Quo Vadis Racial Disparities? Trend Analysis of the Participation and Top Achievement in Advanced Placement Computer Science Exams

Abstract

This study explores the direction and magnitude of racial disparities on three advanced placement (AP) computer science (CS) exams, namely AP CS Principles, AP CS A, and AP CS AB, based on the test scores of more than one million students who have taken AP CS exams between 1997 and 2020. Using Mann–Kendall test and Sen's slope procedures we found that the number of Black, Hispanic, and Native American students in AP CS exams have increased steadily and significantly over years, yet they are still far from reaching parity. Further, our findings suggest that the racial disparities among top achievers are very wide. The results provide educators and researchers support for identifying and quantifying the racial disparities in advanced academic programs and may inform the development of policies, practices, and programs to reduce racial disparities in pre-college CS education and further.

Keywords

AP computer science racial disparities advanced placement participation top achievement excellence gaps

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alfaiz

F. S.

Pease

Maker

C. J.

(2020). Culturally responsive assessment of physical science skills and abilities: Development, field testing, implementation, and results. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(3), 298–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X20920572

Bahar

A. K.

(2022). Girls still fall behind boys in top scores for AP math exams. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/girls-still-fall-behind-boys-in-top-scores-for-ap-math-exams-174192 .

Bahar

A. K.

Adiguzel

(2016). Analysis of factors influencing interest in STEM career: Comparison between high ability and motivated American and Turkish high school students. Journal of STEM Education, 17(6), 64–69.

Bahar

A. K.

Kaya

Zhang

(2022). Gender disparities in AP computer science exams: Analysis of trends in participation and top achievement. Journal of Advanced Academics, 33(4), 574–603. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X221119499

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

Benbow

C. P.

Stanley

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

Benjamin

(2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new jim code. Wiley.

10.

Bort

Guha

Brylow

(2018). The impact of exploring computer science in Wisconsin: where disadvantage is an advantage. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 57–62).

11.

Brown

E. A.

Brown

R. S.

(2020). The effect of Advanced Placement Computer Science course taking on college enrollment. West Coast Analytics. https://www.westcoastanalytics.com/uploads/6/9/6/7/69675515/longitudinal_study_-_combined_report_final_3_10_20__jgq_.pdf.

12.

Buolamwini

Gebru

(2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency (pp. 57–62). https://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html .

13.

Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS] (2022). U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Computer and Information Research Scientists. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/computer-and-information-research-scientists.htm.

14.

Camp

Adrion

W. R.

Bizot

Davidson

Hall

Hambrusch

Zweben

(2017). Generation CS: The mixed news on diversity and the enrollment surge. ACM Inroads, 8(3), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1145/3103175

15.

Century

Ferris

Zuo

(2017). Finding time for computer science in the elementary day. https://s3.amazonaws.com/cemse/time-for-cs/docs/TimeforCS_Preliminary_Findings.pdf.

16.

Chatterji

Campbell

Quirk

(2021). Closing advanced coursework equity gaps for all students. Center for American Progress.

17.

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), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0296-x

18.

Code.org, CSTA, & ECEP (2022). 2022 State of Computer Science Education. https://advocacy.code.org/stateofcs.

19.

Colby

Fowler

(2020). Data snapshot: IPEDS data on full-time women faculty and faculty of color. American Association of University Professors.

20.

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

21.

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

22.

College Board (2023). Course & Exam Pages. https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/courses.

23.

Corporation for Supportive Housing (2021). Racial Disparities and Disproportionality Index. https://www.csh.org/supportive-housing-101/data/.

24.

Darling-Hammond

(2004). The color line in American education: Race, resources, and student achievement. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 1(2), 213–246. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X0404202X

25.

Ehrlinger

Plant

E. A.

Hartwig

M. K.

Vossen

J. J.

Columb

C. J.

Brewer

L. E.

(2018). Do gender differences in perceived prototypical computer scientists and engineers contribute to gender gaps in computer science and engineering? Sex Roles, 78(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0763-x

26.

Ericson

(2022). AP CS Data for 2021. https://cs4all.home.blog/.

27.

Ericson

Engelman

McKlin

Taylor

J. Q.

(2014, March). Project Rise Up 4 CS: Increasing the Number of Black Students Who Pass Advanced Placement CS A. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education (pp. 439–444).

28.

Ericson

Guzdial

(2014). Measuring Demographics and Performance in Computer Science Education at a Nationwide Scale Using AP CS Data. In: Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, pp. 217–222.

29.

Ericson

B. J.

Garcia

Mondisa

J. L.

(2022, February). Lessons Learned from Scaling Sisters Rise Up. In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education-Volume 1 (pp. 773–779).

30.

García

Weiss

(2019). The teacher shortage is real, large and growing, and worse than we thought. The First Report in” The Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market” Series. Economic Policy Institute.

31.

Goins

Koshy

Scott

Payton

F. C.

Lundgren

Toldson

(2022). The State of Tech Diversity: The Black Tech Ecosystem. https://www.kaporcenter.org/black-tech/.

32.

Google & Gallup (2017a). Computer science learning: Closing the gap: Rural small town school districts .

33.

Google & Gallup (2017b). Encouraging Students Toward Computer Science Learning.

34.

Google & Gallup (2015). Searching for Computer Science: Access and Barriers in U.S. K-12 Education. https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/searching-for-computer-science_report.pdf.

35.

Google & Gallup (2020). Current Perspectives and Continuing Challenges in Computer Science Education in U.S. K-12 Schools .

36.

Hamilton Project (2022). Career earnings by college major. https://www.hamiltonproject.org/charts/career_earnings_by_college_major/.

37.

Heinrich

(2018). Careers in Computer Science: 5 facts on this flourishing field you can no longer ignore. https://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/technology/blog/careers-in-computer-science-face-the-facts/.

38.

Hirsch

R. M.

Slack

Smith

(1982). Techniques of trend analysis for monthly water quality data. Water Resources Research, 18(1), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR018i001p00107

39.

Hussain

Mahmud

(2019). Pymannkendall: A python package for nonparametric Mann Kendall family of trend tests. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(39), 1556. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01556

40.

Institute of Educational Sciences (2021). US Department of Education Principal Office Functional Statements. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/or/fs/ies/nces.html.

41.

Jaiswal

R. K.

Lohani

Tiwari

(2015). Statistical analysis for change detection and trend assessment in climatological parameters. Environmental Processes, 2, 729–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-015-0105-3

42.

Jewett

E. C.

Chen

(2022). Examining the relationship between AP STEM course-taking and college major selection: Gender and racial differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 111(3), 512–530. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20464

43.

Kapor Center (2018). The leaky tech pipeline: A comprehensive framework for understanding and addressing the lack of diversity across the tech ecosystem. https://www.kaporcenter.org/the-leaky-tech-pipeline-a-comprehensive-framework-for-understanding-and-addressing-the-lack-of-diversity-across-the-tech-ecosystem/.

44.

Kapor Center (2021). Culturally responsive-sustaining computer science education: A framework. https://www.kaporcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/1_CRCSFramework-Report_v7_for-web-redesign-.pdf.

45.

Karlin

Ottenbreit-Leftwich

Liao

Y. C.

(2023). Building a gender-inclusive secondary computer science program: Teacher led and stakeholder supported. Computer Science Education, 33(1), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2022.2131281

46.

Kaya

Newley

Yesilyurt

Deniz

(2020). Measuring computational thinking teaching efficacy beliefs of preservice elementary teachers. Journal of College Science Teaching, 49(6).

47.

Kendall

(1975). Rank correlation measures. Charles Griffin.

48.

Khambhammettu

(2005). Mann–Kendall Analysis, HydroGeoLogic Inc. OU-1 Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report–Former Fort Ord.

49.

Kolas

(2022). Computer science teachers need better pay to avert crisis. Buckeye Institute. https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/detail/computer-science-teachers-need-better-pay-to-avert-crisis?fbclid=IwAR1C_XhijKc-htiK4_r7xl1mpzIjW_1fVT0OUXC7PjwnbTI8RZsC3awJ6p0.

50.

Lachney

Bennett

A. G.

Eglash

Yadav

Moudgalya

(2021). Teaching in an open village: A case study on culturally responsive computing in compulsory education. Computer Science Education, 31(4), 462–488. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2021.1874228

51.

Makel

M. C.

Wai

Peairs

Putallaz

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

52.

Maker

C. J.

Pease

(2021). Building on and extending the characteristics of gifted learners: Implementing the real engagement in active prrblem solving (REAPS) teaching model. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 30(2), 5–25. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.134952943259460

53.

Mann

H. B.

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

54.

Margolis

Estrella

Goode

Holme

J. J.

Nao

(2017). Stuck in the shallow end: Education, race, and computing. MIT Press.

55.

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

56.

McGill

M. M.

Decker

Settle

(2016). Undergraduate students’ perceptions of the impact of precollege computing activities on choices of major. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 16(4), 15, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/2920214

57.

McKinsey (2020). Diversity Wins: How Inclusion Matters. McKinsey. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters.

58.

Newley

Kaya

Deniz

Yesilyurt

(2018). Celebrity statues: Learning computational thinking by designing biomimetic robots. Science Scope, 42(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/ss18_042_01_74

59.

Newley

Kaya

Deniz

Yesilyurt

(2019). Animatronic lions, and tigers, and bears, oh my! How computational thinking and 3D printing can help students create an animatronic zoo. Science & Children, 56(8), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc19_056_08_64

60.

Newsome

(2022). Computer science has a racism problem: These researchers want to fix it. Nature, 610(7932), 440–443. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-03251-0

61.

Noble

S. U.

(2018). Algorithms of oppression. In Algorithms of Oppression. New York University Press.

62.

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

63.

Parker

M. C.

Hendrickson

K. A.

(2022). Capacity-related factors associated with computer science access and participation in Georgia public high schools. Policy Futures in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103221081920

64.

Pew Research Center (April, 2021). STEM Jobs See Uneven Progress in Increasing Gender, Racial and Ethnic Diversity .

65.

Scott

K. A.

Sheridan

K. M.

Clark

(2015). Culturally responsive computing: A theory revisited. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(4), 412–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2014.924966

66.

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

67.

Sundquits

(2016). AP Exam Scores: All your questions answered. https://blog.collegevine.com/ap-exam-scores-all-your-questions-answered/.

68.

Teals (2022). MS Teals Program. https://www.tealsk12.org/.

69.

Wai

Cacchio

Putallaz

Makel

(2010). Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30-year examination. Intelligence, 38(4), 412–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.006

70.

Wai

Hodges

Makel

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

71.

Waisome

J. A.

Jackson

J. F.

Gilbert

J. E.

(2020, March). The iAAMCS Ecosystem: Retaining Blacks/African-Americans in CS PhD Programs. In 2020 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT) (Vol. 1, pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT49803.2020.9272427.

72.

Wang

Hejazi Moghadam

Tiffany-Morales

(2017, August). Social perceptions in computer science and implications for diverse students. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM conference on international computing education research (pp. 47–55). https://doi.org/10.1145/3105726.3106175.

73.

Wang

Hong

Ravitz

Hejazi Moghadam

(2016, February). Landscape of K-12 computer science education in the US: Perceptions, access, and barriers. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (pp. 645–650). https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844628.

74.

Wyatt

Feng

Ewing

(2020). AP computer science principles and the STEM and computer science pipelines. The College Board.

75.

Yadav

Heath

M. K.

(2022). Breaking the code: Confronting racism in computer science through community, criticality, and citizenship. TechTrends, 66, 450–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00734-9

76.

P. S.

Yang

Chou

(2002). Effects of climate change on evapotranspiration from paddy fields in southern Taiwan. Climate Change, 54, 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015764831165

77.

Zimmerman

R. H.

Maker

C. J.

Alfaiz

(2020). Culturally responsive assessment of life science skills and abilities: Development, field testing, implementation, and results. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(3), 329–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X20923981