Blog Post #6 -- Melody Lam -- 4/16/2020

NC Computer Science Standards Draft Review

As stated in the "Expand Computer Science Opportunities" recommendation to policymakers document, the goals of incoroporating computer science into the NC Standards of Study are two fold: to have students be able to "create and contribute...in the digital economy" and "actively engage as informed citizens" in the "complex and technology driven world". These goals are noble and should be actively persued by NC DPI in order to prepare our students for higher education and/or careers in the workforce. However, the standards given, especially in High School, need further refinement or adjustment as they are too broad and unfocused. As a (former) computer science teacher in Texas and North Carolina I feel that there needs to be more refinement or clarification on the standards.

An example of a standard that I feel is too broad and unfocused is below.

HS-AP-01 Identify artificial intelligence algorithms.

I feel that students should have a discussion about AI and algorithms in their class. However, the standard is too broad and unfocused. For one, there are multiple artifical intelligence algorithms that are used today. The standards do not make clear which algorithms students should know nor is the word "identify" clear in this context. Should students be able to distinguish between algorithms and their strengths and weaknesses? Or possibly where the algorithm could be used? Which algorithms do students need to know? 

For example, a common "artifical intelligence algorithm" is using decision trees and min-maxing to determine the next move in a game such as chess. Do students need to know how min-maxing works or do they need to be able to identify it from sample program code? These are some of the questions that I feel would be able to help the standards creators to be able to refine the standard.

In general, while I feel that Introduction to CS is very much aligned to the existing AP Computer Science Principles course by Collegeboard (here is the Course and Exam description) and is easily aligned to that framework, the "CS Level 1" standards stated in the draft should be split up into two courses. In my experience, students that take a second CS course in HS either are very interested in programming and software development, or are actually interested in the hardware side of things -- namely, networking and cybersecurity. While there is some overlap between the two sides of computing, students would benefit more from a focused offering that either is programming/software heavy or hardware heavy. As such, I would suggest that the standards be split into course pathways.

Lastly, I believe that the standards need more higher level rigor -- namely "creating and contributing". If you look at the standards across the grade bands, there are very few standards that address creating a "computational artifact" vs. being able to identify and understand/explain existing artifacts. Given that one of the goals was to have students "create and contribute", the standards creators should aim to have more opportunities for students to demonstrate standards through creating and contributing. 

Integrating standards into existing curriclum

At the high school level, students already use computational thinking processes and some of the computer science standards in their math and science classes. For example, students already can "select appropriate data collection tools and techniques" and "collect data using computational tools" through virtual lab experiences and projects. An addition that teachers could add in the math and science classes would be a standard such as "Collaborate with many contributors to create a computational artifact" to create a presentation, video, graph, or audio podcast about their project and their rationale for collecting the data and presenting it. In the mathmatics classes, a special discussion about probability and its impact on password choices could be taught. For example, students can use probability and combinatorics to show that passwords with only numbers in it are less secure than passwords that combine multiple symbols. Students can also analyze the impact of longer passwords and their effectiveness in securing accounts.

In the healthful living curriculum, students can gather data on habits and the effiectiveness of exercise on a person's health and create a presentation about their findings. One of the biggest trends in technology is using smartphones in conjunction with fitness trackers/smartwatches to analyze and record the user's healthy activities (such as walking, running, biking, etc.) Students can discuss the privacy implications on current health technology and trends, such as the effect that fitness trackers have on user's habits and how health companies can use the data generated on the fitness trackers for good and bad uses. The standard ICS-IC-08 Explain privacy concerns related to the collection and generation of data through automated processes that may not be evident to users. would address health technology and its impact on user privacy. Students could debate whether or not the technology has made a profound positive impact on the world or otherwise.

Teacher Support

For PD, teachers should first understand the concept of computational thinking and how it can be used in their curriclums. Computational thinking fundamentally is a skill that we use in everyday life and while we may not be naming it we are using it to solve everyday problems. Another skill that should be taught in PD is problem solving and how it applies to any subject, whether it be mathematics, science, or healthful living.

I forsee the central concept of the impacts of computing and data and analysis to be the easiest to get teachers on board with. Programming I think would be the hardest. A lot of teachers will have a hard time seeing programming being incorporated into their curriclums, and would see it as "shoving something in" rather than a natural extension of the curriclum. 

Another big challenge would be getting teachers to teach computer science at the HS level. Having a CS teacher on staff or at least in close contact would help with adoption of the standards, as they can be a good resource for teachers. While NC does plan to try to get another 500 teachers to teach computer science, there are huge barriers with licensure. Because CS is currently in the CTE realm, a teacher coming from another state that wants to teach CS also has to get certified in business and finance concepts. In many states, CS is aligned with mathematics or is its own licence (like in Texas). NC shares no reprocity agreement with other states and requires CS teachers to take a Praxis exam in subjects they do not have any experience with.