Communication in Computer Science Classrooms: Understanding Defensive Climates as a Means of Creating Supportive Behaviors

ACM Journal on Educational Resources in Computing

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 2-

  Garvin Doxas, Kathy ^a   Barker, Lecia J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

classroom communication behaviors; Defensive climate; ethnographic research in computer science classrooms; gender and computer science education; Human Factors

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; HUMAN ENGINEERING; INFORMATION SCIENCE; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; STUDENTS;

CLASSROOM COMMUNICARION BEHAVIOURS; COMPUTER SCIENCE EDUCATION; DEFENSIVE CLIMATE; ETHANOGRAPHIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE CLASSROOMS;

EDUCATION;

EID: 21244469079     PISSN: 15314278     EISSN: 15314278     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1060071.1060073     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. rdSIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM Press, New York, 43-47
2. Barker, L. J. and Garvin-Doxas, K. 2004. Making visible the behaviors that influence the learning environment: A qualitative exploration of computer science classrooms. Computer Science Education 14 (2004), 119-146.
3. Beyer, S., K., Rynes, J. Perrault, K., Hay, and S. Haller 2003. Gender differences in computer science students. in Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Reno, NV). ACM Press, New York.
4. Button, G. and Sharrock, W. 1996. Project work: The organization of collaborative design and development in software engineering. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing 5 (1996), 369-386.
5. Burke, K. 1966. Language as Symbolic Action. University of California Press, Los Angeles.
6. Cohoon, J. M. 2002. Recruiting and retaining women in undergraduate computing majors. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 34, 2 (2002).
7. Colbeck, C.L., Cabrera, A. F., and Terenzini, P.T. 2001. Learning professional confidence: Linking teaching practices, students’ self-perceptions, and gender. Review of Higher Education 24, 2 (2001), 173-191.
8. Farenga, S. J., and Joyce, B. A. 1998. Science-related attitudes and science course selection: A study of high-ability boys and girls. Roeper Review 20, 4 (1998), 247-251.
9. Fisher, A., J. Margolis, and F. Miller 1997. Undergraduate women in computer science: experience, motivation, and culture, ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium, pp. 106-110.
10. Gibb, J. R. 1961. Defensive communication. Journal of Communication (1961), 11-12, 141-148.
11. Gilligan, C. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA.
12. Gurer, D. and Camp, T. 2002. An ACM-W literature review on women in computing, Inroads: ACM SIGCSE Journal, 34(2), pp. 121-127
13. Hackett, G. 1985. The role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-related majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology 32 (1985), 47-56.
14. Hall, R. and Sandler, B. 1982. The classroom climate: A chilly one for women? Project on the Status and Education of Women. Association of American Colleges, Washington, DC.
15. Lundeberg, M., Fox, P., and Puncochar, J. 1994. Highly confident but wrong: Gender differences and similarities in confidence judgements. Journal of Educational Psychology 86, 1 (1994), 114-121.
16. Klawe, M. and Leveson, N. 1995. Women in computing: Where are we now? Communications of the ACM 38, 1 (1995), 29-44.
17. Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. 2002. Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
18. Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. 1997. Geek mythology and attracting undergraduate women to computer science. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~gendergap/papers/wepan97.html.
19. Margolis, J., Fisher, A., and Miller, F. The anatomy of interest: Women in undergraduate computing. http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~gendergap/papers/anatomyWSQ99.html.
20. Noelle-Neumann, E. 1984. The Spiral of Silence. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
21. Pedersen-Gallegos, L., S. Laursen, E. Seymour, R. Donohue, R. Crane, T. Deantoni, R. Haenfler 2004. Attracting and retaining women in information technology programs: A comparative study of three programmatic approaches. Unpublished report on NSF grant #0090026.
22. Reis, R. 2002. Tomorrow's professor listserv. Stanford University Learning Laboratory. National Communication Association, TP#400.
23. Seymour, E., and Hewitt, N. 1997. Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences. Westview Press, Boulder, CO:
24. Sax, L. J. 1995. Predicting gender and major-field differences in mathematical self-concept during college. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 1, 4 (1995), 291-307.
25. Tannen, D. 1999. The display of (gendered) identities in talk at work. In Reinventing Identities: The Gendered Self in Discourse. M. Bucholtz et al. eds. Oxford University Press, 221-224.
26. Teague, J. and Clarke, V. 1996. Improving gender equity in computing programmes: Some suggestions for Increasing female participation and retention rates. In Proceedings of the 1st Australasian Conference on Computer Science Education (University of Sydney, Australia). ACM Press, New York.
27. Trent, J. S. (Ed.) 2002. Included in Communication: Learning Climates that Cultivate Racial and Ethnic Diversity. American Association for Higher Education and National Communication Association.
28. Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J., and Jackson, D. 1967. Pragmatics of Human Communication, W.W. Norton, New York.
29. Weston, T. J. and Barker, L. J. 2002. Student computing in higher education: A profile of student use, training, and proficiency. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 14,1 (2002), 107-127.