Search the California Content Standards

Standard:
Use data to highlight and/or propose relationships, predict outcomes, or communicate ideas.

Descriptive Statement:
The accuracy of data analysis is related to how the data is represented. Inferences or predictions based on data are less likely to be accurate if the data is insufficient, incomplete, or inaccurate or if the data is incorrect in some way. Additionally, people select aspects and subsets of data to be transformed, organized, and categorized. Students should be able to refer to data when communicating an idea, in order to highlight and/or propose relationships, predict outcomes, highlight different views and/or communicate insights and ideas. For example, students can be provided a scenario in which they are city managers who have a specific amount of funds to improve a city in California. Students can collect data of a city concerning land use, vegetation, wildlife, climate, population density, services and transportation (HSS.4.1.5) to determine and present what area needs to be focused on to improve a problem. Students can compare their data and planned use of funds with peers, clearly communicating or predict outcomes based on data collected. (CA CCCS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.1, SL.4.1, SL.5.1) Alternatively, students could record the temperature at noon each day to show that temperatures are higher in certain months of the year. If temperatures are not recorded on non-school days or are recorded incorrectly, the data would be incomplete and ideas being communicated could be inaccurate. Students may also record the day of the week on which the data was collected, but this would have no relevance to whether temperatures are higher or lower. In order to have sufficient and accurate data on which to communicate the idea, students might use data provided by a governmental weather agency. (CA NGSS: 3-ESS2-1)

Standard:
Propose ways to improve the accessibility and usability of technology products for the diverse needs and wants of users.

Descriptive Statement:
The development and modification of computing technology is driven by people’s needs and wants and can affect groups differently. Students anticipate the needs and wants of diverse end users and propose ways to improve access and usability of technology, with consideration of potential perspectives of users with different backgrounds, ability levels, points of view, and disabilities. For example, students could research a wide variety of disabilities that would limit the use of traditional computational tools for the creation of multimedia artifacts, including digital images, songs, and videos. Students could then brainstorm and propose new software that would allow students that are limited by the disabilities to create similar artifacts in new ways (e.g., graphical display of music for the deaf, the sonification of images for visually impaired students, voice input for those that are unable to use traditional input like the mouse and the keyboard). (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.3.7, W.4.7, W.5.7) Alternatively, as they anticipate unique user needs, students may consider using both speech and text to convey information in a game. They may also wish to vary the types of programs they create, knowing that not everyone shares their own tastes. (CA NGSS: 3-5-ETS1-1, 3-5-ETS1-2, 3-5-ETS1-3)

Standard:
Seek and explain the impact of diverse perspectives for the purpose of improving computational artifacts.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing technologies enable global collaboration and sharing of ideas. Students solicit feedback from a diverse group of users and creators and explain how this input improves their computational artifacts. For example, students could seek feedback from classmates via user surveys, in order to create an idea and then make a claim as to how to improve the overall structure and function of their computational artifact. Using the feedback students could write an opinion piece supporting their claim. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy W.3.1, W.4.1, W.5.1) Alternatively, with guidance from their teacher, students could use video conferencing tools, shared documents, or other online collaborative spaces, such as blogs, wikis, forums, or website comments, to gather and synthesize feedback from individuals and groups about programming projects. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.3.1, SL.4.1, SL.5.1)

Standard:
Compare tradeoffs associated with computing technologies that affect people's everyday activities and career options.

Descriptive Statement:
Advancements in computer technology are neither wholly positive nor negative. However, the ways that people use computing technologies have tradeoffs. Students consider current events related to broad ideas, including privacy, communication, and automation. For example, students could compare and contrast the impacts of computing technologies with the impacts of other systems developed throughout history such as the Pony Express and US Postal System. (HSS.7.8.4) Alternatively, students could identify tradeoffs for both personal and professional uses of a variety of computing technologies. For instance, driverless cars can increase convenience and reduce accidents, but they may be susceptible to hacking. The emerging industry will reduce the number of taxi and shared-ride drivers, but may create more software engineering and cybersecurity jobs.

Standard:
Discuss issues of bias and accessibility in the design of existing technologies.

Descriptive Statement:
Computing technologies should support users of many backgrounds and abilities. In order to maximize accessiblity, these differences need to be addressed by examining diverse populations. With the teacher's guidance, students test and discuss the usability of various technology tools, such as apps, games, and devices. For example, students could discuss the impacts of facial recognition software that works better for lighter skin tones and recognize that the software was likely developed with a homogeneous testing group. Students could then discuss how accessibility could be improved by sampling a more diverse population. (CA CCSS for ELA/Literacy SL.6.1, SL.7.1, SL.8.1)

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:
Study, discuss, and think critically about the potential impacts and implications of emerging technologies on larger social, economic, and political structures, with evidence from credible sources.

Descriptive Statement:
For example, after studying the rise of artifical intelligence, students create a cause and effect chart to represent positive and negative impacts of this technology on society.

Standard:
Describe the design characteristics of the Internet.

Descriptive Statement:
The Internet connects devices and networks all over the world. Large-scale coordination occurs among many different machines across multiple paths every time a web page is opened or an image is viewed online. Through the domain name system (DNS), devices on the Internet can look up Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, allowing end-to-end communication between devices. The design decisions that direct the coordination among systems composing the Internet also allow for scalability and reliability. Students factor historical, cultural, and economic decisions in their explanations of the Internet. For example, students could explain how hierarchy in the DNS supports scalability and reliability. Alternatively, students could describe how the redundancy of routing between two nodes on the Internet increases reliability and scales as the Internet grows.

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.