Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 1 - 10 of 14 Standards

Standard Identifier: K-2.IC.19

Grade Range: K–2
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Social Interactions
Practice(s): Collaborating Around Computing (2.1)

Standard:
Work respectfully and responsibly with others when communicating electronically.

Descriptive Statement:
Electronic communication facilitates positive interactions, such as sharing ideas with many people, but the public and anonymous nature of electronic communication also allows intimidating and inappropriate behavior in the form of cyberbullying. Responsible electronic communication includes limiting access to personably identifiable information. Students learn and use appropriate behavior when communicating electronically (often called "netiquette"). For example, students could share their work on a classroom blog or in other collaborative spaces online, taking care to avoid sharing information that is inappropriate or that could personally identify themselves to others. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.K.6, W.1.6, W.21.6) Alternatively, students could provide feedback to others on their work in a kind and respectful manner. They could learn how written words can be easily misinterpreted and may seem negative when the intention may be to express confusion, give ideas, or prompt further discussion. They could also learn to identify harmful behavior on collaborative spaces and intervening to find the proper authority to help. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.K.5, W.1.5, W.2.5) (HSS 1.1.2)

Standard Identifier: 3-5.AP.18

Grade Range: 3–5
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Collaborating Around Computing (2.2)

Standard:
Perform different roles when collaborating with peers during the design, implementation, and review stages of program development.

Descriptive Statement:
Collaborative computing is the process of creating computational artifacts by working in pairs or on teams. It involves asking for the contributions and feedback of others. Effective collaboration can often lead to better outcomes than working independently. With teacher guidance, students take turns in different roles during program development, such as driver, navigator, notetaker, facilitator, and debugger, as they design and implement their program. For example, while taking on different roles during program development, students could create and maintain a journal about their experiences working collaboratively. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.3.10, W.4.10, W.5.10) (CA NGSS: 3-5-ETS1-2)

Standard Identifier: 3-5.NI.5

Grade Range: 3–5
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.1)

Standard:
Describe physical and digital security measures for protecting personal information.

Descriptive Statement:
Personal information can be protected physically and digitally. Cybersecurity is the protection from unauthorized use of electronic data, or the measures taken to achieve this. Students identify what personal information is and the reasons for protecting it. Students describe physical and digital approaches for protecting personal information such as using strong passwords and biometric scanners. For example, students could engage in a collaborative discussion orally or in writing regarding topics that relate to personal cybersecurity issues. Discussion topics could be based on current events related to cybersecurity or topics that are applicable to students, such as the necessity of backing up data to guard against loss, how to create strong passwords and the importance of not sharing passwords, or why we should keep operating systems updated and use anti-virus software to protect data and systems. Students could also discuss physical measures that can be used to protect data including biometric scanners, locked doors, and physical backups. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.1, SL.4.1, SL.5.1)

Standard Identifier: 6-8.AP.15

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture, Collaborating Around Computing (1.1, 2.3)

Standard:
Seek and incorporate feedback from team members and users to refine a solution that meets user needs.

Descriptive Statement:
Development teams that employ user-centered design processes create solutions (e.g., programs and devices) that can have a large societal impact (e.g., an app that allows people with speech difficulties to allow a smartphone to clarify their speech). Students begin to seek diverse perspectives throughout the design process to improve their computational artifacts. Considerations of the end-user may include usability, accessibility, age-appropriate content, respectful language, user perspective, pronoun use, or color contrast. For example, if students are designing an app to teach their classmates about recycling, they could first interview or survey their classmates to learn what their classmates already know about recycling and why they do or do not recycle. After building a prototype of the app, the students could then test the app with a sample of their classmates to see if they learned anything from the app and if they had difficulty using the app (e.g., trouble reading or understanding text). After gathering interview data, students could refine the app to meet classmate needs. (CA NGSS: MS-ETS1-4)

Standard Identifier: 6-8.AP.18

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Collaborating Around Computing, Creating Computational Artifacts (2.2, 5.1)

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 Identifier: 6-8.CS.1

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Devices
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture, Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (1.2, 3.3)

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 Identifier: 6-8.IC.22

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Social Interactions
Practice(s): Collaborating Around Computing, Creating Computational Artifacts (2.4, 5.2)

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 Identifier: 6-8.NI.5

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.1, 3.3)

Standard:
Explain potential security threats and security measures to mitigate threats.

Descriptive Statement:
Cybersecurity is an important field of study and it is valuable for students to understand the need for protecting sensitive data. Students identify multiple methods for protecting data and articulate the value and appropriateness for each method. Students are not expected to implement or explain the implementation of such technologies. For example, students could explain the importance of keeping passwords hidden, setting secure router administrator passwords, erasing a storage device before it is reused, and using firewalls to restrict access to private networks. Alternatively, students could explain the importance of two-factor authentication and HTTPS connections to ensure secure data transmission.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.21

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Collaborating Around Computing (2.4)

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 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 1 - 10 of 14 Standards


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