Building Virtual Spaces

Games as Gatekeepers for the IT Workforce
  • Andrea H. Tapia
  • Magy Seif El-Nasr
  • Ibrahim Yucel
  • Joseph Zupko
  • Edgard Maldonado
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 236)


The percentage of young women choosing educational paths leading to science and technology-based employment has been dropping for several years [1, 2]. In our view, the core cause for this phenomenon is a lack of interest and social support on the part of the girls and their families and not a lack of ability. The specific aim of this paper is to evaluate the utility of building virtual environments in influencing girls’ interest in computer-related educational paths and careers. This is evaluated through an intervention, or action-research, in the form of a class named Gaming for Girls. This class was offered to middle and high school girls three times over the years 2005–2006. We assert playing and developing computer games can lead to the acquisition of tangible IT skills and a higher sense of self-efficacy in terms of computer use. In particular, we discuss intervention methods that aim at changing socialization patterns by bringing girls into an all-girl classroom, reducing game violence by altering the forms of game action, and removing potentially negative character designs by allowing girls to design characters and game interaction themselves. We assert that within the information economy, playing video games is an advantage.


Video Game Virtual Environment Game Design Female Character Play Video Game 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    ITAA, Workforce Studies Series, Adding Value: Annual Workforce Study, (2004).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ITAA, Untapped Talent: Diversity, Competition, and America’s High Tech Future, (2005).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Camp, The Incredible Shrinking Pipeline, Communications of the ACM 40(10), 103–110(1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Freeman and W. Aspray, The Supply of Information Technology Workers in the United States (Computing Research Association, Washington, DC, 1999).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    U.S. Department of Education, 2002 Digest of Education Statistics, (2002).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ITAA, Workforce Studies Series, Annual Workforce Study, (2003).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    National Science Foundation, Women, Minorities and People with Disabilities in Science and Engineering 2000, (2000).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Engineering, N.A.C.f.M.i., The State of Minorities in Engineering and Technology, (2001–2002).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Annenberg Public Policy Center, Progress or No Room at the Top? The Role of Women in Telecommunications, Media, and e-Companies, (2001).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Geewax, If Women Ruled... Female Techies Image a World, in: The Atlanta Journal, (2000).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Spender, The Position of Women in Information Technology, or Who Got There First and with What Consequences?, Current Sociology 45(2), 135–147(1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Trauth, Odd Girl Out: An Individual Differences Perspective on Women in the IT Profession, Information, Technology & People 15(2), 98–118 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. von Hellens, S. Nielsen, and E. Trauth, Breaking and Entering the Male Domain: Women in the IT industry, in: Special Interest Group of the Association for Computing Machinery on Computing Personnel Research-SIGCPR 2001, (2001).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Beise, IT Project Management and Virtual Teams, in: 2004 SIGMIS Conference on Computer Personnel Research, (Tucson, Arizona, 2004).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Craig and A. Stein, in: Women, Work and Computerization: Charting a Course to the Future, edited by E. Balka and R. Smith (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 2000).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Margolis and A. Fisher, Unlocking the Club House; Women in Computing (The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2002).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Margolis and A. Fisher, Geek Mythology and Attracting Undergraduate Women to Computer Science, in: Joint National Conference of the Women in Engineering Program, Advocates Network and the National Association of Minority Engineering Program Administrators, (1997).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Nielsen, L. von Hellens, and S. Wong, The Game of Social Constructs: We’re Going to Win IT!, in: 2000 International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), (2000).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Symonds, in: Women, Work and Computerization: Charting a Course to the Future, edited by E. Balka and R. Smith (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 2000).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Teague, A Structured Review of Reasons for the Underrepresentation of Women in Computing, in: Second Australasian Conference on Computer Science, (1997).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    L. von Hellens, et al., Bridging the IT Skills Gap. A Strategy to Improve the Recruitment and Success of IT Students, in: 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, (1999).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Woodfield, Women Work and Computing (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. Giddens, Sociology (Polity Press, London, 1997).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    P. Bourdieu and J-C. Passeron, in: Knowledge, Education, and Cultural Change, edited by R. Brown (Tavistock, London, 1973).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    P. Shoemaker, Gatekeeping (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1991).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    R. Simon and J. Fyfe, eds., Editors as Gatekeepers: Getting Published in the Social Sciences (Rowman and Littlefield Pub., Inc., 1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    L.A. Coser, Publishers as Gatekeepers of Ideas, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 421, 14–22 (1975).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    W. Schramm, in: Mass Communication, edited by W. Schramm (University of Illinois, Urbana, 1949).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    S. Maxfield, S., Gatekeepers of Growth: The International Political Economy of Central Banking in Developing Countries (Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1998).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. Gibbs and E.H. Blakely, eds., Gatekeeping in BSW Programs (Columbia University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    J. Steinberg, The Gatekeepers: Inside the Admissions Process of a Premier College (Penguin Books, London, England, 2002).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    L.S. Moore and C.A. Urwin, Gatekeeping: A Model for Screening Baccalaureate Students for Field Education, Journal of Social Work Education 27(1), 8–17 (1991).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    A.T. Denzau and R.J. McKay, Gatekeeping and Monopoly Power of Committees: An Analysis of Sincere and Sophisticated Behavior, American Journal of Political Science 27, 740–761 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    D. Epstein, An Informational Rationale for Committee Gatekeeping Power, Public Choice 91, 270 (1996).Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    T. Groseclose and K. Krehbiel, Gatekeeping, in: Conference on Political Parties and Legislative Organization in Parliamentary and Presidential Regimes, (Yale University, 2002).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    J.M. Snyder, Gatekeeping or Not, Sample Selection in the Roll Call Agenda Matters, American Journal of Political Science 36, 36 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    E.R. Harcum and E.F. Rosen, The Gatekeepers of Psychology: Evaluation of Peer Review by Case History (Praeger Publishers, 1993).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    S. Kiesler, L. Sproull and J.S. Eccles, Pool Halls, Chips, and War games: Women in the Culture of Computing, SIGCSE 34(2), 159–164 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    A.M. Martinson, Playing with Technology: Designing Gender Sensitive Games to Close the Gender Gap (March 10, 2005); Scholar
  40. 40.
    C.M. Gorriz and C. Medina, Engaging Girls with Computers through Software Games, Communications of the ACM 43(1), 42–49 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    D. Agosto, Girls and Gaming: A Summary of the Research with Implications for Practice, Teacher Librarian 31(3)(2004).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    J. Cassel and H. Jenkins, in: From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and Computer Games, edited by J. Cassel and H. Jenkins (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999), pp. 2–45.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    H. Gilmore, in: Kid’s Media Culture, edited by M. Kinder (Duke University Press, Durham, NC, 1999), pp. 263–292.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    U. Ritterfeld and R. Weber, in: Playing Video Games; Motives, Responses, and Consequences, edited by P. Vorderer and J. Bryant (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey, 2006).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    C. Huff, Gender, Software Design, and Occupational Equity, SIGCSE Bulletin 34(2), 112–115(2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    J.D. Bransford, et al., in: Cognition, Education, and Multimedia: Exploring Ideas in High Technology, edited by D. Nix and R. Spiro (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990), pp. 115–141.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    A. Collins, J.S. Brown, and S.E. Newman, in: Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser, edited by L. Resnick (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    J.S. Bruner, The Process of Education (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1960).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    J. Carroll, The Nurnberg Funnel: Designing Minimalist Instruction for Practical Computer Skill (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    M.B. Rosson and J. Carroll, Scaffolded Examples for Learning Object-Oriented Design, Communications of the ACM 39(4), 46–47 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    M.B. Rosson and J. Carroll, The Reuse of Uses in Smalltalk Programming, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 3(3), 219–253 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    S. Papert, The Children’s Machine (Basic Books, New York, 1993).Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Y. Kafai and M. Resnick, eds., Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in a Digital World (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1996).Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    S. Papert, Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas (Basic Books, New York, 1980).Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Y. Kafai, Minds In Play: Computer Game Design as a Context for Children’s Learning (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1994).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    P. Angliolillo, Gaming Makes the Grade, in: Technology Review, (2005).Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    B. Moskal, D. Lurie, and S. Cooper, in: Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, edited by D. Joyce and D. Knox (ACM Press, New York, 2004), pp. 75–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Y.B. Kafai, Software by Kids for Kids, Communications of the ACM 39(4), 38–39 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Y.B. Kafai, Children Designing Software for Children: What Can We Learn? in: 2003 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (Preston, England, 2003).Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    M. Conway, et al., Alice: Lessons Learned from Building a 3D System for Novices, in: SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (The Hague, The Netherlands, 2000).Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    A. Repenning and J. Ambach, The Agentsheets Behavior Exchange: Supporting Social Behavior Processing. in: CHI 97, (New York, 1997).Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    A. Repenning and T. Sumner, Agentsheets: A Medium for Creating Domain-Oriented Visual Languages, Computer 4, 17–25 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    D. Smith, A. Cypher, and J. Spohrer, KidSim: Programming Agents without a Programming Language, Communications of the ACM 54–67 (1994).Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    E. Klopfer, V. Colella, and M. Resnick, New Paths on a StarLogo Adventure, Computers & Graphics 26(4), 615–622 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    R. Pausch, et al., Alice: Rapid Prototyping System for Virtual Reality, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications (1995).Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    I. Harel, Children Designers: Interdisciplinary Constructions for Learning and Knowing Mathematics in a Computer-Rich School (Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ, 1991).Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    P.K. Hooper, They Have Their Own Thoughts: Children’s Learning of Computational Ideas from a Cultural Constuctionist Perspective, (1998), (unpublished).Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    M. Seif El-Nasr and B.K. Smith, Learning Through Game Modding, ACM Computers in Entertainment 4(1), Article 3B (2006).Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    J. Gee, What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (Palgrace Macmillan, 2004).Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    C. Heeter, et al., Do Girls Prefer Games Designed by Girls? (2004).Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    J.F. Sullivan, D. Reamon, and B. Louie, Girls Embrace Technology: A Summer Internship for High School Girls, in: 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, (Boulder, CO, 2003).Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    K. Tran, U.S. Video-Game Industry Post Record Sales, in: Wall Street Journal, (2002).Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    M. Ritchel, Video Game Industry Sales Reach Pace in 2004, in: The New York Times, (2005).Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    S.G. Ray, Gender Inclusive Game Design: Expanding the Market (Charles River Media, INC, Hingham, Mass, 2003).Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    A.A. Raney, J.K. Smith, and K. Baker, in: Playing Video Games; Motives, Responses, and Consequences, edited by P. Vorderer and J. Bryant (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey, 2006).Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    D. Williams, in: Playing Video Games; Motives, Responses, and Consequences, edited by P. Vorderer and J. Bryant (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey, 2006).Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    M. Natale, The Effect of a Male-oriented Computer Gaming Culture on Careers in the Computer Industry, Computer and Society, 24–31 (2002).Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    R.M. Scantlin, Interactive Media: An Analysis of Children’s Computer and Video Game Use, (1999), (unpublished).Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    D.D. Buchman and J.B. Funk, Video and Computer Games In the’ 90s: Children’s Time Commitment and Game Preference, Children Today 24(1), 12–15 (1996).Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    K.H. Knowlee, et al., Fair Play? Violence, Gender and Race in Video Games (Children Now, Oakland, CA, 2001).Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    C. Merripen, Increasing the Bottom Line: Women’s Market Share, in: Gamedeveloper, (2005).Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    J.B. Funk, Girls Just Want to Have Fun, in: Playing by The Rules Conference, (Chicago, Illinois, 2001).Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    I. Yucel, J. Zupko, and M. Seif El-Nasr, Education, IT, Girls, and Game Modding, ITSE International Journal of Interactive Technology and Smart Education Journal, Special Issue on Smarter Use of Technology in Education (2006).Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    M. Seif El-Nasr and B.K. Smith, Learning Through Game Modding, ACM Computers in Entertainment 4(1), 3b (2006).Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    J. McNiff, Action Research: Principles and Practices (Routledge, London, 1988).Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    J. McNiff, Teaching as Learning: An Action Research Approach (Routledge, London, 1993).Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    B. Somekh and M. Thaler, Contradiction of Management Theory, Organizational Cultures and Self, Educational Action Research 5(1), 17–25 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    R. Winter, Action-Research and the Nature of Social Inquiry (Aldershot, Gower, 1987).Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    R. Winter, Learning From Experience (Falmer Press, Lewes, 1989).Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    R. Winter, Finding a Voice-Thinking with Others: A Conception of Action-Research, Educational Action Research 6(1), 53–63 (1998).CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Gender Diversities & Technology Institute, The FunWorks (January 10th, 2007); Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea H. Tapia
    • 1
  • Magy Seif El-Nasr
    • 2
  • Ibrahim Yucel
    • 3
  • Joseph Zupko
    • 3
  • Edgard Maldonado
    • 4
  1. 1.The College of Information Sciences & TechnologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA
  2. 2.The College of Information Sciences & TechnologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA
  3. 3.The College of Information Sciences & TechnologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA
  4. 4.The College of Information Sciences & TechnologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations