807706.

88.

Webb

R. M.

Lubinski

Benbow

C. P.

(2007). Spatial ability: A neglected dimension in talent searches for intellectually precocious youth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 397–420. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.397

89.

Wilcox

(2001). Fundamentals of modern statistical methods: substantially improving power and accuracy. Springer Science and Business Media.

90.

Wilson

B. C.

(2002). A study of factors promoting success in computer science including gender differences. Computer Science Education, 12(1–2), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.1076/csed.12.1.141.8211

91.

Zilberman

Ice

(2021). Why computer occupations are behind strong STEM employment growth in the 2019–29 decade. Beyond the Numbers: Employment & Unemployment, 10(1) https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-10/why-computer-occupations-are-behind-strong-stem-employment-growth.htm.

92.

Zweben

Bizot

(2018). 2017 CRA Taulbee survey. Computing Research News, 30(5), 1–47 https://cra.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/2017-Taulbee-Survey-Report.pdf.n