Search the California Content Standards

Standard:
Test and analyze the effects of changing variables while using computational models.

Descriptive Statement:
Variables within a computational model may be changed, in order to alter a computer simulation or to more accurately represent how various data is related. Students interact with a given model, make changes to identified model variables, and observe and reflect upon the results. For example, students could test a program that makes a robot move on a track by making changes to variables (e.g., height and angle of track, size and mass of the robot) and discussing how these changes affect how far the robot travels. (CA NGSS: MS-PS2-2) Alternatively, students could test a game simulation and change variables (e.g., skill of simulated players, nature of opening moves) and analyze how these changes affect who wins the game. (CA NGSS: MS-ETS1-3) Additionally, students could modify a model for predicting the likely color of the next pick from a bag of colored candy and analyze the effects of changing variables representing the common color ratios in a typical bag of candy. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 7.SP.7, 8.SP.4)

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:
Create more generalized computational solutions using collections instead of repeatedly using simple variables.

Descriptive Statement:
Computers can automate repetitive tasks with algorithms that use collections to simplify and generalize computational problems. Students identify common features in multiple segments of code and substitute a single segment that uses collections (i.e., arrays, sets, lists) to account for the differences. For example, students could take a program that inputs students' scores into multiple variables and modify it to read these scores into a single array of scores. Alternatively, instead of writing one procedure to find averages of student scores and another to find averages of student absences, students could write a single general average procedure to support both tasks.

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:
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:
Refine computational models to better represent the relationships among different elements of data collected from a phenomenon or process.

Descriptive Statement:
Computational models are used to make predictions about processes or phenomena based on selected data and features. They allow people to investigate the relationships among different variables to understand a system. Predictions are tested to validate models. Students evaluate these models against real-world observations. For example, students could use a population model that allows them to speculate about interactions among different species, evaluate the model based on data gathered from nature, and then refine the model to reflect more complex and realistic interactions.

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:
Compare and contrast fundamental data structures and their uses.

Descriptive Statement:
Data structures are designed to provide different ways of storing and manipulating data sets to optimize various aspects of storage or runtime performance. Choice of data structures is made based on expected data characteristics and expected program functions. Students = compare and contrast how basic functions (e.g.., insertion, deletion, and modification) would differ for common data structures including lists, arrays, stacks, and queues. For example, students could draw a diagram of how different data structures change when items are added, deleted, or modified. They could explain tradeoffs in storage and efficiency issues. Alternatively, when presented with a description of a program and the functions it would be most likely to be running, students could list pros and cons for a specific data structure use in that scenario.

Standard:
Demonstrate the flow of execution of a recursive algorithm.

Descriptive Statement:
Recursion is a powerful problem-solving approach where the problem solution is built on solutions of smaller instances of the same problem. A base case, which returns a result without referencing itself, must be defined, otherwise infinite recursion will occur. Students represent a sequence of calls to a recursive algorithm and show how the process resolves to a solution. For example, students could draw a diagram to illustrate flow of execution by keeping track of parameter and returned values for each recursive call. Alternatively, students could create a video showing the passing of arguments as the recursive algorithm runs.

Standard:
Evaluate the ability of models and simulations to test and support the refinement of hypotheses.

Descriptive Statement:
A model could be implemented as a diagram or a program that represents key properties of a physical or other system. A simulation is based on a model, and enables observation of the system as key properties change. Students explore, explain, and evaluate existing models and simulations, in order to support the refinement of hypotheses about how the systems work. At this level, the ability to accurately and completely model and simulate complex systems is not expected. For example, a computer model of ants following a path created by other ants who found food explains the trail-like travel patterns of the insect. Students could evaluate if the output of the model fits well with their hypothesis that ants navigate the world through the use of pheromones. They could explain how the computer model supports this hypothesis and how it might leave out certain aspects of ant behavior and whether these are important to understanding ant travel behavior. Alternatively, students could hypothesize how different ground characteristics (e.g., soil type, thickness of sediment above bedrock) relate to the severity of shaking at the surface during an earthquake. They could add or modify input about ground characteristics into an earthquake simulator, observe the changed simulation output, and then evaluate their hypotheses.