As shown by the following graph, the percentage of bachelor's degrees going to women in the US has increased over time in almost every major, with the dramatic exception of CS, which peaked in 1984 at 37%, then fell drastically, never to rise again above 20%.
Why are the numbers for CS so diff...
Interesting events I see: "October 11 – Aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger, astronaut Kathryn D. Sullivan becomes the first American woman to perform a space walk." - Wikipedia. Not sure how that'd inspire CS only, though. Also: "April 23 – Margaret Heckler of the U.S. Public Health Service announces the identity of HTLV-III as the virus that causes AIDS."
@heather thank you for the article. The conclusion seems to be: assume that students in intro courses have no experience. Sounds good. I don't recall having a bias when I was a TA for an intro class 30 years ago. If anything, women learned faster and with more clarity. Men were simply more persistent in some cases (pig-headed, actually).
Enrollment generally declined after 1984. The problem is that it rose later for (only) men. So, 1984 isn't the year to focus on, but a bit later. What happened then?
Here's a link to the data with absolute numbers, which are actually quite interesting and illustrate the significant decline in total enrollment after 1984 that Buffy mentions. To put the numbers in some context, the absolute number of degrees across all fields for 2010-2011 is show here.
The gender disparity isn't about unequal opportunity but unequal desire; women can be computer scientists, it's just that, given the choice, they disproportionately prefer being doctors instead. Educators should focus on empowering to students to make decisions that they're happy about. Beyond that, it should be all about free choice.
@Buffy but the plot is about %, so a decrease in the absolute number of enrolments should not have affected it, unless it decreased faster for women, hence it is still worth investigating
@heather: "Not sure how that'd inspire CS only, though." Similarly, I would expect e.g. Michael Schumacher's skill and fame to have had an influence on how many people enrolled to become a mechanic. The auxiliary jobs (developer/mechanic) usually far outnumber the "hero" jobs (astronaut/F1 pilot), and not everyone thinks of themselves as a "hero in training". Engineering was on the rise at the same time as CS, arguably also related to "hero" astronauts. The larger rise in CS may be influenced by the general increase in computer technology (and need for workers) at the time.
Maybe the teaching of programming does not take sufficient advantage of women's language facility? Teach programming from a generative / productive standpoint. "Give me a language and a place to compile and I will move the world."
@EllenSpertus If I may chime in. Looking at some of the links here, the decline of degrees doesn't necessarily seem to be a gendered issue. One of the links posted, indicates that the ratio of women:men stays relatively stable until 2005 or so.
@nobrandheroes While you're right that enrollment went down for both men and women, it's well documented that it went down by a larger percent for women than for men. What link suggests otherwise?
A very simple explanation - males started doing CS in very large numbers after that year. The % dropping doesn't mean less females were on the field, just that the proportion of males to females changed.
Discussion on question by Ellen Spert…
Discussion on question by Ellen Spert…