FELE
For Testing Beginning 1/1/2026

Print

Subtest 3 – Leadership Development

General Information

The written performance assignment is an authentic task that offers you the opportunity to demonstrate the skills necessary for supporting emerging school leaders through mentorship, growth opportunities, and systems of accountability; and for applying decision-making strategies that develop the capacity of emerging school leaders to improve instructional practices. For this assignment, you will develop an action plan for cultivating emerging school leaders based on a scenario-based prompt that includes data related to students' academic learning.

Directions for the Written Performance Assignment

A sample written performance assignment is presented below. You will have one hour and 15 minutes to prepare, write, and edit your response.

You must write an original response that specifically and directly responds to the assignment. Pre-prepared responses that are discovered to contain memorized sentences or pre-prepared passages will be invalidated. For example, if the raters discover passages that appear in two or more responses, the responses and the violation will be brought to the attention of the Florida Department of Education and may result in the invalidation of your scores.

Be sure to monitor your time effectively and allow time for editing and revising. Take a few minutes to organize your thoughts and plan your response. Leave time for editing and revising after you have completed your response. You may outline or plan your response on the erasable notebooklet provided. Your informal outline or plan will not be scored.

Your response should demonstrate your ability to write, with proficiency, at a postsecondary level appropriate to an educational leader.

Performance Criteria

Your written performance assessment will be evaluated holistically according to the following criteria.

Performance Criteria

Criteria	Description
Completion	The degree to which the examinee completes the assignment by responding to each specific task in the assignment.
Data and Plan Alignment	The degree to which the examinee establishes plans for change that are aligned with data findings and relevant implications.
Application of Content	The degree to which the examinee applies the relevant knowledge and skills to the response accurately and effectively and reflects understanding of the target audience.
Support	The degree to which the examinee supports the response with appropriate evidence, examples, and explanations based on the relevant content knowledge and skills.

Scoring Criteria

Your response will be scored holistically by two raters. The raters will use the criteria listed below when evaluating your response. The score you receive for your written performance assessment will be the combined total of the two raters' scores.

Essay Scores and Criteria

Essay Score	Criteria
SCORE of 4	The "4" response reflects a thorough understanding of the relevant content knowledge and skills. The response fully addresses all parts of the assignment. The response clearly and accurately interprets and aligns data to an action plan or stakeholder communication. The response demonstrates an accurate, highly effective application of the relevant content knowledge and skills and clearly reflects understanding of the target audience. The response provides strong, relevant evidence, specific examples, and well-reasoned explanations.
SCORE of 3	The "3" response reflects a general understanding of the relevant content knowledge and skills. The response addresses most or all parts of the assignment. The response interprets and aligns data to an action plan or stakeholder communication. The response demonstrates a generally accurate, effective application of the relevant content knowledge and skills and generally reflects understanding of the target audience. The response provides sufficient evidence, some examples, and generally sound explanations.
SCORE of 2	The "2" response reflects a limited understanding of the relevant content knowledge and skills. The response addresses at least some of the parts of the assignment. The response partially interprets and aligns data to an action plan or stakeholder communication. The response demonstrates a partially accurate, partially effective application of the relevant content knowledge and skills and partially reflects understanding of the target audience. The response provides limited evidence and examples or explanations, when provided, may be only partially appropriate.
SCORE of 1	The "1" response reflects little or no understanding of the relevant content knowledge and skills. The response addresses, few, if any, parts of the assignment. The response inaccurately interprets and aligns data, if at all, to an action plan or stakeholder communication. The response demonstrates a largely inaccurate, ineffective application of the relevant content knowledge and skills and reflects little understanding of the target audience. The response provides little to no evidence, and if provided, examples or explanations are weak or inappropriate.
U	The response is unscorable because it is not written to the assigned topic, is written in a language other than English, does not contain a sufficient amount of original work to score, or does not appear to be an original essay in terms of sentence structure, diction, organization, and/or content.
B	There is no response to the assignment.

Sample Written Performance Assignment

Read and analyze the three exhibits provided, then write a response in which you:

• describe a problem of practice clearly demonstrated by the evidence provided;
• create an action plan that will address the problem of practice by developing emerging school leadership;
• explain how your analysis of the evidence influenced the action plan you created; and
• identify specific actions you will take to guide teacher-leaders in their decision-making process, support their efforts, and ensure that appropriate systems of accountability are in place.

Be sure to use evidence from all the exhibits in your response. Responses should be approximately 300– to 600 words.

Exhibit 1: Scenario

You are planning for your first year as a new assistant principal of a middle school in a suburban district. Your new school enrolls 707 students in grades 6, 7, and 8 and employs 46 faculty members. Approximately 56% of the students are eligible for free or reduced-price meals, 4.5% of the students are identified as English language learners, and 16.6% of the students have identified learning disabilities. Each grade level has two academic teams composed of an English language arts teacher, a science teacher, a mathematics teacher, and a social studies teacher, with one teacher serving as the team leader.

A school goal over the past several years involves student literacy, especially as it relates to academic vocabulary across content areas. Early last year, professional development activities focused on incorporating literacy strategies into all classes. The principal tells you that student achievement related to this goal is mixed across both local and state assessments. Classroom observations show a higher degree of student learning in the classes of teachers routinely using the new strategies. "The biggest hurdle may be some teachers' inability to incorporate these strategies into their instruction," says the principal. "Some of them seem unwilling to even try."

Many of the teachers who use the new strategies also regularly use their weekly meeting time as professional learning groups. The principal informs you that the meeting notes show that these teams regularly review data, plan instruction, and focus their collaboration on improving student learning. The principal has observed team meetings and reports that efforts are uneven across teams: "Just because some teams are talking about students does not mean they are talking about student learning." The principal has discussed having the more productive teams present their strategies to the other teams, but the teachers have been reluctant to do so. As the principal explains, "They do not want to appear as if they have all the answers and make their peers resentful."

The principal asks you to develop an action plan for working with the grade-level teams to move learning forward for all students. As you prepare to develop this action plan, you review data compiled from last year's team meetings as well as state assessment scores in reading and mathematics.

Exhibit 2: State Assessment Data

The table shown indicates percentages of students in grades 6, 7, and 8 who received a score of 3 or higher (1– to 5 scale) on state assessments in the past 2 years.

Students Receiving a Score of 3 or More on State Assessments

Students	English language arts				Mathematics
	School		State		School		State
	% last year	% 2 yrs. years  ago	% last year	% 2 yrs. years  ago	% last year	% 2 yrs. years  ago	% last year	% 2 yrs. years  ago
All students	52.2	51.9	51.3	52.8	54.2	61.2	53.5	59.6
Students who are economically disadvantaged	42.9	49.0	41.2	46.8	44.5	55.0	43.6	50.2
English language learners	22.4	23.1	33.4	35.8	38.9	47.2	42.4	48.3
Students with disabilities	22.9	25.9	23.9	26.2	27.3	29.5	28.7	32.4

Exhibit 3: Weekly Grade-level Team Meeting Activities

The principal regularly reviews grade-level team meeting agendas and notes taken at those meetings. The following chart documents the number of times each team engaged in one of the team meeting activities between October and April of last year.

Team Meeting Activities
October– to April

Team meeting activities	Grade 6 Team A	Grade 6 Team B	Grade 7 Team C	Grade 7 Team D	Grade 8 Team E	Grade 8 Team F
Reviewing data and assessment results	2	9	1	10	3	9
Sharing instructional practices	4	9	4	7	4	8
Planning interdisciplinary lessons	4	10	6	10	4	11
Collaborating with other faculty*	7	6	6	7	6	6
Discussing consequences for student misbehavior	11	4	8	4	7	4
Planning non-instructional activities	10	4	10	6	9	5

Sample Responses

The sample responses below include an example that meets the general level of writing skill and subject matter knowledge necessary to receive a passing score as well as an example that does not meet the required standard. All responses are scored holistically, meaning that both strengths and weaknesses are weighed when assigning an overall score. While rationales are provided, it is important to keep in mind that not all strengths and weaknesses are identified and that there may be errors in grammar and mechanical conventions, even in the sample passing response.

Sample Passing Response

Please note: The sample response provided below is for review purposes only and should not be used in a response on an operational exam. Use of the exact words and phrases presented in this sample response will result in a Not Passing score due to lack of original work.

Principal X,

As your assistant principal, I am pleased to be able to work with the grade-level teams to further build upon student literacy across the content areas. My goal is to build upon the previous professional development activities that focused on incorporating literacy strategies in all subject areas. It is imperative that the teams work together collaboratively in this endeavor.

According to our most recent state assessment data, all students in English language arts (ELA) (52.2% ELA school / 51.3% ELA state) and math (54.2% math school / 53.5% math state) have exceeded the state in achieving a 3 or higher. However, English language learners (ELL) and students with disabilities (SWD) did not exceed the state. ELL students in ELA (22.4% school / 33.4% state) and math (38.9% school / 42.4% state) lagged behind state achievement. SWD students also fell below state percentages: 22.9% compared to 23.9 for ELA, and 27.3% compared to 28.7% in math.

We must improve upon these scores by focusing on student literacy strategies. According to the Weekly Grade-level Team Meeting Activities chart, where the frequency of engaging in team meeting activities was compiled from October through April, it is apparent that teams 6A, 7C, and 8E are not reviewing data and assessments (2, 1, and 3 times, respectively), sharing instructional practices (4 times each), and planning interdisciplinary lessons (4, 6, and 4 times, respectively) as well as the other grade 6–8 teams. Teams A, C, and E meetings have focused more on student behavior and planning non-instructional activities, which indirectly affect student success. A shift from non-instructional topics (e.g., consequences for student misbehavior) to a discussion instruction strategies (e.g., sharing instructional practices) in team meetings would directly impact student achievement. These teams would benefit from a mentor relationship with their grade-level peers who more frequently engage in these activities (6B, 7D, and 8F). This relationship will be established in grade-level professional learning communities (PLCs).

I realize that this can be a difficult situation for the mentor/mentees, but it is time that we all work together to improve our students' academic success. Grade-level PLCs (e.g., 6A and 6B, 7C and 7D, 8E and 8F) will allow teams to share best practices, including reviewing data, planning instruction, addressing student literacy, and focusing on improving student learning together. The goal will be to develop a concrete plan that moves from the sharing of ideas into implementation.

Additional time will be given to the ELA and math teachers in each grade level to meet separately with the special education and ELL teachers to review the data and standards, incorporate those standards that are weak into teaching practice, and share best practices and planning for ELA and math specifically. Formative assessments can be created and evaluated based on standards that need to be included. These assessments will determine whether additional instruction or grouping of students is necessary.

I plan to be an active participant in the grade-level ELA/math PLCs and team meetings to listen and share ideas. I will follow up by conducting classroom walkthroughs to observe how the sharing in PLCs has evolved into practice. Follow-up professional development will also be a component of the PLCs as needed. It is expected that this plan will ensure that there is continuity across grade-level teams and have a substantial positive impact on student learning.

Sincerely,

Assistant Principal Y

The sample is Passing based on the following performance characteristics:

Sample Passing Response Criteria Rating

Category	Description
Completion	This response completes the assignment by fully addressing all four charges. The problem of practice (increasing the use of literacy strategies) is clearly demonstrated by the evidence provided in paragraph one with supporting data in paragraphs two and three, as well as the relevant implications to the problem. The action plan addresses the problem of practice in a way that allows the teams in each grade level to take the lead in modeling best practices for the lower performing team. As described in paragraphs four and five, this includes a shift in team meetings from non-academic topics to a discussion of data and assessment, as well as establishing mentor/mentee relationships between teachers in grade-level PLCs. The analysis of the evidence included in the response in paragraphs two and three directly gives evidence as to the direction the teachers need to take to improve student achievement. The plan is well supported through the use of same grade-level PLCs, the additional support from ELL and SPED educators, the active participation of the Assistant Principal in PLC meetings, and follow-up professional development as needed. The Assistant Principal will be able to determine the success of the process through classroom walkthroughs and formative assessments throughout the school year.
Data and Plan Alignment	The plan is developed under the direction of the principal in an effort to uniformly incorporate literacy strategies into teaching practice. The plan is data driven (based on state/school assessment results for ELA and math), the principal's review of grade-level team meeting activities, and the principal's classroom observation. The response shows specific data regarding grade-level team activities that indicate a discrepancy between grade-level teams to address data/assessment, sharing of instructional practices, and planning interdisciplinary lessons, which directly influence state assessments.
Application of Content	The response shows good understanding in identifying the problem of practice, analyzing the data, and developing an action plan. PLCs were developed within grade levels to create a mentor/mentee relationship as the need is indicated by the principal's review of the team meeting activities. The principal indicated that one team in each grade successfully reviewed data and assessment results, shared instructional practices, and planned interdisciplinary lessons whereas the other team discussed disciplinary issues and planning non-instructional activities. The use of mentor/mentee is not threatening but rather helps to solve a problem through collaboration and cooperation. The response accurately and effectively reflects the target audience.
Support	The response is aligned with the principal's directive to incorporate literacy strategies into instruction (Exhibit 1), state assessment data (Exhibit 2), and weekly grade-level team activities (Exhibit 3). The information from each source is effectively used to determine the action plan and consequences of the plan. Examples and explanations are specific, appropriate, and well-reasoned.

Sample Not Passing Response

Please note: The sample response provided below is for review purposes only and should not be used in a response on an operational exam. Use of the exact words and phrases presented in this sample response will result in a Not Passing score due to lack of original work.

Our state assessment data is in, and our first order of business is to review and analyze the data. As you can see in the All Students categories, our students exceeded the state in both ELA and math. Unfortunately, the same is not true for our English language learners (ELL) and students with disabilities (SWD). It also must be noted that the scores of these two subgroups, as well as the economically disadvantaged (ED), in ELA and math are lower than two years ago. The ELL and SWD scores were below the state. It is clear that there is work to be done with these groups of students.

Perhaps a refresher course on incorporating language and math strategies and test-taking skills for the special educators and ELL teachers would be beneficial to their students. It is important that we serve our subgroup students in the same capacity as our regular education students.

We have other issues to discuss. Last year, our school's focus was on incorporating literacy strategies into all classes. According to Principal X, some teachers adjusted their teaching practices to incorporate these strategies while others did not. In addition, our All Students math scores for our school decreased from two years ago. Principal X noted that the grade-level team meetings should focus more on student learning rather than student behavior and non-instructional activities. Teachers need to realize that they are instructional leaders, not coaches or student buddies. Yes, discipline is important; however, leave discipline to me as assistant principal. Reorganizing team meetings is a must.

As you are aware, our principal has compiled a chart documenting team meeting activities. The data indicates that some teams focus on data, assessment, and instruction. Whereas other teams focus on behavior and fun activities. To address this issue, we are going to have all teams participate in a professional development (PD) session. During this PD, we will have teams that excelled in specific team meeting activities explain their successful methodologies to the underperforming teams. For instance, the grade 7D team can explain how they review data and assessment results to grades 6, 7, and 8. Team grade 8E excelled in planning interdisciplinary lessons and can share their methods to grades 6, 7, and 8.

Also, the principal has noted that some teams discuss concerns and develop plans to address them. We need to build on that strategy but ensure that the focus is on learning. It is expected that all teams will work together to improve the team meeting discussions, which must focus on student success.

Lastly, parents can be our greatest resource. Having literacy and math nights where parents are invited to observe simple instructional techniques in literacy and math that can be done at home. This will reinforce what is being taught in the classroom. Hopefully, they will leave with specific learning techniques that will be beneficial to their own child.

The sample is Not Passing based on the following performance characteristics:

Sample Passing Response Criteria Rating

Category	Description
Completion	The response only partially addresses the charges of the prompt. The problem of practice (increasing the use of literacy strategies) is not clearly identified. The action plan includes "a refresher course on incorporating language and math strategies and test-taking skills," which includes what should be the focus but does not distinguish it from other concerns. The section of the plan that describes successful teams explaining and sharing their methods to all grade levels is partially appropriate (7D) but includes an inappropriate team choice (8E). While there is some use of the evidence in the exhibits, it is not specific or clearly aligned to the action plan.
Data and Plan Alignment	The response does not use specific data points from the exhibits. English language arts and math assessment scores in Exhibit 2 are generally stated, and while there is a reference to the grade-level team meeting activities (Exhibit 3), the specific frequency of the activities is not included. Some of the principal's observational comments are included. The professional development session in paragraph four is not specifically targeted at successful methodologies for incorporating literacy strategies. General team success rather than specific improvement of student performance through literacy strategies across subject areas is the goal in this response.
Application of Content	There is limited understanding of the grade-level dynamics since this plan has team 7D and 8E providing guidance to all grade-level teams. The plan does not establish a good foundation for grade-level collaboration by saying "[i]t is expected that all teams will work together." The inclusion of parents (paragraph six) to help students succeed is outside the principal's directive to improve the grade-level team meetings.
Support	The response does not provide a significant rationale for the plan. It does not include data appropriate to support the plan from Exhibit 2 (State Assessment Data) or Exhibit 3 (Grade-level Team Meeting Activities). Some examples the response provides are not appropriate (e.g., use of parents in the plan, having 8E discuss methods for interdisciplinary lessons). The response does not include examples of how teams will be held accountable.

Return to Navigation

---

Copyright © 2025 by the State of Florida, Department of State