Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 21 - 30 of 39 Standards

Standard Identifier: 6-8.IC.24

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Safety, Law, & Ethics
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Compare tradeoffs between allowing information to be public and keeping information private and secure.

Descriptive Statement:
While it is valuable to establish, maintain, and strengthen connections between people online, security attacks often start with intentionally or unintentionally providing personal information online. Students identify situations where the value of keeping information public outweighs privacy concerns, and vice versa. They also recognize practices such as phishing and social engineering and explain best practices to defend against them. For example, students could discuss the benefits of artists and designers displaying their work online to reach a broader audience. Students could also compare the tradeoffs of making a shared file accessible to anyone versus restricting it to specific accounts. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.6.1, SL.7.1, SL.8.1) Alternatively, students could discuss the benefits and dangers of the increased accessibility of information available on the internet, and then compare this to the advantages and disadvantages of the introduction of the printing press in society. (HSS.7.8.4)

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.14

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.2)

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 Identifier: 9-12.AP.15

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.1, 5.2, 5.3)

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).

Standard Identifier: 9-12.CS.1

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Devices
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.1)

Standard:
Describe ways in which abstractions hide the underlying implementation details of computing systems to simplify user experiences.

Descriptive Statement:
An abstraction is a representation of an idea or phenomenon that hides details irrelevant to the question at hand. Computing systems, both stand alone and embedded in products, are often integrated with other systems to simplify user experiences. For example, students could identify geolocation hardware embedded in a smartphone and describe how this simplifies the users experience since the user does not have to enter her own location on the phone. Alternatively, students might select an embedded device such as a car stereo, identify the types of data (e.g., radio station presets, volume level) and procedures (e.g., increase volume, store/recall saved station, mute) it includes, and explain how the implementation details are hidden from the user.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.CS.3

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Troubleshooting
Practice(s): Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (6.2)

Standard:
Develop guidelines that convey systematic troubleshooting strategies that others can use to identify and fix errors.

Descriptive Statement:
Troubleshooting complex problems involves the use of multiple sources when researching, evaluating, and implementing potential solutions. Troubleshooting also relies on experience, such as when people recognize that a problem is similar to one they have seen before and adapt solutions that have worked in the past. For example, students could create a list of troubleshooting strategies to debug network connectivity problems such as checking hardware and software status and settings, rebooting devices, and checking security settings. Alternatively, students could create troubleshooting guidelines for help desk employees based on commonly observed problems (e.g., problems connecting a new device to the computer, problems printing from a computer to a network printer).

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.23

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture, Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (1.2, 3.1)

Standard:
Evaluate the ways computing impacts personal, ethical, social, economic, and cultural practices.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing may improve, harm, or maintain practices. An understanding of how equity deficits, such as minimal exposure to computing, access to education, and training opportunities, are related to larger, systemic problems in society enables students to create more meaningful artifacts. Students illustrate the positive, negative, and/or neutral impacts of computing. For example, students could evaluate the accessibility of a product for a broad group of end users, such as people who lack access to broadband or who have various disabilities. Students could identify potential bias during the design process and evaluate approaches to maximize accessibility in product design. Alternatively, students could evaluate the impact of social media on cultural, economic, and social practices around the world.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.24

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture (1.2)

Standard:
Identify impacts of bias and equity deficit on design and implementation of computational artifacts and apply appropriate processes for evaluating issues of bias.

Descriptive Statement:
Biases could include incorrect assumptions developers have made about their users, including minimal exposure to computing, access to education, and training opportunities. Students identify and use strategies to test and refine computational artifacts with the goal of reducing bias and equity deficits and increasing universal access. For example, students could use a spreadsheet to chart various forms of equity deficits, and identify solutions in existing software. Students could use and refine the spreadsheet solutions to create a strategy for methodically testing software specifically for bias and equity.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.25

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.1)

Standard:
Demonstrate ways a given algorithm applies to problems across disciplines.

Descriptive Statement:
Students identify how a given algorithm can be applied to real-world problems in different disciplines. For example, students could demonstrate how a randomization algorithm can be used to select participants for a clinical medical trial or to select a flash card to display on a vocabulary quiz. Alternatively, students could demonstrate how searching and sorting algorithms are needed to organize records in manufacturing settings, or to support doctors queries of patient records, or to help governments manage support services they provide to their citizens.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.26

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Study, discuss, and think critically about the potential impacts and implications of emerging technologies on larger social, economic, and political structures, with evidence from credible sources.

Descriptive Statement:
For example, after studying the rise of artifical intelligence, students create a cause and effect chart to represent positive and negative impacts of this technology on society.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.27

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Social Interactions
Practice(s): Collaborating Around Computing (2.4)

Standard:
Use collaboration tools and methods to increase connectivity with people of different cultures and careers.

Descriptive Statement:
Increased digital connectivity and communication between people across a variety of cultures and in differing professions has changed the collaborative nature of personal and professional interaction. Students identify, explain, and use appropriate collaborative tools. For example, students could compare ways that various technological collaboration tools could help a team become more cohesive and then choose one of these tools to manage their teamwork. Alternatively, students could use different collaborative tools and methods to solicit input from not only team members and classmates but also others, such as participants in online forums or local communities.

Showing 21 - 30 of 39 Standards


Questions: Curriculum Frameworks and Instructional Resources Division | CFIRD@cde.ca.gov | 916-319-0881