Shirley Malcom is Head of the Directorate for Education and Human Resources Programs of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). The directorate includes AAAS programs in education, activities for underrepresented groups, and public understanding of science and technology. Dr. Malcom serves on several boards including the Howard Heinz Endowment, the H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, and the National Park System Advisory Board and is an honorary trustee of the American Museum of Natural History. She serves as a Regent of Morgan State University and as a trustee of Caltech. In addition she has chaired a number of national committees addressing education reform and access to scientific and technical education, careers and literacy. Dr. Malcom is also a former trustee of the Carnegie Corporation of New York. She is a fellow of the AAAS and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She served on the National Science Board, the policymaking body of the National Science Foundation, from 1994 to 1998 and from 1994-2001 served on the President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology. Dr. Malcom received her doctorate in ecology from Pennsylvania State University; master's degree in zoology from the University of California, Los Angeles; and bachelor's degree with distinction in zoology from the University of Washington. In addition she holds thirteen honorary degrees. In 2003 Dr. Malcom received the Public Welfare Medal of the National Academy of Sciences, the highest award given by the Academy.

More information on Malcolm can be found in: http://www.aaas.org/ScienceTalk/malcom.shtml

Talk title:
If You're Not There, You Can't Do It: Advancing Arguments for Diversity in Computing

Abstract:
Ada, Countess of Lovelace, and Grace Murray Hopper, notwithstanding, the dominant image of computer science is that of "white male nerds." Efforts undertaken in the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's and 90's to bring more women into STEM (science, technology, engineering and) led to patterns of steady growth by women into most fields, albeit at different rates. Computer science (CS) was a glaring exception to this pattern. Whereas the biosciences are at or near parity for women at all degree levels, computer science reached its peak in proportion of bachelor's degrees earned by women in the mid-1980's. The overall number of degrees has declined for both men and women since the "boom years" of the 1980's, but so too has women's proportion of all computer science degrees. Late 1990's and early 2000's numbers have indicated some rebound from this trend.

In contrast, the numbers of African Americans, Latinos, and American Indians, though growing, remain low, this at a time when these groups are an increasing proportion of school age, college age and overall populations.

As the demand for IT/CS professionals grew in the late 1990's America's companies addressed their needs through temporary fixes: increasing the "import" of talent by increasing the number of H1-B visas, and , more recently, "offshoring" many of its IT/CS functions.

There are several assumptions that seem to underlie these decisions:

• That IT/CS is not affected by culture and perspective;
• That short term fixes will always be available since there is an excess of highly skilled, less expensive labor around the world;
• That it does not matter that women and minorities are not proportionately invovled in IT/CS since it is likely a reflection of their choices; and
• That the absence of women and minorities has little or no impact on IT/CS.

Each of these assumptions will be examined.

For many years we have assumed that once women reached a certain level of participation (critical mass) it becomes less necessary to exert special effort to maintain the increases. Women's participation in computer science defies this assumption. Why has this happened? Much of the evidence that has emerged has suggested that this decline was related to the learning environment or climate of the departments. Strategies will be discussed about challenging such climates as well challenging policies and practices that impede achieving diversity. "Sitting at the table" gives opportunities to make changes. Effective advocacy involves "being there" as well as having data, arguments and promising practices to support the need for and strategies for achieving change.