We investigate whether progressive data scheduling -- a curriculum learning strategy that incrementally increases training data exposure (33\%$\rightarrow$67\%$\rightarrow$100\%) -- yields consistent efficiency gains across architecturally distinct document understanding models. By evaluating BERT (text-only, 110M parameters) and LayoutLMv3 (multimodal, 126M parameters) on the FUNSD and CORD benchmarks, we establish that this schedule reduces wall-clock training time by approximately 33\%, commensurate with the reduction from 6.67 to 10.0 effective epoch-equivalents of data. To isolate curriculum effects from compute reduction, we introduce matched-compute baselines (Standard-7) that control for total gradient updates. On the FUNSD dataset, the curriculum significantly outperforms the matched-compute baseline for BERT ($Δ$F1 = +0.023, $p=0.022$, $d_z=3.83$), constituting evidence for a genuine scheduling benefit in capacity-constrained models. In contrast, no analogous benefit is observed for LayoutLMv3 ($p=0.621$), whose multimodal representations provide sufficient inductive bias. On the CORD dataset, all conditions converge to equivalent F1 scores ($\geq$0.947) irrespective of scheduling, indicating a performance ceiling. Schedule ablations comparing progressive, two-phase, reverse, and random pacing confirm that the efficiency gain derives from reduced data volume rather than ordering. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that progressive scheduling is a reliable compute-reduction strategy across model families, with curriculum-specific benefits contingent on the interaction between model capacity and task complexity.