Submitted:
11 February 2025
Posted:
12 February 2025
Read the latest preprint version here
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
3.1. Sociodemographic Factors
3.2. Academic Factors
4. Discussion
5. Conclusion
5.1. Limitations & Future Work
Acknowledgments
References
- Amiel, D., & Blitz, C. (2022). Computer science teacher capacity: The need for expanded understanding. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 5(4), 38–47. [CrossRef]
- Barker, L. J., & Aspray, W. (2006). The state of research on girls and IT. In J. M. Cohoon and W. Aspray (Eds.), Women and Information Technology: Research on Underrepresentation, pp. 3-54. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Blitz, C.L., Duncan, T., & Amiel, D.J. (2025). The Intersection of computer science education and ELL services: Understanding the impact on underrepresented learners. Unpublished manuscript.
- Code.org, CSTA, ECEP Alliance (2024). 2024 state of computer science education. Retrieved from https://advocacy.code.org/stateofcs.
- CSTA, IACE, ACM, Code.org, College Board, CSforALL, & ECEP Alliance (2024). Reimagining CS pathways: Every student prepared for a world powered by computing. Association for Computing Machinery. [CrossRef]
- Denner, J. (2011). What predicts middle school girls’ interest in computing? International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 3(1), 53-69.
- English, L. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(S1), 5–24. [CrossRef]
- Fletcher, C.L., Warner, J.R. (2021, February). CAPE: A framework for Assessing equity throughout the computer science education ecosystem. Communications of the ACM, 64(2), 23-25.
- Hagiwara, S. & Rodriguez, N. J. (2021). English learners (EL) and computer science (CS) learning: Equity issues. In J. Keengwe & Y. Tran (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Equity in Computer Science in P-16 Education (pp. 70-87). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. [CrossRef]
- Jaccheri, J, Pereira, C, & Fast, S. (2020). Gender Issues in Computer Science: Lessons Learnt and Reflections for the Future. 2020 22nd International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing (SYNASC), 9–16. [CrossRef]
- Lee, H., Closser, F., Alghamdi, K. et al. (2023). Current experiences and factors of future enrollment in computer science for high school students. TechTrends 67, 955–964 (2023). [CrossRef]
- Lei, Y., & Allen, M. (2022). English language learners in computer science education: A scoping review. Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - Volume 1, 57–63. [CrossRef]
- Madrigal, V., Yamaguchi, R., Hall, A., and Burge, J. (2020). Promoting and supporting computer science among middle school girls of color: Initial findings from BRIGHT-CS. In Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 247–253. [CrossRef]
- McGee, S., McGee-Tekula, R., Duck, J., Greenberg, R. I., Dettori, L., Reed, D. F., Wilkerson, B., Yanek, D., Rasmussen, A. M., & Chapman, G. (2017). Does a taste of computing increase computer science enrollment? Computing in Science & Engineering, 19(3), 8–18. [CrossRef]
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM; 2024). Equity in K-12 STEM education: Framing decisions for the future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. [CrossRef]
- National Forum on Education Statistics. (2014). Forum guide to school courses for the exchange of data (SCED) classification system. (NFES 2014-802). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2014802.asp.
- R Core Team. (2024). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
- Ryoo, J.J., Margolis, J., Lee, C.H., Sandoval, C.D. M., & Goode J. (2012). Democratizing computer science knowledge: Transforming the face of computer science through public high school education. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(2), 161-181.
- TeachAI and CSTA (2024). Guidance on the future of computer science education in an age of AI. Retrieved from https://www.teachai.org/cs.
- Torbey, R., Martin, N. D., Warner, J. R., & Fletcher, C. L. (2020). Algebra I Before High School as a Gatekeeper to Computer Science Participation. Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 839–844. [CrossRef]
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2024). Occupational outlook handbook: Computer and information technology occupations. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/.
- Warner, J. R., Fletcher, C. L., Martin, N. D., Baker, S. N., (2022). Applying the CAPE framework to measure equity and inform policy in computer science education. Policy Futures in Education, 0(0), 1-19. [CrossRef]
- Wiebe, E., Barnes, T., Freeman, S., Frye, D., Maher, M. L., Cao, L., Dorodchi, M., Pugalee, D., Rorrer, A., Boulden, D., & Cateté, V. (2019, February). Developing a systemic, scalable model to broaden participation in middle school computer science. In 2019 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT) (pp. 1-2). IEEE.
- Weintrop, D, Hansen, A.K., Harlow, D.B., Franklin, D. (2018). Starting from scratch: Outcomes of early computer science learning experiences and implications for what comes next. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 142–150. [CrossRef]
- National Center for Education Statistics (NCES; 2019). Percentage of persons’ ages 18-29 enrolled in colleges or universities, by age group, 4-category local, and sex. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015144.pdf.
- Whitecraft, M.A., & Williams, W.M. (2010). Why aren’t more women in computer science? In Making Software: What Really Works and Why We Believe It, ed. A. Oram and G. Wilson, 221-238. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.



| Characteristic | N = 5,5051 |
| Gender | |
| Male | 2,860 (52%) |
| Female | 2,642 (48%) |
| Other | 3 (<0.1%) |
| Race/Ethnicity | |
| White | 1,860 (34%) |
| Asian | 387 (7.0%) |
| Black | 606 (11%) |
| Hispanic | 2,510 (46%) |
| Indigenous | 2 (<0.1%) |
| Multiracial | 123 (2.2%) |
| Pacific Islander | 17 (0.3%) |
| Sp. Education | 992 (18%) |
| ELL | 488 (8.9%) |
| Economically Disadvantaged | 3,104 (56%) |
| Avg. MS Course Grade | 0.89 (0.83, 0.94)2 |
| Algebra I in MS | 1,563 (28%) |
| Characteristic | log(OR)1 | 95% CI2 | p |
| Gender (male) | 0.90 | 0.77, 1.0 | <0.001 |
| Race/Ethnicity | |||
| White | — | — | |
| Asian | 0.45 | 0.21, 0.69 | <0.001 |
| Black | 0.05 | -0.19, 0.28 | 0.7 |
| Hispanic | 0.17 | 0.00, 0.34 | 0.044 |
| Other | 0.36 | -0.05, 0.75 | 0.076 |
| Sp. Education | -0.27 | -0.45, -0.10 | 0.002 |
| ELL | -0.34 | -0.59, -0.09 | 0.008 |
| Economically Disadvantaged | 0.08 | -0.07, 0.23 | 0.3 |
| CS-related Courses Taken by Grade 8 | 1.1 | 0.69, 1.5 | <0.001 |
| Avg. MS Course Grade | 2.3 | 1.2, 3.3 | <0.001 |
| Algebra I in MS | 0.19 | 0.03, 0.35 | 0.022 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).