
How Harvey Mudd Transformed Its CS Program And Nearly Closed Its Gender Gap - gkuan
http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/10/how-harvey-mudd-transformed-its-computer-science-program-and-nearly-closed-its-gender-gap/
======
Luit2
Here are Harvey Mudd's acceptance rates by gender:

Men 14.4%

Women 38%

Source: [http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-545-harvey-
mudd-c...](http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-545-harvey-mudd-
college.html)

I am perpetually bamboozled how anyone can think anecdotes like this matter.
If Harvard wanted too I am sure they could make half their undergraduate
population disabled black lesbians. That does not prove that your average
state school is horrible and discriminatory just because that is not their
class composition.

Elite schools get more applicants of either gender than they have room for and
those applicants are of very high quality with very high levels of interest in
the subject matter.

~~~
arjie
Well, the higher female acceptance rate may be because only good female
students do CS. If you have a hostile environment, only the most motivated
will succeed. It's like a sieve. You are applying selective pressure against a
certain group of people succeeding. Expect to get only the most motivated.

Not saying this is the case in reality, but I think the conclusion that
they're indiscriminately accepting women is facile.

~~~
codexon
Citation needed.

It is much more plausible that these engineering colleges have laxer
requirements for females in order to get a 50/50 gender balance rather than
public school discrimination.

~~~
arthulia
Citation needed.

Anecdotal rebuttal: I know a bunch of female students at Harvey Mudd and that
doesn't appear to be the case.

~~~
codexon
It doesn't need a citation, it is supported by Occam's razor while you are
suggesting a complex explanation.

How does Harvey Mudd magically close their gender gap as though they suddenly
decided to stop discriminating against females all these years?

If the girls you knew were, say 10% less capable compared to male applicants,
would you be able to tell? I doubt it.

~~~
arthulia
> If the girls you knew were, say 10% less capable compared to male
> applicants, would you be able to tell? I doubt it.

If you can't tell then what difference does it make?

~~~
codexon
It makes a difference to the male applicants that would've been accepted if
there wasn't a bias.

~~~
davorak
A program erasing the current cultural bias/momentum against females will make
a difference to all the females who will not have to face said momentum/bias.

~~~
codexon
But how do you know that a 50/50 balance is even natural in engineering fields
like CS?

Why isn't there a 50/50 balance and other similar initiatives for males for
female dominated subjects like nursing and education?

~~~
davorak
Is there solid evidence of an IQ difference between the genders or a general
subject, with a biological understanding of why such a difference exists?

I currently have not come across any such solid evidence and biological
understanding. Seems unproductive to operate under an understanding far from
50/50 when I do not have solid evidence that I should be.

~~~
codexon
I never brought up the argument that males are smarter than females.

Why wouldn't you consider the possibility that most females don't want to sit
in front of a screen all day with minimal social interaction often working 70
hour weeks?

Is it because you feel that the field of CS is so superior that no one could
dislike it?

~~~
davorak
> I never brought up the argument that males are smarter than females.

I was not implying you did. IQ is one well know metric but others such as "a
general subject", as I asked for before, are welcome as well.

I asked for solid evidence that operating away form 50/50 is more productive.
If you have some I am willing to look it over.

~~~
codexon
I don't know why you assume that 50/50 is the desired ratio when acceptance is
supposed to be self-selected and merit based.

This CS professor from MIT explains why fewer females choose engineering
studies like CS.

[http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in-
science](http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in-science)

Specifically this quote.

> What about women? Don't they want to impress their peers? Yes, but they are
> more discriminating about choosing those peers. I've taught a fair number of
> women students in electrical engineering and computer science classes over
> the years. I can give you a list of the ones who had the best heads on their
> shoulders and were the most thoughtful about planning out the rest of their
> lives. Their names are on files in my "medical school recommendations"
> directory.

~~~
davorak
> I don't know why you assume that 50/50 is the desired ratio when acceptance
> is supposed to be self-selected and merit based.

I was not trying to communicate my desire. Rather what is optimal? I need
strong evidence to operate far from 50/50.

> Specifically this quote.

This counts as evidence, but not enough evidence to get me to think the
optimum is close to having 14-18% female CS degree recipients(2010).

Nice graph over time:
[http://blogs.computerworld.com/sites/computerworld.com/files...](http://blogs.computerworld.com/sites/computerworld.com/files/u28/women2.jpg)
from article: [http://blogs.computerworld.com/it-careers/21993/women-
comput...](http://blogs.computerworld.com/it-careers/21993/women-computer-
science-visual-trendline)

Summary statistics:
[http://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/legacy/pdf/BytheNum...](http://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/legacy/pdf/BytheNumbers09.pdf)

~~~
codexon
You prefer 50/50 but you have no evidence to even suggest that this is the
"best" distribution for CS let alone any other major.

Why can't you accept the possibility that females do not like CS as much as
males do not like things like nursing or human resources?

If there is a social stigma, should we really force people who normally
wouldn't choose it so we can have a 50/50 ratio just because that is the
probability to be born as?

Who are you to say that they are happier doing CS instead of what they
would've chosen without all this influence?

~~~
davorak
> You prefer 50/50 but you have no evidence to even suggest that this is the
> "best" distribution for CS let alone any other major.

50/50 is the default with out additional information. Again I am not trying to
statement my preferences.

> Why can't you accept the possibility that females do not like CS as much as
> males do not like things like nursing or human resources?

I did not say I can not. Like any idea I want good evidence and solid
understanding to make strong claims.

> If there is a social stigma, should we really force people who normally
> wouldn't choose it so we can have a 50/50 ratio just because that is the
> probability to be born as?

I have not seen anyone make the argument to force people to take CS courses.

> Who are you to say that they are happier doing CS instead of what they
> would've chosen without all this influence?

Trying is better then not trying. Influence exist weather intentional or not.
Unintentional influences are not inherently better then intentional.

------
anonymous
You know, on reflection, this is actually a good thing. Not because of the
diversity - screw diversity. Because you'll have more people with aptitude
admitted. Programming aptitude is mostly evenly distributed regardless of
gender and race, therefore if you keep your number admitted persons constant,
but give a good incentive for every kind of person to apply, you'll end up
with better applicants. Or to put it another way, the best 1000 white male
americans are worse than the best 1000 americans in general. And at least in
this case, I'd expect that there would be about as many capable females as
males. Things might go skewed if we try to have the same number of
heterosexuals and homosexuals or left-handed and right-handed people though.

~~~
011011100
"Programming aptitude is mostly evenly distributed regardless of gender and
race,"

Is it really?

~~~
mathattack
Independently of whether it is or isn't, there is benefit to trying to get as
broad a swatch of the population into programming as possible.

My thinking on this has changed over the years. I used to view programming as
a pure meritocracy. Then I realized that the same thing could be said about so
many other male dominated fields, whose barriers eventually broke down. (Law,
Accounting, Teaching...) Now my inclination is to believe that there are other
things at work: parental expectations, mentorship, etc. that are bigger
drivers.

And how much downside is there if we smartly (key word!) try to be more
inclusive in the field? I don't mean lowering standards, but I do mean
outreach, identifying mentors, etc.

------
teawithcarl
Harvey Mudd's come a long way. In the 1970's, the few women (less than ten)
were joking referred to as "non-males".

------
auctiontheory
Super cool. I hope more departments follow their lead. (Of course, most CS
departments are not headed by women.)

~~~
frankchn
There may be more than you think, for instance:

Stanford Computer Science is headed by Jennifer Widom.

Berkeley EECS's Associate Chair is Tsu-Jae King Liu.

------
silvertonia
It seems a bit odd that they're quoting their Junior class makeup-- makes me
think that's the best data point they have, and it exaggerates their success.
My understanding is that CS enrollment by gender isn't the issue, it's CS
graduation rate.

~~~
davorak
In my lay observations most universities have a problem with females
transferring out in the first two years. So it can across as impressive to me
that they had such an even split in the 3rd year of classes. The program has
only been going on for 6 years so I would be surprised if all of the upper
level curriculum has even been transferred over flexible homework/project
structure described so their is probably still room for improvement by
continuing to apply the same strategy to the high level classes.

------
newnewnew
How big is Harvey Mudd's CS program?

~~~
arthulia
about 200 students, iirc.

~~~
akinity
Great instructors. Zach Dodds is the man!

