Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 31 - 40 of 53 Standards

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.19

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.3)

Standard:
Explain the limitations of licenses that restrict use of computational artifacts when using resources such as libraries.

Descriptive Statement:
Software licenses include copyright, freeware, and open-source licensing schemes. Licenses are used to protect the intellectual property of the author while also defining accessibility of the code. Students consider licensing implications for their own work, especially when incorporating libraries and other resources. For example, students might consider two software libraries that address a similar need, justifying their choice of one over the other. The choice could be based upon least restrictive licensing or further protections for their own intellectual property.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.20

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (6.3)

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 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.AP.22

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

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 Identifier: 9-12.DA.8

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Data & Analysis
Subconcept: Storage
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.1)

Standard:
Translate between different representations of data abstractions of real-world phenomena, such as characters, numbers, and images.

Descriptive Statement:
Computers represent complex real-world concepts such as characters, numbers, and images through various abstractions. Students translate between these different levels of data representations. For example, students could convert an HTML (Hyper Text Markup Language) tag for red font into RGB (Red Green Blue), HEX (Hexadecimal Color Code), HSL (Hue Saturation Lightness), RGBA( Red Green Blue Alpha), or HSLA (Hue Saturation Lightness and Alpha) representations. Alternatively, students could convert the standard representation of a character such as ! into ASCII or Unicode.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.DA.9

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Data & Analysis
Subconcept: Storage
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.3)

Standard:
Describe tradeoffs associated with how data elements are organized and stored.

Descriptive Statement:
People make choices about how data elements are organized and where data is stored. These choices affect cost, speed, reliability, accessibility, privacy, and integrity. Students describe implications for a given data organziation or storage choice in light of a specific problem. For example, students might consider the cost, speed, reliability, accessibility, privacy, and integrity tradeoffs between storing photo data on a mobile device versus in the cloud. Alternatively, students might compare the tradeoffs between file size and image quality of various image file formats and how choice of format may be infuenced by the device on which it is to be accessed (e.g., smartphone, computer).

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.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.NI.4

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Network Communication & Organization
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.1)

Standard:
Describe issues that impact network functionality.

Descriptive Statement:
Many different organizations, including educational, governmental, private businesses, and private households rely on networks to function adequately in order to engage in online commerce and activity. Quality of Service (QoS) refers to the capability of a network to provide better service to selected network traffic over various technologies from the perspective of the consumer. Students define and discuss performance measures that impact network functionality, such as latency, bandwidth, throughput, jitter, and error rate. For example, students could use online network simulators to explore how performance measures impact network functionality and describe impacts when various changes in the network occur. Alternatively, students could describe how pauses in television interviews conducted over satellite telephones are impacted by networking factors such as latency and jitter.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.NI.5

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Network Communication & Organization
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Describe the design characteristics of the Internet.

Descriptive Statement:
The Internet connects devices and networks all over the world. Large-scale coordination occurs among many different machines across multiple paths every time a web page is opened or an image is viewed online. Through the domain name system (DNS), devices on the Internet can look up Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, allowing end-to-end communication between devices. The design decisions that direct the coordination among systems composing the Internet also allow for scalability and reliability. Students factor historical, cultural, and economic decisions in their explanations of the Internet. For example, students could explain how hierarchy in the DNS supports scalability and reliability. Alternatively, students could describe how the redundancy of routing between two nodes on the Internet increases reliability and scales as the Internet grows.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.NI.6

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Compare and contrast security measures to address various security threats.

Descriptive Statement:
Network security depends on a combination of hardware, software, and practices that control access to data and systems. The needs of users and the sensitivity of data determine the level of security implemented. Potential security problems, such as denial-of-service attacks, ransomware, viruses, worms, spyware, and phishing, present threats to sensitive data. Students compare and contrast different types of security measures based on factors such as efficiency, feasibility, ethical impacts, usability, and security. At this level, students are not expected to develop or implement the security measures that they discuss. For example, students could review case studies or current events in which governments or organizations experienced data leaks or data loss as a result of these types of attacks. Students could provide an analysis of actual security measures taken comparing to other security measure which may have led to different outcomes. Alternatively, students might discuss computer security policies in place at the local level that present a tradeoff between usability and security, such as a web filter that prevents access to many educational sites but keeps the campus network safe.

Showing 31 - 40 of 53 Standards


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