Preparing Marginalised Students for Learning Computer Science: A Case Study of Teaching Computational Thinking to Underrepresented Middle School Youth

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.57125/FED.2026.03.12

Keywords:

Computer science education, Computational thinking, Middle school adolescents, Increasing presence of marginalised students in CS, University/secondary school partnership.

Abstract

This case study describes a university-middle school partnership aimed at preparing underserved youth for success in computer science (CS) and inspiring them to attend college.  The objectives of the partnership were a) to inspire youth from underrepresented demographic groups to believe they could study technology, b) prepare them for success in technology through teaching them computational thinking skills, and c) inspire them to attend college and major in CS. For three years, the partnership’s workshops, taught by computer science undergraduates who shared a racial/ethnic, social class, or gender identity with their pupils, taught computational thinking skills to 65 low-income, minoritised adolescents in middle school.  The variety of data used to assess the outcomes of the workshops included post-workshop student responses to surveys developed by the middle school educators, observations by the researchers, interviews with the undergraduate tutors and middle school CS teachers, and reflective essayswritten after each workshop by the undergraduate tutors.  Analyses of data strongly suggest that for most middle school participants, the workshops were successful. Workshops appear to undercut gender and race stereotypes of who belongs in CS, taught middle school pupils computational thinking skills, and inspired the participants to go to college and study technology.  In the absence of pre-tests of students’ prior levels of preparation and inspiration, findings only suggest that the intervention offers a strategy to both increase interest in and preparation for pursuing CS among underserved youth and, in doing so, may broaden the demographics of those participating in technology.

References

Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). "Doing" science versus "being" a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren's constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639.

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Vol. 1, p. 25). AERA.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. (2015). Fast facts.

Cheryan, S., Master, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2015). Cultural stereotypes as gatekeepers: Increasing girls' interest in computer science and engineering by diversifying stereotypes. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 49. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00049

Chetty, R., Hendren, N., Jones, M., & Porter, S. (2019). Race and economic opportunity in the United States: An intergenerational perspective. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(2), 711–783.

Code.org, CSTA, & ECEP Alliance. (2021). 2021 state of computer science education: Accelerating action through advocacy. https://advocacy.code.org/stateofcs

College of Computing and Informatics. (2018). Reflections on the first two years of CCI's curriculum [White paper]. University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

CSTA & ISTE. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K–12 education. https://cdn.iste.org/www-root/Computational_Thinking_Operational_Definition_ISTE.pdf

Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking: A guide for teachers. Computing at School. https://www.computingatschool.org.uk/media/kscbloob/computationalthinking.pdf

DeJarnette, N. (2012). America's children: Providing early exposure to STEM initiatives. Education, 133(1), 77–84.

Deslonde, V. L. (2017). Exploratory case study: On school counselors' perceived influence on low socioeconomic students' college enrollment [Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University].

Dorodchi, M., Benedict, A., Rorrer, A., Pugalee, D., & Cao, L. (2021). Broadening the middle school computational thinking interventions beyond block programming. In 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education.

Dorodchi, M., Dehbozorgi, N., Benedict, A., Al-Hossami, E., & Benedict, A. (2020). Scaffolding a team-based active learning course to engage students: A multidimensional approach. In 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education.

Engberg, M. E., & Wolniak, G. C. (2013). College student pathways to the STEM disciplines. Teachers College Record, 115(1), 1–27.

Fry, R., Kennedy, B., & Funk, C. (2021). STEM jobs see uneven progress in increasing gender, racial and ethnic diversity. Pew Research Center.

Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43.

Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer science course for middle school students. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 199–237.

Hammack, R., Ivey, T. A., Utley, J., & High, K. A. (2015). Effect of an engineering camp on students' perceptions of engineering and technology. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 5(2), Article 2.

Hanson, S. (2008). Swimming against the tide: African American girls and science education. Temple University Press.

Justice, C., Sample, C., Loo, S., Ball, A., & Hampton, C. (2022). Future needs of the cybersecurity workforce. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security (Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 81–91). Academic Conferences International Limited.

McKillip, M. E., Rawls, A., & Barry, C. (2012). Improving college access: A review of research on the role of high school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 16(1), 49–58.

Meerbaum-Salant, O., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (2013). Learning computer science concepts with Scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(3), 239–264.

Mickelson, R. A. (2015). The cumulative disadvantages of first- and second-generation segregation for middle school achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 52(4), 657–692.

Mickelson, R., Mikkelsen, I., Dorodchi, M., & Cukic, B.(2024). Inspiring and preparing underserved middle school students for computer science: A descriptive case study of the UNC Charlotte/Wilson STEM Academy partnership. School Community Journal, 34(1), 17–58. http://www.schoolcommunitynetwork.org/SCJ.aspx

Mickelson, R., Mikkelsen, I., Dorodchi, M., Cukic, B., & Horn, T. (2022). Fostering greater persistence among underserved computer science undergraduates: A descriptive study of the I-PASS project. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/15210251221086928

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE.

Morgan, S. L., Gelbgiser, D., & Weeden, K. A. (2013). Feeding the pipeline: Gender, occupational plans, and college major selection. Social Science Research, 42(4), 989–1005.

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2022). Computer science and technology education.

Rainey, K., Dancy, M., Stearns, E., & Moller, S. (2019). A descriptive study of race and gender differences in how instructional style and perceived professor care influence decisions to major in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 6, Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0159-2

Rogers, M. E., & Creed, P. A. (2011). A longitudinal examination of adolescent career planning and exploration using a social cognitive career theory framework. Journal of Adolescence, 34(1), 163–172.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Settle, A., & Perkovic, L. (2010). Computational thinking across the curriculum: A conceptual framework (Technical Report No. 13). DePaul University. http://via.library.depaul.edu/tr/13

Settle, A., Franke, B., Hansen, R., Spaltro, F., Jurisson, C., Rennert-May, C., & Wildeman, B. (2012). Infusing computational thinking into the middle- and high-school curriculum. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 22–27). Association for Computing Machinery.

University of North Carolina System. (2018). Insight data mart, reports and data tables, year 2018.

University of North Carolina at Charlotte & Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District. (2022). Memo of understanding regarding the UNC Charlotte/College of Computing and Informatics and Wilson Middle School STEM Academy Partnership.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023). Occupational outlook handbook: Computer and information research scientists. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/computer-and-information-research-scientists.htm

U.S. Census Bureau. (2018). American Community Survey (ACS), one-year public use microdata sample (I-PUMS). https://census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/microdata.html

Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of science identity and its role as the driver of student choices. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), Article 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0140-5

Voskoglou, M. G., & Buckley, S. (2012). Problem solving and computational thinking in a learning environment. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0750

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.

Wing, J. M. (2011). Research notebook: Computational thinking—What and why. The Link Magazine, 6, 20–23.

Woods, C. S., & Domina, T. (2014). The school counselor caseload and the high school-to-college pipeline. Teachers College Record, 116(10), 1–30.

Zweben, S., & Bizot, B. (2022). 2022 Taulbee survey. Computing Research Association. https://cra.org/crn/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2023/05/2022-Taulbee-Survey-final.pdf

Downloads

Published

2026-03-19

How to Cite

Mickelson, R., Dorodhi, M., Mikkelsen, I., Wiktor, S., Cukic, B., Petro, C., … Cook, J. (2026). Preparing Marginalised Students for Learning Computer Science: A Case Study of Teaching Computational Thinking to Underrepresented Middle School Youth. Futurity Education, 6(1), 217–240. https://doi.org/10.57125/FED.2026.03.12