Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 11 - 20 of 27 Standards

Standard Identifier: 6-8.CS.2

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Hardware & Software
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.1)

Standard:
Design a project that combines hardware and software components to collect and exchange data.

Descriptive Statement:
Collecting and exchanging data involves input, output, storage, and processing. When possible, students select the components for their project designs by considering tradeoffs between factors such as functionality, cost, size, speed, accessibility, and aesthetics. Students do not need to implement their project design in order to meet this standard. For example, students could design a mobile tour app that displays information relevant to specific locations when the device is nearby or when the user selects a virtual stop on the tour. They select appropriate components, such as GPS or cellular-based geolocation tools, textual input, and speech recognition, to use in their project design. Alternatively, students could design a project that uses a sensor to collect the salinity, moisture, and temperature of soil. They may select a sensor that connects wirelessly through a Bluetooth connection because it supports greater mobility, or they could instead select a physical USB connection that does not require a separate power source. (CA NGSS: MS-ETS1-1, MS-ETS1-2)

Standard Identifier: 6-8.IC.20

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Compare tradeoffs associated with computing technologies that affect people's everyday activities and career options.

Descriptive Statement:
Advancements in computer technology are neither wholly positive nor negative. However, the ways that people use computing technologies have tradeoffs. Students consider current events related to broad ideas, including privacy, communication, and automation. For example, students could compare and contrast the impacts of computing technologies with the impacts of other systems developed throughout history such as the Pony Express and US Postal System. (HSS.7.8.4) Alternatively, students could identify tradeoffs for both personal and professional uses of a variety of computing technologies. For instance, driverless cars can increase convenience and reduce accidents, but they may be susceptible to hacking. The emerging industry will reduce the number of taxi and shared-ride drivers, but may create more software engineering and cybersecurity jobs.

Standard Identifier: 6-8.IC.21

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture (1.2)

Standard:
Discuss issues of bias and accessibility in the design of existing technologies.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing technologies should support users of many backgrounds and abilities. In order to maximize accessiblity, these differences need to be addressed by examining diverse populations. With the teacher's guidance, students test and discuss the usability of various technology tools, such as apps, games, and devices. For example, students could discuss the impacts of facial recognition software that works better for lighter skin tones and recognize that the software was likely developed with a homogeneous testing group. Students could then discuss how accessibility could be improved by sampling a more diverse population. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.6.1, SL.7.1, SL.8.1)

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: 9-12.AP.14

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.2)

Standard:
Justify the selection of specific control structures by identifying tradeoffs associated with implementation, readability, and performance.

Descriptive Statement:
The selection of control structures in a given programming language impacts readability and performance. Readability refers to how clear the program is to other programmers and can be improved through documentation. Control structures at this level may include, for example, conditional statements, loops, event handlers, and recursion. Students justify control structure selection and tradeoffs in the process of creating their own computational artifacts. The discussion of performance is limited to a theoretical understanding of execution time and storage requirements; a quantitative analysis is not expected. For example, students could compare the readability and program performance of iterative and recursive implementations of procedures that calculate the Fibonacci sequence. Alternatively, students could compare the readability and performance tradeoffs of multiple if statements versus a nested if statement.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.15

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.1, 5.2, 5.3)

Standard:
Iteratively design and develop computational artifacts for practical intent, personal expression, or to address a societal issue by using events to initiate instructions.

Descriptive Statement:
In this context, relevant computational artifacts can include programs, mobile apps, or web apps. Events can be user-initiated, such as a button press, or system-initiated, such as a timer firing. For example, students might create a tool for drawing on a canvas by first implementing a button to set the color of the pen. Alternatively, students might create a game where many events control instructions executed (e.g., when a score climbs above a threshold, a congratulatory sound is played; when a user clicks on an object, the object is loaded into a basket; when a user clicks on an arrow key, the player object is moved around the screen).

Standard Identifier: 9-12.CS.2

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Hardware & Software
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.1)

Standard:
Compare levels of abstraction and interactions between application software, system software, and hardware.

Descriptive Statement:
At its most basic level, a computer is composed of physical hardware on which software runs. Multiple layers of software are built upon various layers of hardware. Layers manage interactions and complexity in the computing system. System software manages a computing device's resources so that software can interact with hardware. Application software communicates with the user and the system software to accomplish its purpose. Students compare and describe how application software, system software, and hardware interact. For example, students could compare how various levels of hardware and software interact when a picture is to be taken on a smartphone. Systems software provides low-level commands to operate the camera hardware, but the application software interacts with system software at a higher level by requesting a common image file format (e.g., .png) that the system software provides.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.23

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture, Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (1.2, 3.1)

Standard:
Evaluate the ways computing impacts personal, ethical, social, economic, and cultural practices.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing may improve, harm, or maintain practices. An understanding of how equity deficits, such as minimal exposure to computing, access to education, and training opportunities, are related to larger, systemic problems in society enables students to create more meaningful artifacts. Students illustrate the positive, negative, and/or neutral impacts of computing. For example, students could evaluate the accessibility of a product for a broad group of end users, such as people who lack access to broadband or who have various disabilities. Students could identify potential bias during the design process and evaluate approaches to maximize accessibility in product design. Alternatively, students could evaluate the impact of social media on cultural, economic, and social practices around the world.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.24

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture (1.2)

Standard:
Identify impacts of bias and equity deficit on design and implementation of computational artifacts and apply appropriate processes for evaluating issues of bias.

Descriptive Statement:
Biases could include incorrect assumptions developers have made about their users, including minimal exposure to computing, access to education, and training opportunities. Students identify and use strategies to test and refine computational artifacts with the goal of reducing bias and equity deficits and increasing universal access. For example, students could use a spreadsheet to chart various forms of equity deficits, and identify solutions in existing software. Students could use and refine the spreadsheet solutions to create a strategy for methodically testing software specifically for bias and equity.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.IC.25

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Impacts of Computing
Subconcept: Culture
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.1)

Standard:
Demonstrate ways a given algorithm applies to problems across disciplines.

Descriptive Statement:
Students identify how a given algorithm can be applied to real-world problems in different disciplines. For example, students could demonstrate how a randomization algorithm can be used to select participants for a clinical medical trial or to select a flash card to display on a vocabulary quiz. Alternatively, students could demonstrate how searching and sorting algorithms are needed to organize records in manufacturing settings, or to support doctors queries of patient records, or to help governments manage support services they provide to their citizens.

Showing 11 - 20 of 27 Standards


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