skip to main content
10.1145/3446871.3469757acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicerConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

Identity in K-12 Computer Education Research: A Systematic Literature Review

Published:17 August 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

The identity or self-concept of computer scientists has received increasing attention in the computing education research (CER) literature in recent years. Identity is often considered relevant both for initially choosing a path of study and subsequent retention. It is therefore also considered highly relevant for the questions of how to reduce drop-out rates and broadening participation of currently underrepresented groups in computing in higher education. However, as more and more students have eligible or mandatory computing education in their K-12 years, identity may become relevant in this area as well.

In this article, we analyze the use and development of identity in the CER literature with a focus on K-12 education. To do so, we undertook a systematic literature review that identified appropriate publications through both a traditional database search (ACM DL, IEEE Xplore, SpringerLink, ScienceDirect, DBLP, and Google Scholar) as well as an additional forward and backward snowballing process. In total, 31 papers from the years 1997-2020 were identified that address identity in the K-12 CS context.

We summarize key research findings from these articles and develop a category system that demonstrate how and why identity is used in CER in the K-12 context. Our findings suggest that the use of identity in K-12 research needs to be thought of in fundamentally different ways than for higher education. Alongside, we provide evidence that the underlying theory is less fragmented than often claimed and highlight potentials arising from greater networking and discussion of identity research in (K-12) CER.

References

  1. Jane Abbiss. 2011. Boys and machines: gendered computer identities, regulation and resistance. Gender and Education 23, 5 (2011), 601–617.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Nur Akkus Çakir, Arianna Gass, Aroutis Foster, and Frank J. Lee. 2017. Development of a game-design workshop to promote young girls’ interest towards computing through identity exploration. Computers & Education 108 (May 2017), 115–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.002Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Gene Alarcon and Jean Edwards. 2013. Ability and Motivation: Assessing Individual Factors That Contribute to University Retention. Journal of Educational Psychology 105 (Feb. 2013), 129. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028496Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Jane M. Armstrong and Richard A. Price. 1982. Correlates and Predictors of Women’s Mathematics Participation. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 13, 2 (1982), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.2307/748357Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Joseph A. Bailey. 2003. Self-image, self-concept, and self-identity revisited.Journal of the National Medical Association 95 5 (2003), 383–6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Roy F. Baumeister. 1997. Chapter 26 - Identity, Self-Concept, and Self-Esteem: The Self Lost and Found. Academic Press, San Diego, 681–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50027-5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. David N Beede, Tiffany A Julian, David Langdon, George McKittrick, Beethika Khan, and Mark E Doms. 2011. Women in STEM: A gender gap to innovation. Economics and Statistics Administration Issue Brief04-11 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Kera Bell-Watkins, Tiffany Barnes, and Nathan Thomas. 2009. Developing computing identity as a model for prioritizing dynamic K-12 computing curricular standards. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges 24, 3 (Jan. 2009), 125–131.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Maureen Biggers, Anne Brauer, and Tuba Yilmaz. 2008. Student Perceptions of Computer Science: A Retention Study Comparing Graduating Seniors with Cs Leavers. In Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Portland, OR, USA) (SIGCSE ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 402–406. https://doi.org/10.1145/1352135.1352274Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jo Boaler. 2000. Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning. Vol. 1. Greenwood Publishing Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Mimi Bong and Richard E. Clark. 1999. Comparison between self-concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research. Educational Psychologist 34, 3 (June 1999), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3403_1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Mimi Bong and Einar M. Skaalvik. 2003. Academic Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: How Different Are They Really?Educational Psychology Review 15, 1 (2003), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021302408382Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Nancy W. Brickhouse and Jennifer T. Potter. 2001. Young women’s scientific identity formation in an urban context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 38, 8 (2001), 965–980. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1041 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/tea.1041Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Brigitte Maria Brisson, Anna-Lena Dicke, Hanna Gaspard, Isabelle Häfner, Barbara Flunger, Benjamin Nagengast, and Ulrich Trautwein. 2017. Short Intervention, Sustained Effects: Promoting Students’ Math Competence Beliefs, Effort, and Achievement. American Educational Research Journal 54, 6 (2017), 1048–1078. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217716084Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Monica F. Bugallo and Angela M. Kelly. 2014. A pre-college recruitment strategy for electrical and computer engineering study. In 2014 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2014.6891010Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Jennifer Burg, V. Paúl Pauca, William Turkett, Errin Fulp, Samuel S. Cho, Peter Santago, Daniel Cañas, and H. Donald Gage. 2015. Engaging Non-Traditional Students in Computer Science through Socially-Inspired Learning and Sustained Mentoring. In Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education(SIGCSE ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 639–644. https://doi.org/10.1145/2676723.2677266Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Christine Bieri Buschor, Simone Berweger, Andrea Keck Frei, and Christa Kappler. 2013. Majoring in STEM—What Accounts for Women's Career Decision Making? A Mixed Methods Study. The Journal of Educational Research 107, 3 (dec 2013), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2013.788989Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Judith Butler. 1990. Gender trouble, feminist theory, and psychoanalytic discourse. Feminism/postmodernism 327 (1990), x.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Brenda M Capobianco. 2006. Undergraduate women engineering their professional identities. Journal of Women and minorities in Science and Engineering 12, 2-3(2006), 95–117.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Brenda M. Capobianco, Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, and Meara M. Habashi. 2009. Generating measures of Engineering Identity Development among young learners. In 2009 39th IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2009.5350817 ISSN: 2377-634X.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Brenda M. Capobianco, Brian F. French, and Heidi A. Diefes-Du. 2012. Engineering Identity Development Among Pre-Adolescent Learners. Journal of Engineering Education 101, 4 (2012), 698–716. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb01125.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Heidi B. Carlone and Angela Johnson. 2007. Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 44, 8 (2007), 1187–1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20237Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. David Wade Chambers. 1983. Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test. Science education 67, 2 (1983), 255–265.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Abigail Clark and Rachel Louis Kajfez. 2019. Engineering Identity in Pre-College Students: A Literature Review. In ASEE 2019 Annual Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Joanne Cohoon and William Aspray. 2008. Just Get Over It or Just Get On with It: Retaining Women in Undergraduate Computing. (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. J McGrath Cohoon and William Aspray. 2006. Women and information technology: Research on underrepresentation. Vol. 1. The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. John W Creswell and J David Creswell. 2017. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Lisa Darragh. 2016. Identity research in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics 93, 1 (Sept. 2016), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9696-5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Betsy DiSalvo, Mark Guzdial, Amy Bruckman, and Tom McKlin. 2014. Saving Face While Geeking Out: Video Game Testing as a Justification for Learning Computer Science. Journal of the Learning Sciences 23, 3 (2014), 272–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.893434 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.893434Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Brian Dorn and Allison Elliott Tew. 2015. Empirical validation and application of the computing attitudes survey. Computer Science Education 25, 1 (2015), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1014142Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Wendy DuBow, Joanna Weidler-Lewis, and Alexis Kaminsky. 2016. Multiple factors converge to influence women’s persistence in computing: A qualitative analysis of persisters and nonpersisters. In 2016 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT). 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT.2016.7836161Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Wendy M. DuBow and Laurie James-Hawkins. 2015. What influences female interest and persistence in computing? Preliminary findings from a multi-year study. In 2015 Research in Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT). 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT.2015.7296498Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. J. Eccles. 1983. Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. Achievement and achievement motives(1983).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. E.H. Erikson. 1968. Identity: youth and crisis. Norton & Co., Oxford, England.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Lauren Eskreis-Winkler, Elizabeth P. Shulman, Scott A. Beal, and Angela L. Duckworth. 2014. The grit effect: predicting retention in the military, the workplace, school and marriage. Frontiers in Psychology 5 (Feb. 2014). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00036Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Aamir Fidai, Luciana R. Barroso, Mary M. Capraro, and Robert M. Capraro. 2018. Can Building an Electric Bicycle Build an Engineering Identity?. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8659037 ISSN: 2377-634X.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Aamir Fidai, Cynthia Jarvis, Madison Benzor, Saaransh Verma, Mary Margaret Capraro, and Robert M. Capraro. 2019. Motivating Future Engineers: Building Situation Sensing Mars Rover with Elementary School Students. In 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE43999.2019.9028368 ISSN: 2377-634X.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Deborah Fields and Noel Enyedy. 2013. Picking up the mantle of “expert”: Assigned roles, assertion of identity, and peer recognition within a programming class. Mind, Culture, and Activity 20, 2 (2013), 113–131.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Hanoch Flum and Avi Kaplan. 2006. Exploratory Orientation as an Educational Goal. Educational Psychologist 41, 2 (June 2006), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Hanoch Flum and Avi Kaplan. 2012. Identity formation in educational settings: A contextualized view of theory and research in practice. Contemporary Educational Psychology 37, 3 (2012), 240 – 245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.01.003 Identity Formation in Educational Settings.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Michel Foucault. 1980. Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. Vintage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Francis Fukuyama. 2018. Identity: The demand for dignity and the politics of resentment. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Hanna Gaspard. 2015. Promoting Value Beliefs in Mathematics : A Multidimensional Perspective and the Role of Gender. Ph.D. Dissertation. Universität Tübigen. https://doi.org/10.15496/publikation-5241Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Hanna Gaspard, Isabelle Häfner, Cora Parrisius, Ulrich Trautwein, and Benjamin Nagengast. 2016. Assessing Task Values in Five Subjects During Secondary School: Measurement Structure and Mean Level Differences Across Grade Level, Gender, and Academic Subject. Contemporary Educational Psychology 48 (Oct. 2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.09.003Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. James Paul Gee. 2000. Chapter 3: Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of research in education 25, 1 (2000), 99–125.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Donald E. Gibson. 2003. Developing the Professional Self-Concept: Role Model Construals in Early, Middle, and Late Career Stages. Organization Science 14, 5 (2003), 591–610.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Allison Godwin, Geoff Potvin, Zahra Hazari, and Robynne Lock. 2016. Identity, Critical Agency, and Engineering: An Affective Model for Predicting Engineering as a Career Choice. Journal of Engineering Education 105, 2 (2016), 312–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20118Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Florence Laura Goodenough. 1926. Measurement of intelligence by drawings.(1926).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Gregor Große-Bölting, Yannick Schneider, and Andreas Mühling. 2019. It’s like Computers Speak a Different Language: Beginning Students’ Conceptions of Computer Science. In Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli, Finland) (Koli Calling ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 2, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3364510.3364527Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Gregor Große-Bölting, Yannick Schneider, and Andreas Mühling. 2020. Beginning Students’ Conceptions of Computer Science: The Effect of the First Semester. In 2020 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTICE). Ho-Chi-Minh-City; Vietnam.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Jiesi Guo, Herbert W. Marsh, Philip D. Parker, Alexandre J. S. Morin, and Theresa Dicke. 2017. Extending expectancy-value theory predictions of achievement and aspirations in science: Dimensional comparison processes and expectancy-by-value interactions. Learning and Instruction 49 (June 2017), 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.12.007Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Lelia Hampton, Robert Cummings, and Kinnis Gosha. 2019. Improving Computer Science Instruction and Computer Use for African American Secondary School Students: A Focus Group Exploration of Computer Science Identity of African American Teachers. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Computers and People Research Conference(SIGMIS-CPR ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322385.3322399Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Dale B Harris. 1965. Children’s drawings as measures of intellectual maturity. (1965).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Susan Harter. 1985. Manual for the self-perception profile for children:(revision of the perceived competence scale for children). University of Denver.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Susan Harter. 1990. Self and identity development.Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, US, 352–387.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Michael Hewner. 2013. Undergraduate Conceptions of the Field of Computer Science. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research(San Diego, San California, USA) (ICER ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1145/2493394.2493414Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Michael Hewner and Maria Knobelsdorf. 2008. Understanding computing stereotypes with self-categorization theory. In Proceedings of the 8th international Conference on Computing Education Research. 72–75.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Claudia Hildebrandt and Ira Diethelm. 2012. The school experiment InTech: how to influence interest, self-concept of ability in informatics and vocational orientation. In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education(WiPSCE ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/2481449.2481458Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Dorothy C Holland, William Lachicotte Jr, Debra Skinner, and Carole Cain. 2001. Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Henriette Tolstrup Holmegaard, Lars M. Ulriksen, and Lene Møller Madsen. 2014. The Process of Choosing What to Study: A Longitudinal Study of Upper Secondary Students’ Identity Work When Choosing Higher Education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 58, 1 (Jan. 2014), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.696212Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Jingoo Kang, Tuula Keinonen, and Anssi Salonen. 2019. Role of Interest and Self-Concept in Predicting Science Aspirations: Gender Study. Research in Science Education (Nov. 2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09905-wGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Avi Kaplan and Hanoch Flum. 2012. Identity formation in educational settings: A critical focus for education in the 21st century. Contemporary Educational Psychology 37, 3 (2012), 171 – 175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.01.005 Identity Formation in Educational Settings.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Amy K. Kiefer and Denise Sekaquaptewa. 2007. Implicit stereotypes and women’s math performance: How implicit gender-math stereotypes influence women’s susceptibility to stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43, 5 (2007), 825–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.08.004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Royce Kimmons and George Veletsianos. 2014. The fragmented educator 2.0: Social networking sites, acceptable identity fragments, and the identity constellation. Computers & Education 72 (March 2014), 292–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.001Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Barbara Kitchenham. 2004. Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Keele, UK, Keele Univ. 33 (Aug. 2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Maria Knobelsdorf. 2011. Biographische Lern- und Bildungsprozesse im Handlungskontext der Computernutzung. Ph.D. Dissertation. http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-8680Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Siu Cheung Kong and Yi Qing Wang. 2020. Formation of computational identity through computational thinking perspectives development in programming learning: A mediation analysis among primary school students. Computers in Human Behavior 106 (2020), 106230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106230Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Lyda Lannegrand-Willems and Harke A Bosma. 2006. Identity development-in-context: The school as an important context for identity development. Identity 6, 1 (2006), 85–113.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Luzia Leifheit, Katerina Tsarava, Korbinian Moeller, Klaus Ostermann, Jessika Golle, Ulrich Trautwein, and Manuel Ninaus. 2019. Development of a Questionnaire on Self-concept, Motivational Beliefs, and Attitude Towards Programming. In Proceedings of the 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education(WiPSCE’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3361721.3361730Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Luzia Leifheit, Katerina Tsarava, Manuel Ninaus, Klaus Ostermann, Jessika Golle, Ulrich Trautwein, and Korbinian Moeller. 2020. SCAPA: Development of a Questionnaire Assessing Self-Concept and Attitudes Toward Programming. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education(ITiCSE ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 138–144. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341525.3387415Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Robert Lent, Steven Brown, and Gail Hackett. 1994. Toward a Unifying Social Cognitive Theory of Career and Academic Interest, Choice, and Performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior 45 (Aug. 1994), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. Jonathan Mahadeo, Zahra Hazari, and Geoff Potvin. 2020. Developing a Computing Identity Framework: Understanding Computer Science and Information Technology Career Choice. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 20, 1, Article 7 (Jan. 2020), 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3365571Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Adam V. Maltese and Robert H. Tai. 2010. Eyeballs in the Fridge: Sources of early interest in science. International Journal of Science Education 32, 5 (2010), 669–685. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902792385Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Jane Margolis and Allan Fisher. 2002. Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. MIT press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Herbert W. Marsh, Reinhard Pekrun, Philip D. Parker, Kou Murayama, Jiesi Guo, Theresa Dicke, and A. Katrin Arens. 2019. The murky distinction between self-concept and self-efficacy: Beware of lurking jingle-jangle fallacies.Journal of Educational Psychology 111, 2 (feb 2019), 331–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000281Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Danny Bernard Martin. 2000. Mathematics success and failure among African-American youth: The roles of sociohistorical context, community forces, school influence, and individual agency. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Danny Bernard Martin. 2012. Learning mathematics while Black.Educational Foundations 26 (2012), 47–66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Allison Master, Sapna Cheryan, and Andrew N Meltzoff. 2016. Computing whether she belongs: Stereotypes undermine girls’ interest and sense of belonging in computer science.Journal of educational psychology 108, 3 (2016), 424.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Philipp Mayring. 2014. Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. AUT.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. George H Mead. 1913. The social self. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 10, 14(1913), 374–380.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  82. Wim Meeus, Jurjen Iedema, Marianne Helsen, and Wilma Vollebergh. 1999. Patterns of adolescent identity development: Review of literature and longitudinal analysis. Developmental review 19, 4 (1999), 419–461.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. E. M. Mercier, B. Barron, and K. M. O’Connor. 2006. Images of self and others as computer users: the role of gender and experience. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 22, 5 (2006), 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00182.x arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00182.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  84. John R. Morelock. 2017. A systematic literature review of engineering identity: definitions, factors, and interventions affecting development, and means of measurement. European Journal of Engineering Education 42, 6 (Nov. 2017), 1240–1262. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1287664Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  85. Michele S. Moses, Kenneth R. Howe, and Tricia Niesz. 1999. The Pipeline and Student Perceptions of Schooling: Good News and Bad News. Educational Policy 13, 4 (Sept. 1999), 573–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904899013004005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  86. Erica Mourão, João Felipe Pimentel, Leonardo Murta, Marcos Kalinowski, Emilia Mendes, and Claes Wohlin. 2020. On the performance of hybrid search strategies for systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Information and Software Technology 123 (2020), 106294.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  87. Na’ilah Suad Nasir and Jamal Cooks. 2009. Becoming a Hurdler: How Learning Settings Afford Identities. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 40, 1 (2009), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2009.01027.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. Greg L. Nelson and Andrew J. Ko. 2018. On Use of Theory in Computing Education Research. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Espoo, Finland) (ICER ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230992Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  89. Lijun Ni and Mark Guzdial. 2012. Who AM I? understanding high school computer science teachers’ professional identity. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education(SIGCSE ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 499–504. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157283Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  90. Brian A Nosek, Mahzarin R Banaji, and Anthony G Greenwald. 2002. Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me.Journal of personality and social psychology 83, 1(2002), 44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  91. J. Steve Oliver and Ronald D. Simpson. 1988. Influences of attitude toward science, achievement motivation, and science self concept on achievement in science: A longitudinal study. Science Education 72, 2 (1988), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730720204Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  92. Daphna Oyserman, Deborah Bybee, and Kathy Terry. 2006. Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91, 1 (July 2006), 188–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.188Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  93. Daphna Oyserman, Deborah Bybee, Kathy Terry, and Tamera Hart-Johnson. 2004. Possible selves as roadmaps. Journal of Research in personality 38, 2 (2004), 130–149.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  94. Daphna Oyserman, Kristen Elmore, and Smith. 2012. Self, self-concept, and identity. In Handbook of self and identity. 69–104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  95. Anne-Kathrin Peters. 2017. Learning Computing at University: Participation and Identity : A Longitudinal Study. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. Anne-Kathrin Peters and Detlef Rick. 2014. Identity development in computing education: theoretical perspectives and an implementation in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education(WiPSCE ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 70–79. https://doi.org/10.1145/2670757.2670787Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  97. Patrice Potvin, Abdelkrim Hasni, Ousmane Sy, and Martin Riopel. 2018. Two Crucial Years of Science and Technology Schooling: A Longitudinal Study of the Major Influences on and Interactions Between Self-Concept, Interest, and the Intention to Pursue S&T. Research in Science Education (Aug. 2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9751-6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  98. Lilian L. Pozzer and Phoebe A. Jackson. 2015. Conceptualizing Identity in Science Education Research: Theoretical and Methodological Issues. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4240-6_11Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  99. Darinka Radovic, Laura Black, Julian Williams, and Christian E. Salas. 2018. Towards conceptual coherence in the research on mathematics learner identity: a systematic review of the literature. Educational Studies in Mathematics 99, 1 (Sept. 2018), 21–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9819-2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  100. Laurie Hart Reyes. 1984. Affective Variables and Mathematics Education. The Elementary School Journal 84, 5 (1984), 558–581. https://doi.org/10.1086/461384Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  101. Sarah L Rodriguez and Kathleen Lehman. 2017. Developing the next generation of diverse computer scientists: the need for enhanced, intersectional computing identity theory. Computer Science Education 27, 3-4 (2017), 229–247.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  102. Mark Santolucito and Ruzica Piskac. 2020. Formal Methods and Computing Identity-based Mentorship for Early Stage Researchers. In Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education(SIGCSE ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3366957Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  103. Toni Schmader. 2002. Gender Identification Moderates Stereotype Threat Effects on Women’s Math Performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38, 2 (2002), 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1500Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  104. Anna Sfard and Anna Prusak. 2005. Telling Identities: In Search of an Analytic Tool for Investigating Learning as a Culturally Shaped Activity. Educational Researcher 34 (May 2005), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034004014Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  105. Mia S. Shaw, Deborah A. Fields, and Yasmin B. Kafai. 2019. Connecting with Computer Science: Electronic Textile Portfolios as Ideational Identity Resources for High School Students. International Journal of Multicultural Education 21, 1 (March 2019), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v21i1.1740Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  106. Claude M Steele. 1997. A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.American psychologist 52, 6 (1997), 613.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  107. Amanda Sullivan and Marina Umashi Bers. 2016. Girls, boys, and bots: Gender differences in young children’s performance on robotics and programming tasks. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice 15, 1(2016), 145–165.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  108. Hideyuki Suzuki and Hiroshi Kato. 1997. Identity formation/transformation as the process of collaborative learning through AlgoArena. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Computer support for collaborative learning(CSCL ’97). International Society of the Learning Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 283–291.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  109. Ulrich Trautwein and Olaf Köller. 2003. Was lange währt, wird nicht immer gut. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 17, 3/4 (2003), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1024//1010-0652.17.34.199Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  110. Stuart A. Tross, Jeffrey P. Harper, Lewis W. Osher, and Linda M. Kneidinger. 2000. Not Just the Usual Cast of Characteristics: Using Personality To Predict College Performance and Retention. Journal of College Student Development 41, 3 (2000), 323–34.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  111. Jessica Tupou and Judith Loveridge. 2019. Understanding Pasifika Students’ Engagement with Computer Science: A New Zealand-Based Case Study. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies 54, 2 (Nov. 2019), 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-019-00147-yGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  112. Sepehr Vakil. 2020. “I’ve Always Been Scared That Someday I’m Going to Sell Out”: Exploring the relationship between Political Identity and Learning in Computer Science Education. Cognition and Instruction 38, 2 (2020), 87–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1730374 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1730374Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  113. Monique Verhoeven, Astrid M. G. Poorthuis, and Monique Volman. 2019. The Role of School in Adolescents’ Identity Development. A Literature Review. Educational Psychology Review 31, 1 (2019), 35–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9457-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  114. Robin Whittemore, Susan K Chase, and Carol Lynn Mandle. 2001. Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative health research 11, 4 (2001), 522–537.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  115. Jesse L. M. Wilkins. 2004. Mathematics and Science Self-Concept: An International Investigation. The Journal of Experimental Education 72, 4 (July 2004), 331–346. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.72.4.331-346Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  116. Jeannette M. Wing. 2006. Computational thinking. Commun. ACM 49, 3 (2006), 33. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  117. Claes Wohlin. 2014. Guidelines for Snowballing in Systematic Literature Studies and a Replication in Software Engineering. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (London, England, United Kingdom) (EASE ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 38, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2601248.2601268Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  118. Billy Wong. 2016. ‘I’m good, but not that good’: digitally-skilled young people’s identity in computing. Computer Science Education 26, 4 (2016), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2017.1292604 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2017.1292604Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  119. Billy Wong and Peter EJ Kemp. 2018. Technical boys and creative girls: the career aspirations of digitally skilled youths. Cambridge Journal of Education 48, 3 (2018), 301–316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  120. Yi Xue and Richard C Larson. 2015. STEM crisis or STEM surplus? Yes and yes. Monthly labor review 2015 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. Identity in K-12 Computer Education Research: A Systematic Literature Review

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ICER 2021: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research
      August 2021
      451 pages
      ISBN:9781450383264
      DOI:10.1145/3446871

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 17 August 2021

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate189of803submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      ICER 2024
      ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research
      August 13 - 15, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format