Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

blog.play-i.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#21

Post by sp332 »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #13
cschmidt wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like the only thing they did with admissions was to not look at previous programming experience as a major factor. I was admitted to a Chemical Engineering college program, despite the fact that I had no previous high school experience in fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, and the rest. No one thought that was strange. Why is CS so different that you have to be a hot-shot programmer before you enter?

CS, much like art and music, is something that any sufficiently motivated individual will start doing far before they turn 18. (They differ from chemeng in this manner.) Both CMU art and CMU music require a portfolio review or audition. http://admission.enrollment.cmu.edu/pages/art-required-portf... http://www.music.cmu.edu/pages/audition-portfolio-review

Art and music are not unusual things to get into. But computer programming is often not presented as an option to anyone, especially women. So plenty of motivated and talented people might not even be introduced to it, or take it seriously.

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#22

Post by tzs »

khawkins wrote: post #8
cschmidt wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like the only thing they did with admissions was to not look at previous programming experience as a major factor. I was admitted to a Chemical Engineering college program, despite the fact that I had no previous high school experience in fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, and the rest. No one thought that was strange. Why is CS so different that you have to be a hot-shot programmer before you enter?

CMU is a top tier school. Why should you deny a hot-shot programmer admission for someone who has a passing fancy? Judging "potential" instead of a candidate's past work and experience reeks of affirmative action.

CMU is a top tier school. Why would you expect hot-shot programming experience to be relevant to their computer science program?

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#23

Post by xrctl »

Um, how CMU:SCS has a gender ratio higher than average is because they accept more women. In 2000 the acceptance rate for women was 39%, for men it was 9% [1].

This is completely boring, MIT could make it so its CS class was 100% women if it wanted to, and because loads of very intelligent people apply to MIT I am sure that class of 100% women would do well. But, this is not a tactic that your average school who struggles to get qualified applicants at all can utilize.

[1] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~lblum/PAPERS/women_in_computer_scien...

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#24

Post by jamesbritt »

cschmidt wrote: post #9
jamesbritt wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the hot-shot requirement?

> In the past, admissions gave preference to people with lots of previous programming experience.

Right. Lots of exerience doesn't equal "hot shot" though.

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#25

Post by camelite »

gamegoblin wrote: post #7

I think that the biggest one is number 2 (giving more emphasis to CS potential rather than CS skill in the admissions process). Somehow we've made a society in which getting into computer programming at a young age is generally not something young girls are taught to want. Consequently, the huge majority of young programmers (below college age) are boys. I started programming when I was 12. The advantage this has giv…

Your comment is self-contradicting: If there's a "giant" gap between boys who start young and girls or boys who don't, then acknowledging that gap at the application stage is not preferential treatment. Ignoring it because it doesn't favour girls, on the other hand, is preferential treatment.

Edited to add: The time to intervene, if it to be equitable, is around the age of 12. But getting the interest of 12 year olds who wouldn't otherwise participate is a more difficult task than changing admission criteria at colleges.

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#27

Post by Zigurd »

moultano wrote: post #16

I had a chance to talk to the undergraduate dean of SCS about #2. Essentially they found that "geekiness" (as he described it) had no correlation with performance in the program, but a huge correlation with gender.

Experience, if not geekiness, still counts. Lots of boys get into coding in high school, with or without formal training. My daughter, who is in SCS at CMU now, was fortunate to transfer from her high school to Mass Academy, adjacent to the WPI campus, where she took WPI's intro course that's somewhat SICP-based. I believe that helped significantly, compared to other women in SCS who are certainly intelligent and in all other ways capable enough, but were starting without experience, and hence without informed expectations of what they were about to embark upon.

[EDIT:] The SCS curriculum is designed to minimize the academic effect of coming in "cold," and all majors, especially ones where outsiders have little notion of what's current have this risk, but there's still a relatively larger potential among women for the shock of not knowing what exactly you signed up for.

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#28

Post by gamegoblin »

camelite wrote: post #25
gamegoblin wrote: post #7

I think that the biggest one is number 2 (giving more emphasis to CS potential rather than CS skill in the admissions process). Somehow we've made a society in which getting into computer programming at a young age is generally not something young girls are taught to want. Consequently, the huge majority of young programmers (below college age) are boys. I started programming when I was 12. The advantage this has giv…

Your comment is self-contradicting: If there's a "giant" gap between boys who start young and girls or boys who don't, then acknowledging that gap at the application stage is not preferential treatment. Ignoring it because it doesn't favour girls, on the other hand, is preferential treatment. Edited to add: The time to intervene, if it to be equitable, is around the age of 12. But getting the interest of 12 year olds…

Where is the contradiction?

I was pointing out essentially what your edit suggests. Somehow we've made a society in which young boys favor programming more than girls.

I wasn't saying that people who have been programming since age 12 should be on equal footing in terms of the admissions process. As I said in some comments below, I think that the non-preferential treatment is instead geared towards people who have dabbled in programming a bit (AP Computer Science or a similar course in highschool). So at face value, the person who has 1 year experience in Java will appear to be a better fit for the program than someone with no experience, but by graduation time, there will probably be no correlation between those who came in with 1 year experience and those without any.

Someone who has been programming as a hobby since age 12 will probably be highly correlated with success by graduation time. I don't think CMU is disputing that. Rather, they are disputing the first case of someone with some experience vs. someone with no experience.

So I think there was just a misunderstanding when you read my comment, since I was pretty much saying (longer-windedly) what you did in your edit.

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#29

Post by yummyfajitas »

sp332 wrote: post #21
yummyfajitas wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CS, much like art and music, is something that any sufficiently motivated individual will start doing far before they turn 18. (They differ from chemeng in this manner.) Both CMU art and CMU music require a portfolio review or audition. http://admission.enrollment.cmu.edu/pages/art-required-portf... http://www.music.cmu.edu/pages/audition-portfolio-review

Art and music are not unusual things to get into. But computer programming is often not presented as an option to anyone, especially women. So plenty of motivated and talented people might not even be introduced to it, or take it seriously.

Anyone with a Facebook account could have typed "learn to program" into Google rather than poking people in the farm while eating candy (or whatever people do on facebook these days).

If a person chose not to take programming seriously, that's on them.

Re: How CMU Increased the Proportion of Women in Computer Science (2013)

#30

Post by Crito »

moultano wrote: post #16

I had a chance to talk to the undergraduate dean of SCS about #2. Essentially they found that "geekiness" (as he described it) had no correlation with performance in the program, but a huge correlation with gender.

I've recently been toying with the idea that the "brogrammer" trend is in reality little more than a term used to vilify male programmers who, more than anything else, share the common trait of having rejected "geek/nerd/gamer" culture or fashion.

The term is male specific because female enrollment has been suppressed for the past few decades, making males the most prominent members of just about any fashion/culture trend in tech. The term has become synonymous with sexism because many (but by no means all, or even most) "brogrammers" are indeed sexist (as are other programmers). Because "brogrammers" are different, this sexism is recognized for what it is more frequently than sexism from "non-bro programmers" (who, for most programmers, are part of the in-group).

If we stop selecting for "geek/nerd/gamer", I think that we might see the evaporation of the concept of "brogrammer" as a particularly problematic gender specific trend.

(One of the assumptions that I make is that most people who are labeled as "brogrammers" by others do not self-identify as "brogrammers".)

Post reply on HN