Chuang 1

Stephanie Chuang

Instructor Sarah Ghasedi

English 182

25 October 2018

The Social Implications of Education in Computer Science

I made my decision to study the undergraduate computer science population at the

University of Washington mainly because of my recent experiences my classmates. I became

curious about the social effects of computer science culture on students because of something my

advisor said, “Not everyone has free printing, so please be humble.” She was implying our

position of privilege within the university as Direct Admits into the major, a feat with lower than

a 5% acceptance rate. When I observed my classmates while we discussed career opportunities,

advantages, and resources, I was appalled by what seemed to be outright materialism in their

motivation to study computer science. The obsession with high salaries, free swag, and the titular

status accompanying being a computer science major seemed to become an icon in my

classmates’ eyes, myself included. While I acknowledge that my feelings about this are highly

subjective, it really got me thinking about the negative social effects of computer science culture.

Are we fostering a generation of students that come out of the program less generous and

empathetic than they were before? This is important to consider because the people who graduate

from programs like these go on to create and influence technologies that tell us where to go, what

to buy, and what to listen to. I would hope that the people creating such important technologies

were people of sound character and morals, because their behavior will trickle down into the

technologies they create, whether they know it or not, and rebound culturally across millions of
 Chuang 2

lives. This leads me to my question, how do the stereotypes surrounding computer science

majors affect those students’ decisions to major in computer science? While this question may

seem unrelated to what I just described, it’s really a neutral investigation into what I’m

researching. It’s imperative that I stay neutral when I am asking questions, because any false

assumptions I make could affect the results I get. By doing this, I can then authentically

investigate the potentially negative causes and effects of computer science culture.

Initially, when I started my research, I struggled to find any relevant sources about my

topic. Most sources were about diversity in computer science, ethics of certain types of code, or

the sociology of non-computer science fields. All were in the ballpark, but not exactly what I

needed. This told me that my topic was not something that was broadly discussed. After several

combinations of keywords, I did find a article in the ​Journal of Moral Education​ titled

“Computer Majors’ Education as Moral Enterprise: a Durkheimian analysis” that was precisely

about what I was looking for. One of the first points the authors make is that computer science

students are not explicitly told how to behave in an ethical way. “In the same sense that no one is

taught directly how to behave in an elevator, no one is taught directly how to behave as a

computer professional. As with explicit moral education, students learn to ‘be good’ as a

by-product of specific demonstrated actions” (Rigoni and Lamagdeleine 492). In addition to the

lack of explicit instruction, the authors establish through their analysis that students learn their

behaviors implicitly by copying the actions around them. One possible reason for the lack of

explicit instruction is offered in an article titled, “A Framework for Enhancing the Social Good

in Computing Education: A Values Approach,” “We see this in the current culture of computer

science: CS instructors see themselves as information providers and trainers of future computing
 Chuang 3

practitioners (or graduate students), rather than deep educators” (Goldweber et al. 60). The belief

of computer science as a strictly technical field is one that is widespread, even held by teachers

who don’t emphasize on the importance that the social impact of computer science can have. If

we want to change the way we view the influence of computer science, talking to teachers is the

way to start.

In continuation on this, my next point is that there are negative implications that come

from the lack of discussion surrounding this. Computer Science is often viewed as an

individualistic, “out for yourself” challenge. The authors of the book ​Implementing a Tenth

Strand in the CS Curriculum ​describe this behavior, “Many students come to computer science

with a hacker mentality; that is, they view the computer as a personal intellectual challenge, a

test of their ability to solve logical problems and to control the computer” (Martin et al. 77).

However, this is a dangerous and unchecked way of thinking that is false. To think this way

would be to ignore any potential consequences of one’s actions as a programmer on other people,

which is irresponsible. Rigoni and Lamagdeleine reinforce my point by stating, “Among some of

the representations majors become invested in, we can certainly cite traces of hegemonic

discourse that qualifies as ideology” (502). In their case study at the anonymously renamed St

Cecelia University, the social pickups similar to those just described earlier among students are

so strong it amounts to an ideology. To sum it up, first, we have established that there is a

tendency among students to treat computer science as a field where they can reign rampant and

unchecked. Secondly, we have established that these inclinations are strong enough to be

considered an ideology of sorts. This, combined with the lack of attention to the effects of these
 Chuang 4

aspects, accumulate to a growing generation of programmers who are not adequately considering

the consequences of their behaviors.

The next point I would like to make is that not only are these behaviors bad for the

programmers, but they have a negative effect on their work and the general populace, who

consume what they create. A Senior at St Cecelia University said this of programmer behavior,

“The people who've been most successful with the computer courses, I always thought of as

being better people. They're more friendly. They're more outgoing. They work harder. They're

not out for just themselves. They're helpful to everybody. I guess I see them as more caring

(Senior)” (Rigoni and Lamagdeleine 495). Here, we have arguably the most important point of

my research. This student’s testimony is evidence of the connection there is between social

behaviors and results in academia. Having strong morals of generosity and selflessness does

make a difference, in both the programmer’s work and other people. Without it, we cannot

function as well as we could in teams, groups, or classes. Pursuing sensitivity and awareness in

computer science is not a fruitless attempt, and caring about others in computer science is

imperative. Something else worth mentioning in Rigoni and Lamagdeleine’s study is a comment

by a professor, “You're a service person in the business . . . ‘You're going to get a lot of

self-serving satisfaction out of this, but your objective is to serve somebody else.’ I think that's

where we went wrong with these folks or where they went wrong because they couldn't get out

of the self-serving mode into a serving others mode (Dr C)” (495). Dr. C supports the idea that

Computer Science is a service field to other people, not just an individual challenge. This also

ties back in with the first point I made, about how no programmer is explicitly told how to

behave and what values to keep. When we create such an intense, high-stakes, stressful
 Chuang 5

environment for students to grow in, these are the setbacks experienced. Students work so hard

to be admitted into a program that is so hard to get into, and then they work even harder to get a

job and benefits secured. It makes sense that over time, these students start to believe that they

have to be the only ones looking out for themselves, and that they are the only reason they will or

won’t succeed. It’s from this environment we get the self-serving mode, and like Dr. C says, we

never teach students to get out of it, because we always see everyone else as the competition to

beat and not someone to support.

While on the surface, my project may seem like it’s making a mountain out of a molehill,

it’s really an important point of view that the industry has neglected to pay attention to. These

behaviors and environments matter so much, and they have a rebounding effect on consumers

whether they know it or not. All I want to do it just bring attention to the fact that the University

of Washington can combat any negative effects they may be fostering. It’s possible that because

of the environment, people are choosing to not study computer science, or that people are

“scared away” from the subject. In “A Framework for Enhancing the Social Good in Computing

Education: A Values Approach,” the authors discuss these stereotypes and unnecessary

consequences in terms of their connection with diversity, “Although girls enroll in secondary

math and science classes at or near gender parity and perform as well as or better than boys[45],

many avoid taking computer science classes because they do not perceive a computing career as

having ‘the power to do good and make a difference’” (Goldweber et al. 59). This quote supports

the idea that we have to place importance on the social influences of computer science, because

not only does a lack of social values in computer science have adverse effects on programmers

and the people around them, but it also influences the diversity or lack thereof in the industry.
 Chuang 6

The quantity of connections that social values in computer science have to other parts of the

industry is only more evidence that we need to address it.

 Chuang 7

Works Cited

Goldweber, Michael, et al. “A Framework for Enhancing the Social Good in Computing

Education.” ​ACM Inroads​, vol. 4, no. 1, 1 Mar. 2013, pp. 58–79.,

doi:10.1145/2432596.2432616.

Martin, C. Dianne, et al. ​Implementing A Tenth Strand in the CS Curriculum.​ Vol. 39,

Communications of the ACM, 1996.

Rigoni, David P., and Donald R. Lamagdeleine. “Computer Majors’ Education as Moral

Enterprise: a Durkheimian Analysis.” ​Journal of Moral Education,​ vol. 27, no. 4, 1998,

pp. 489–503. ​Taylor & Francis Online,​ doi:10.1080/0305724980270404.