| Course | MT381 Construction Planning and Scheduling |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 8 |
| Paper type | Schedule update report |
| Length | About 1,100 words, 7 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT381 Unit 8
Six Days, Each With a Cause: An MT381 Unit 8 Schedule Update Report for a Medical Office Building
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT381: Construction Planning and Scheduling
Unit 8 Schedule Update Report
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The progress, delays and forecast are composite; the update was computed with the stated script, and the sources cited are real.
Status Summary
As of the data date, September 1, 2027, thirty-seven activities are complete and three are under way. Substantial completion is forecast for December 23, 2027, six working days later than the baseline date of December 15. The contract completion date is December 27, and with the December 24 holiday, the forecast leaves one working day of project float, down from seven. The critical path has not changed: it still runs from steel through the envelope to interiors and closeout, and no new chain has come within five days of it. A second ceiling crew on level 3 would recover four days.
Progress
Completed activities are entered with their actual start and finish dates, from notice to proceed on March 1 through the level 3 in-wall rough-in on August 31. The three activities under way are entered with remaining durations, not only percent complete, because the forecast depends on how much work is left, not on how much has been done. Curtain wall is 64 percent complete with nine exterior working days remaining. Elevator installation is 80 percent complete with six days remaining. Switchgear fabrication is 72 percent through a revised 144 working days, with 40 remaining. The level 3 cover inspection is scheduled for the data date itself and is entered as not started.
Where the Six Days Came From
Every lost day has a cause, and the narrative accounts for all six.
Three days came from steel connection details. The architect returned the moment connection details for revision, and review of the resubmittal closed in thirteen working days against the ten the specification allows. Because steel procurement heads the critical path, those three days passed straight through to erection.
Three more came from wind. Three unforecast windy days in June halted crane picks during erection. The weather calendar already removes anticipated lost days, so these were additional, and steel erection took 33 exterior working days instead of 30. Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006) found that weather and late approvals are among the delay causes owners and contractors most often cite, and this update shows one of each.
The six days then passed through the deck, the level 2 pour, framing, air barrier and curtain wall, moving dry-in from September 8 to September 16 and every later critical date by six working days.
Every one of the six days traces to a named event and a dated record, so none of them is left to be argued about later.
Baseline Against Forecast
The variance table sets baseline beside forecast for every activity whose dates moved, and the comparison bar chart overlays the two, baseline in gray beneath the forecast. Five dates tell the story. Steel erection finished on July 7 instead of June 29. Curtain wall is forecast to finish on September 15 instead of September 7. Level 1 drywall hang starts on September 16 instead of September 8. Level 3 ceilings and trim-out finish on December 6 instead of November 24. The punch list ends on December 23 instead of December 15. Each moved by six working days, which confirms that the slip entered at the head of the critical path and has not grown on the way down.
Two Late Items That Moved Nothing
Two items arrived late without affecting completion, and the report shows the float that absorbed them. Curtain wall fabrication was delivered eight working days late, on July 12 rather than June 29; it had 21 days of float in the baseline and still has 18, because the critical path itself slipped. Switchgear shipping is forecast four days late, on October 27; its chain had five days of float in the baseline and now has seven, for the same reason. Reporting these items keeps the owner from hearing about them later and assuming they caused the delay. It also documents that the contractor tracked them: if a later dispute arises over who caused what, the update shows that the late curtain wall and switchgear consumed only float and never touched the completion date.
How the Float Changed
Chains on the critical path lost nothing because they have none. Chains off it gained six days of float, less any delay of their own: brick veneer, already moved by telehandler leveling to start September 8, now has 16 days; paving 17; the level 3 rough-in chain 33. The switchgear chain, at seven days, remains the near-critical chain to watch.
Risks in the Next Period
Three risks are carried into the next update. The switchgear ship date is still a forecast, and a slip of more than seven working days would make permanent power critical. The fall months carry three anticipated lost days each on the weather calendar, and brick veneer and paving now have far less float than in the baseline because of leveling. And the level 3 cover inspection on September 1 must pass on the first visit, or drywall on level 3 will wait.
Recovery
One option was tested by rerunning the network. If a second ceiling crew starts level 3 four days after level 2 ceilings begin, instead of waiting for level 2 to finish, level 3 ceilings run from November 11 to November 30 and completion moves to December 17, recovering four of the six days and restoring five working days of project float. The ceiling subcontractor has confirmed it can provide a second crew from November 8. The cost is a second foreman and mobilization, which the report estimates for the owner's decision. Other options, such as overtime on curtain wall, were not tested because curtain wall finishes within two weeks and would gain little. The owner is asked to decide on the second ceiling crew by October 15, so the subcontractor can commit it in time.
Settings Used
So the numbers can be reproduced, the update uses retained logic for out-of-sequence progress, forecasts in-progress activities from remaining duration, keeps the leveled starts adopted in Unit 7 as start-no-earlier-than dates and runs exterior work on the weather calendar. Mubarak (2015) emphasizes that update settings can change a forecast by days, which is why they are stated rather than assumed. Hinze (2012) recommends that each update compare the forecast with the baseline activity by activity, and the variance table attached does so.
References
Assaf, S. A., & Al-Hejji, S. (2006). Causes of delay in large construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 24(4), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.11.010
Hinze, J. W. (2012). Construction planning and scheduling (4th ed.). Pearson.
Mubarak, S. (2015). Construction project scheduling and control (3rd ed.). Wiley.
The Purdue Global MT381 Unit 8 instructions
Unit 8 asks students to update their schedule with progress at a data date and report the result to the owner. Completed activities should carry actual dates and those under way should carry remaining durations. Instructors expect the report to explain any change in the forecast completion date, cause by cause, with every day accounted for. Late items that did not affect completion should be reported along with the float that absorbed them. A comparison of baseline and forecast dates is usually required, often as a variance table and an overlay bar chart. A recovery option tested in the network strengthens the report. The scheduling settings used should be stated so the forecast can be reproduced.
How the MT 381 Unit 8 example is put together
The sample opens with a one-paragraph status summary. Progress is entered for completed and running activities, with remaining durations stated. The six days are traced in two causes and followed down the critical path, under a highlighted line about every day tracing to a record, with Assaf and Al-Hejji on delay causes. A variance section lists five critical dates, each moved by six days. Two late deliveries are shown with the float that absorbed them. Float changes are summarized, risks for the next period are listed, a second ceiling crew is tested and costed, and the settings section names retained logic, remaining duration forecasting and both calendars. Nothing in the report relies on a number the reader cannot trace.
Reading the MT381 Unit 8 grading rubric
Update reports are commonly graded on accurate progress entry, complete accounting for schedule change, clear communication of float and risk, and a credible recovery analysis. Remaining durations entered explicitly show the forecast rests on work left, not percent complete alone. Rubrics reward a narrative that traces each lost day to a specific event with a record. Reporting late items that consumed only float shows thoroughness. A variance comparison that confirms how the slip propagated demonstrates understanding of the network. A recovery option tested, costed and given a decision date shows management judgment. Stating update settings protects reproducibility. Sources appear in APA 7, and the variance table matches the narrative day for day.
Common MT381 Unit 8 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Update reports often state that the job is behind and list several problems without showing how many days each caused. Others enter percent complete without remaining durations, which can make the forecast drift. Late deliveries that consumed float are commonly left out, inviting later confusion about what caused the delay. Recovery is frequently proposed as working harder rather than as a specific change tested in the network. Settings are almost never stated. Before you send the report, add up the days your causes explain and compare the total with the slip. If they do not match, find the missing days before the owner does, because unexplained days are the ones that end up in claims.
Get an MT381 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Share the baseline schedule, the progress data your Unit 8 prompt supplies, and the rubric, plus any required narrative format. The first update report is free, back within 24-48h, with the baseline preserved, remaining durations entered, and every day of slip traced to a cause alongside the float it consumed. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More MT381 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT381 Unit 1: Plan Vs. Schedule Discussion Post
- MT381 Unit 2: Construction Work Breakdown Structure
- MT381 Unit 3: Activity Duration Estimate Worksheet
- MT381 Unit 4: CPM Network Logic Diagram
- MT381 Unit 5: Critical Path Method Calculation
- MT381 Unit 6: Float Ownership Seminar Reflection
- MT381 Unit 7: Resource-Leveled Construction Schedule
- MT381 Unit 9: Three-week Look-ahead
- MT381 Unit 10: Baseline Schedule Submittal
- MT362 Unit 8: AI Pilot Test Design
- MT361 Unit 8: Two Offers, Net Proceeds Analysis
- MT359 Unit 8: Media and Budget Plan
- MT358 Unit 8: Social Media Crisis Protocol
MT381 Unit 8 questions, answered
Should the baseline change when the schedule is updated?
Generally not. The baseline is the approved plan, and each update is measured against it. Most contracts allow a formal rebaseline only after major changes, with the owner's agreement. Keep the original intact and report the forecast beside it, so readers can see exactly how far each date moved and why.
What are retained logic and progress override?
Two ways scheduling software treats work that started out of sequence. Retained logic keeps the remaining work waiting on unfinished predecessors; progress override lets it continue as though the logic were satisfied. The choice can change a forecast by days, so an update report should say which one was used and why.
How do I explain a slip bigger than its causes?
Show the calculation. On a network with weather calendars or overlapping ties, pushing work later can meet different nonwork days or interact with lags, so the finish moves more than the delays add up to. Name that effect as its own line in the narrative rather than stretching another cause to cover it.
Where can I find a free MT381 Unit 8 sample paper?
The full MT381 Unit 8 schedule update report appears on this page, tracing a six-day slip on a medical office building to two causes.
How does the MT381 Unit 8 sample recover four days?
A second ceiling crew starts level 3 four days after level 2 ceilings begin, instead of waiting for level 2 to finish, moving completion from December 23 to December 17.