Draft 3.0 - Revised CSTA PK-12 Standards

The Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) is currently conducting a comprehensive revision process for the CSTA PK-12 Standards. The writing phase of the process began in September 2024, and we are excited to share Draft 3.0 of the standards with you for interim, formative feedback.

The draft standards document represents the work of 24 standards writers and 70 standards advisors (find more information about writers and advisors here), as well as CSTA staff, our research/technical writing partners at WestEd, and several other research partners. We seek feedback from the CS education community on the following:

1. Preface materials, including their contents, structure, and clarity
2. Clarity, granularity, and placement of individual standards
3. Needs related to supplementary resources

The standards writing team will convene in late January to process feedback received, and we anticipate finalizing all standards and clarifying information by March 2026. The final products, including downloadable files and web interface, will be launched in July at the 2026 CSTA Annual Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana.

The draft standards are available here for your reference as you conduct your review. Reviewers are encouraged to read the preface materials on pages 4-28 of the document prior to proceeding through the feedback form.

If you have any questions, please reach out to jacob.koressel@csteachers.org.

Preface materials can be found on pages 4-28 of Draft 3.0 and currently include the following components:

• Vision
• Defining Computer Science
• About the CSTA PK-12 Standards
• Revision Overview
• Additional Context for Reviewers (this component will be removed once standards are finalized)
• Navigating the Standards
• Components of a Standard
• Concepts
• Pillars & Practices
• Dispositions

On a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree), indicate your level of agreement with the following statements.

Utilize the Section-Specific Preface Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity and comprehensive nature of the preface materials. First select the section of the preface on which you would like to provide feedback, then provide your comments in the feedback box. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of foundational content from PK through high school within the Algorithms & Design concept is shown below and on pages 30-49 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full progression view of the foundational standards here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Algorithm Fundamentals, Problem Solving, Machine Learning, and Impacts of Algorithms & Design). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Algorithms & Design standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of foundational content from PK through high school within the Programming concept is shown below and on pages 50-74 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full progression view of the foundational standards here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Programming Fundamentals, Program Development, Reading & Documenting Code, Testing & Refining Code, and Data Handling). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Programming standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of foundational content from PK through high school within the Data & Analysis concept is shown below and on pages 75-95 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full progression view of the foundational standards here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Data Fundamentals, Data Processing, Data Investigation, and Impacts of Data Science). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Data & Analysis standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of foundational content from PK through high school within the Systems & Security concept is shown below and on pages 96-119 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full progression view of the foundational standards here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Hardware & Software, Security, Networks, and Impacts of Computing Systems). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Systems & Security standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of foundational content from PK through high school within the Computing & Society concept is shown below and on pages 120-142 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full progression view of the foundatoinal standards here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., History of Computing, Emerging Technologies, Humans & Computing, and Career Exploration). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Computing & Society standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The Emerging Technologies subconcept (seen above) is intended to acknowledge the rapid evolution of computing technologies and provide space for standards implementation to adjust accordingly over time. Our current working definition of emerging technologies is as follows:

Emerging technologies are recent advancements in computing technology that: (1) are not yet widely accessible or only very recently widely accessible, and (2) accomplish tasks in fundamentally distinct ways from computing technologies commonly used in recent years. Current examples include generative AI and quantum computing. We expect these examples will need to be updated regularly.

Currently, Draft 3.0 standards contain many explicit and implicit references to artificial intelligence. Quantum computing, however, is less clearly included. Your responses to the following questions will assist the writing team in formalizing any potential approach related to quantum computing in the standards.

The progression of high school specialty content across two levels (Specialty I and Specialty II) within the Software Development specialty area is shown below and on pages 147-159 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Program Design & Development, User Experience, Testing & Refining Code, and Professional Practice). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Software Development specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of high school specialty content across two levels (Specialty I and Specialty II) within the Cybersecurity specialty area is shown below and on pages 160-176 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Network Theory & Design, Network Operations, Threats & Security Measures, Cybersecurity Policies, and Professional Practice). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Cybersecurity specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of high school specialty content across two levels (Specialty I and Specialty II) within the Artificial Intelligence specialty area is shown below and on pages 177-192 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., AI Design & Development, Data Science for AI, Human Responsibility, and Professional Practice). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Artificial Intelligence specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of high school specialty content across two levels (Specialty I and Specialty II) within the Physical Computing specialty area is shown below and on pages 193-203 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Hardware & Circuit Design; Sensors, Actuators, & Peripherals; Programming & Software Development; Connectivity & Internet of Things; and Professional Practice). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Physical Computing specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of high school specialty content across two levels (Specialty I and Specialty II) within the Data Science specialty area is shown below and on pages 204-229 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Creation & Curation; Analysis & Modeling Techniques; Interpreting Models, Problems, & Results; Visualization; and Professional Practice). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Data Science specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of high school specialty content across two levels (Specialty I and Specialty II) within the Game Development specialty area is shown below and on pages 230-242 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

Respond in each row of the scale question table indicating your level of agreement with the provided statement as-related to each subconcept (i.e., Design, Program Development, Architecture, and Professional Practice). Explain your response as needed in the far right column of the table.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual Game Development specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

The progression of high school specialty content within the X+CS specialty area is shown below and on pages 243-246 of Draft 3.0. You can access the full specialty progression view here.

*Note that the intended approach for X+CS differs from that of the other six specialty areas. While the other specialty areas (e.g., software development, cybersecurity, AI) define content that students can learn after experiencing the foundational standards, X+CS includes standards that provide framing for applying foundational CS content within other disciplines (represented by X). Additionally, there is only one level of X+CS standards, while the other specialty areas have two levels.

Utilize the Standard-Specific Feedback section to share any suggestions related improving the clarity, granularity, and placement of individual X+CS specialty standards. First select the identifier of the standard on which you would like to provide feedback, then indicate the type of feedback you'd like to provide. Add as many rows as you would like in order to capture all of your feedback.

Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback on Draft 3.0 of the 2026 CSTA PK-12 Standards. We look forward to reviewing your comments. Please click the Submit button below to finalize your submission.