Curriculum Project Case Study: Improving 10th Grade Reading
Proficiency

Project Overview

This curriculum project was designed to address gaps in 10th grade student
performance on the FAST PM1 (baseline assessment, September 2024). Initial data
indicated that 20% of students (9 out of 45) were at Level 1 (below proficiency), and
38% (17 students) were at Level 2. The project aimed to improve overall proficiency by
tailoring instruction to identified weaknesses through data-driven, differentiated
strategies.

The project life cycle followed PMBOK-aligned stages: initiation, planning, execution,
monitoring & controlling, and closure.

Initiation

Problem Statement: FAST PM1 results revealed that nearly 58% of students
(Levels 1–2 combined) were performing below grade-level expectations.
Business Case (Educational Value): Raising proficiency was critical for
meeting state accountability benchmarks and supporting students’ college
readiness.
Stakeholders: School administrators, instructional coaches, parents, and the
10th grade ELA cohort.
Project Charter: Outlined objectives to reduce Level 1 students from 20% to
<5% by the end of the year, while increasing the proportion of students in Levels
3–5.

Planning (Scope & Schedule Management)

 Scope
- Design and deliver differentiated lessons aligned to Florida B.E.S.T.
  standards.
- Provide targeted interventions for Level 1 and Level 2 students.
- Track progress with ongoing formative assessments and state FAST PM
  benchmarks (PM2 and PM3).
Tools & Platforms:
- Canvas LMS and Blackboard for digital content delivery.
- Power BI dashboards to visualize assessment data and monitor trends.
- Microsoft Excel for schedule control and student intervention tracking.
Schedule & Milestones:
- September 2024: Baseline assessment analysis.
- October–December 2024: Implementation of targeted small-group
  instruction.
- January 2025: FAST PM2 checkpoint.
- February–April 2025: Instructional adjustments, enrichment for higher-
  level students.
- May 2025: FAST PM3 summative evaluation and project closure.

Execution (Implementation)

 Scope
- Level 1 students received intensive small-group reading interventions,
  scaffolded practice, and one-on-one conferencing.
- Level 2 students engaged in guided practice with extended scaffolding
  and targeted skill reinforcement.
- Levels 3–5 students participated in enrichment activities such as Socratic
  seminars, advanced literary analysis, and peer-teaching opportunities.
- Collaboration: Worked with literacy coaches to align interventions, ensuring
  consistency across classrooms.
- Stakeholder Communication: Shared progress updates with administrators and
  parents using progress reports and data visualizations in Power BI.

Monitoring & Controlling

Performance Tracking: Compared student growth between FAST PM1 andPM2 using Power BI dashboards. By January 2025 (PM2), Level 1 studentsdropped to 2% (1 student), indicating progress but signaling continued need fortargeted support.
Resource Management: Adjusted instructional grouping mid-year to allocatemore support staff to the remaining Level 1–2 students.
Schedule Control: Weekly PLC meetings monitored instructional pacing, with
corrective actions taken to ensure lessons remained aligned to the project
charter.

Final Results (FAST PM3, May 2025):

 Scope
- Level 1 (red): 0% — complete elimination of students below proficiency.
- Level 2 (yellow): 32% (14 students) — reduction from 38% at baseline.
- Level 3 (green): 39% (17 students) — significant increase from 16% at
  baseline.
- Levels 4–5 (blue + purple): 23% (10 students) — growth in advanced
  performance.
Success Criteria Met: The project charter goal of reducing Level 1 students
below 5% was exceeded, reaching 0% by project closure.
Lessons Learned:
- Early baseline analysis and differentiated intervention are critical drivers of
  success.
- Data visualization tools (Power BI) significantly enhanced stakeholder
  communication and instructional decision-making.
- Regular monitoring and adaptive reallocation of resources ensured
  continuous improvement.
Sustainability: Developed a reusable curriculum intervention framework for
future cohorts, with documented lesson plans, pacing guides, and dashboards
archived for replication.

�� 10th Grade FAST ELA Reading Achievement Levels (Project Lifecycle
Outcomes)

Level 1 (Red): Dropped from 20% at baseline (PM1) to 0% by PM3 — complete
elimination of students below proficiency.
Level 2 (Yellow): Held steady (~32–38%), but shifted upward into higher levels.
Level 3 (Green): Grew from 16% → 39%, showing strong movement into
proficiency.
Level 4 (Blue): Held stable overall, with slight increase then redistribution.
Level 5 (Purple): Fluctuated (9% → 0%) as students moved into Level 3/4
categories.

Curriculum Project Case Study: Improving 10th Grade Reading Proficiency