Search the California Content Standards

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:
Document decisions made during the design process using text, graphics, presentations, and/or demonstrations in the development of complex programs.

Descriptive Statement:
Complex programs are often iteratively designed as systems of interacting modules, each with a specific role, coordinating for a common overall purpose. Comments are included in code both to document the purpose of modules as well as the implementation details within a module. Together these support documentation of the design process. Students use resources such as libraries and tools to edit and manage parts of the program and corresponding documentation. For example, during development of a computational artifact students could comment their code (with date, modification, and rationale), sketch a flowchart to summarize control flow in a code journal, and share ideas and updates on a white board. Students may document their logic by explaining the development process and presenting to the class. The presentation could include photos of their white board, a video or screencast explaining the development process, or recorded audio description.

Standard:
Describe how artificial intelligence drives many software and physical systems.

Descriptive Statement:
Artificial intelligence is a sub-discipline of computer science that enables computers to solve problems previously handled by biological systems. There are many applications of artificial intelligence, including computer vision and speech recognition. Students research and explain how artificial intelligence has been employed in a given system. Students are not expected to implement an artificially intelligent system in order to meet this standard. For example, students could observe an artificially intelligent system and notice where its behavior is not human-like, such as when a character in a videogame makes a mistake that a human is unlikely to make, or when a computer easily beats even the best human players at a given game. Alternatively, students could interact with a search engine asking various questions, and after reading articles on the topic, they could explain how the computer is able to respond to queries.

Standard:
Implement an algorithm that uses artificial intelligence to overcome a simple challenge.

Descriptive Statement:
Artificial intelligence algorithms allow a computer to perceive and move in the world, use knowledge, and engage in problem solving. Students create a computational artifact that is able to carry out a simple task commonly performed by living organisms. Students do not need to realistically simulate human behavior or solve a complex problem in order to meet this standard. For example, students could implement an algorithm for playing tic-tac-toe that would select an appropriate location for the next move. Alternatively, students could implement an algorithm that allows a solar-powered robot to move to a sunny location when its batteries are low.

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:
Evaluate algorithms in terms of their efficiency.

Descriptive Statement:
Algorithms that perform the same task can be implemented in different ways, which take different amounts of time to run on a given input set. Algorithms are commonly evaluated using asymptotic analysis (i.e., “Big O”) which involves exploration of behavior when the input set grows very large. Students classify algorithms by the most common time classes (e.g., log n, linear, n log n, and quadratic or higher). For example, students could read a given algorithm, identify the control constructs, and in conjunction with input size, identify the efficiency class of the algorithm.

Standard:
Plan and develop programs for broad audiences using a specific software life cycle process.

Descriptive Statement:
Software development processes are used to help manage the design, development, and product/project management of a software solution. Various types of processes have been developed over time to meet changing needs in the software landscape. The systems development life cycle (SDLC), also referred to as the application development life cycle, is a term used in systems engineering, information systems, and software engineering to describe a process for planning, creating, testing, and deploying an information system. Other examples of common processes could include agile, spiral, or waterfall. Students develop a program following a specific software life cycle process, with proper scaffolding from the teacher. For example, students could work in teams on a common project using the agile development process, which is based on breaking product development work into small increments. Alternatively, students could be guided in implementing sprints to focus work on daily standup meetings or scrums to support efficient communication.

Standard:
Develop programs for multiple computing platforms.

Descriptive Statement:
Humans use computers in various forms in their lives and work. Depending on the situation, software solutions are more appropriate or valuable when available on different computational platforms or devices. Students develop programs for more than one computing platform (e.g. desktop, web, or mobile). For example, students could develop a mobile app for a location-aware software product and a different program that is installed on a computer. Alternatively, students could create a browser-based product and make it accessible across multiple platforms or computers (e.g., email).

Standard:
Identify and fix security issues that might compromise computer programs.

Descriptive Statement:
Some common forms of security issues arise from specific programming languages, platforms, or program implementation choices. Students read a given a piece of code that contains a common security vulnerability, explain the code's intended function or purpose, provide and explain examples of how a specific input could exploit that vulnerability (e.g., the program accessing data or performing in unintended ways), and implement a change in the code to mitigate this vulnerability. For example, students could review code that takes a date as input, recognize that the code doesn't check for appropriate last days of the month, and modify the code to do that. Alternatively, students could review code that supports entry of patient data (e.g., height and weight) and doesn't prompt users to double check unreasonable values (e.g., height at 6 feet and weight at 20 pounds).