"Tehc" Blog

One of the main things separating women and Computer Science careers lie in the misconceptions that many people have of the field, so here are 3 misconceptions about Computer Science careers, debunked:

Misconception 1: Work/Life Balance

Contrary to popular belief, computer scientists don’t spend all hours of the day typing out code. In fact, many tech companies (such as Google and Apple) support non traditional working environments, including videoconferencing, working from home, and super flexible schedules. This allows many employees to work around their own schedules, and complete projects on their own time. High end tech companies are also known for having incredibly fun workplaces. On top of that, many companies allow their employees much more paid maternity leave than the national average of 6 weeks.

Misconception 2: Programmers are Anti-social

As I mentioned in the previous misconception, Most companies urge their workers to maintain a good work-life balance. This boots the common misconception that programmers are hunched over their laptops all day right out the window! Some companies are very serious about keeping their employees healthy, often offering free or reduced gym memberships and places to exercise through. 

Misconception 3: There’s a lot of math

Is actually way smaller than it is in other fields. According to the AAUW, Women in Computer Science careers earn (on average) 94% of what their male counterparts do. This is a huge leap from the national average, where women earn 82 cents to every dollar that men do. 

There are many benefits of going into the computer science field, such as great vacation and benefits packages, the constant increase in IT jobs, and being on the brink of innovation in Computer Science. Because of this, tech companies are known for allowing their employees to have a healthy work-life balance.

Recently, I listened to this lovely podcast from NPR. 

The podcast is a good listen, but the description has a great graph that I’d like to focus on. Kenney and Henn talk about the massive drop in women in computing right around 1984. Hearing about the decline is one thing, but the graph shows the drop well. In 1984, women held 37% of all Computer Science degrees! The hosts talk about how the male-focused advertising for computing, namely for apple products, drove many to label computing as something for men. The percentage of women pursuing computer science degrees has since dropped to a steady 18%.

The lack of women in computer science is continued today, but often due to a lack of support during introductory computer science classes and clubs at the middle and high school levels. You may have noticed that a lot of advertising to get women into STEM is focused on children in elementary school. This method of advertising is helpful, but not particularly useful. As a girl who is currently in a STEM major, I think i can say wholeheartedly that those ads meant for small children didn’t work for me. They’re vaguely empowering, sure, but personally? They make me feel like the golden years where I have my whole life ahead of me are gone. 

I’m 17. These are supposed to be my golden years, by any full blown adult’s definition.

Before I get into this, i’d like to note that i’ll be specifically talking about the books published by L’engle. The movies were both okay, but neither really captured the same vibes that I found in the books. Also, that this will contain spoilers for a Wrinkle in Time

I always had my nose in a book when I was a kid. Most of the time they were of the fantasy genre, taking my mind far away from things I was dealing with at the time. Sometimes, they were those diary style slice of life books that were unreasonably popular in the 2000′s. A Wrinkle in Time definitely isn’t either of those types of book though- it’s steeped in cryptic language and overt explanations of math and science. Despite not being one of my favorite genres as a kid, this book (and 4 four books that follow it) have been my favorites since I read it.

Now, as an adult, I can see exactly why I was so drawn to these books, starting with the protagonist: Meg Murry. First off, she’s smart and outspoken. And she’s ostracized by her peers and teachers for both. She’s not a normal YA female protagonist by any means, but I think that makes her all the more wonderful. She’s an example of a strong, smart, female figure who’s around the same age as many of the young ladies who pick up this book. In later books, we even learn that she’s become a Mathematician !

Meg does a great job of presenting a strong, smart women, but her mother probably inspired me even more. Meg and Charles’ mother is a renowned scientist, and she and their father created a piece of technology never seen before: A TESSERACT. That was insane to me as a kid. This lady who made soup over a bunsen burner for her kids also made a tesseract??? 

 She’s a great example of a strong woman in STEM. I’m really interested in the effect that this book had on young girls, and how it inspired many to defy traditional gender roles and go into STEM fields. I’m one of those girls (currently persuing Computer Science), and I grew up on L’Engle’s strange but beautiful stories about unicorns, mitochondria, and history. The representation of strong women and femme non-binary characters in this story is deeply inspiring, and I think that if more girls had access to it, we might have more smart women persuing majors and careers in STEM.