Map the curriculum standards a project must cover

1

Research

Why this matters, and what good looks like

Placeholder content, pending authoring in content Batch 1.

Standards alignment decides whether a project is defensible to a head of department. The distinction that matters is between a standard the project genuinely requires students to master and one it merely mentions.

Where the evidence comes from

PBLWorks, Gold Standard project design

Placeholder pending authoring. Curriculum alignment is standard practice; the contribution of AI to it is not yet evidenced here.

2

Workflow

Brief it, steer it, check it

Paste the standards verbatim

Give the exact wording rather than your summary of it. Paraphrase is where false coverage claims begin.

Prompt 1 · Sort

CONTEXT
I teach [subject] to [year group].
The project runs [number] weeks.
Here are the standards I am accountable for: [paste them verbatim].
Here is the project idea: [describe it in three sentences].

REQUEST
Sort these standards into three groups: genuinely required to complete
the project, partly touched, and not addressed.

QUALITY BAR
For each standard, quote the phrase from its wording that justifies
the group you put it in.

FORMAT
Three lists, each item as: standard reference, the quoted phrase,
one sentence of justification.

Check before you use it

Does every "genuinely required" claim quote the standard's own wording?
Could you defend each claim to a colleague reading the standard aloud?
Have you cut the standards the project only mentions in passing?

Stop rule

Do not accept a coverage claim you could not defend to a colleague reading the standard aloud. Cut anything the project only touches in passing.

3

Reuse it

So the next one takes minutes

Suitable

Build a skill

Save this as a reusable instruction you can run on any project.

Not suitable

Build an agent

Chain the steps, with a checkpoint where you approve.

One pass over a fixed document does not need a chained workflow.