Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 11 - 20 of 34 Standards

Standard Identifier: 3-5.NI.5

Grade Range: 3–5
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.1)

Standard:
Describe physical and digital security measures for protecting personal information.

Descriptive Statement:
Personal information can be protected physically and digitally. Cybersecurity is the protection from unauthorized use of electronic data, or the measures taken to achieve this. Students identify what personal information is and the reasons for protecting it. Students describe physical and digital approaches for protecting personal information such as using strong passwords and biometric scanners. For example, students could engage in a collaborative discussion orally or in writing regarding topics that relate to personal cybersecurity issues. Discussion topics could be based on current events related to cybersecurity or topics that are applicable to students, such as the necessity of backing up data to guard against loss, how to create strong passwords and the importance of not sharing passwords, or why we should keep operating systems updated and use anti-virus software to protect data and systems. Students could also discuss physical measures that can be used to protect data including biometric scanners, locked doors, and physical backups. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.1, SL.4.1, SL.5.1)

Standard Identifier: 3-5.NI.6

Grade Range: 3–5
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.4)

Standard:
Create patterns to protect information from unauthorized access.

Descriptive Statement:
Encryption is the process of converting information or data into a code, especially to prevent unauthorized access. At this level, students use patterns as a code for encryption, to protect information. Patterns should be decodable to the party for whom the message is intended, but difficult or impossible for those with unauthorized access. For example, students could create encrypted messages via flashing a flashlight in Morse code. Other students could decode this established language even if it wasn't meant for them. To model the idea of protecting data, students should create their own variations on or changes to Morse code. This ensures that when a member of that group flashes a message only other members of their group can decode it, even if other students in the room can see it. (CA NGSS: 4-PS4-3) Alternatively, students could engage in a CS Unplugged activity that models public key encryption: One student puts a paper containing a written secret in a box, locks it with a padlock, and hands the box to a second student. Student 2 puts on a second padlock and hands it back. Student 1 removes her lock and hands the box to student 2 again. Student 2 removes his lock, opens the box, and has access to the secret that student 1 sent him. Because the box always contained at least one lock while in transit, an outside party never had the opportunity to see the message and it is protected.

Standard Identifier: 6-8.AP.10

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Algorithms
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.1, 4.4)

Standard:
Use flowcharts and/or pseudocode to design and illustrate algorithms that solve complex problems.

Descriptive Statement:
Complex problems are problems that would be difficult for students to solve without breaking them down into multiple steps. Flowcharts and pseudocode are used to design and illustrate the breakdown of steps in an algorithm. Students design and illustrate algorithms using pseudocode and/or flowcharts that organize and sequence the breakdown of steps for solving complex problems. For example, students might use a flowchart to illustrate an algorithm that produces a recommendation for purchasing sneakers based on inputs such as size, colors, brand, comfort, and cost. Alternatively, students could write pseudocode to express an algorithm for suggesting their outfit for the day, based on inputs such as the weather, color preferences, and day of the week.

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.CS.1

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Devices
Practice(s): Fostering an Inclusive Computing Culture, Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (1.2, 3.3)

Standard:
Design modifications to computing devices in order to improve the ways users interact with the devices.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing devices can extend the abilities of humans, but design considerations are critical to make these devices useful. Students suggest modifications to the design of computing devices and describe how these modifications would improve usabilty. For example, students could create a design for the screen layout of a smartphone that is more usable by people with vision impairments or hand tremors. They might also design how to use the device as a scanner to convert text to speech. Alternatively, students could design modifications for a student ID card reader to increase usability by planning for scanner height, need of scanner device to be connected physically to the computer, robustness of scanner housing, and choice of use of RFID or line of sight scanners. (CA NGSS: MS-ETS1-1)

Standard Identifier: 6-8.DA.9

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Data & Analysis
Subconcept: Inference & Models
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions, Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (4.4, 6.1)

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 Identifier: 6-8.NI.5

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems (3.1, 3.3)

Standard:
Explain potential security threats and security measures to mitigate threats.

Descriptive Statement:
Cybersecurity is an important field of study and it is valuable for students to understand the need for protecting sensitive data. Students identify multiple methods for protecting data and articulate the value and appropriateness for each method. Students are not expected to implement or explain the implementation of such technologies. For example, students could explain the importance of keeping passwords hidden, setting secure router administrator passwords, erasing a storage device before it is reused, and using firewalls to restrict access to private networks. Alternatively, students could explain the importance of two-factor authentication and HTTPS connections to ensure secure data transmission.

Standard Identifier: 6-8.NI.6

Grade Range: 6–8
Concept: Networks & the Internet
Subconcept: Cybersecurity
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.4)

Standard:
Apply multiple methods of information protection to model the secure transmission of information.

Descriptive Statement:
Digital information is protected using a variety of cryptographic techniques. Cryptography is essential to many models of cybersecurity. At its core, cryptography has a mathematical foundation. Cryptographic encryption can be as simple as letter substitution or as complicated as modern methods used to secure networks and the Internet. Students encode and decode messages using encryption methods, and explore different levels of complexity used to hide or secure information. For example, students could identify methods of secret communication used during the Revolutionary War (e.g., ciphers, secret codes, invisible ink, hidden letters) and then secure their own methods such as substitution ciphers or steganography (i.e., hiding messages inside a picture or other data) to compose a message from either the Continental Army or British Army. (HSS.8.1) Alternatively, students could explore functions and inverse functions for encryption and decryption and consider functions that are complex enough to keep data secure from their peers. (CA CCSS for Mathematics 8.F.1)

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.12

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Algorithms
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions, Creating Computational Artifacts (4.2, 5.1)

Standard:
Design algorithms to solve computational problems using a combination of original and existing algorithms.

Descriptive Statement:
Knowledge of common algorithms improves how people develop software, secure data, and store information. Some algorithms may be easier to implement in a particular programming language, work faster, require less memory to store data, and be applicable in a wider variety of situations than other algorithms. Algorithms used to search and sort data are common in a variety of software applications. For example, students could design an algorithm to calculate and display various sports statistics and use common sorting or mathematical algorithms (e.g., average) in the design of the overall algorithm. Alternatively, students could design an algorithm to implement a game and use existing randomization algorithms to place pieces randomly in starting positions or to control the "roll" of a dice or selection of a "card" from a deck.

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.

Showing 11 - 20 of 34 Standards


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