Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 11 - 20 of 37 Standards

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.AP.19

Grade Range: 3–5
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Describe choices made during program development using code comments, presentations, and demonstrations.

Descriptive Statement:
People communicate about their code to help others understand and use their programs. Explaining one's design choices gives others a better understanding of one's work. Students may explain their step-by-step process of creating a program in a presentation or demonstration of their personal code journals. They describe how comments within code organize thought and process during the develpment of the program. For example, students could describe the decision to have the score in a game flash when it can be rounded to 100 by writing a comment in the code. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 3.NBT.1) Alternatively, students could present their overall program development experience and justify choices made by using storyboards, annotated images, videos, and/or journal entries. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.4, SL.4.4, SL.5.4, SL.3.5, SL.4.5, SL.5.5) (CA NGSS: 3-5-ETS1-1, 3.5-ETS1-2, 3.5-ETS1-3)

Standard Identifier: 3-5.CS.3

Grade Range: 3–5
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Troubleshooting
Practice(s): Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (6.2)

Standard:
Determine potential solutions to solve simple hardware and software problems using common troubleshooting strategies.

Descriptive Statement:
Although computing systems vary, common troubleshooting strategies can be used across many different systems. Students use troubleshooting strategies to identify problems that could include a device not responding, lacking power, lacking a network connection, an app crashing, not playing sounds, or password entry not working. Students use and develop various solutions to address these problems. Solutions may include rebooting the device, checking for power, checking network availability, opening and closing an app, making sure speakers are turned on or headphones are plugged in, and making sure that the caps lock key is not on. For example, students could prepare for and participate in a collaborative discussion in which they identify and list computing system problems and then describe common successful fixes. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.1, SL.4.1, SL.5.1) Alternatively, students could write informative/explanatory texts, create a poster, or use another medium of communication to examine common troubleshooting strategies and convey these ideas and information clearly. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.3.2, W.4.2, W.5.2)

Standard Identifier: 6-8.AP.12

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.1, 5.2)

Standard:
Design and iteratively develop programs that combine control structures and use compound conditions.

Descriptive Statement:
Control structures can be combined in many ways. Nested loops are loops placed within loops, and nested conditionals allow the result of one conditional to lead to another. Compound conditions combine two or more conditions in a logical relationship (e.g., using AND, OR, and NOT). Students appropriately use control structures to perform repetitive and selection tasks. For example, when programming an interactive story, students could use a compound conditional within a loop to unlock a door only if a character has a key AND is touching the door. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.6.3, W.7.3, W.8.3) Alternatively, students could use compound conditionals when writing a program to test whether two points lie along the line defined by a particular linear function. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 8.EE.7) Additionally, students could use nested loops to program a character to do the "chicken dance" by opening and closing the beak, flapping the wings, shaking the hips, and clapping four times each; this dance "chorus" is then repeated several times in its entirety.

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.16

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions, Creating Computational Artifacts, Communicating About Computing (4.2, 5.2, 7.3)

Standard:
Incorporate existing code, media, and libraries into original programs, and give attribution.

Descriptive Statement:
Building on the work of others enables students to produce more interesting and powerful creations. Students use portions of code, algorithms, digital media, and/or data created by others in their own programs and websites. They give attribution to the original creators to acknowledge their contributions. For example, when creating a side-scrolling game, students may incorporate portions of code that create a realistic jump movement from another person's game, and they may also import Creative Commons-licensed images to use in the background. Alternatively, when creating a website to demonstrate their knowledge of historical figures from the Civil War, students may use a professionally-designed template and public domain images of historical figures. (HSS.8.10.5) Additionally, students could import libraries and connect to web application program interfaces (APIs) to make their own programming processes more efficient and reduce the number of bugs (e.g., to check whether the user input is a valid date, to input the current temperature from another city).

Standard Identifier: 6-8.AP.17

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (6.1)

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.

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.AP.19

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Program Development
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Document programs in order to make them easier to use, read, test, and debug.

Descriptive Statement:
Documentation allows creators, end users, and other developers to more easily use and understand a program. Students provide documentation for end users that explains their artifacts and how they function (e.g., project overview, user instructions). They also include comments within code to describe portions of their programs and make it easier for themselves and other developers to use, read, test, and debug. For example, students could add comments to describe functionality of different segments of code (e.g., input scores between 0 and 100, check for invalid input, calculate and display the average of the scores). They could also communicate the process used by writing design documents, creating flowcharts, or making presentations. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.6.5, SL.7.5, SL.8.5)

Standard Identifier: 6-8.CS.3

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Troubleshooting
Practice(s): Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (6.2)

Standard:
Systematically apply troubleshooting strategies to identify and resolve hardware and software problems in computing systems.

Descriptive Statement:
When problems occur within computing systems, it is important to take a structured, step-by-step approach to effectively solve the problem and ensure that potential solutions are not overlooked. Examples of troubleshooting strategies include following a troubleshooting flow diagram, making changes to software to see if hardware will work, checking connections and settings, and swapping in working components. Since a computing device may interact with interconnected devices within a system, problems may not be due to the specific computing device itself but to devices connected to it. For example, students could work through a checklist of solutions for connectivity problems in a lab of computers connected wirelessly or through physical cables. They could also search for technical information online and engage in technical reading to create troubleshooting documents that they then apply. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy RST.6-8.10) Alternatively, students could explore and utilize operating system tools to reset a computer's default language to English. Additionally, students could swap out an externally-controlled sensor giving fluctuating readings with a new sensor to check whether there is a hardware problem.

Showing 11 - 20 of 37 Standards


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