About two years ago, my ESE Department implemented an after
school tutoring program specifically aimed at students with disabilities. The goal was to improve the students’ phonics
and reading comprehension skills. To ensure intense instruction and maximum
support for our students, we decided that the class size for each teacher
should be no more than ten students. This way we could also rotate among small
groups of five or pair in twos. Funding
for the program was obtained through an educational grant of $20,000. We had
just enough money to buy a complete reading curriculum, priced at $7, 795 and
to pay our small staff of ESE teachers, which totaled $7, 200. The rest of the money was to be used for
supplies and supplemental materials. The
program was to last for a duration of 6 six weeks, but we only had three weeks
to plan and get the program started.
By the end of week 2,
the students had been identified and selected for the invitations to be sent
home and that’s when our Principal threw in a curve ball. After careful consideration and an
examination of past FCAT scores, she thought it would be best for us to also
add in a math component along with additional “at risk” students who have been
identified during the RTI process as needing additional remediation in math and
reading. This addition would certainly
increase our expenditures for resources, especially since we were not planning
for a math component, along with an increase in students per class. The
increase in class size left us all feeling a little disappointed, because the
larger number would mean less individual time with students, which was one of
our primary purposes. The initial number of students given to us included about
40 other students, which would have put each class at about 20 students. So we
needed go come up with a contingency plan and had one week left before launch
date.
So feeling the pressure of the short notice, we presented a
list of concerns to our Principal along with a list of compromises that would
allow the ESE team to meet the goals of small group instruction, with an
additional math component. We were able
to get the number of additional students reduced to 20, thereby limiting the
class size to no more than 15 students per class. Although the class size was
still larger than we originally planned, the number was still small enough for
us to effectively manage small group instruction. For the addition of the math
component, we decided to focus on mathematical word problems and critical
thinking skills. This approach still gave us the opportunity to focus on reading
comprehension skills. We used some of
the money we had set aside for supplies, to purchase inexpensive classroom sets
of problem solving workbooks. We were able to use our previously purchased sets
of math manipulative to supplement our hands on activities for the small
groups. With three days left before the start date, we each divided up the list
of students to make personal phone calls to parents of the selected
students. With one day left to spare, we
were able to gain permission and enrollment on all our student
participants! Now the only thing we had
to wait on, was our order of supplies and materials. But we had a contingency plan for that too!
This project taught me that often time changes will be
dictated by the boss or upper management that can present a certain amount of
risk. Although our Principal had the
authority to make decisions that we were obligated to follow, we were fortunate
in that she was willing to listen to our concerns and alternative suggestions. The success of a project can be determined in
the PM’s ability to effectively identify and communicate the risks along with
providing a written contingency plan. “The
best strategy for addressing risk focuses on minimizing the chances that the
risks will occur, developing contingency plans in they do occur, and
continually updating the project’s risk management plan throughout the
remainder of the project” (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton &
Kramer, 20007).
Reference
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith,
J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and
controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
