2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

BACKGROUND
In the last two decades, many computer science (CS) departments have undertaken diversity, equity, access and inclusion (DEAI) efforts to broaden participation in computing (BPC) for underrepresented populations. Much National Science Foundation (NSF) has gone toward these efforts with little progress in changing the gender or racial representation of computer science students or faculty. We posit that this stasis is rooted in departmental cultures and organizational values that inhibit change. Little research has focused on faculty contributions to CS departmental cultures and what helps or hinders progress towards equitable climates.

STUDY DESIGN
Our phenomenological qualitative research study explores faculty attitudes toward departmental BPC efforts. We use organizational change theory developed by Maxey and Kezar, among others, to understand the role that faculty beliefs and actions play in responding to and co-creating departmental culture. These theories examine how organizational structures, norms and values are formed and reproduced within organizations through everyday practices and interactions. Our approach focuses on understanding individuals’ perceptions and experiences in order to make sense of organizational phenomena, i.e., BPC efforts.

This project is funded through the NSF EDU Core Research program. Study sites were three computing departments in three different states. Site selection was based on (1) high undergraduate degree-production, (2) involvement in NSF BPC initiatives, (3) experiencing success in some BPC areas and lagging in others. Our research question is: How does the locus of BPC efforts influence the norms of the department relative to DEAI?

DATA ANALYSIS
The data sources are 63 interviews with faculty, staff, and administrators collected during site visits and via Zoom. The qualitative data consist of hour-long individual interviews using a semi-structured protocol based on prior research on organizational change. Analysis included generating first cycle codes to identify important issues in the data, then second cycle codes to organize first cycle codes into larger patterns or themes. First cycle codes were generated deductively, based on our research questions and theoretical framework (e.g., leadership, BPC practices, DEIA norms/values, etc.) and inductively, based on emerging issues salient to interviewees (e.g. perceptions of individual sphere of influence, student admissions, etc.). Second cycle codes identified overarching patterns and unifying themes.

RESULTS
We found that: (1) BPC standalone programs may relieve faculty of responsibility for DEAI; (2) low faculty accountability or recognition for involvement impede BPC efforts; (3) a wide swath of activities integrated in the department’s regular functions may normalize BPC within the departmental culture and promote greater faculty engagement.

SIGNIFICANCE
We conclude that where BPC efforts are located in the structure of the department influence the culture and norms related to DEAI. The locus of activities also influences who becomes involved in BPC efforts and how they are valued within the department. A wider array of integrated activities leads to engagement of more faculty and staff, and ultimately greater success, compared to efforts that stand outside of regular departmental structures and processes. Our findings suggest it is crucial to locate BPC activities within teaching, research, and service.