Equity has come up throughout this part, in readiness checks that separate language from content, in culturally relevant connections, in equitable pairing, and in disaggregated data. This section gathers those threads, because inclusion isn't a separate step in teaching but a concern at every step. It works at several levels. At the level of the field, it starts with history: who has been kept out of computing, and why. At the level of a teacher's outlook, it asks for an asset-based perspective. At the level of lesson design, Universal Design for Learning plans for the variety of all learners from the start. For particular students, there are specific supports, some of them legal obligations, for students with disabilities and for multilingual learners. And at the level of daily classroom life, inclusion depends on belonging, on equitable participation and access, and on how students come to see their own ability.

Who has been left out, and why#

Girls, Black, Latino, and Indigenous students, students with disabilities, and students from low-income families have historically been underrepresented in computer science. The causes are unequal access and stereotypes about who belongs, not differences in ability.¹ Unequal access includes schools that offer no CS courses, along with gaps in devices, connectivity, and early experiences. Stereotypes shape students' choices: what looks like a free choice not to take a course is shaped by access, by encouragement from teachers and family, and by images of who belongs in the field. Schools can reinforce these patterns without meaning to. A requirement that students obtain a teacher's recommendation before enrolling can act as gatekeeping, since recommendations tend to go to students who already fit the image of a programmer, and the remedy is removing the requirement and recruiting broadly. Offering a course doesn't by itself change who takes it, either. A school whose new CS course enrolls almost entirely one group should examine its messaging, its recruitment, and its classroom culture. The Exploring Computer Science curriculum was designed with these problems in mind, combining inquiry-based teaching with an explicit focus on equity in an introductory course.

An asset-based perspective#

Responding to that history begins with how a teacher sees students. An asset-based perspective treats students' languages, cultures, and experiences as strengths to build on, instead of as deficits to fix.² A deficit description such as "These students lack computer skills and come from homes without technology" can be rewritten as "These students have experience with phones and games, and they are new to programming," which names real experience and the learning ahead. A teacher with a bilingual student might encourage use of both languages to reason about code while building technical vocabulary, instead of treating the home language as an obstacle. An asset-based perspective doesn't mean low demands: support accompanies high expectations. Simplifying a course for a group of students on the assumption that they can't handle more assumes limited ability instead of building on strengths. The same perspective applies to interest in computing, which doesn't look only one way. A student drawn to music, art, or social causes may become deeply engaged with computing through those interests, so offering multiple entry points values more students' interests.

Universal Design for Learning#

An asset-based perspective shapes how a teacher sees students, and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) shapes how a teacher designs lessons. UDL plans from the start for the variety among all learners, instead of designing for an imagined typical student and retrofitting accommodations afterward. It calls for multiple means of three things. Engagement is how students are drawn into and sustained in learning, for example through choices of topic. Representation is how content is presented, for example as a video, a diagram, and runnable code showing the same idea. Action and expression is how students show what they know, for example through a choice among a flowchart, a recorded explanation, or code. Because UDL anticipates variety, it helps all learners, including those whose needs have never been documented, and the supports it builds in often help many students beyond those they were designed for.

Supporting particular learners#

UDL serves everyone, and some students also have specific needs that require specific responses. For students with disabilities, the responses are partly legal. An Individualized Education Program (IEP), under special education law, and a 504 plan, under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, are legally binding documents that specify a student's accommodations, and teachers must follow them. Beyond what the plans require, teachers can offer accessible tools, such as programming environments that work with a screen reader, chosen in collaboration with support staff. They can chunk tasks, dividing a project into checkpoints, sometimes with extended deadlines, or giving a visible checklist with short, clear steps, which supports working memory and attention. And they can offer flexible ways of demonstrating learning. Throughout, accommodations provide access to the goal without lowering it: a student who completes a project in checkpoints with extended deadlines still demonstrates the same target skills.

Multilingual learners, students developing proficiency in English alongside other languages, benefit from key vocabulary taught in context, with visuals and code examples, along with sentence frames, translated resources, and opportunities to use their home languages. A student who writes code comments in a home language is using it to reason about the code, which should be allowed, with English terms added over time. Programming creates a particular difficulty with everyday words that have technical meanings. Words such as "while" and "for" mean something specific in code, different from their everyday use, and may need explicit explanation. The principle is to keep the computer science demand while reducing the language load that isn't part of it. If a word problem uses an unfamiliar context, such as a sport the student doesn't know, rewriting it in a familiar context, or with a visual, keeps the same programming demands while removing the barrier.

Belonging and participation#

Students learn best in a classroom where they feel they belong, and many students, influenced by the stereotypes described above, enter a CS classroom unsure that they do. Inclusive classrooms use diverse role models, relevant projects, and norms that value help-seeking and multiple forms of participation, such as recognizing designing, testing, and documenting as well as coding, all of which counter the stereotype that computing is for a narrow group. Role models matter because they signal who belongs, so a classroom's posters, videos, and guest speakers should include people of varied backgrounds and show a wide range of computing work. Projects matter because varied examples, chosen with input from students on what interests them, signal that computing is for everyone. Norms matter because one stereotype, that "real programmers" started as children and never need help, discourages students who are new or who struggle. Sharing the varied paths of real professionals and affirming that skill grows with practice and help-seeking counters it, as does treating questions as a sign of good practice, with the teacher modeling them.

Participation also has to be made equitable deliberately, because groups left to themselves tend to reproduce existing imbalances. Teachers should watch for unequal participation in group work, such as one student doing all the typing, and rotate defined roles so that every student codes, tests, and documents. Structured turn-taking, or pair discussion before sharing with the whole class, widens who speaks. Assigning groups thoughtfully and teaching collaboration norms prevent exclusion. Access to technology outside school varies too, so teachers should avoid assignments that require technology some students don't have at home, providing class time, loaned equipment, or an offline option so that the same goal is reachable by everyone.

Stereotype threat and growth mindset#

Even with equal access, students' beliefs about themselves affect how they perform. Stereotype threat, described by the psychologists Claude Steele and Joshua Aronson, is anxiety about confirming a negative stereotype about one's group, and it can reduce performance. It can be triggered even by well-meant remarks, as when a teacher mentions a stereotype about girls and computing in order to motivate girls to disprove it. Reducing how prominent identity is before a test may reduce the threat, for instance by moving demographic questions to the end of a test. A complementary approach draws on research on growth mindset, associated with the psychologist Carol Dweck: framing ability as something that grows through effort, good strategies, and feedback helps counter the belief that ability is fixed. "Programming skill grows through effort, good strategies, and feedback" expresses the idea. Praising effort alone isn't enough, though. A student who has worked hard without improving needs a discussion of specific strategies to try, along with notice of what the student has already improved, because growth comes from effective strategies as well as effort.

These ideas complete the arc that began with a learning goal in 0005.a. A teacher who knows the content of the earlier parts, unpacks goals carefully, finds out where students stand, connects to what they bring, chooses strategies for reasons, gathers and uses evidence, and makes every stage open to every student is practicing the pedagogical content knowledge this part describes.

• gatekeeping: requirements, such as teacher recommendations, that limit who can enroll
• asset-based perspective: treating students' languages, cultures, and experiences as strengths to build on
• Universal Design for Learning (UDL): planning from the start for multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression
• Individualized Education Program (IEP): a legally binding plan of special education services and accommodations
• 504 plan: a legally binding plan of accommodations under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
• accommodation: a change that provides access to a goal without lowering it
• chunking: dividing a task into smaller steps or checkpoints
• multilingual learner: a student developing proficiency in English alongside other languages
• sentence frame: a partial sentence that scaffolds how students talk or write about an idea
• stereotype threat: anxiety about confirming a negative stereotype, which can reduce performance
• growth mindset: the belief that ability grows through effort, strategies, and feedback

Practice: practice questions for 0005.g

1. LAI 516, Exploring Computer Science: inquiry and equity in an introductory curriculum. ↩

2. LAI 516, Design of a UB-BPS high school: how values and institutions shape computing education. ↩