Oklahoma Computer Science Standards Compared With CSTA 2026: What Changed From 2017

CSTA published a revised PK-12 computer science standards document in 2026, with new codes and a reorganized set of concepts. I compared every Oklahoma OAS-CS standard, 225 across Grades 1 through Level 2, with the new edition, then did the same for 297 Texas TEKS points. This post covers what the Oklahoma comparison shows.

The Headline Number

Against the 2017 CSTA standards, 189 of the 225 Oklahoma standards (84%) were a strong match: the same skill at the same grade level. Against the 2026 edition, 52 are (23%).

Fit with the 2026 edition	Oklahoma standards
Strong match	52
Partial match	124
Match at a different level	12
No 2026 equivalent	37

That drop is about the two documents, not about Oklahoma’s standards getting worse. OAS-CS was adopted from the 2017 structure, so the match was close by design. The 2026 edition regroups the concepts and writes narrower standards, so one Oklahoma standard now often sits across two 2026 standards, or partly on one.

Where the Strong Matches Are

Programming and computing systems hold most of them. Of the 52 strong matches, 23 land on the 2026 Programming concept and 14 on Systems. Level 2 has the most strong matches of any course (10 of 27). Grade 4 has the fewest (2 of 22).

Where the Match Thins Out

• Algorithms and Programming is the largest Oklahoma strand (93 standards) and has 29 strong matches. 62 standards in this strand were a strong match against 2017 and are not against 2026, the largest shift of any strand.
• Computing Systems has 4 strong matches in 29 standards, and 10 with no equivalent: the device-evaluation and troubleshooting standards in the early grades.
• Data and Analysis has 4 strong matches in 31, and 8 with no equivalent: the storage and information-management standards.
• 37 Oklahoma standards have no 2026 equivalent at all. That says nothing about their value. It means the 2026 edition does not address the topic at that level.

Oklahoma and Texas

Texas shows the same direction: 60 of 297 TEKS points (20%) are a strong match to the 2026 edition, down from 83 (28%) against 2017. 125 Texas points have no 2026 equivalent, mostly keyboarding, file handling, and productivity-software skills.

What to Do With This

• If your documents cite CSTA 2017 codes, keep them. They are still correct for the 2017 edition.
• Where a strong 2026 match exists, add the 2026 code next to the 2017 one. The updated crosswalks and my product listings now do this.
• Treat “partial” as a prompt to read both standards, not as a match.

How the Comparison Was Done

Each Oklahoma and Texas standard was compared one by one with the 2026 standards at the matching level (Grade 1 with the Grade 1 band, middle school with the middle school band, and so on). A match is “strong” only when both cover the same skill at the same level. The ratings are my judgment, and a different reviewer may rate some rows differently. Codes are cited as identifiers only.

Free Downloads

• The three-way crosswalk (Oklahoma, CSTA, Texas), with 2026 codes for the strong matches
• The Texas TEKS-to-CSTA crosswalk
• The Oklahoma OAS-to-CSTA crosswalk (2017 edition; a full 2026 edition is next)

More Computer Science Teaching Guides

• Problem-solving in computer science, Grades 1-12
• Algorithms and programming basics, Grades 1-12
• Data collection, charts and analysis, Grades K-12
• Networks, hardware and cybersecurity, Grades 1-12

This is an independently produced correlation guide. CSTA standard codes are cited as identifiers only; the guide does not reproduce CSTA’s standard text (CSTA K-12 and PK-12 standards are licensed CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). Not endorsed by CSTA, OSDE, or TEA.