On Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 20:54:05 UTC, Observer wrote:
I have to say, not to be too negative, ...
Let me turn that around and suggest something in a positive light. If the researcher wants to investigate social phenomena around programming and gender, then I suspect that a more fruitful approach would be to find out what types of problems are being taught, and whether or not those issues are terribly interesting (or not) to specific genders. For instance, if I were female, I suspect I might be interested in how variations of knit1-purl2 patterns turn into fantastic patterns on knitted sweaters. And on whether I might be able to program a knitting machine to carry out a complex design. I might also be interested in programming sewing patterns for various garments of my own design, and on learning how to scale the patterns for various sizes, particularly if the class had access to a large-format plotter for output. Even better would be if students could send off designs to get them laser-cut, so they could then sew them up and make some fun clothes or costumes to wear. But do present instructors think to come up with such approaches? The point is, be more expansive about what attracts people or discourages people from particular disciplines. You could, in effect, be mirroring the plaint of one of my high-school's biology teachers. He wanted to know why most of the best-and-brightest students gravitated more toward physics than biology. Myself, it was because I didn't care to work around smelly pathogens. But everyone will have their own reasons for making such choices.