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:
Refine computational models to better represent the relationships among different elements of data collected from a phenomenon or process.

Descriptive Statement:
Computational models are used to make predictions about processes or phenomena based on selected data and features. They allow people to investigate the relationships among different variables to understand a system. Predictions are tested to validate models. Students evaluate these models against real-world observations. For example, students could use a population model that allows them to speculate about interactions among different species, evaluate the model based on data gathered from nature, and then refine the model to reflect more complex and realistic interactions.

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).

Standard:
Develop and use a series of test cases to verify that a program performs according to its design specifications.

Descriptive Statement:
Testing software is a critically important process. The ability of students to identify a set of important test cases communicates their understanding of the design specifications and potential issues due to implementation choices. Students select and apply their own test cases to cover both general behavior and the edge cases which show behavior at boundary conditions. For example, for a program that is supposed to accept test scores in the range of [0,100], students could develop appropriate tests (e.g, a negative value, 0, 100, and a value above 100). Alternatively, students developing an app to allow users to create and store calendar appointments could develop and use a series of test cases for various scenarios including checking for correct dates, flagging for user confirmation when a calendar event is very long, checking for correct email address format for invitees, and checking for appropriate screen display as users go through the process of adding, editing, and deleting events.

Standard:
Evaluate key qualities of a program through a process such as a code review.

Descriptive Statement:
Code reviews are a common software industry practice and valuable for developing technical communication skills. Key qualities of code include correctness, usability, readability, efficiency, and scalability. Students walk through code they created and explain how it works. Additionally, they follow along when someone else is explaining their code and ask appropriate questions. For example, students could present their code to a group or visually inspect code in pairs. Alternatively, in response to another student's presentation, students could provide feedback including comments on correctness of the code, comments on how code interacts with code that calls it, and design and documentation features.