Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Computer Science Standards




Results


Showing 11 - 20 of 20 Standards

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.

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: 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.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.AP.15

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Creating Computational Artifacts (5.1, 5.2, 5.3)

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 Identifier: 9-12.CS.2

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Hardware & Software
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.1)

Standard:
Compare levels of abstraction and interactions between application software, system software, and hardware.

Descriptive Statement:
At its most basic level, a computer is composed of physical hardware on which software runs. Multiple layers of software are built upon various layers of hardware. Layers manage interactions and complexity in the computing system. System software manages a computing device's resources so that software can interact with hardware. Application software communicates with the user and the system software to accomplish its purpose. Students compare and describe how application software, system software, and hardware interact. For example, students could compare how various levels of hardware and software interact when a picture is to be taken on a smartphone. Systems software provides low-level commands to operate the camera hardware, but the application software interacts with system software at a higher level by requesting a common image file format (e.g., .png) that the system software provides.

Standard Identifier: 9-12.CS.3

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Troubleshooting
Practice(s): Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (6.2)

Standard:
Develop guidelines that convey systematic troubleshooting strategies that others can use to identify and fix errors.

Descriptive Statement:
Troubleshooting complex problems involves the use of multiple sources when researching, evaluating, and implementing potential solutions. Troubleshooting also relies on experience, such as when people recognize that a problem is similar to one they have seen before and adapt solutions that have worked in the past. For example, students could create a list of troubleshooting strategies to debug network connectivity problems such as checking hardware and software status and settings, rebooting devices, and checking security settings. Alternatively, students could create troubleshooting guidelines for help desk employees based on commonly observed problems (e.g., problems connecting a new device to the computer, problems printing from a computer to a network printer).

Standard Identifier: 9-12.DA.11

Grade Range: 9–12
Concept: Data & Analysis
Subconcept: Inference & Models
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions, Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts (4.4, 6.3)

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 Identifier: 9-12S.AP.15

Grade Range: 9–12 Specialty
Concept: Algorithms & Programming
Subconcept: Control
Practice(s): Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems, Communicating About Computing (3.2, 7.2)

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 Identifier: 9-12S.CS.2

Grade Range: 9–12 Specialty
Concept: Computing Systems
Subconcept: Hardware & Software
Practice(s): Communicating About Computing (7.2)

Standard:
Categorize and describe the different functions of operating system software.

Descriptive Statement:
Operating systems (OS) software is the code that manages the computer’s basic functions. Students describe at a high level the different functions of different components of operating system software. Examples of functions could include memory management, data storage/retrieval, processes management, and access control. For example, students could use monitoring tools including within an OS to inspect the services and functions running on a system and create an artifact to describe the activity that they observed (e.g., when a browser is running with many tabs open, memory usage is increased). They could also inspect and describe changes in the activity monitor that occur as different applications are executing (e.g., processor utilization increases when a new application is launched).

Standard Identifier: 9-12S.DA.9

Grade Range: 9–12 Specialty
Concept: Data & Analysis
Subconcept: Inference & Models
Practice(s): Developing and Using Abstractions (4.4)

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.

Showing 11 - 20 of 20 Standards


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