Search the California Content Standards

Standard:
Seek and explain the impact of diverse perspectives for the purpose of improving computational artifacts.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing technologies enable global collaboration and sharing of ideas. Students solicit feedback from a diverse group of users and creators and explain how this input improves their computational artifacts. For example, students could seek feedback from classmates via user surveys, in order to create an idea and then make a claim as to how to improve the overall structure and function of their computational artifact. Using the feedback students could write an opinion piece supporting their claim. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.3.1, W.4.1, W.5.1) Alternatively, with guidance from their teacher, students could use video conferencing tools, shared documents, or other online collaborative spaces, such as blogs, wikis, forums, or website comments, to gather and synthesize feedback from individuals and groups about programming projects. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.1, SL.4.1, SL.5.1)

Standard:
Model how information is broken down into smaller pieces, transmitted as packets through multiple devices over networks and the Internet, and reassembled at the destination.

Descriptive Statement:
Information is sent and received over physical or wireless paths. It is broken down into smaller pieces called packets, which are sent independently and reassembled at the destination. Students demonstrate their understanding of this flow of information by, for instance, drawing a model of the way packets are transmitted, programming an animation to show how packets are transmitted, or demonstrating this through an unplugged activity in which they physically act this out. For example, students could design a structure using building blocks or other materials with the intention of re-engineering it in another location, just as early Americans did after the intercontinental railroad was constructed in the 1850s (HSS.4.4.1, 4.4.2). Students could deconstruct the designed structure, place materials into specific containers (or plastic bags/brown paper bags/etc.), and develop instructions on how to recreate the structure once each container arrives at its intended destination. (CA NGSS: 3-5-ETS1) For example, students could cut up a map of the United States by state lines. Students could then place the states in envelopes and transmit the "packets" through a physical network, represented by multiple students spreading out in arms reach of at least two others. At the destination, the student who receives the packets resassembles the individual states back into a map of the United States. (HSS 5.9) Alternatively, students could perform a similar activity with a diatonic scale, cutting the scale into individual notes. Each note, in order, should be placed into a numbered envelope based on its location on the scale. These envelopes can be transmitted across the network of students and reassembled at the destination. (VAPA Music 4.1.2)

Standard:
Design and iteratively develop programs that combine control structures and use compound conditions.

Descriptive Statement:
Control structures can be combined in many ways. Nested loops are loops placed within loops, and nested conditionals allow the result of one conditional to lead to another. Compound conditions combine two or more conditions in a logical relationship (e.g., using AND, OR, and NOT). Students appropriately use control structures to perform repetitive and selection tasks. For example, when programming an interactive story, students could use a compound conditional within a loop to unlock a door only if a character has a key AND is touching the door. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.6.3, W.7.3, W.8.3) Alternatively, students could use compound conditionals when writing a program to test whether two points lie along the line defined by a particular linear function. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 8.EE.7) Additionally, students could use nested loops to program a character to do the "chicken dance" by opening and closing the beak, flapping the wings, shaking the hips, and clapping four times each; this dance "chorus" is then repeated several times in its entirety.

Standard:
Design modifications to computing devices in order to improve the ways users interact with the devices.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing devices can extend the abilities of humans, but design considerations are critical to make these devices useful. Students suggest modifications to the design of computing devices and describe how these modifications would improve usabilty. For example, students could create a design for the screen layout of a smartphone that is more usable by people with vision impairments or hand tremors. They might also design how to use the device as a scanner to convert text to speech. Alternatively, students could design modifications for a student ID card reader to increase usability by planning for scanner height, need of scanner device to be connected physically to the computer, robustness of scanner housing, and choice of use of RFID or line of sight scanners. (CA NGSS: MS-ETS1-1)

Standard:
Systematically apply troubleshooting strategies to identify and resolve hardware and software problems in computing systems.

Descriptive Statement:
When problems occur within computing systems, it is important to take a structured, step-by-step approach to effectively solve the problem and ensure that potential solutions are not overlooked. Examples of troubleshooting strategies include following a troubleshooting flow diagram, making changes to software to see if hardware will work, checking connections and settings, and swapping in working components. Since a computing device may interact with interconnected devices within a system, problems may not be due to the specific computing device itself but to devices connected to it. For example, students could work through a checklist of solutions for connectivity problems in a lab of computers connected wirelessly or through physical cables. They could also search for technical information online and engage in technical reading to create troubleshooting documents that they then apply. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy RST.6-8.10) Alternatively, students could explore and utilize operating system tools to reset a computer's default language to English. Additionally, students could swap out an externally-controlled sensor giving fluctuating readings with a new sensor to check whether there is a hardware problem.

Standard:
Collect data using computational tools and transform the data to make it more useful.

Descriptive Statement:
Data collection has become easier and more ubiquitous. The cleaning of data is an important transformation for ensuring consistent format, reducing noise and errors (e.g., removing irrelevant responses in a survey), and/or making it easier for computers to process. Students build on their ability to organize and present data visually to support a claim, understanding when and how to transform data so information can be more easily extracted. Students also transform data to highlight or expose relationships. For example, students could use computational tools to collect data from their peers regarding the percentage of time technology is used for school work and entertainment, and then create digital displays of their data and findings. Students could then transform the data to highlight relationships representing males and females as percentages of a whole instead of as individual counts. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 6.SP.4, 7.SP.3, 8.SP.1, 8.SP.4) Alternatively, students could collect data from online forms and surveys, from a sensor, or by scraping a web page, and then transform the data to expose relationships. They could highlight the distribution of data (e.g., words on a web page, readings from a sensor) by giving quantitative measures of center and variability. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 6.SP.5.c, 7.SP.4)

Standard:
Collaborate with many contributors when creating a computational artifact.

Descriptive Statement:
Users have diverse sets of experiences, needs, and wants. These need to be understood and integrated into the design of computational artifacts. Students use applications that enable crowdsourcing to gather services, ideas, or content from a large group of people. At this level, crowdsourcing can be done at the local level (e.g., classroom, school, or neighborhood) and/or global level (e.g., age-appropriate online communities). For example, a group of students could use electronic surveys to solicit input from their neighborhood regarding an important social or political issue. They could collaborate with a community artist to combine animations and create a digital community collage informing the public about various points of view regarding the topic. (VAPA Visual Art 8.5.2, 8.5.4)

Standard:
Model the role of protocols in transmitting data across networks and the Internet.

Descriptive Statement:
Protocols are rules that define how messages between computers are sent. They determine how quickly and securely information is transmitted across networks, as well as how to handle errors in transmission. Students model how data is sent using protocols to choose the fastest path and to deal with missing information. Knowledge of the details of how specific protocols work is not expected. The priority at this grade level is understanding the purpose of protocols and how they enable efficient and errorless communication. For example, students could devise a plan for sending data representing a textual message and devise a plan for resending lost information. Alternatively, students could devise a plan for sending data to represent a picture, and devise a plan for interpreting the image when pieces of the data are missing. Additionally, students could model the speed of sending messages by Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cellular networks and describe ways errors in data transmission can be detected and dealt with.

Standard:
Justify the selection of specific control structures by identifying tradeoffs associated with implementation, readability, and performance.

Descriptive Statement:
The selection of control structures in a given programming language impacts readability and performance. Readability refers to how clear the program is to other programmers and can be improved through documentation. Control structures at this level may include, for example, conditional statements, loops, event handlers, and recursion. Students justify control structure selection and tradeoffs in the process of creating their own computational artifacts. The discussion of performance is limited to a theoretical understanding of execution time and storage requirements; a quantitative analysis is not expected. For example, students could compare the readability and program performance of iterative and recursive implementations of procedures that calculate the Fibonacci sequence. Alternatively, students could compare the readability and performance tradeoffs of multiple if statements versus a nested if statement.

Standard:
Iteratively design and develop computational artifacts for practical intent, personal expression, or to address a societal issue by using events to initiate instructions.

Descriptive Statement:
In this context, relevant computational artifacts can include programs, mobile apps, or web apps. Events can be user-initiated, such as a button press, or system-initiated, such as a timer firing. For example, students might create a tool for drawing on a canvas by first implementing a button to set the color of the pen. Alternatively, students might create a game where many events control instructions executed (e.g., when a score climbs above a threshold, a congratulatory sound is played; when a user clicks on an object, the object is loaded into a basket; when a user clicks on an arrow key, the player object is moved around the screen).