Search the California Content Standards

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:
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:
Construct solutions to problems using student-created components, such as procedures, modules, and/or objects.

Descriptive Statement:
Programmers often address complex tasks through design and decomposition using procedures and/or modules. In object-oriented programming languages, classes can support this decomposition. Students create a computational artifact that solves a problem through use of procedures, modules, and/or objects. This problem should be of sufficient complexity to benefit from decomposition and/or use of objects. For example, students could write a flashcard program in which each card is able to show both the question and answer and record user history. Alternatively, students could create a simulation of an ecosystem in which sprites carry out behaviors, such as consuming resources.

Standard:
Demonstrate code reuse by creating programming solutions using libraries and APIs.

Descriptive Statement:
Code reuse is critical both for managing complexity in modern programs, but also in increasing programming efficiency and reliability by having programmers reuse code that has been highly vetted and tested. Software libraries allow developers to integrate common and often complex functionality without having to reimplement that functionality from scratch. Students identify, evaluate, and select appropriate application programming interfaces (APIs) from software libraries to use with a given language and operating system. They appropriately use resources such as technical documentation, online forums, and developer communities to learn about libraries and troubleshoot problems with APIs that they have chosen. For example, students could import charting and graphing modules to display data sets, adopt an online service that provides cloud storage and retrieval for a database used in a multiplayer game, or import location services into an app that identifies points of interest on a map. Libraries of APIs can be student-created or publicly available (e.g., common graphics libraries or map/navigation APIs).

Standard:
Evaluate computational artifacts with regard to improving their beneficial effects and reducing harmful effects on society.

Descriptive Statement:
People design computational artifacts to help make the lives of humans better. Students evaluate an artifact and comment on aspects of it which positively or negatively impact users and give ideas for reducing the possible negative impacts. For example, students could discuss how algorithms that screen job candidates' resumes can cut costs for companies (a beneficial effect) but introduce or amplify bias in the hiring process (a harmful effect). Alternatively, students could discuss how turn-by-turn navigation tools can help drivers avoid traffic and find alternate routes (a beneficial effect), but sometimes channel large amounts of traffic down small neighborhood streets (a harmful effect). Additionally, students could discuss how social media algorithms can help direct users' attention to interesting content (a beneficial effect), while simultaneously limiting users' exposure to information that contradicts pre-existing beliefs (a harmful effect).

Standard:
Evaluate the impact of equity, access, and influence on the distribution of computing resources in a global society.

Descriptive Statement:
Computers, computation, and technology can help improve the lives of humans and support positive developments in society, economy, and/or culture. However, access to such resources is not the same for everyone in the world. Students define and evaluate ways in which different technologies, applications, or computational tools might benefit all people in society or might only benefit those with the greatest access or resources. For example, students could describe ways in which groups of people benefit, do not benefit, or could benefit better by access to high-speed Internet connectivity. Alternatively, students could describe educational impacts of children not having access to a computer in their home.