Search the California Content Standards

Standard:
Debug errors in an algorithm or program that includes sequences and simple loops.

Descriptive Statement:
Algorithms or programs may not always work correctly. Students use various strategies, such as changing the sequence of the steps, following the algorithm in a step-by-step manner, or trial and error to fix problems in algorithms and programs. For example, when given images placed in a random order, students could give step-by-step commands to direct a robot, or a student playing a robot, to navigate to the images in the correct sequence. Examples of images include storyboard cards from a familiar story (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy RL.K.2, RL.1.2, RL.2.2) and locations of the sun at different times of the day (CA NGSS: 1-ESS1-1). Alternatively, students could "program" the teacher or another classmate by giving precise instructions to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich or navigate around the classroom. When the teacher or classmate doesn't respond as intended, students correct their commands. Additionally, students could receive a partially completed soundboard program that has a variety of animals programmed to play a corresponding sound when the user touches them. Students correct any sounds that don't match the animal (e.g., if the cat moos, students change the moo sound to meow).

Standard:
Select and operate computing devices that perform a variety of tasks accurately and quickly based on user needs and preferences.

Descriptive Statement:
People use computing devices to perform a variety of tasks accurately and quickly. Computing devices interpret and follow the given instructions literally. Students select and operate an appropriate computing device and corresponding program or app for a given task. For example, students could use computing devices to describe what plants and animals (including humans) need to survive. In this case, students could choose to use a keyboard to type explanatory sentences onto graphics. They could also choose to use a touchscreen device with a stylus to annotate an image for a slideshow, or choose to use a camera enabled device to make a video. Student choices may reflect their own needs or the needs of others. (CA NGSS: K-LS1-1; 2-LS4-1) Alternatively, students could choose to use a computing device with audio recording capabilities to recount stories or poems. Students could clarify thoughts, ideas, or feelings via their preference of either using a device with digital drawing tools, or by creating paper and pencil drawing based on their needs and preferences. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.K.5, SL.1.5, SL.2.5)

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:
Use an iterative process to plan and develop a program by considering the perspectives and preferences of others.

Descriptive Statement:
Planning is an important part of the iterative process of program development. Students gain a basic understanding of the importance and process of planning before beginning to write code for a program. They plan the development of a program by outlining key features, time and resource constraints, and user expectations. Students should document the plan as, for example, a storyboard, flowchart, pseudocode, or story map. For example, students could collaborate with a partner to plan and develop a program that graphs a function. They could iteratively modify the program based on feedback from diverse users, such as students who are color blind and may have trouble differentiating lines on a graph based on the color. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 5.G.1, 5.G.2) Alternatively, students could plan as a team to develop a program to display experimental data. They could implement the program in stages, generating basic displays first and then soliciting feedback from others on how easy it is to interpret (e.g., are labels clear and readable?, are lines thick enough?, are titles understandable?). Students could iteratively improve their display to make it more readable and to better support the communication of the finding of the experiment. (NGSS.3-5-ETS1-1, 3-5-ETS1-2, 3-5-ETS1-3)

Standard:
Test and debug a program or algorithm to ensure it accomplishes the intended task.

Descriptive Statement:
Programs do not always run properly. Students need to understand how to test and make necessary corrections to their programs to ensure they run properly. Students successfully identify and fix errors in (debug) their programs and programs created by others. Debugging strategies at this level may include testing to determine the first place the solution is in error and fixing accordingly, leaving "breadcrumbs" in a program, and soliciting assistance from peers and online resources. For example, when students are developing a program to control the movement of a robot in a confined space, students test various inputs that control movement of the robot to make sure it behaves as intended (e.g., if an input would cause the robot to move past a wall of the confined space, it should not move at all). (CA NGSS: 3-5-ETS1-3) Additionally, students could test and debug an algorithm by tracing the inputs and outputs on a whiteboard. When noticing "bugs" (errors), students could identify what was supposed to happen and step through the algorithm to locate and then correct the error.

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:
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:
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:
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:
Systematically test and refine programs using a range of test cases.

Descriptive Statement:
Use cases and test cases are created to evaluate whether programs function as intended. At this level, students develop use cases and test cases with teacher guidance. Testing should become a deliberate process that is more iterative, systematic, and proactive than at lower levels. For example, students test programs by considering potential errors, such as what will happen if a user enters invalid input (e.g., negative numbers and 0 instead of positive numbers). Alternatively, in an interactive program, students could test that the character cannot move off of the screen in any direction, cannot move through walls, and can interact with other characters. They then adjust character behavior as needed.