Standards in this Framework
Standards Mapped
Mapped to Course
| Standard | Lessons |
|---|---|
|
CS.3A.1
Explain how abstractions hide the underlying implementation details of computing systems embedded in everyday objects. |
|
|
CS.3A.2
Compare levels of abstraction and interactions between application software, system software, and hardware layers |
|
|
CS.3A.3
Develop guidelines that convey systematic troubleshooting strategies that others can use to identify and fix errors. |
|
|
NI.3A.1
Evaluate the scalability and reliability of networks by describing the relationship between routers, switches, servers, topology, and addressing. |
|
|
NI.3A.2
Give examples to illustrate how sensitive data can be affected by malware and other attacks. |
|
|
NI.3A.3
Recommend security measures to address various scenarios based on factors such as efficiency, feasibility, and ethical impacts. |
|
|
NI.3A.4
Compare various security measures considering tradeoffs between the usability and security of a computing system. |
|
|
NI.3A.5
Explain tradeoffs when selecting and implementing cybersecurity recommendations. |
|
|
DA.3A.1
Translate between different bit representations of real-world phenomena, such as characters, numbers, and images. |
|
|
DA.3A.2
Evaluate the tradeoffs in how data elements are organized and where data is stored. |
|
|
DA.3A.3
Collect, transform, and organize data to help others better understand a problem. |
|
|
DA.3A.4
Create and evaluate computational models that represent real-world systems. |
|
|
AP.3A.1
Create prototypes that use algorithms to solve computational problems by leveraging prior student knowledge and personal interests. |
|
|
AP.3A.2
Use lists and functions to simplify solutions, generalizing computational problems instead of repeatedly using simple variables. |
|
|
AP.3A.3
Justify the selection of specific control structures when tradeoffs involve implementation, readability, and program performance, and explain the benefits and drawbacks of choices made. |
|
|
AP.3A.4
Design and iteratively develop computational artifacts for practical intent, personal expression, or to address a societal issue by using events to initiate instructions. |
|
|
AP.3A.5
Decompose problems into smaller components through systematic analysis, using constructs such as procedures, modules, and/or objects. |
|
|
AP.3A.6
Create artifacts by using procedures within a program, combinations of data and procedures, or independent but interrelated programs. |
|
|
AP.3A.7
Systematically design and develop programs for broad audiences by incorporating feedback from users |
|
|
AP.3A.8
Evaluate licenses that limit or restrict use of computational artifacts when using resources such as libraries. |
|
|
AP.3A.9
Evaluate and refine computational artifacts to make them more usable and accessible. |
|
|
AP.3A.10
Design and develop computational artifacts working in team roles using collaborative tools. |
|
|
AP.3A.11
Document design decisions using text, graphics, presentations, and/or demonstrations in the development of complex programs. |
|
|
IC.3A.1
Evaluate the ways computing impacts personal, ethical, social, economic, and cultural practices. |
|
|
IC.3A.2
Test and refine computational artifacts to reduce bias and equity deficits. |
|
|
IC.3A.3
Demonstrate ways a given algorithm applies to problems across disciplines. |
|
|
IC.3A.4
Use tools and methods for collaboration on a project to increase connectivity of people in different cultures and career fields. |
|
|
IC.3A.5
Explain the beneficial and harmful effects that intellectual property laws can have on innovation. |
|
|
IC.3A.6
Explain the privacy concerns related to the collection and generation of data through automated processes that may not be evident to users. [ |
|
|
IC.3A.7
Evaluate the social and economic implications of privacy in the context of safety, law, or ethics. |
|
