What do you think?
Rate this book
Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing
Understanding and overcoming the gender gap in computer science education. The information technology revolution is transforming almost every aspect of society, but girls and women are largely out of the loop. Although women surf the Web in equal numbers to men and make a majority of online purchases, few are involved in the design and creation of new technology. It is mostly men whose perspectives and priorities inform the development of computing innovations and who reap the lion's share of the financial rewards. As only a small fraction of high school and college computer science students are female, the field is likely to remain a "male clubhouse," absent major changes. In Unlocking the Clubhouse , social scientist Jane Margolis and computer scientist and educator Allan Fisher examine the many influences contributing to the gender gap in computing. The book is based on interviews with more than 100 computer science students of both sexes from Carnegie Mellon University, a major center of computer science research, over a period of four years, as well as classroom observations and conversations with hundreds of college and high school faculty. The interviews capture the dynamic details of the female computing experience, from the family computer kept in a brother's bedroom to women's feelings of alienation in college computing classes. The authors investigate the familial, educational, and institutional origins of the computing gender gap. They also describe educational reforms that have made a dramatic difference at Carnegie Mellon—where the percentage of women entering the School of Computer Science rose from 7% in 1995 to 42% in 2000—and at high schools around the country.
182 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
18 people are currently reading
643 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
February 9, 2017
While of course already dated in terms of technology, this book speaks SO MUCH to my experience as a woman in computer science. I keep finding myself shouting "Yes! That's exactly what it's like!" The authors really get to the heart of this issue. I was lucky enough to have a computer at home at a very young age and then go to a relatively small, liberal arts college, which meant I didn't have to deal QUITE so much with the competitive edge that the Carnegie Mellon students describe, but it was still a difficult field to be in. I remember my first few weeks, when I had to, ashamed, ask my fellow students for help with the Solaris machines - the likes of which I'd never encountered before. It probably didn't help that while I had written code when I was 7 and was clearly comfortable with computers, my high school wouldn't allow me to skip our intro computer science class - which taught us how to use Paint and spreadsheets; our "create a webpage" assignment was simply a DRAWING of the site, with no code behind it!!!! Luckily, my teacher recognized that I was well beyond that, and let me do some extra credit BASIC programming while I waited for the other students to finish their work.
I went to college intending to major either in Computer Science or English. I didn't choose CS for the potential monetary gain; I still find it amusing that when I would originally tell people I was interested in programming, they'd say, "Oh! You'll be rolling in the money!" Of course, by the time I graduated college, that wasn't quite the case anyway, but that wasn't what I went into it for. I loved the logic, the organization, the ability to make a machine do what you wanted (and by the same token, knowing the machine would do ONLY what you asked, nothing more or less). So I was lucky enough to go to a school with a VERY small (and close-knit) CS department, and a department chair who was a woman. I was lucky enough to be one of the two top-scoring students on the CS101 final for all the intro classes, which gave me the confidence I needed (it helped that we began with Lisp, which was a language MOST of the other students had never encountered). I was lucky enough to love writing code and staying up all night with my fellow students getting our programs to work - what a great feeling. And I was lucky enough to graduate with a degree, and get a job writing code.
However, you might ask why I'm not a programmer anymore. I'm a librarian instead. What happened? Well, as the book outlines again and again, I spent 5 years in the CS field, but was constantly nagged by doubts. I was a woman in a man's world, unfortunately. One where I felt that the guys would always "know more" (even if this was just their confidence speaking, and not their actual knowledge). One where I didn't "dream in code" as the book mentions; I wanted more balance in my life than a lot of the geeky guys care for. And I wanted to do some good, make a positive change in the world. I was the only female programmer in my company when I was laid off in 2009. I was actually relieved to be laid off, because I had been looking for some time to move into another field - and I took the opportunity to go back to school and get my MLS. Now, I get to be in a field where I feel good about myself, and feel like I can make a difference in the world. I get to still write code occasionally, but it is NOT my only job. I get to use computers how I've always loved to. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE that I have had the experience of getting into the guts of a computer and writing in machine code. I wouldn't take back those experiences for the world. But I also love where I am, now - with the knowledge and background and ability, but also the chance to do so much more.
I haven't even finished this book and I've already written a review - it's been THAT cathartic for me. I will most likely be adding more to this as I continue to read. What a great eye-opener for all of us females in computer science. I just wish I had read this sooner...maybe I wouldn't have felt QUITE so alone, or incompetent. Maybe I would have believed the people who told me I was smart.
I went to college intending to major either in Computer Science or English. I didn't choose CS for the potential monetary gain; I still find it amusing that when I would originally tell people I was interested in programming, they'd say, "Oh! You'll be rolling in the money!" Of course, by the time I graduated college, that wasn't quite the case anyway, but that wasn't what I went into it for. I loved the logic, the organization, the ability to make a machine do what you wanted (and by the same token, knowing the machine would do ONLY what you asked, nothing more or less). So I was lucky enough to go to a school with a VERY small (and close-knit) CS department, and a department chair who was a woman. I was lucky enough to be one of the two top-scoring students on the CS101 final for all the intro classes, which gave me the confidence I needed (it helped that we began with Lisp, which was a language MOST of the other students had never encountered). I was lucky enough to love writing code and staying up all night with my fellow students getting our programs to work - what a great feeling. And I was lucky enough to graduate with a degree, and get a job writing code.
However, you might ask why I'm not a programmer anymore. I'm a librarian instead. What happened? Well, as the book outlines again and again, I spent 5 years in the CS field, but was constantly nagged by doubts. I was a woman in a man's world, unfortunately. One where I felt that the guys would always "know more" (even if this was just their confidence speaking, and not their actual knowledge). One where I didn't "dream in code" as the book mentions; I wanted more balance in my life than a lot of the geeky guys care for. And I wanted to do some good, make a positive change in the world. I was the only female programmer in my company when I was laid off in 2009. I was actually relieved to be laid off, because I had been looking for some time to move into another field - and I took the opportunity to go back to school and get my MLS. Now, I get to be in a field where I feel good about myself, and feel like I can make a difference in the world. I get to still write code occasionally, but it is NOT my only job. I get to use computers how I've always loved to. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE that I have had the experience of getting into the guts of a computer and writing in machine code. I wouldn't take back those experiences for the world. But I also love where I am, now - with the knowledge and background and ability, but also the chance to do so much more.
I haven't even finished this book and I've already written a review - it's been THAT cathartic for me. I will most likely be adding more to this as I continue to read. What a great eye-opener for all of us females in computer science. I just wish I had read this sooner...maybe I wouldn't have felt QUITE so alone, or incompetent. Maybe I would have believed the people who told me I was smart.
September 20, 2016
First thing that strikes me is the age of the research - all conducted in the late 90's. Has anything significantly changed in the intervening 15 years? Part of me hopes to discount a fraction of this, knowing that many of these trends and influences persist; the cynic in me worries that *nothing* has changed, and in fact may have gotten worse with the brogrammer culture we hear so much about in Silicon Valley and similar high-tech concentrations.
Second thing is how narrow the study population was - all undergraduate students (mostly comp sci majors, some not). It's understandable - a lot of social-studies academic research draws on the handy and willing population of students local to the researchers - but that still means that there's a lot of room for improper extrapolation.
Then there's the narratives and the meaty phrases to chew on:
"The pipeline is leaking all the way"
"The computer in the boys' bedroom"
"Boys and computers: the magnetic attraction"
This book takes a chronological approach to exploring various experiences of girls and women towards and throughout comp sci studies, but it lacks any depth on how women encounter the field/industry/practice of software development and the greater world of computing post-graduation.
As someone deeply embedded in the world of software development in a business/corporate setting, I have fewer opportunities to influence nascent techie girls & women in academic settings - far more direct and indirect influence over those engaged in software and tech professionally.
I'm looking more for context of what I'm doing wrong, and what more I can do to help right the imbalances, in my work and community. This wasn't that book, but for those who are looking at the deep-rooted problem of girls opting out before they even reach the point where they can opt to obtain that college-level education, there are many good stories and insights to be found here.
Second thing is how narrow the study population was - all undergraduate students (mostly comp sci majors, some not). It's understandable - a lot of social-studies academic research draws on the handy and willing population of students local to the researchers - but that still means that there's a lot of room for improper extrapolation.
Then there's the narratives and the meaty phrases to chew on:
"The pipeline is leaking all the way"
"The computer in the boys' bedroom"
"Boys and computers: the magnetic attraction"
This book takes a chronological approach to exploring various experiences of girls and women towards and throughout comp sci studies, but it lacks any depth on how women encounter the field/industry/practice of software development and the greater world of computing post-graduation.
As someone deeply embedded in the world of software development in a business/corporate setting, I have fewer opportunities to influence nascent techie girls & women in academic settings - far more direct and indirect influence over those engaged in software and tech professionally.
I'm looking more for context of what I'm doing wrong, and what more I can do to help right the imbalances, in my work and community. This wasn't that book, but for those who are looking at the deep-rooted problem of girls opting out before they even reach the point where they can opt to obtain that college-level education, there are many good stories and insights to be found here.
May 8, 2012
This book was incredibly vindicating. It voiced all of the complaints I never knew how to articulate, assuaged doubts about my intelligence and ability to persevere, and was just generally what I needed to hear and read.
I'm not sure it will be compelling enough for someone who thinks they see things "objectively" to change their minds, but sometimes nothing is enough. I thought this book did an excellent job of concisely combining qualitative and quantitative data from the authors' longitudinal study as well as articles and books from 20+ years of research on the subjects of women and computing.
I wish they had included resources for people post-college, because selfishly that is what I am looking for right now. If anyone is a woman in computer science/IT and is looking to mentor a young professional in the Boston area, give me a holler!!
I'm not sure it will be compelling enough for someone who thinks they see things "objectively" to change their minds, but sometimes nothing is enough. I thought this book did an excellent job of concisely combining qualitative and quantitative data from the authors' longitudinal study as well as articles and books from 20+ years of research on the subjects of women and computing.
I wish they had included resources for people post-college, because selfishly that is what I am looking for right now. If anyone is a woman in computer science/IT and is looking to mentor a young professional in the Boston area, give me a holler!!
November 13, 2007
I'm not remotely a computer scientist but I was able to recognize the experiences in the book by translating them to the form: "what happens when there is an individual or group who does not feel that they fit in or are valued in a particular culture?"
The culture discussed in the book in the boy wonder / male hacker culture prevalent in computer science. Some of the more explicit forms of exclusivity and bullying from both students and teachers who feel themselves to be members of the group towards those they feel are not part of this group are awful, but they easily explain why particular groups in the population do not end up experiencing the same opportunities to 'discover' whether or not they would be interested in computer science. A lot of this exclusivity happens early in life (e.g., putting the computer in the son's room rather than the daughter's room or common room), and continues in schools.
What's harder to explain, and what I was particularly interested in, is what happens to students who don't fit into the dominant culture, yet one way or another managed to discover that they really were interested in computer science. They show up at colleges like Carnegie Mellon, places that for the large part no longer have explicitly rejecting/discriminating behaviors towards these students. Nonetheless, students who do not identify as strongly with the dominant male hacker culture (in this case, largely women) end up more prone to lose their confidence, and without recovery of confidence, to interpret this loss in confidence as a lack of ability and interest -- followed ultimately by leaving the field.
This is the more frequent but not the only outcome. There are also "persisters," students who don't fit into the dominant culture, but nonetheless soldier on and even thrive. There were only a handful of perisisters chronicled in the book, and almost all had some extrinsic source of motivation to keep their feet to the fire and felt their was no option for failure (e.g., student whose family was depending on the money she would make after graduation to live on and help support younger siblings). The authors argue that these students stayed in the game long enough to have experiences that eventually did restore their confidence, and that if other students did the same, this would have happened to them as well. It's an argument for a "don't look down"/"exiting is not an option" mental strategy for individual persistence. I wish there were data to support this claim, as it is currently my own primary motivation for keeping one foot stepping in front of the other. It would be nice to have another example of the efficacy of total mental commitment to forward movement besides that of General Xiang Yu -- preferably one that involves someone with whom I feel I can identify, and does not end with that person falling on their own sword.
Although it's not the most excitingly written prose I've encountered, I would have given this five stars for taking on an important project, if not for the authors' forays into "girls are like this, boys are like that" language. The authors seem to argue that girls do not intrinsically have less interest or are less skillful in math/tech fields, but are instead less likely to persist when challenged and less confident in themselves overall. This leaves me to wonder why some writers on gender are happy to exchange one kind of gender stereotype for another, and hope that more will consider rejecting this kind of thinking altogether.
The culture discussed in the book in the boy wonder / male hacker culture prevalent in computer science. Some of the more explicit forms of exclusivity and bullying from both students and teachers who feel themselves to be members of the group towards those they feel are not part of this group are awful, but they easily explain why particular groups in the population do not end up experiencing the same opportunities to 'discover' whether or not they would be interested in computer science. A lot of this exclusivity happens early in life (e.g., putting the computer in the son's room rather than the daughter's room or common room), and continues in schools.
What's harder to explain, and what I was particularly interested in, is what happens to students who don't fit into the dominant culture, yet one way or another managed to discover that they really were interested in computer science. They show up at colleges like Carnegie Mellon, places that for the large part no longer have explicitly rejecting/discriminating behaviors towards these students. Nonetheless, students who do not identify as strongly with the dominant male hacker culture (in this case, largely women) end up more prone to lose their confidence, and without recovery of confidence, to interpret this loss in confidence as a lack of ability and interest -- followed ultimately by leaving the field.
This is the more frequent but not the only outcome. There are also "persisters," students who don't fit into the dominant culture, but nonetheless soldier on and even thrive. There were only a handful of perisisters chronicled in the book, and almost all had some extrinsic source of motivation to keep their feet to the fire and felt their was no option for failure (e.g., student whose family was depending on the money she would make after graduation to live on and help support younger siblings). The authors argue that these students stayed in the game long enough to have experiences that eventually did restore their confidence, and that if other students did the same, this would have happened to them as well. It's an argument for a "don't look down"/"exiting is not an option" mental strategy for individual persistence. I wish there were data to support this claim, as it is currently my own primary motivation for keeping one foot stepping in front of the other. It would be nice to have another example of the efficacy of total mental commitment to forward movement besides that of General Xiang Yu -- preferably one that involves someone with whom I feel I can identify, and does not end with that person falling on their own sword.
Although it's not the most excitingly written prose I've encountered, I would have given this five stars for taking on an important project, if not for the authors' forays into "girls are like this, boys are like that" language. The authors seem to argue that girls do not intrinsically have less interest or are less skillful in math/tech fields, but are instead less likely to persist when challenged and less confident in themselves overall. This leaves me to wonder why some writers on gender are happy to exchange one kind of gender stereotype for another, and hope that more will consider rejecting this kind of thinking altogether.
December 20, 2020
A fascinating read. The premise is two high-up academics in Carnegie Mellon decide to actively tackle the gender gap in Computer Science, studying the whys and applying what they can to see what works. The methodology was a huge number of interviews given to Carnegie Mellon students, 50/50 men and women and a mix of Computer Science and other topics.
From this basis, albeit qualitative and culturally specific, they have found some interesting insights. For example, toxic masculinity is horrific but it isn't the main cause of the gender gap in Computer Science. The issue is more cultural, since women are exposed to computers less at a young age (book was first published in 2001) and the average woman tends is less likely to identify with the established male nerd culture that encourages early computer literacy. Also an interesting insight for teachers is how women prefer to learn less abstractly. Women will be concerned about the social and wider benefits of their work, in opposed to the approach men will take of diving deep into the topic for its own sake. Again, this is all specific to Carnegie Mellon Computer Science students of 1995-2000, but it still supplies some basis for thinking today.
I would recommend it to any woman in tech who wants to dive deeper on the gender issues of Computer Science / tech work. Also I would recommend it to any teachers of tech topics. Together we can reduce the gap! Computer Science must not stay a purely male discipline, or we shall pay the cost in the long term!
From this basis, albeit qualitative and culturally specific, they have found some interesting insights. For example, toxic masculinity is horrific but it isn't the main cause of the gender gap in Computer Science. The issue is more cultural, since women are exposed to computers less at a young age (book was first published in 2001) and the average woman tends is less likely to identify with the established male nerd culture that encourages early computer literacy. Also an interesting insight for teachers is how women prefer to learn less abstractly. Women will be concerned about the social and wider benefits of their work, in opposed to the approach men will take of diving deep into the topic for its own sake. Again, this is all specific to Carnegie Mellon Computer Science students of 1995-2000, but it still supplies some basis for thinking today.
I would recommend it to any woman in tech who wants to dive deeper on the gender issues of Computer Science / tech work. Also I would recommend it to any teachers of tech topics. Together we can reduce the gap! Computer Science must not stay a purely male discipline, or we shall pay the cost in the long term!
December 31, 2011
Excellent book; a must read for anyone who cares about getting more young women to choose Computer Science as a field of study and a profession, from grade school through grad school.
December 26, 2022
The book was published in 2002, but it is still as relevant as ever. Great insight into how we can make computing education more inclusive to women at high school and university level.
January 24, 2013
I found this to be simultaneously a very important book and a rather dull book. I would have found the book fascinating 5 years ago. But now I have spent a summer at CMU interacting with their women@scs group; I have seen Jane Margolis speak twice (once with Allan Fisher); I have seen many other wonderful speakers talk about women in computing; I have given miniature versions of such talks myself. The material in this book has become such a part of my life, such a part of how I relate to my field of choice, that actually reading the material felt a little redundant.
Thus, if you are at all interested in issues of gender and computing (and if you are in the field of computing, you ought to be), you should read this book. If you are really interested in issues of gender and computing, you should read it earlier rather than later because you will have to read it eventually, and the sooner you read it, the more novel the material will be.
Thus, if you are at all interested in issues of gender and computing (and if you are in the field of computing, you ought to be), you should read this book. If you are really interested in issues of gender and computing, you should read it earlier rather than later because you will have to read it eventually, and the sooner you read it, the more novel the material will be.
July 3, 2013
As a girl in tech, reading this book helped me realize how hungry I was for something like that. I found the reflection of my own, long denied and well hidden emotions, and it helped me understand why I was against even talking about the problem of girls in tech. I was simply scared of digging out that pile of stinky skeletons!
The interviews with a multitude of different Carnegie Mellon female students of the CS program made me feel at home, helped me maybe not to gain confidence, but to lessen the feeling of lack of confidence. Must read for every struggling soul in computing (and any other field, really!)
The interviews with a multitude of different Carnegie Mellon female students of the CS program made me feel at home, helped me maybe not to gain confidence, but to lessen the feeling of lack of confidence. Must read for every struggling soul in computing (and any other field, really!)
June 8, 2015
I owe this book a real review, but for now, let's leave it at this: everyone working in programming and computer science should probably read this.
While the discussion of the attributes of women in technology is [necessarily] rather broad (and made me feel a little bit antisocial, in comparison), the characterization of our experiences is accurate. In my mind the description of the crippling doubt that women face, even when we are successful, is the crux of the book.
If this research had been done 5-10 years earlier, perhaps I would have majored in Computer Science, instead of minoring. Ah well.
While the discussion of the attributes of women in technology is [necessarily] rather broad (and made me feel a little bit antisocial, in comparison), the characterization of our experiences is accurate. In my mind the description of the crippling doubt that women face, even when we are successful, is the crux of the book.
If this research had been done 5-10 years earlier, perhaps I would have majored in Computer Science, instead of minoring. Ah well.
March 10, 2008
There's a stereotype of a hacker, someone who has been coding since childhood and spends their spare time working on computers. It's often easy to identify great programmers who fit this mold. And I identify with it myself, at least to some extent. This book made clear to me how narrow that stereotype is. There could be many ways to be successful in computing if we don't focus too much on that stereotype as the norm.
August 3, 2016
Diary of a toxic culture
September 14, 2023
I've been hearing about the research in this slim book for YEARS and am glad to have finally read it. It's mostly about work that was done at Carnegie Mellon in the late 90s, which is exactly when I was an undergrad myself!
I would be really interested to understand how some of the specific issues identified as important are playing out now, for example, how this book points to boys' greater computing experience compared to girls'. I perceive most computers today to be much less open and hackable (not specifically in a security way, but in a change/customize way) than those I grew up with, and I wonder how the rise of "walled garden" computers has impacted gender differences in computing experience. Does basically everyone now, regardless of gender, arrive in high school computer science without, say, knowing how to use a terminal? It made me think a lot about Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language and its discussion of how early internet users were required to have some computing skill to even be users at all, and how that is less true now.
I would be really interested to understand how some of the specific issues identified as important are playing out now, for example, how this book points to boys' greater computing experience compared to girls'. I perceive most computers today to be much less open and hackable (not specifically in a security way, but in a change/customize way) than those I grew up with, and I wonder how the rise of "walled garden" computers has impacted gender differences in computing experience. Does basically everyone now, regardless of gender, arrive in high school computer science without, say, knowing how to use a terminal? It made me think a lot about Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language and its discussion of how early internet users were required to have some computing skill to even be users at all, and how that is less true now.
July 18, 2021
I think this book is overrated. I picked it up because I heard it is relevant even after twenty years since the publication and everyone in the computer science field should read it. I may agree with the first one, but not the second. I'm not a parent or teacher and therefore there is nothing for me. The main message is for parents to give the same access to computer and computer science to both daughters and sons, and for teachers to create a better environment so women don't feel left out. There is nothing about the issue outside of family and school. For example, I had only one woman programmer as a colleague so far and I failed to keep her in the field. I would love to read about tips on what I could have done better. Also, the format of the book does not work for me. At least it was short. Even though I gave two stars, that doesn't mean I don't agree with the content or the content is wrong. Just I don't find it enough.
July 27, 2017
This is from 95-99, but mostly still relevant. Weird that I found myself relating more to avoidance of negative stereotypes than thinking incorporation of more diverse applications would make me feel more welcome. But I am admittedly weird...
Am also present firmly in the nurture side of the debate and they didn't commit to one side.
But, overall thought provoking and resonant for me
Am also present firmly in the nurture side of the debate and they didn't commit to one side.
But, overall thought provoking and resonant for me
May 28, 2020
The stats may be a bit dated yet the themes and recommendations hold true today. I wish this had been extended to commercial work environments post graduation as well. Would be great to see a follow up to emphasis the lack of progress in getting more women both computer science degree programs and the workforce.
August 22, 2020
The book may be nearly 20 years old. But it is hugely relevant still. Applied to my background (web development) it made me consider, how while we actively encourage females and welcome females into the field, we don’t really consider just how male oriented the field it. And the effect that can have on the women in it.
March 20, 2020
As a developer, as a parent and as a code-club leader, I wonder why there are too little women in IT. This book does not provide any silver bullet but very useful insight to the current situation (and yes, some long-term hints verified at Carnegie Mellon University).
February 6, 2018
Well researched and insightful book on why we face a gender gap in the technology workforce.
August 30, 2019
Still a must read for those interested in helping effect change in this area.
December 25, 2020
A very informative and eye-opening read, even if it is (or the state of affairs described in it is hopefully) a bit outdated.
February 1, 2025
Every woman in computing should read this book, especially those new to the industry. I wish that I would have read this when I was a freshman having doubts about my competence in this field.
August 11, 2018
read this book for a book club at work. At first I didn't agree with a lot of the points. My biggest issue was the looking down upon the obsessive behaviour of male students in the field of computing (the idea of living and breathing all things coding) and also the shaming of hyper competetiveness. I still believe these traits are essential to be elite in any field (music, ahtletics, etc). However, after discussing the book with other engineers at work (specifically female ones), they explained these points better and my overall impression of the points in the book improved. Still find some issues with it but nonetheless I am very glad I read it.
December 25, 2012
The question of why there are so few women involved in computing-related fields inspires much discussion, most of it heavy on anecdotes and speculation. I found this book in my search for studies that had approached the issue with more rigor. The core research underlying "Unlocking the Clubhouse" is a longitudinal study conducted with undergraduate students at the Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science in the mid-to-late 1990s, with additional investigation into girls' experiences with computing prior to college and into gender issues in high school advanced placement computer science classes.
While "Unlocking the Clubhouse" is in some ways presented as drawing broad conclusions about the causes of the gender gap in computing, the exclusive focus on school-age years and academic computer science means that while it does an excellent job of answering the questions "Why do so few women pursue degrees in computer science?" and "What are the experiences of women in an elite academic CS program?" it arguably falls short of answering the more general question "Why are there so few women in computing?" Being one of those rare women myself (a software engineer, but without a CS degree) I would have appreciated some additional investigation into women's experiences in computing-related professions, as factors influencing women into and out of the field are not confined to the classroom.
Still, the section on girls' experiences with computers in childhood (which does look both in and outside of the classroom) does have broad relevance and goes part-way to addressing the more general issue. Over 10 years after the book was published the software and IT fields are as male-dominated as ever, and I recommend "Unlocking the Clubhouse" to those interested in credible research explaining why.
While "Unlocking the Clubhouse" is in some ways presented as drawing broad conclusions about the causes of the gender gap in computing, the exclusive focus on school-age years and academic computer science means that while it does an excellent job of answering the questions "Why do so few women pursue degrees in computer science?" and "What are the experiences of women in an elite academic CS program?" it arguably falls short of answering the more general question "Why are there so few women in computing?" Being one of those rare women myself (a software engineer, but without a CS degree) I would have appreciated some additional investigation into women's experiences in computing-related professions, as factors influencing women into and out of the field are not confined to the classroom.
Still, the section on girls' experiences with computers in childhood (which does look both in and outside of the classroom) does have broad relevance and goes part-way to addressing the more general issue. Over 10 years after the book was published the software and IT fields are as male-dominated as ever, and I recommend "Unlocking the Clubhouse" to those interested in credible research explaining why.
March 25, 2014
This in-depth look at Women in Computing and what we can do to encourage their participation was simultaneously revealing, uplifting and discouraging. Based on research done at CMU, CS professionals everywhere can learn from it. Discussing what makes the computing environment (specifically, within high schools and undergrad institutions) inhospitable to women, it should be required reading for any CS educator and manager. Interestingly enough for me, I resonated strongly with some of the issues discussed, while others I felt were U.S.-specific and did not match my experience at an Israeli undergrad institution. In any case I highly recommend it for any CS professional, men and women alike. I take off one star because (a) this was not "fun" reading, and (b) some of the discussions are a bit dated. That said, I recently attending a virtual discussion with Jane Margolis on race and gender in computing education and I think that her research and efforts to improve access to CS education is commendable. She and the coauthor did a great job here and I hope that they will come out with an updated book at some point.
September 15, 2007
This book is about a study conducted at the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science. The focus of the study was to determine why many women choose to leave the computer science program, and hope that these results generalize and determine why there are so few women in computer science (or, as I like to think of it, "Why am I surrounded by dudes?").
Although much of the data they use is based on interviews, the authors make a reasonable effort to avoid anecdotalism. Although not entirely successful, it still seems like this phenomenon is worth measuring, and this way of measuring is probably better than guessing.
In regards to what I learned, it never really occurred to me that women are intimidated by the sheer geekiness of some men (irregardless of any overt sexisim). Lack of confidence is still not something I understand very well.
I'm a little less sure how relevant any of it beyond CMU, and there is not much effort made to convince me either way. I'm at least that some one is thinking of how to get women involved in the field, because the perspective of male geeks like mine is probably insufficient to solve all of the problems.
Although much of the data they use is based on interviews, the authors make a reasonable effort to avoid anecdotalism. Although not entirely successful, it still seems like this phenomenon is worth measuring, and this way of measuring is probably better than guessing.
In regards to what I learned, it never really occurred to me that women are intimidated by the sheer geekiness of some men (irregardless of any overt sexisim). Lack of confidence is still not something I understand very well.
I'm a little less sure how relevant any of it beyond CMU, and there is not much effort made to convince me either way. I'm at least that some one is thinking of how to get women involved in the field, because the perspective of male geeks like mine is probably insufficient to solve all of the problems.
August 9, 2020
This book made me want to laugh and cry. It was written some years before I took my first computer science class, but exactly mirrored my experiences in high school and university. All of the little voices in my head, the nagging worries and doubts, the things I attributed to my personal shortcomings were addressed here. Even the fact that I did attribute them to my own shortcomings was addressed here. There were countless excerpts that I would read and then do a double take, because I have once ago said those very same words to myself. It's strange and incredibly cathartic to see them printed on the page.
I wish dearly that I could have attended a university that implemented things like the big sister/little sister program, or the four-tiered curriculum entry, or a more application-based, holistic/interdisciplinary approach like those applied at Carnegie Mellon. I only hope that educational institutions will take cues from Jane, Allan, and the School of Computer Science at CMU, not just for the sake of my fellow women but changing the conversation entirely. Highly, highly recommend.
I wish dearly that I could have attended a university that implemented things like the big sister/little sister program, or the four-tiered curriculum entry, or a more application-based, holistic/interdisciplinary approach like those applied at Carnegie Mellon. I only hope that educational institutions will take cues from Jane, Allan, and the School of Computer Science at CMU, not just for the sake of my fellow women but changing the conversation entirely. Highly, highly recommend.
February 24, 2015
Eye opening.
This book should be a pre-requisite to all books that talk about what it means to be a programmer. Our industry is plagued with reading material which reinforces narrowly focused and masculine ideals for the industry, and it's all too prevalent in any environment for someone who codes to be expected to live and breathe nothing but that.
We need a broader and deeper view of what is going on in the world and how to write and contribute to applications that affect change.
This book speaks to more than that, through the study and interviews it helps to clarify the deeper systematic issues to contribute to a hostile and sometimes toxic industry. This happens not absentmindedly, but thoughtfully with suggestions, case studies, approaches and examples along the way.
As a manager, and as an educator this book is something I will reflect on and reference constantly. It is essential reading, and the seasoning through which all cs books should be read.
This book should be a pre-requisite to all books that talk about what it means to be a programmer. Our industry is plagued with reading material which reinforces narrowly focused and masculine ideals for the industry, and it's all too prevalent in any environment for someone who codes to be expected to live and breathe nothing but that.
We need a broader and deeper view of what is going on in the world and how to write and contribute to applications that affect change.
This book speaks to more than that, through the study and interviews it helps to clarify the deeper systematic issues to contribute to a hostile and sometimes toxic industry. This happens not absentmindedly, but thoughtfully with suggestions, case studies, approaches and examples along the way.
As a manager, and as an educator this book is something I will reflect on and reference constantly. It is essential reading, and the seasoning through which all cs books should be read.
January 19, 2017
Good book about how Carnegie Mellon increased the fraction of women majoring in computer science--and kept retention rates high. A good long term project; it seemed they worked around the tenured and tenure-track faculty.
One problem is that they assumed that women had one distribution of attributes, computer science at first demanded another set--and the idea was that they moved both distributions until they got higher overlap between the two distributions. (This is not quite true--they moved the major away from the geeks, and developed a less competitive culture). They also did not really motivate why having more women in computer science addressed some greater good (other than more women in computer science would be great).
If you are interested in diversity in STEM, read it.
One problem is that they assumed that women had one distribution of attributes, computer science at first demanded another set--and the idea was that they moved both distributions until they got higher overlap between the two distributions. (This is not quite true--they moved the major away from the geeks, and developed a less competitive culture). They also did not really motivate why having more women in computer science addressed some greater good (other than more women in computer science would be great).
If you are interested in diversity in STEM, read it.
March 4, 2011
For much of my education and early career, I thought that gender differences didn't affect me or people in my career. I changed my mind when I saw less competent but more confident people becoming more successful in my chosen field. Reading this book made me realize that some of my difficulties were gender related and that if I can tackle those, I can become more technically proficient and more successful in my career path.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews