Computer Science Standards
Results
Showing 11 - 15 of 15 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.
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.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.
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.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).
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: 9-12S.AP.26
Grade Range:
9–12 Specialty
Concept:
Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept:
Program Development
Practice(s):
Communicating About Computing (7.2)
Standard:
Compare multiple programming languages, and discuss how their features make them suitable for solving different types of problems.
Descriptive Statement:
Particular problems may be more effectively solved using some programming languages than other programming languages. Students provide a rationale for why a specific programming language is better suited for a solving a particular class of problem. For example, students could explain how a language with a large library base can make developing a web application easier. Alternatively, students could explain how languages that support particular programming paradigms (e.g., object-oriented or functional) can make implementation more aligned with design choices. Additionally, students could discuss how languages that implement garbage collection are good for simplicity of memory management, but may result in poor performance characteristics.
Compare multiple programming languages, and discuss how their features make them suitable for solving different types of problems.
Descriptive Statement:
Particular problems may be more effectively solved using some programming languages than other programming languages. Students provide a rationale for why a specific programming language is better suited for a solving a particular class of problem. For example, students could explain how a language with a large library base can make developing a web application easier. Alternatively, students could explain how languages that support particular programming paradigms (e.g., object-oriented or functional) can make implementation more aligned with design choices. Additionally, students could discuss how languages that implement garbage collection are good for simplicity of memory management, but may result in poor performance characteristics.
Standard Identifier: 9-12S.CS.1
Grade Range:
9–12 Specialty
Concept:
Computing Systems
Subconcept:
Devices
Practice(s):
Developing and Using Abstractions, Communicating About Computing (4.4, 7.2)
Standard:
Illustrate ways computing systems implement logic through hardware components.
Descriptive Statement:
Computing systems use processors (e.g., a central processing unit or CPU) to execute program instructions. Processors are composed of components that implement the logical or computational operations required by the instructions. AND, OR, and NOT are examples of logic gates. Adders are examples of higher-leveled circuits built using low-level logic gates. Students illustrate how modern computing devices are made up of smaller and simpler components which implement the logic underlying the functionality of a computer processor. At this level, knowledge of how logic gates are constructed is not expected. For example, students could construct truth tables, draw logic circuit diagrams, or use an online logic circuit simulator. Students could explore the interaction of the CPU, RAM, and I/O by labeling a diagram of the von Neumann architecture. Alternatively, students could design higher-level circuits using low-level logic gates (e.g., adders).
Illustrate ways computing systems implement logic through hardware components.
Descriptive Statement:
Computing systems use processors (e.g., a central processing unit or CPU) to execute program instructions. Processors are composed of components that implement the logical or computational operations required by the instructions. AND, OR, and NOT are examples of logic gates. Adders are examples of higher-leveled circuits built using low-level logic gates. Students illustrate how modern computing devices are made up of smaller and simpler components which implement the logic underlying the functionality of a computer processor. At this level, knowledge of how logic gates are constructed is not expected. For example, students could construct truth tables, draw logic circuit diagrams, or use an online logic circuit simulator. Students could explore the interaction of the CPU, RAM, and I/O by labeling a diagram of the von Neumann architecture. Alternatively, students could design higher-level circuits using low-level logic gates (e.g., adders).
Showing 11 - 15 of 15 Standards
Questions: Curriculum Frameworks and Instructional Resources Division |
CFIRD@cde.ca.gov | 916-319-0881