Rethinking Inclusion in Computer Science Education

Abstract

Figure 1: The CS Knowledge Framework invites educators to broaden how computing is taught and learned (epistemological pluralism), and to support students in understanding computing in social, ethical, and ecological contexts (sociotechnical awareness). Problem. Broadening participation in computer science (CS) education remains a persistent challenge. Despite decades of initiatives to increase girls’ and women’s participation in computing, the proportion of women entering the field has changed little [2, 4, 17]. Prior research has identified barriers at individual, institutional, and societal levels, including stereotypes, exclusionary cultures, and structural inequalities, and has argued that gender inequality should not be addressed by trying to “fix the women,” but by changing cultures and organisations [3, 10, 13]. Gap. Less attention has been paid to how CS education itself might be redesigned by rethinking what counts as knowledge in the field and how that knowledge is taught and learned. Purpose. This work addresses that gap by exploring what it might mean to shift attention from “fixing women” to “fixing knowledge” in CS education. This shift is particularly important as computing education increasingly emphasizes the need for future developers to become more critically conscious and sustainability-aware [1, 11, 14]. The challenge is therefore not only who participates in CS, but also what kinds of knowledge and values CS education cultivates. Approach. Methodologically, this is a conceptual study. It builds on findings from a prior scoping review of gender-inclusive CS education [15] and extends them through theoretical synthesis. The review findings were interpreted through feminist technoscience and universal design, particularly recent proposals for a third-generation move toward nonclusive design [9]. The feminist technoscience lens is used to question dominant assumptions about knowledge and to support a shift in focus from women to knowledge [5, 6, 7]. The nonclusive design perspective offers a way of moving beyond barrier-reduction strategies by questioning approaches to inclusion that begin from an assumed norm and then seek to incorporate predefined “others.” [8, 9] Rather than starting from categories of who belongs and who deviates, it encourages educational environments in which belonging is possible without such prior distinctions, by focusing instead on the knowledge and educational practices that students are invited to engage with. Result. The resulting CS Knowledge Framework consists of two dimensions. The first, epistemological pluralism, focuses on whether CS education recognises multiple ways of learning, teaching, and knowing computing [15, 16]. The second, sociotechnical awareness, focuses on how CS education helps students understand computing in social, ethical, and ecological contexts and reflect on values, ethics, power, consequences, and responsibility [11, 14]. Together, these dimensions provide a conceptual tool for analysing and redesigning CS curriculum and pedagogy. Contribution. The framework contributes to research on inclusive CS education by shifting the focus from participation alone to the knowledge structures that shape participation. It offers educators a way to consider inclusion not only as a question of access, but also as a question of what kinds of digital futures CS education prepares students to imagine and create. Future work could apply the framework to Computer Science Curricula 2023 [12] in order to identify where current curriculum guidelines support broader participation through plural ways of knowing, and where they support more socially and ecologically aware computing education.