Irving Independent School District Smart Solutions

Teacher material · Page · Unpublished in Canvas

Facilitator Guide: Code + Web Day 3 — Predict, Debug + Log

Canvas state
Unpublished

CODING FOUNDATIONS RETROFIT · PASSPORT CHECKPOINT 3

Alignment and scoring correction for this added evidence

This block controls the retrofit evidence and supersedes any conflicting Coding Foundations wording below.

Topic: Controlled debugging and plan revision

Objective: Students will predict program behavior, change one instruction at a time, and revise both executable code and its pseudocode from test evidence.

Essential standards:

  • §126.19(c)(1)(E) — develop, compare, and improve algorithms for a specific task to solve a problem; and
  • §126.19(c)(2)(C) — modify and implement previously written code to develop improved programs.

Evidence status: Demonstrated: (1)(E) and (2)(C) when all three cause-and-effect records and the matching pseudocode revision are present.

Required evidence: Passport Checkpoint 3: three prediction/observation/change/result records, revised pseudocode, and an improvement claim.

Meets the threshold when: Three records each include a prediction, observed result, one exact change, and result after change; the final claim names what improved and why.

Period budget: 3 minutes model + current debugging work with the Passport used as the bug log + 3-minute close.
Point-preserving scoring: Keep 5 points: 1 progress evidence, 3 complete controlled-test records, 1 pseudocode revision and improvement claim.

Projectable support: Editable retrofit deck, Slides 13–17 · PowerPoint fallback

Teacher move: Use the Passport as the named planning/test evidence inside the current lesson and current point total. Do not create a duplicate worksheet or count completion alone as mastery.

TEACHER ONLY · LESSON GUIDE

Code + Web Day 3 — Predict, Debug + Log

Run the current student lesson with its existing evidence, resources, and submission route.

Daily Learning Contract

Topic: Debugging through controlled tests

Objective: Students will evaluate program behavior by changing one variable or instruction at a time and use results to improve the code.

TEKS:
  • §126.19(c)(2)(C) — modify and implement previously written code to develop improved programs.

Demonstration of learning: Progress screenshot plus a three-entry bug log showing prediction, single change, observed result, and final fix.

Use what is already in Canvas

Student-facing task: Day 3: Debugging Detective. Keep the current student page, requirements, points, and rubric as the source of truth.

  • Code.org Express Lesson 2 / Debugging in Maze
  • existing deck
  • current assignment

Before students begin

  • Open the student task in Student View and test the exact sign-in, link, file, or submission path students will use.
  • Prepare only the listed existing materials; do not require a personal account or a new unlisted product.
  • Keep the current student page available as the accessible and absence route.

Lesson flow

  1. 1. Launch: Put the purpose in front of students: Students will test one change at a time and explain the result.
  2. 2. Model: Use one current example, tool, or teacher resource before students begin debugging.
  3. 3. Guide: Complete the first decision or step together; conference before students commit to a direction.
  4. 4. Build: Students complete the existing Canvas task. Do not add a second product or change the current rubric.
  5. 5. Check + next step: Verify this evidence before students leave: Progress screenshot, three-bug log, and reflection.

Scaffolds and teacher decisions

Keep the student lesson's bilingual tabs, word bank, models, and current support route in view while students work. Reduce the number of examples or provide a partially completed planning frame before reducing the evidence. If a student needs an alternate format, preserve the same named evidence and use the current rubric or teacher judgment rather than adding a hidden requirement.

Close the loop

Use the current Canvas submission for grading. Record the specific misconception, access issue, or revision need you observed; use it to choose the next lesson's launch rather than creating a duplicate exit assignment.