Computing is "machine-focused, boring and anti-social - the antithesis of girls' interest in communication and people-centre professions" - or, at least, that's the prevailing image. But, now, girls are making positive career choices in favour of courses that they consider are "socially useful" as well as academically challenging.
Barriers for Women in Computing, a study by Helen McQuillan and Rose Mary Bradley of UL, tries to explain why women are under-represented in computing at third-level.
Women now account for 34 per cent of computing undergraduates, compared to 20 per cent in 1994, but women's participation is still lower than it was in the Eighties. Meanwhile, "pipeline shrinkage" is wreaking its own havoc with the gender statistics - the higher you go up the academic pipeline, the fewer women are to be found.
McQuillan and Bradley surveyed 125 Leaving Cert girls in two Limerick schools, one single-sex and one coed, to determine attitudes to computing and career choices. They also surveyed 91 female undergraduates in Limerick IT and UL.
Their findings suggest that women's low participation is not caused by lack of ability, interest, false perceptions or lack or awareness of opportunities and salaries. Rather, it is a function of computing's academic and cultural image which is "stereotypically as well as inherently masculine."
All of the Leaving Cert students had access to computers at school and half had a home computer but computing featured low on the list of hobbies. Despite school computing experience, only slightly more than half of the girls felt confident using a computer.
Some 92 per cent of the students had applied for third-level courses through the CAO, while 22 per cent had applied for PLC courses. Only 14 per cent put computing as their number one choice on the CAO form with three per cent of these opting for business and computing and one per cent for languages and computing.
Many of these had non-computing courses as second and third choices. The majority of girls favoured subjects in the humanities and business area. No girl from the co-ed school put computing as a number one choice.
The most important influence on course choice was the college prospectus but the majority of third-level institutions fail to mention the words "people" or "communication" in the descriptions of computer courses. Guidance teachers and work experience were also important influences.
When asked about career aspirations, 86 per cent of the girls were seeking careers with "interesting work" as a factor, while 52 per cent highlighted "good job prospects." But these did not equate to high salaries which were considered important by only 16 per cent of the sample.
The top three career choices were tourism, office work and teaching. Very few students listed computing. Most girls opted for careers where role models are more visible and which are people- rather than machine-oriented.
At third-level, nearly of the female students rated their computing skills positively but over two-thirds described their course as difficult or very difficult. The authors suggest this means that "major barriers to women's progress lies in the academic environment, rather than in women's ability or interest in computing."
The main problems were caused by "the abstract and theoretical nature of computing, which they felt failed to cater for their need for relevance and purpose. Many women also complained about the lack of a social dimension to their course."
The authors of the study urge the immediate provision of a forum for discussion of issues raised by this study and other research on the gender-computing relationship and women's under-representation in computing. At school level, a debate is necessary before the Schools IT2000 project is fully implemented, while NITEC should consider the immediate development of a website aimed specifically at girls' interests. This could be modelled on the Backyard Project - httep:/ www.backyard.org/ - developed in Silicon Valley.
More women teachers need to be facilitated and encouraged to develop their skills and expertise in computing to provide female role models with "expert" status.
Other recommendations include giving realistic examples of what a course in computing entails with colleges including details or photographs of final-year students to illustrate the diversity of courses, and outlining the different career paths available to graduates. Descriptions in college prospectuses need to be improved.
AT third level, computing courses need to have a more visible social dimension. Consideration should be given to a module on computer culture or sociology, which could debate the role of computing in society and embrace wider issues such as sexism, class issues and equality. Colleges should fund more Women in Technology and Science seminars, initiatives and publications to build on existing women's networks and create stronger links between women in schools, colleges and industry.
Industry is urged to develop better links with schools and third-level institutions. The computer industry needs "an urgent PR campaign to dispel the stereotype of a computer scientist as a narrowly focused male, who sits in front of a computer terminal for hours on end." It should invite high profile women in the computer industry to give career talks to girls.
