Search the California Content Standards

Standard:
Incorporate existing code, media, and libraries into original programs, and give attribution.

Descriptive Statement:
Building on the work of others enables students to produce more interesting and powerful creations. Students use portions of code, algorithms, digital media, and/or data created by others in their own programs and websites. They give attribution to the original creators to acknowledge their contributions. For example, when creating a side-scrolling game, students may incorporate portions of code that create a realistic jump movement from another person's game, and they may also import Creative Commons-licensed images to use in the background. Alternatively, when creating a website to demonstrate their knowledge of historical figures from the Civil War, students may use a professionally-designed template and public domain images of historical figures. (HSS.8.10.5) Additionally, students could import libraries and connect to web application program interfaces (APIs) to make their own programming processes more efficient and reduce the number of bugs (e.g., to check whether the user input is a valid date, to input the current temperature from another city).

Standard:
Systematically test and refine programs using a range of test cases.

Descriptive Statement:
Use cases and test cases are created to evaluate whether programs function as intended. At this level, students develop use cases and test cases with teacher guidance. Testing should become a deliberate process that is more iterative, systematic, and proactive than at lower levels. For example, students test programs by considering potential errors, such as what will happen if a user enters invalid input (e.g., negative numbers and 0 instead of positive numbers). Alternatively, in an interactive program, students could test that the character cannot move off of the screen in any direction, cannot move through walls, and can interact with other characters. They then adjust character behavior as needed.

Standard:
Distribute tasks and maintain a project timeline when collaboratively developing computational artifacts.

Descriptive Statement:
Collaboration is a common and crucial practice in programming development. Often, many individuals and groups work on the interdependent parts of a project together. Students assume pre-defined roles within their teams and manage the project workflow using structured timelines. With teacher guidance, they begin to create collective goals, expectations, and equitable workloads. For example, students could decompose the design stage of a game into planning the storyboard, flowchart, and different parts of the game mechanics. They can then distribute tasks and roles among members of the team and assign deadlines. Alternatively, students could work as a team to develop a storyboard for an animation representing a written narrative, and then program the scenes individually. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.6.3, W.7.3, W.8.3)

Standard:
Design algorithms to solve computational problems using a combination of original and existing algorithms.

Descriptive Statement:
Knowledge of common algorithms improves how people develop software, secure data, and store information. Some algorithms may be easier to implement in a particular programming language, work faster, require less memory to store data, and be applicable in a wider variety of situations than other algorithms. Algorithms used to search and sort data are common in a variety of software applications. For example, students could design an algorithm to calculate and display various sports statistics and use common sorting or mathematical algorithms (e.g., average) in the design of the overall algorithm. Alternatively, students could design an algorithm to implement a game and use existing randomization algorithms to place pieces randomly in starting positions or to control the "roll" of a dice or selection of a "card" from a deck.

Standard:
Create more generalized computational solutions using collections instead of repeatedly using simple variables.

Descriptive Statement:
Computers can automate repetitive tasks with algorithms that use collections to simplify and generalize computational problems. Students identify common features in multiple segments of code and substitute a single segment that uses collections (i.e., arrays, sets, lists) to account for the differences. For example, students could take a program that inputs students' scores into multiple variables and modify it to read these scores into a single array of scores. Alternatively, instead of writing one procedure to find averages of student scores and another to find averages of student absences, students could write a single general average procedure to support both tasks.

Standard:
Create computational artifacts using modular design.

Descriptive Statement:
Computational artifacts are created by combining and modifying existing computational artifacts and/or by developing new artifacts. To reduce complexity, large programs can be designed as systems of interacting modules, each with a specific role, coordinating for a common overall purpose. Students should create computational artifacts with interacting procedures, modules, and/or libraries. For example, students could incorporate a physics library into an animation of bouncing balls. Alternatively, students could integrate open-source JavaScript libraries to expand the functionality of a web application. Additionally, students could create their own game to teach Spanish vocabulary words using their own modular design (e.g., including methods to: control scoring, manage wordlists, manage access to different game levels, take input from the user, etc.).

Standard:
Iteratively evaluate and refine a computational artifact to enhance its performance, reliability, usability, and accessibility.

Descriptive Statement:
Evaluation and refinement of computational artifacts involves measuring, testing, debugging, and responding to the changing needs and expectations of users. Aspects that can be evaluated include correctness, performance, reliability, usability, and accessibility. For example, after witnessing common errors with user input in a computational artifact, students could refine the artifact to validate user input and provide an error message if invalid data is provided. Alternatively, students could observe a robot in a variety of lighting conditions to determine whether the code controlling a light sensor should be modified to make it less sensitive. Additionally, students could also incorporate feedback from a variety of end users to help guide the size and placement of menus and buttons in a user interface.

Standard:
Design and develop computational artifacts working in team roles using collaborative tools.

Descriptive Statement:
Collaborative tools can be as complex as a source code version control system or as simple as a collaborative word processor. Team roles in pair programming are driver and navigator but students can take on more specialized roles in larger teams. Teachers or students should choose resources that aid collaborative program development as programs grow more complex. For example, students might work as a team to develop a mobile application that addresses a problem relevant to the school or community, using appropriate tools to support actions such as: establish and manage the project timeline; design, share, and revise graphical user interface elements; implement program components, track planned, in-progress, and completed components, and design and implement user testing.

Standard:
Implement searching and sorting algorithms to solve computational problems.

Descriptive Statement:
One of the core uses of computers is to store, organize, and retrieve information when working with large amounts of data. Students create computational artifacts that use searching and/or sorting algorithms to retrieve, organize, or store information. Students do not need to select their algorithm based on efficiency. For example, students could write a script to sequence their classmates in order from youngest to oldest. Alternatively, students could write a program to find certain words within a text and report their location.

Standard:
Compare and contrast fundamental data structures and their uses.

Descriptive Statement:
Data structures are designed to provide different ways of storing and manipulating data sets to optimize various aspects of storage or runtime performance. Choice of data structures is made based on expected data characteristics and expected program functions. Students = compare and contrast how basic functions (e.g.., insertion, deletion, and modification) would differ for common data structures including lists, arrays, stacks, and queues. For example, students could draw a diagram of how different data structures change when items are added, deleted, or modified. They could explain tradeoffs in storage and efficiency issues. Alternatively, when presented with a description of a program and the functions it would be most likely to be running, students could list pros and cons for a specific data structure use in that scenario.