Is Computer Science Education Without Gender Bias Really Possible? My First Conversation With the Founder

Hello, this is Yoona.

Not long after I joined POCU, there was a moment during an all-hands town hall when the founder answered the question, "Why doesn't POCU offer offline classes?" What I heard there for the first time was the idea that gender bias exists severely even inside education, especially in computer science education, and I was genuinely shocked.

I had always thought of gender bias as a broad social issue, but I had never deeply imagined how it specifically breaks fair evaluation inside classrooms, grading methods, professor–student relationships, and even student–student relationships. That was the first time I clearly understood, "Ah, this is why POCU's structure is designed this way."

I felt that this story was too important to stay as something only internal staff heard once and moved on from. I thought it would be valuable to share with current computer science students, future learners, and anyone interested in education. So I decided to organize the story in this blog post and revisit what I heard that day.

In this series, based on that conversation, I will be asking the founder about how gender bias appears in computer science education and what kinds of design choices POCU has made to reduce that bias. And honestly... there are so many other things I want to ask the founder too. (Haha) So I plan to turn this into a series and keep pestering him in future posts. Hehe.

1. Why You Left a Professorship to Create POCU

Yoona:
CEO Pope Kim... or rather, Founder! Hello. There is something I've been really wanting to ask you today.

Pope:
Hello. Please ask anything freely.

Yoona:
Today's topic is gender bias, right? But before jumping straight into that, I feel like we need to understand what problems you saw and what path you walked. I think it will help readers understand better too.

Pope:
Sure. Where should we start?

Yoona:
You were already considered one of the top engineers in the industry, yet you went into academia as a professor. I always found that fascinating. It felt like going from a highly successful industry career to a public university professor was a big shift. Was there a particular mission behind it?

Pope:
It wasn't as grand as having a big mission. I had actually been noticing issues in the education system for a long time. Almost ten years into industry work, I kept running into the same reality: "It's really hard to find good developers." So I had always been thinking that someday I wanted to fix something in education.

Eventually I ended up in a position where I was conducting final interviews for developer candidates. Through that experience, my conviction grew stronger. I noticed that the skill levels of applicants were becoming increasingly unstable across generations. I was especially surprised when seeing graduates from my own alma mater. Because I knew their curriculum very well, I expected a certain baseline of preparedness. But repeatedly, that baseline was not met, and I began wondering more seriously, "What is happening in the education system right now?"

So becoming a professor was not a sudden decision but part of a process to directly examine the field and, if possible, fix it. I needed to see the structural problems with my own eyes, and if they were solvable, I wanted to attempt to solve them myself.

Yoona:
Wow... so you went into academia to confirm the problems and try fixing them if possible?

Pope:
Yes. I wanted firsthand understanding and wanted to try improving things using approaches I believed in.

Yoona:
But eventually, you left the professorship. What did you see that made you decide to step out?

Pope:
Once inside, I found problems different from what I saw in the industry, and these were more fundamental. The biggest issue was that it was structurally extremely difficult to objectively evaluate skill.

This is not something an individual professor can fix.

Yoona:
Is that problem really that serious?

Pope:
Yes. If fair, skill-based evaluation collapses, students shift from thinking about "how to learn" to "how to get points." That lowers the overall level of skill over time.

So I realized that patching the existing system would not solve the problem.

Yoona:
So you decided to build a whole new education system?

Pope:
Yes. I concluded that a fairness-based skill evaluation environment must be built from scratch. That is the origin of POCU.

Yoona:
Then gender bias is one of those structural issues that undermine fairness?

Pope:
Correct. Gender bias exists, but it was not the main reason I left academia. The root cause was a system where fair evaluation is fundamentally difficult. Gender bias is simply one example of the kinds of problems that break fairness.

Yoona:
Ah, so gender bias is one slice of a much larger problem, and today we are zooming in on that slice?

Pope:
Exactly. Today we will focus on how gender bias shakes fairness and why it matters in education.

2. How Gender Bias Breaks Fairness

Yoona:
Then let's get into the main topic. Gender bias in computer science... how exactly does it show up?

Pope:
When we say gender bias, people usually think of "female students being discriminated against." But the issue is far more structural. Because of gender, some students are undervalued, while others receive excessive help and lose opportunities to grow. Either way, the skill-building process becomes distorted.

Yoona:
Yes, I've heard "You just do the presentation" many times in group projects. At first it felt convenient, but later I felt like the scope of what I could do kept shrinking.

Pope:
Exactly. Gender bias is not just about unpleasant experiences. It is a structural force that determines what skills a student gets to build.

And the issue does not come only from professors or adults. Students themselves create these structures. Male students take over technical tasks, while female students are assigned other roles, or the opposite happens where female students receive unnecessary help. Either way, fairness is broken.

When students appear to avoid certain roles, it is not always a purely personal choice. Humans are highly influenced by expectations and feedback from their environment. If the environment makes certain choices feel natural or easier, those choices are repeated and can eventually alter a student's career trajectory or confidence.

How Male-Dominated Fields Magnify Bias

Yoona:
Since computer science is male-dominated, I imagine the problem becomes worse?

Pope:
Correct. Whenever one gender heavily dominates a field, special treatment and distorted expectations almost inevitably appear. This is not unique to Korea. It was a serious issue at the North American university where I taught as well.

And importantly, this is not exclusively a female issue. In female-dominated fields, the opposite happens. Male students become the minority and are undervalued or pushed into stereotypical roles.

So the real issue is not "women are discriminated against," but minorities of any kind suffer structural bias.

Gender Bias as a Fairness Problem

Pope:
That is why I do not view gender bias as merely a gender inequality issue. The deeper problem is distorted evaluation.

This applies not only to gender minorities but also to:

• Quiet students
• Introverted students
• Students uncomfortable with self-promotion
• Anyone who differs from the group's average expectations

In other words: gender bias is part of a broader issue where any deviation from the majority creates unfairness in evaluation.

3. How POCU Designed a System That Protects Fairness

Yoona:
Understanding these structural issues helps me see why POCU made certain design choices. Is this why you insist on being online-only?

Pope:
There were several reasons, but yes, the online environment plays a major role. Many sources of unfairness come from information visible in face-to-face environments: gender, appearance, voice, communication style, personality.

Of course, in the long run society needs to reduce these biases structurally. But at the scale of one organization, online is the most effective way to secure fairness.

So online-only is not for convenience. It is a philosophical requirement.

Why Online-Only Is a Core Principle

Pope:
POCU was designed from day one with "online-only" as a core educational philosophy.

Removing the physical classroom reduces hierarchy, social pressure, and subtle interpersonal expectations. What remains is only skill and results. So online-only is not about cost but a prerequisite for fair evaluation.

Why POCU Does Not Collect Gender Information

Yoona:
I was also surprised that the company DB contains no gender field at all.

Pope:
Right. We do not collect any information that is unnecessary for education. This prevents unconscious bias and prevents developers from accidentally creating features that use that data.

The safest way is to not have the data at all.

Anonymous Discussion Spaces

Yoona:
But one question. You emphasize fairness so much that POCU does not even collect gender, yet the discussion space (Slack) encourages Q&A. Some students use real names. Is that okay?

Pope:
Good question. By principle, we do not force real names. In fact, we recommend pseudonyms. Staff and TAs are required to use pseudonyms so students naturally feel that pseudonyms are the norm.

The only person required to use a real name is me, the founder, for accountability and for providing a consistent reference point.

Exposing personal information is a student’s choice. Some have used real names and helped build a great community. But that was their individual capability, not a structural bias from POCU.

To summarize:

Slack = optional exposure
Discussion room = full anonymity

Why Evaluation Cannot Be Biased

Yoona:
Slack allows optional exposure, but in evaluation, is it truly impossible for bias to creep in?

Pope:
Yes. The evaluation system is designed so that bias structurally cannot occur.

Assignments are entirely auto-graded. For exams, graders cannot see any personal data. And they grade per-question, not per-student. Answers are shuffled, and a grader never sees a full exam from a single student.

Bias has no opportunity to form because the system prevents graders from forming any impression of a particular student.

Yoona:
This could be a separate series on its own! Please explain more next time. (laughs)

Pope:
Sure. There is a lot to say about how we defend fairness technically and operationally.

4. POCU's Social Role

Yoona:
Hearing all this, POCU feels less like a company selling courses and more like it has a kind of social role.

Pope:
(waves hands) Oh no, it feels too grand to say that. I simply wanted to fix the problems I personally saw. Watching fairness break down in education made me think, "At least let me fix the part I can reach."

Gender imbalance is a societal issue, not something one company can solve. But within the domain of fair skill evaluation, there is meaningful work we can do. POCU is run with the mindset of "Let's build the part we can control properly."

Yoona:
Hearing your philosophy makes me understand POCU's structure much more deeply. Working here feels even more meaningful now.

Shall we wrap up for today? I learned so much. Thank you for sharing.

Pope:
Hold on... you sound like you're giving a closing remark. (laughs) We'll see each other at work tomorrow.

Yoona:
Ah, right. Haha. Guess I slipped into interview mode. Then... see you tomorrow!

Pope:
Yes, see you. And if you prepare questions like today, I'm always ready to answer. (laughs)

Yoona:
Oh! So you're saying it's okay to continue the series. I will take that as permission.

Everyone, see you again in the next episode!