Search for: All records

Computer science (CS) has the potential to positively impact the economic well-being of those who pursue it, and the lives of those who benefit from its innovations. Yet, large CS learning opportunity gaps exist for students from systemically excluded populations. Because of these disparities, the Computer Science for All (CS for All) movement has brought nationwide attention to inequity in CS education. Funding agencies and institutions are supporting the development of research-practice partnerships (RPPs) to address these disparities, recognizing that collaboration between researchers and educators yields accurate and relevant research results, while informing teaching practice. However, for initiatives to effectively make computing inclusive, partnership members need to begin with a shared and collaboratively generated definition of equity to which all are accountable. This paper takes a critical look at the development of a shared definition of equity and its application in a CS for All RPP composed of university researchers and administrators from local education agencies across a large west coast state. Details are shared about how the RPP came together across research and practice to define equity, as well as how that definition continued to evolve and inform the larger project’s work with school administrators/educators. Suggestions about how to apply key lessons from this equity exercise are offered to inform similar justice-oriented projects. 

Background and Context: Most large-scale statewide initiatives of the Computer Science for All (CS for All) movement have focused on the classroom level. Critical questions remain about building school and district leadership capacity to support teachers while implementing equitable computer science education that is scalable and sustainable. Objective: This statewide research-practice partnership, involving university researchers and school leaders from 14 local education agencies (LEA) from district and county offices, addresses the following research question: What do administrators identify as most helpful for understanding issues related to equitable computer science implementation when engaging with a guide and workshop we collaboratively developed to help leadership in such efforts? Method: Participant surveys, interviews, and workshop observations were analyzed to understand best practices for professional development supporting educational leaders. Findings: Administrators value computer science professional development resources that: (a) have a clear focus on “equity;” (b) engage with data and examples that deepen understandings of equity; (c) provide networking opportunities; (d) have explicit workshop purpose and activities; and (e) support deeper discussions of computer science implementation challenges through pairing a workshop and a guide. Implications: Utilizing Ishimaru and Galloway’s (2014) framework for equitable leadership practices, this study offers an actionable construct for equitable implementation of computer science including (a) how to build equity leadership and vision; (b) how to enact that vision; and (c) how to scale and sustain that vision. While this construct applies to equitable leadership practices more broadly across all disciplines, we found its application particularly useful when explicitly focused on equity leadership practices in computer science.