In mid-January I came across a link to a story about a new book by Random House called Barbie I Can Be…A Computer Engineer. As you know, I travel with a Computer Engineer Barbie (@data_model) and Venus Barbie (@venusbarbie) in my work advocating that girls take more STEM courses. So let’s say I have a strong interest in making sure my wonder girl Barbie has a great book.
But the story said that the book actually put Barbie in not so great place. So I bought the book and read it. And it made me cringe. I read it a few times and decided it needed to be fixed. Or in Computer Engineering terms, it need to be refactored.
So that’s what I’ve done. In this review of Barbie I Can Be…A Computer Engineer, I will point out the parts that set a lousy role model for girls and offer suggestions on how it can be refactored to make it better. Just like in software refactoring, I’m not going to change the functionality of the book, but I’m going to improve the
code words to leave it better.
And to make it easy for you to fix you copy, I’ve included a Refactoring Computer Engineer Barbie PDF. You are welcome.
Synopsis (SPOILER ALERT!)
Barbie is working on a design for a new puppy computer game when her laptop catches a virus. Luckily, she wears a heart USB drive around her neck and has backups of her files. So she uses her little sister’s (Skipper) laptop to try to retrieve the files. Oh, CURSORS! she has infected Skipper’s laptop, too. She promises to make it all right and rushes off to school to ask her computer teacher (who is a female!) how to fix it. Her teacher gives her some tips and Barbie heads to the library to get get both her data and Skipper’s data back. She gets two friends to help and they get it done. Skipper, with her restored data, makes an excellent presentation in her class where she says that Barbie is the person she most admires. Cue tears. Barbie presents her game in computer class. She does such a wonderful job, her teacher even gives her extra credit.
Well that sounds Awesome! Isn’t it?
Sounds like a great story with good female leadership, doesn’t it? Female teacher, Barbie and friends fix the problem, Skipper and Barbie give great presentations. We need more great females to speak, right? Well, just like in database design, the Devil is in the details.
Unfortunately, some of the details really make it look like Barbie is more of a Booth Babe than a Computer Engineer. This is making the IT community cringe. Twitter is blowing up with campaigns to get the book removed from shelves or to get Random House to fix it. Well, I’m going to save Random-House the effort by
fixing refactoring it for them. It’s one thing to raise the issue, but as a designer-architect-project manager-methodologist-computer engineer, I just want to FIX it.
Let’s start with the first troublesome passage:
Computer Engineer Barbie Laughs and is Needy
"I’m designing a game that shows kids how computers work", explains Barbie. "You can make a robot puppy do cute tricks by matching up a color blocks!"
"Your robot puppy is so sweet," says Skipper. "Can I play your game?"
"I’m only creating the design ideas," Barbie says, laughing. "I’ll need Steven’s and Brian’s help to turn it into a real game."
That last line is a problem. First, saying “I’m only” makes it look like design work is some how lesser than building. I know there are some techs out there that would agree with that, but it’s still not true. In fact, in technical professions, the designer / architect is the senior position on the project. Secondly, she is laughing this line, as if it is hilarious to think that Barbie can build something. Finally, Steven and Brian are recurring characters throughout the I Can Be… book series. They are friends and friends help each other. But this passage seems to reinforce a position that boys build, girls draw.
So I’ve refactored this passage by changing out that line with this one:
"Not yet," explains Barbie. "I need to finish the design then work with Steven and Brian to turn it into a game."
See how that says basically the same thing, but it doesn’t devalue Barbie’s design work? It also reinforces the more realistic situation that teams work together to make a product. Barbie doesn’t “need help”; she is part of a team to get it done.
Steve and Brian Will Get It Done Faster
After class Barbie meets with Steven and Brian in the library.
"Hi guys!" says Barbie. "I tried to send you my designs but I ended up crashing my laptop and Skipper’s, too. I need to get back to lost files and repair both of our laptops."
"It will go faster if Brian and I help," offers Steven.
This last line could be interpreted that Steven and Brian, not Barbie, can get this done faster. I realize this is just one interpretation and the intention could be that if everyone works together, we can get it done faster. We know in software engineering this may or may not be true – in form of the Mythical Man Month. But in general, three people fixing two laptops might make this all go faster – debugging, troubleshooting, copying files and those sorts of things typically do turn out better with more people at the desk.
But I’m still concerned about the fact that the less generous interpretation could be that boys can fix things; girls just come to them with their problems. So I’ve refactored this to say:
"We can all work on this together; it will be faster," says Steven.
The work continues with this on the next page:
"I got Skipper’s assignment from the hard drive!" exclaimed Steven.
"Fantastic!" says Barbie. "And her other files as well?"
"I got everything," says Steven. "Now let’s retrieve the files from your hard drive. Both laptops will be good is new in no time!"
It’s here where the dialogue really makes it look like Steven did all the work and Barbie waited anxiously for the results of his work. So I’ve refactored these to show Barbie being more engaged in the process. Not just the Holder of the Compact Disc.
"We’ve got Skipper’s assignment from the hard drive!" exclaimed Steven.
"Fantastic!" says Barbie. "Let me get her other files as well!"
"Great! Now we’ve got everything," says Steven.
See how Barbie has a more engaged role here? No confusion about her fixing this problem, too.
One More Thing…
One of the key things that an engineer should do when disasters happen is to ensure that it never happens again. One of the steps missing from this story is making sure Barbie and Skipper’s laptops are safe from future viruses. So I’ve added a new line to a passage:
The next morning Barbie gives her sister a big surprise. Skipper turns on your laptop – and it works!
"My lost assignment! cries Skipper. "You are just too cool, Barbie. You fixed my computer and saved my homework!
"I set up new security software on both laptops to make sure this doesn’t happen again," exclaims Barbie.
Skipper gives Barbie a huge hug.
You can’t just retrieve the files; you have to ensure those pesky viruses don’t come back.
How Do We Fix the Book, Though?
I fixed my copy by refactoring the printed pages. You can do that, too. I’m sharing the Refactoring Computer Engineer Barbie PDF I created with the refactored dialogue. Just print it on sticker paper and cut out the revised sections to update your copy of the book. You might also want to head over to read that open letter to Random House, too.
I love my Technical Barbies and I want girls (and their parents) to have great role models in real life, not just with
dolls action figures. So books like this need the Best Practices in their writing. I hope you do, too.
I have another post coming about the computer security parts of this story. But for now, go fix your copy of this book. Don’t leave it sitting around in production, waiting for someone to read it when it’s wrong. Love your Data and Love your @Data_Model.
Leave a comment
Subscribe via E-mail
- SQLRockstar on Yet Another Odd Job Criterion
- Karen Lopez on Yet Another Odd Job Criterion
- Alex on And They Wonder Why There are no Women Working There…
- Sue on And They Wonder Why There are no Women Working There…
- Big Challenges in Data Modeling: Ethics & Data Modeling April 24th | Securing SQL Server on Big Challenges in Data Modeling: Ethics & Data Modeling–24 April
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010