Work in Progress: “When You Know Better, Do Better”: Measuring the Climates of University Computer Science Departments

Alicia Nicki Washington; Victoria E. Callais

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Publication Date: June 22, 2025
Start Date: June 22, 2025
End Date: August 15, 2025
Conference Session: Supporting Students and Faculty in Computing (Equity, Culture & Social Justice in Education Division ECSJ Technical Session 7)
Tagged Divisions: Equity and Culture & Social Justice in Education Division (EQUITY)
Tagged Topic: Diversity
Page Count: 10
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--57472
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/57472
Download Count: 8

Paper Authors

biography

Alicia Nicki Washington Duke University orcid.org/0000-0001-9180-6234

visit author page

Dr. Nicki Washington is the Cue Family Professor of the Practice of Computer Science and Professor of the Practice of Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies at Duke University. She is currently the director of the Cultural Competence in Computing (3C) Fellows program and the NSF-funded Alliance for Identity-Inclusive Computing Education (AiiCE). She also serves as senior personnel for the NSF-funded Athena Institute for Artificial Intelligence (AI). Her career in higher education began at Howard University as the first Black female faculty member in the Department of Computer Science. Her professional experience also includes Winthrop University, The Aerospace Corporation, and IBM. She is also the author of Unapologetically Dope: Lessons for Black Women and Girls on Surviving and Thriving in the Tech Field. She is a graduate of Johnson C. Smith University (B.S., ‘00) and North Carolina State University (M.S., ’02; Ph.D., ’05), becoming the first Black woman to earn a Ph.D. in computer science at the university and 2019 Computer Science Hall of Fame Inductee.

visit author page

biography

Victoria E. Callais Duke University orcid.org/0000-0001-8519-5270

visit author page

Dr. Tori Callais is an AiiCE postdoctoral researcher at Duke University. She received a Bachelor’s Degree in Liberal Arts, a concentration in women and gender studies, with minors in sociology and social work from Louisiana State University. She received her Master’s Degree in Higher Education Administration from Louisiana State University and her Ph.D. in Higher Education from Loyola University Chicago. Her graduate research focused on the racialization of digital campus spaces through the lens of undergraduate experiences and administrative reflection on organizational infrastructure and digital campus culture. Her other research interests include racial equity and STEM education, whiteness and organizational change, untangling whiteness in research approaches, and equity-focused research on higher education in the deep south.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

The purpose of this WIP research paper is to understand how computer science (CS) students perceive their department climates. University CS departments have long attributed a lack of diversity to perceived “deficits” in groups who are historically underrepresented by race, gender, socioeconomic status, and/or disability status (e.g., lack of access to physical devices, K-12 computing courses, computational thinking skills, self-efficacy, and interest). However, a growing body of literature calls attention to departmental policies, practices, and climates that impact students’ sense of belonging and abilities to successfully navigate/complete CS majors.

This work was motivated by two challenges with existing computing climate surveys. First, the majority are designed for distribution by individual departments, with no method for cross-organization analysis and comparison. Second, the most-used climate survey that does provide cross-organization comparison has a long completion time, removes responses from demographics with less than five responses per item, and does not allow for open-ended responses. This literally “erases” students who are the least represented and most marginalized in a department, and likely discipline; eliminates opportunities for data disaggregation; and reinforces hegemonic department cultures that do not value these nuanced and often very different experiences.

This paper addresses the research question “how do postsecondary CS students perceive department cultures?” through the development and distribution of an instrument that measures student experiences in CS departments across seven major themes: 1) perceptions of inclusion efforts by department community members, 2) comfort discussing concerns with community members, 3) experiences of exclusion, 4) confidence in accommodations being provided (if needed), 5) physical presence questioned in computing spaces, 6) thoughts about changing majors, and 7) satisfaction with department inclusion efforts. Additionally, the survey collects demographic data on race, ethnicity, gender, classification, disability status, and first-generation status, allowing for disaggregation across multiple identities.

The survey was first distributed in the spring 2024 semester across 13 institutions in the U.S., with a total of 750 responses. Descriptive statistics were determined for closed-ended items, while a thematic analysis was applied to open-ended responses. Participating departments received organizational descriptive statistics and individual, deidentified open-ended responses. They also received aggregate descriptive statistics and high-level themes across all organizations.

Results indicated that across almost all identities, students from groups that are overrepresented in computing had the most favorable perceptions of and satisfaction with cross-department inclusion efforts, as well as comfort discussing departmental concerns. Students from groups that are the least represented experienced the most exclusion, questioning of their presence in physical spaces, thoughts of changing majors, and dissatisfaction with department inclusion efforts.

This novel instrument has several benefits. First, no responses are dropped, which provides departments with some of the most valuable information for broadening participation and allows for triaging departmental “pain points” based on concerns of the most marginalized students. Second, its annual distribution allows departments to longitudinally measure the impact of various interventions at an individual and discipline level. Finally, it can be distributed across postsecondary (non-)STEM departments.

Citation
Format

Washington, A. N., & Callais, V. E. (2025, June), Work in Progress: “When You Know Better, Do Better”: Measuring the Climates of University Computer Science Departments Paper presented at 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Montreal, Quebec, Canada . 10.18260/1-2--57472

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - The purpose of this WIP research paper is to understand how computer science (CS) students perceive their department climates. University CS departments have long attributed a lack of diversity to perceived “deficits” in groups who are historically underrepresented by race, gender, socioeconomic status, and/or disability status (e.g., lack of access to physical devices, K-12 computing courses, computational thinking skills, self-efficacy, and interest). However, a growing body of literature calls attention to departmental policies, practices, and climates that impact students’ sense of belonging and abilities to successfully navigate/complete CS majors. 

This work was motivated by two challenges with existing computing climate surveys. First, the majority are designed for distribution by individual departments, with no method for cross-organization analysis and comparison. Second, the most-used climate survey that does provide cross-organization comparison has a long completion time, removes responses from demographics with less than five responses per item, and does not allow for open-ended responses. This literally “erases” students who are the least represented and most marginalized in a department, and likely discipline; eliminates opportunities for data disaggregation; and reinforces hegemonic department cultures that do not value these nuanced and often very different experiences. 

This paper addresses the research question “how do postsecondary CS students perceive department cultures?” through the development and distribution of an instrument that measures student experiences in CS departments across seven major themes: 1) perceptions of inclusion efforts by department community members, 2) comfort discussing concerns with community members, 3) experiences of exclusion, 4) confidence in accommodations being provided (if needed), 5) physical presence questioned in computing spaces, 6) thoughts about changing majors, and 7) satisfaction with department inclusion efforts. Additionally, the survey collects demographic data on race, ethnicity, gender, classification, disability status, and first-generation status, allowing for disaggregation across multiple identities.

The survey was first distributed in the spring 2024 semester across 13 institutions in the U.S., with a total of 750 responses. Descriptive statistics were determined for closed-ended items, while a thematic analysis was applied to open-ended responses.  Participating departments received organizational descriptive statistics and individual, deidentified open-ended responses. They also received aggregate descriptive statistics and high-level themes across all organizations. 

Results indicated that across almost all identities, students from groups that are overrepresented in computing had the most favorable perceptions of and satisfaction with cross-department inclusion efforts, as well as comfort discussing departmental concerns. Students from groups that are the least represented experienced the most exclusion, questioning of their presence in physical spaces, thoughts of changing majors, and dissatisfaction with department inclusion efforts. 

This novel instrument has several benefits. First, no responses are dropped, which provides departments with some of the most valuable information for broadening participation and allows for triaging departmental “pain points” based on concerns of the most marginalized students. Second, its annual distribution allows departments to longitudinally measure the impact of various interventions at an individual and discipline level. Finally, it can be distributed across postsecondary (non-)STEM departments. 

AU  - Alicia Nicki Washington
AU  - Victoria E. Callais
CY  - Montreal, Quebec, Canada 
DA  - 2025/06/22
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Work in Progress: “When You Know Better, Do Better”: Measuring the Climates of University Computer Science Departments
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/57472
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--57472
ER  -