Cyber.org K-12
K-12 Cybersecurity Learning Standards
pedagogy
us
At a glance
| Steward | Cyber Innovation Center / Cyber.org |
| Canonical page | K-12 Cybersecurity Learning Standards |
| Version | 1.0 |
| Released | 2021-09-09 |
| Source format | |
| License | Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0 |
framework_summary slug |
cyberorg-k12-v1.0 |
Structure in cybed: terms
Counts
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Standard groups | 116 |
| Strict elements (numbered standards) | 123 |
| With-examples elements | 500 |
| Examples (clarification statements) | 377 |
| Elements per standard group (strict) | 1.1 |
| Elements per standard group (with examples) | 4.3 |
The strict count reflects only numbered standards. The with-examples count promotes each Clarification statement to a queryable node, which roughly quadruples the apparent density. Use the strict count when comparing against frameworks (NICE, DCWF, SFIA) that encode all detail in numbered statements. Use the with-examples count when the comparison is about what reaches a classroom.
Provenance
Source
Cyber.org K-12 Learning Standards distribution.
Ingestion
scripts/010-ingest-cyberorg.R parses standards and clarification statements into the cybed schema.
License
Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0, non-commercial use with attribution. The package does not bundle the source distribution. Users stage it locally.
Caveats
- Each standard group typically contains one or two numbered standards, so numbered standards are sparse. The framework’s instructional density lives in the clarification-statement prose rather than in additional numbered standards. Analyses that look only at the strict count will undercount what the framework actually specifies for a teacher.
- Clarification statements are teacher-facing pedagogical scaffolding, not enumerable sub-standards. They’re reachable through the separate
cybed:hasExamplepredicate to keep this distinction visible at query time.