SBL · Performance-Task Playbook · NY School Leadership Prep

The arithmetic that decides your score Performance tasks are 60% of Part One and 75% of Part Two. Completeness is scored first, and it is arithmetic: count the obligations in the prompt before you write. Assignment 1 has 26 discrete blanks. Each short task has 6. Each human capital task has 3–4. The video task has 10. An obligation the grader can't find is an obligation you didn't meet.

One structure for all six responses

Every scoreable unit on this exam is the same four-move block. Learn it once; deploy it 26 times.

Claim

The strength / need / priority / question / action / finding / challenge is X.

Evidence

The evidence is [a specific number, table or quotation] in Document N, and [a second data point].

Reasoning

This matters because [causal link to student achievement, a named subgroup, or teacher practice].

Role

As building leader we would [a collaborative, process-first action].

Buys Completeness

The label and the one-block-per-prompt-part rule. Start a new paragraph or bullet for every lettered obligation, and use the prompt's own letter.

Buys Accuracy

Two cited data points per claim, quoted or numerically specific. The rubric penalizes “a largely inaccurate interpretation of the information in the exhibits” — quoting the exhibit is the only defense.

Buys Depth

Reasoning plus Role. The rubric defines depth as demonstrating “a thorough understanding of the role of the School Building Leader in the given situation.” This is where we, PLCs, job-embedded PD and subgroup equity language earn their keep.

The universal five-move sequence

For any task that asks “what would you do.”

Name the issue and anchor it in a number. One sentence. Never open with a solution.
Ask the two questions before acting. Do not move to a solution until you have built a process to collect information and assess it. This is exactly what prompts D and E on Assignment 1, and B and C on the short tasks, are testing.
Describe the inquiry process concretely. Pull from the toolkit: surveys (anonymous and identified), data analysis, formal and informal observation, student work, focus groups, informal conversation, review of board policy and state and federal law, visits to other schools, review of the literature. Name a challenge for each method.
Act — collaboratively, with named mechanisms. Grade-level and departmental teams, PLCs, needs assessment, job-embedded and targeted professional learning, peer coaching, Teacher Improvement Plans, teacher leaders, action research. Explain why each works.
Anticipate challenges and manage them. Two challenges, two management strategies, every time. This is its own rubric row on Assignment 1 and its own prompt on Part Two Assignment 3.

Part One · the three tasks

Assignment 1

Instructional Leadership

600–800 words · 60 min · 30% of Part One

You get a scenario and six documents — student performance indicators, formative results, a student survey, a teacher survey, teacher evaluation composites and observation summary data. Then eight prompts. The 109 and 107 versions of this task are near-identical, which is the strongest signal on the exam that its structure is stable.

A. One strength is ______. The evidence is ______ and ______ (citing documents). B. 1. The first need is ______. The evidence is ______. 2. The second need is ______. The evidence is ______. 3. The third need is ______. The evidence is ______. C. The highest priority need is ______ (must be one of the three above) because ______. D. 1. Question 1 is: ______? Importance is ______. 2. Question 2 is: ______? Importance is ______. E. 1. I will get answers to D1 by ______. 2. I will get answers to D2 by ______. F. The actions to address C are ______ and ______, because ______ and ______. G. I will use A to address C by ______. H. The challenges these actions may create are ______ and ______. The ways I would manage them are ______ and ______.

What the official model did Identified staff dedication as the strength (backed by 76% of ELA and 84% of math teachers wanting professional learning). Named three needs: stagnant math, ELL and SWD achievement far below peers, and a contradiction between evaluation composites and observation ratings. Chose ELL/SWD achievement as the priority — 19% and 20% of enrollment, both under 45% proficient. Asked what targeted learning teachers need, and how to align teacher self-perception with evidence. Answered both through a needs assessment and cycles of inquiry. Acted through grade-level and departmental teams plus job-embedded learning. Leveraged the staff's appetite for learning. Named two challenges: tension from teachers with inflated self-perception, and communicating the ELL/SWD focus as part of overall school improvement. 733 words.

The scoring commentary praised it for illustrating “the inquiry stance of a strong instructional leader” and for drawing on all sources of data provided.

Assignments 2 & 3

Educational Equity · School Culture and Learning Environment

300–400 words each · 30 min each · 15% each

Two shorter tasks, one exhibit each, and the same four prompts both times. Learn this shape once and you have both tasks.

A. The primary issue is ______ because ______. (Assignment 3 phrasing: “An important school culture and learning environment issue is ___ because ___”) B. 1. The first question is: ______? It is important because ______. 2. The second question is: ______? It is important because ______. C. 1. To get answers to question 1 I would ______. The challenges may be ______. 2. To get answers to question 2 I would ______. The challenges may be ______. D. One possible finding is ______, and the potential action it implies is ______.

The methods that always work

Administer a survey differentiated by audience (students / parents and guardians / staff). Hold discussions or interviews with staff. Conduct formal observations or walkthroughs with a rubric. Review existing data. Then share the results with staff and plan collaboratively.

The challenges that always score

Low response rates. Validity of self-reported responses. Respondents lacking a shared definition (what counts as cyberbullying, what co-teaching means). Staff feeling singled out or intruded upon. Time to administer and analyze. Establishing productive dialogue. The commentary calls these “significant and highly probable for the situations.”

The “possible finding” should be the plausible bad news The problem is bigger than believed · staff lack the strategies they need · the process is restricting access. Then the implied action must connect directly to it — targeted learning in the identified areas, a transparent plan through the Shared Decision-Making Team, following district procedures. Anchor in law and structures when the scenario invites it: DASA drove the cyberbullying investigation; the Code of Conduct framed the discipline scenario.

Part Two · the three tasks

Assignment 1

Video Observation and Analysis

300–600 words · 70 min · 30% of Part Two

The rules of engagement A 15-minute clip that plays exactly once — no pause, no stop, no replay. While it plays you can see only the component text of the rubric. Afterward you see the assignment and the full rubric while you write. The official sample is a third-grade ELA class of 35 students, objective: “students will be able to think analytically, address problems creatively, and advocate persuasively.”

Before you press play: copy the lesson objective off the screen onto your notebooklet. Pre-draw four quadrants, one per component. Remember the 15 minutes you see is part of a roughly 40-minute lesson — criticizing the absence of strategies that may occur in the part you don't see is a trap.

What the response must contain — all four, or you cap at a 2

For each rubric component, cite observable, objective evidence from the video.
Assign a performance level of 1 to 5 for each component, citing that evidence.
Identify one significant strength, naming the relevant component(s) and the observable evidence.
Identify one significant area for improvement, same requirement.

For Component 1, I assigned a performance level of __. One sentence on what the teacher did. The evidence is: 1. ______ 2. ______ 3. ______ (3–4 discrete, quoted, observable) One sentence tying the evidence back to the level. …repeat for Components 2, 3 and 4. One significant strength is Component __. The observable evidence is ______. One significant area for improvement is Component __. The observable evidence is ______.

The Teacher Observation Rubric

Three domains, four components, five levels. Label components, not domains — domain labels confuse graders and buy you nothing.

Component 1 — Engages students in learning tasks that develop understandings and/or skills relevant to the learning objective

Students are passive or inattentive, OR participating in tasks vaguely or superficially related to the objective

Tasks focused primarily on basic facts or procedures, with little attention to deeper understanding or complex application

Students engaged in tasks that address understandings or skills relevant to the objective

Tasks that develop deep understandings and/or complex skills relevant to the objective

Differentiated tasks that deepen and extend understanding by addressing individual learning needs

Component 2 — Elicits and builds on students' responses to promote conceptual and/or skills development

Teacher does most of the talking and students provide few responses, OR teacher responses cause significant confusion

Primarily surface-level questions; responses evaluated as simply correct or incorrect

Teacher elicits responses that require and promote conceptual or skills development

Teacher elicits and builds on responses to promote development

Teacher designs experiences that let students evaluate their own ability to understand and apply

Component 3 — Uses instructional strategies in ways that deepen understanding and/or ability to apply

Facts only, no opportunity to apply or practice, OR a clear mismatch between strategies and student readiness

Strategies address concepts vaguely or superficially, or give very limited opportunity to apply

Strategies help students understand or apply relevant concepts or skills

Strategies deepen understanding or ability to apply

Deepen understanding and facilitate interactions among students to promote development

Component 4 — Demonstrates rapport with and respect for students in a positive and challenging learning environment

Evidence of disrespectful or disruptive behavior interfering with learning

Environment serves primarily to control behavior and does not challenge students academically

Rapport and respect in a positive learning environment

Rapport and respect in a positive and challenging environment

…where students take risks and support each other to achieve

The structural logic — memorize this shape Level 1 = absence or harm, usually an “OR” pair. Level 2 = surface, basic, control. Level 3 = the objective is addressed / helped / positive. Level 4 = deepened, built on, challenging. Level 5 = student agency — differentiation to individual needs, student self-evaluation, student-to-student interaction, risk-taking and peer support.

Do

Quote what you actually heard the teacher say.
Reuse the same observed moment across components — the guidance says this is expected.
Write it as notes for a post-observation conference, addressed to the teacher.
Cite 3–4 well-chosen pieces of evidence per component.

Don't

No “should have.” Just the facts, no prescriptions.
Don't label domains — components only.
Don't prejudge. A lesson that isn't your style may be strong.
Never leave a component unrated. That alone caps Completeness at a 2, which is failing.

Assignment 2

Developing Human Capital

4 tasks × 100–200 words · 70 min · 25% of Part Two

Five documents: student performance, teacher evaluation composites, a multi-year teacher survey, and two observation-summary excerpts. Each of the four tasks is scored separately — a brilliant Task 2 cannot rescue a thin Task 3. Every task carries the same standing instruction: “be very specific, clearly identifying the situation, what you would do about it, and the evidence necessary to justify your answer.”

Task 1 The most pressing immediate area is ______. I would address it by ______. This would be effective because ______. Task 2 The two most important long-term actions are 1. ______ and 2. ______. These have long-term benefits because ______. Task 3 I would ensure Teacher __ develops into a more effective teacher by ______, because ______. Task 4 The growth opportunities I would suggest for Teacher __ are ______ and ______, because ______.

The division that scores Task 1 is immediate = individual performance. Name the specific teachers from the evaluation table — the official model scores well precisely because it says “the three teachers rated Developing: one ELA, one science, and one in Specialty Areas” and cites Document 2. Task 2 is long-term = structures, systems and culture — norms for collaborative team meetings, collaborative analysis of survey results with team leaders, building a professional learning community.

The struggling teacher (Task 3)

Review prior evaluations → conference → ask the teacher to self-reflect and self-identify growth areas first → name strengths to leverage against the challenge areas → a Teacher Improvement Plan with a timeline targeting the unsatisfactory components → observations and conferences between benchmarks → peer coaching and mentoring from a highly effective same-subject colleague who models lessons → a summative observation at the end to plan future growth.

The high performer (Task 4)

Learn their goals and aspirations. Then leverage their strengths toward school needs — facilitating professional learning, mentoring, family communication, leadership roles. The model is explicit about the trap: “be sensitive to not make suggestions that would simply be additional work” and “if the teacher would be interested.” Opportunity, not workload.

Assignment 3

Family and Community Engagement

400–500 words · 40 min · 20% of Part Two

A. The two important issues are 1. ______ and 2. ______. B. Issue 1 would benefit from family/caregiver involvement because ______, and it would work by ______. Issue 2 would benefit because ______, and it would work by ______. C. For Issue 1 I would take this action ______. It would be effective because ______. For Issue 2 I would take this action ______. It would be effective because ______. D. Additional challenges these actions may create are ______ and ______. Ways to manage them are ______ and ______.

Prompt B is where responses lose points It asks why and how the issues could benefit from family involvement. Answer both halves explicitly. And note the competency is family and community engagement — business partners, higher education institutions and community organizations are all fair game as actors.

When two constituencies conflict, address both — including the group that agrees with you. The official model identifies both the opposed half and the supportive half, because the rubric requires that “the two issues identified are significant.” And treat disengagement as an access and welcome problem, not apathy: a 35% response rate means those families could become disenfranchised, and the answer is targeted outreach to them specifically.

Time and length budget

Part	Task	Words	Minutes	% of part
109	Assignment 1 — Instructional Leadership	600–800	60	30%
109	Assignment 2 — Educational Equity	300–400	30	15%
109	Assignment 3 — School Culture & Learning Environment	300–400	30	15%
109	41 selected-response items	—	120	40%
110	Assignment 1 — Video Observation and Analysis	300–600	70	30%
110	Assignment 2 — Developing Human Capital (4 tasks)	100–200 each	70	25%
110	Assignment 3 — Family & Community Engagement	400–500	40	20%
110	26 selected-response items	—	60	25%

The official models come in at 733 / 400 / 387 / 493 words — at or just under the ceiling, never short. Treat the word count as a time budget, not a target: “the lengthy responses are often the weaker or rambling responses.”

The do / don't list

Do

Label every answer with the prompt's own letter, and start a new paragraph for each.
Answer in the order asked, and answer every buried second half — “…and why?” “…what challenges?”
Cite two specific pieces of evidence per claim, by document number, quoting survey and observation language.
Write we / us / our. Answer as the building leader, not as a teacher.
Prioritize the subgroup furthest from the mean — ELL/ENL, students with disabilities, economically disadvantaged, newcomer populations.
Build the process before the plan: questions → inquiry → findings → actions → challenges.
Use the named machinery: PLCs, grade-level and departmental teams, needs assessment, job-embedded and teacher-led PD with follow-up, peer coaching, Teacher Improvement Plans, action research, DASA where relevant.
Read the prompts before the exhibits, then hunt anomalies and outliers.
Spell out every acronym on first use — ELL, SWD, ENL, PLC, MGP, DASA, TIP, BOCES, ICT.
Match every challenge with a management strategy. Challenges alone is a half-answered prompt.

Don't

Don't lead with the solution. Jumping to a fix before establishing inquiry is the single most-cited failure in the source material.
Don't write “should have” on the video task. No prescriptions.
Don't label domains on the video task — four components only.
Don't prejudge the teacher, and don't criticize the absence of strategies from the 25 minutes you didn't see.
Don't pad. Length is not score.
Don't use I / me / mine, and don't answer from a teacher's chair.
Don't use undefined acronyms or jargon.
Don't chase an interesting but irrelevant data point. A stray variable costs you accuracy.
Don't pick a priority need that isn't one of the three you already listed — prompt C is explicitly constrained.
Don't merge answers into one flowing essay. An obligation the grader can't find is one you didn't meet.
Don't assume graders are current practitioners. Write plainly, define terms, make it self-contained.