Inclusion and Belonging in Computing Education
In this reflective piece, PhD researcher Tina Vrieler, who works at the intersection of computing education, sociology of education, and social justice, explores what it truly means for students to feel they belong in computer science. Drawing on both personal experience and research, the blog examines how teaching practices, classroom culture, and the values we reward can either open doors or quietly exclude, and offers practical ways to build more inclusive computing environments.
Looking back – where does my interest in inclusion come from? 
Ever since I was a child, I have been drawn to the idea of inclusion—and what it truly means for someone to feel they belong. Belonging, I realized early on, is a complex feeling and can take many forms: it can be tied to a place, a school subject, an activity, or a community. My interest in belonging and inclusion grew from moving to another country as a child. When I was ten, we moved from our home in Thailand to seek better opportunities in Sweden. Sweden was a place I had never been to, I did not speak the language, and I knew very little about the people. How could I ever feel at home there, I wondered.
Thailand and Sweden differ in countless ways—culturally, socially, and especially in how children and education are viewed. I remember vividly how stark the contrasts were. The two educational systems operated on entirely different philosophies: for example, the expectations placed on students, the methods of teaching, and even the way children were spoken to and regarded. Those early impressions stayed with me, making me curious about why some environments or activities feel welcoming and accessible, while others feel distant or closed off.
When you grow up in a country that is not the one you were born into, and when your parents cannot guide you through the cultural references, norms, and everyday rituals that everyone else seems to understand instinctively, you have to learn it all on your own—slowly, with effort, and through trial and error. I remember working so hard (and sometimes also doing things I disliked) to be just like everyone else. I did not like being the odd one out. Now, many years later, I realize that what I was doing was playing “catch-up” with the Swedish kids, but the game was rigged; I was years behind them in figuring out what it meant to be “Swedish”. After all, I could not change who I was or what I knew overnight. Accepting this fact, I believe, is a crucial starting point for teachers when thinking about equity and inclusivity in education: You cannot change your students, but you can change how you teach, and this can make all the difference to make a student feel included in your subject.
How can we conceptualize inclusion in the computing classroom?
In teaching, it is easy to assume that your students will enjoy the same things you did when you were a student. And when that teaching approach doesn’t work—when we cannot reach our students—it can be tempting to assume that something is lacking in them rather than in our own approaches. This is problematic because it implicitly blames students and overlooks the different backgrounds, resources, and experiences they bring.
The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu describes a person’s unique resources through the concept of capital: the invisible backpack each of us carries, filled with resources that help us navigate the world. According to Bourdieu, there are three main forms of capital: economic capital, which includes financial resources; social capital, which comprises networks and relationships; and cultural capital, which encompasses knowledge, skills, language, habits, and ways of being valued by society. Bourdieu also discusses symbolic capital, which represents the value others assign to a person’s economic, social, or cultural capital—often expressed through honor, status, or respect. Since symbolic capital is socially constituted, it varies across fields and among the people in them.
In computing education, the research context of my PhD, Bourdieu’s theory has helped me understand that some students’ forms of capital are valued more highly than others. This uneven valuation shapes who feels they naturally belong in computing. The student who fits the “ideal type” is often male, white, and arrives with substantial prior programming experience, along with habits, language, and confidence that align closely with what the field implicitly rewards. When belonging hinges on meeting such a narrow ideal, many students feel like outsiders (often even before the course begins). This realization, then, underscores an important truth: we need to redefine what it means to do computing and to be a computer scientist. To achieve this, change must start with us – the educators – as we have the power to redefine what is valued in any educational context. This means we must rethink how we teach, the language we use, and the signals we send to students if we want computing to be a place where more students can thrive and feel included.
This is, of course, easier said than done. In my article “A Sociocultural Perspective on Computer Science Capital and its Pedagogical Implications in Computer Science Education,” I explore how this shift can take place by conceptualizing teaching as a way to actively strengthen students’ social and cultural capital, as well as their emerging behaviors and practices related to computing. In other words, teaching is not simply the transmission of knowledge – it is an opportunity to expand the kinds of capital that students bring into the classroom, and to make those forms of capital visible, valued, and meaningful within the field of computing. Below, I provide a recap of the key pedagogical considerations that can guide educators in putting this approach into practice. If you wish to read more, the article is openly accessible.
How can we teach to strengthen students’ CS-related social capital?
Learning is fundamentally a social process: students build both competence and social capital through their interactions with peers, teachers, and other adults. Strong social networks—friends, classmates, mentors, and role models—play a significant role in shaping students’ persistence in CS, their perception of who belongs in the field, and how they fit in it. To broaden these networks, students need opportunities to see people “like them” involved in computing. This can be achieved by discussing or inviting guest speakers with diverse backgrounds, identities, interests, and pathways into CS, and by highlighting that being a good computer scientist requires far more than technical skills alone.
Teachers can further support students by helping them form friendships and peer connections around computing. Emphasizing collaboration in the classroom—through group work, pair programming, and even simple choices like arranging furniture to encourage dialogue—can foster a sense of community. Showing students (and their families) that there are opportunities to engage with computing outside the classroom, such as local coding clubs, also expands their social networks.
Families themselves can become important contributors to students’ computing journeys when they are included in meaningful ways. Providing clear, accessible information about what students are learning in class and organizing showcases or exhibitions where students present their work can help families see the value of computing and become more supportive of their children’s interests.
Ultimately, building a computing identity requires more than helping students develop competence; it requires helping them feel that they belong to a community. When students experience both capability and connection, they can begin to see computing as a place for them.
How can we teach to strengthen students’ CS-related cultural capital?
Educators can strengthen students’ CS‑related cultural capital by taking a genuine interest in who their students are. Understanding students’ backgrounds, experiences, and motivations is essential for designing learning environments that build the forms of capital they need to thrive in computing. When we recognize and value students’ diverse lived experiences and interests, we are better positioned to create learning activities that make computing personally meaningful and relevant.
Equally important is the critical examination of curricula for hidden assumptions. For example, it is easy to mistake prior experience for innate talent, especially in a field like computing, where some students arrive with substantial preparatory privilege. To counter this, teachers should avoid equating speed or prior knowledge with ability or potential. Instead, they should assess students in ways that reward growth, persistence, critical thinking, and problemsolving, qualities that are equally important in CS.
Broadening what counts as legitimate knowledge in CS is also vital. Communication, collaboration, ethical reflection, and creative problemsolving are all integral to real-world computing, yet they are often undervalued in traditional CS classrooms. By integrating these dimensions into teaching, educators signal that a wide range of strengths, not just technical skills, are meaningful and valued. Ensuring equitable access to computing devices and software further reduces barriers, while presenting diverse, socially relevant applications of computing helps students, especially those uncertain about their place in the field, connect CS to their intrinsic values and aspirations.
How can we teach to strengthen students’ CS-related behaviors and practices?
Since many students develop interest and confidence through informal experiences—such as tinkering, coding clubs, or online exploration- teachers can broaden access to these opportunities by making students aware of local coding opportunities, free learning platforms, and community events, and by framing such activities as open to everyone.
At the same time, educators can help students critically examine stereotypical media portrayals of computing, which often equate computer scientists with male “genius” figures, thereby discouraging underrepresented students from identifying with the field. Discussing these depictions in class helps students question their legitimacy and recognize more inclusive possibilities for participation.
Finally, collaboration with a diverse range of stakeholders, including public and private organizations, universities, research groups, nonprofits, and various companies, can expose students to the breadth of computing in society and demonstrate that the field encompasses far more than stereotypical images suggest.
Looking forward – where do we go from here?
Building an inclusive computing classroom is not easy. It requires time, patience, and a willingness to change habits and to rethink long‑standing assumptions about what computing is and who it is for. Teachers need time and space to reflect on their own practices, along with encouragement and professional development to experiment with new strategies that may feel unfamiliar at first. Meaningful changes also demand institutional support: schools and organizations must prioritize inclusivity not as an optional addition, but as a core component of high‑quality computing education. When teachers are empowered, supported, and trusted, they are better positioned to create learning environments where all students can develop the skills, confidence, and sense of belonging needed to see computing as a place for them. The journey toward inclusive computing education is ongoing, but each intentional step brings us closer to a computing classroom for all learners.