Writing an assessment of a project plan's effectiveness

Name:

Date:

Class:

Quick Questions

Shade in the A or B circle for each question.

1. Which opening sentence is a real judgement of a project plan's effectiveness?

A The plan was good and I liked it.

B The plan was mostly effective because only 3 changes were needed and none delayed the final deadline.

2. Which piece of evidence best supports a judgement that a plan was NOT effective?

A The plan was changed 11 times, mostly due to poor estimates, and the project finished 2 weeks late.

B The plan was printed in colour and had a title page.

3. A student writes: 'Two changes were made, so the plan was effective.' What is missing?

A The reasons for the changes and their impact on the project

B A longer list of the software used

4. Which statement is an improvement for next time?

A Add 20% buffer time to testing tasks because they ran over by 3 days.

B Testing tasks ran over by 3 days.

5. Which is the best order for writing an assessment of plan effectiveness?

A Improvements, then a guess, then a list of tasks

B Judgement, then evidence (number, reasons, impact), then improvements

Match the Pairs

Draw a line connecting each item on the left to its match on the right.

Left column		Right column
1Judgement: The plan was mostly effective.		AThe judgement is vague and gives no evidence about the number, reasons or impact of changes.
2Improvement: Add a 2-day buffer before testing.		BA specific change to make in the next project plan, based on what went wrong in this one.
3Evidence for a judgement combines the number, the reasons and the impact of changes to the plan.		CJudgement: Mostly effective, as only 2 of 9 tasks changed and the deadline was met.
4A judgement must be supported by evidence from the project log, not just opinion.		DA clear overall statement about how well the plan worked, which the rest of the assessment must then support.
5Judgement: The plan was good.		EEvidence: 6 changes, 4 caused by unclear scope, 3 delayed delivery.
6Improvements: Try harder next time.		FThe improvement is not specific or linked to evidence, so it cannot be used to change the next project plan.

Definitions

Project plan effectiveness judgement

Fill in the Blanks

Complete each line of code by filling in the missing parts.

Evidence: ______, reasons, impact of changes

Few changes, low impact: plan was _________

Many changes, ____ impact: not effective

Improvement for ____ time: add buffer days

A judgement must be backed by ________

Spot the Error

Shade in the letter of the line that contains an error.

Question 1

A changes = 5

B delay = 8

C if changes > 4 and delay > 5

D verdict = 'Not effective'

Question 2

A changes = 2

B delay = 1

C if changes < 3 && delay < 2:

D verdict = 'Effective'

Question 3

A changes = 4

B reason = 'scope creep'

C print('Changes: ' + changes)

D print('Reason:', reason)

Question 4

A total = 6

B serious = 4

C share = serious / total * 100

D print('Serious:', share, '%'

Question 5

A fixes = []

B fixes.add('Add buffer')

C fixes.append('Weekly review')

D print(len(fixes), 'fixes')

Answer Key

Writing an assessment of a project plan's effectiveness

Section A: Quick Questions

B — The plan was mostly effective because only 3 changes were needed and none delayed the final deadline.

A — The plan was changed 11 times, mostly due to poor estimates, and the project finished 2 weeks late.

A — The reasons for the changes and their impact on the project

A — Add 20% buffer time to testing tasks because they ran over by 3 days.

B — Judgement, then evidence (number, reasons, impact), then improvements

Section B: Match the Pairs

Judgement: The plan was mostly effective. → A clear overall statement about how well the plan worked, which the rest of the assessment must then support.

Improvement: Add a 2-day buffer before testing. → A specific change to make in the next project plan, based on what went wrong in this one.

Evidence for a judgement combines the number, the reasons and the impact of changes to the plan. → Evidence: 6 changes, 4 caused by unclear scope, 3 delayed delivery.

A judgement must be supported by evidence from the project log, not just opinion. → Judgement: Mostly effective, as only 2 of 9 tasks changed and the deadline was met.

Judgement: The plan was good. → The judgement is vague and gives no evidence about the number, reasons or impact of changes.

Improvements: Try harder next time. → The improvement is not specific or linked to evidence, so it cannot be used to change the next project plan.

Section C: Definitions

Project plan effectiveness judgement — A judgement of how well a plan worked, using evidence from the number, reasons and impact of changes, plus improvements for next time.

Section D: Fill in the Blanks

Evidence: number, reasons, impact of changes

Few changes, low impact: plan was effective

Many changes, high impact: not effective

Improvement for next time: add buffer days

A judgement must be backed by evidence

Section E: Spot the Error

C — An if statement must end with a colon. The line should be: if changes > 4 and delay > 5: so the judgement is only made when both pieces of evidence are high.

C — Python does not use && for combining conditions. Use the keyword and: if changes < 3 and delay < 2: so both pieces of evidence must support the judgement.

C — You cannot join a string and an integer with +. This causes a TypeError. Use a comma, print('Changes:', changes), or convert with str(changes).

D — The closing bracket is missing, which is a syntax error. The line should be: print('Serious:', share, '%') to report the percentage of high-impact changes as evidence.

B — Lists do not have an add() method. Use append() to add an improvement for next time: fixes.append('Add buffer').