State Policy Examples

When advocating for computer science education policy at the local and state level that will broaden participation in computing, it is helpful to understand the policies that exist in other states. Due to educational policy being a state decision, not all policies can be directly translated into a new setting, however the examples on this page can serve as models for your state to consider when developing new policies, considering amendments, or building implementation plans for existing policy.

Our work to broaden participation in computing will only have its full desired impact if we actively confront the structures in our society at large, and educational institutions specifically, that fail to recruit, enroll, and retain students who are historically underrepresented in computer science pathways. We acknowledge that the CS profession and the CS education community have explicitly and implicitly erected barriers to the participation of women, Black/African Americans, Native Americans and indigenous peoples, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders, persons from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, people identifying as LGBTQ, and persons with disabilities. In order to build equitable CS education pathways, new CS education policies must not only take these barriers into account, but also begin to remove them so that all communities can experience CS opportunities.

ECEP is currently working on a project that will identify policies that are deemed ‘equity-explicit’, meaning that the policy either drives actions focused on increasing the number and diversity of students in computing pathways, or has language that explicitly identifies priority populations of students to be reached in computing. This page will be updated regularly.