Jenelle Williams, Disciplinary Literacy Task Force Co-Chair: How did St. Johns Middle School get started with disciplinary literacy? What led you to identify it as the approach that could address the challenges your school was facing, and what were some of the first steps you took to begin the work?
Andrea: What set us on this path was an analysis of our benchmark data, which we review four times a year with support from Clinton County RESA. We noticed that students needed more support with comprehending informational text—a persistent area of need that hadn’t improved over time. As we explored ways to address this, we connected with colleagues in other districts. Our former principal, Adel DiOrio, shared insights from her work with the GELN network and introduced the concept of disciplinary literacy. That idea kept surfacing in professional conversations and soon emerged as a promising professional development focus to strengthen Tier 1 instruction across all content areas. The appeal was that it applied to everyone.
Once you determined disciplinary literacy would be your focus, what did getting started look like? Was there an initial professional learning session or team that led the effort?
We already had an instructional leadership team composed of our school improvement team and department chairs, so we didn’t need to create an additional structure. That team, made up of our content area experts, attended a RESA workshop to deepen our understanding of what disciplinary literacy is—and what it isn’t. That experience launched our learning as an instructional leadership team and shaped our summer workshop with our core academic and special education teachers. During that time, we defined disciplinary literacy, explored the Essential Practices, and quickly realized that Essential Practice 1—building inquiry-based learning—needed to be our foundation. Teachers used the workshop time to review and refine their units of study, identifying where inquiry was already present and where it could be strengthened. Having that dedicated time during the summer was critical to launching the work.
It sounds like a shared leadership model was central to your approach. What resources or supports helped move the work forward?
We’ve taken advantage of ongoing opportunities to attend one-day disciplinary literacy workshops, allowing us to bring new learning back to our staff. We integrate disciplinary literacy into district professional development, department meetings, and sometimes staff meetings to keep the work present. Our foundational resource is the Essential Practices in Disciplinary Literacy document, which continues to guide us. We’ve also partnered with colleagues such as Stephanie Sebrell from Clinton County RESA and Sarah Felsing in Eaton RESA, who have facilitated professional learning for our teachers. Hearing from someone outside our leadership team has been valuable in moving the work forward.
You’ve leveraged both people and time—using district PD days, summer workshops, and department meetings—as well as resources like the Essential Practices document. As you’ve continued this work, what patterns or trends have you noticed across content areas?
One of the most encouraging trends is that everyone is engaged in the work. It’s not happening in isolated pockets but across departments. In previous initiatives, we often saw early adopters leading the way while others took longer to engage. This time, the work resonates broadly. Teachers appreciate that disciplinary literacy elevates what makes each content area unique. They’re thinking deeply about what “text” means in their disciplines, which has been motivating.
We also realized we’re progressing more slowly than we initially expected. As we dig into each Essential Practice, we uncover new layers of understanding and areas that need further development. We’ve learned that it’s more important to go deep than to rush through. Our focus on Practice 1—building inquiry—remains central, and we’ve recently started exploring Practice 7, academic vocabulary. Sarah Felsing shared a powerful example comparing a text with its academic language removed to a Mad Lib—it showed how much meaning is lost when students lack that vocabulary. This inspired us to teach vocabulary more intentionally in context.
We’ve also recognized that teachers need strategies to increase classroom engagement. Building teachers’ “engagement toolbox” has become another important layer of our work, helping create the conditions for disciplinary literacy practices to thrive.
Implementation often involves both learning and unlearning. What are some things your team has had to unlearn as you’ve advanced this work?
One of the biggest shifts has been letting go of the idea that teachers must always have the answers. We’re learning to shift responsibility for thinking and meaning-making to students. Teachers are realizing that their role is to design the structures, conditions, and materials that enable students to do the work of learning. That’s a significant mindset change and an essential part of this approach.
What advice would you give to other middle or high school principals who are beginning this work?
Invest significant time in understanding what disciplinary literacy is and isn’t. It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach or a single strategy—it’s highly content-specific. That front-loading is essential. As I mentioned earlier, this work isn’t a race or a checklist. Take the time to wrestle with the concepts and build depth before moving forward. Prioritize collaboration and implementation time so teachers can apply what they’re learning.
We’ve also learned a lot through collaboration with other districts. For example, Fowler Public Schools visited our teachers as part of a learning lab. That experience was powerful because it allowed for authentic teacher-to-teacher conversations. It benefited both schools—our teachers reflected deeply on their practice and identified next steps. Our next goal is to visit another school and continue that reciprocal learning. Within our own building, we’re also increasing opportunities for teachers to observe and learn from one another.
It sounds like hosting visiting educators not only supported others but also gave your teachers time to reflect and grow. Finally, if I asked your teachers what it is about your leadership that creates a culture where they feel comfortable trying new things—even if not everything works the first time—what do you think they would say?
I think it’s less about me and more about our academic chairs and instructional leaders. Their openness and willingness to engage in deep, sometimes challenging conversations within their departments make this work possible. Giving those small groups space to make instructional decisions as content experts is empowering. At the secondary level, these teachers are specialists in their disciplines, and they need to drive the work and support each other.
My role as principal is to provide the resources—people, time, and financial support—to make that happen. Whether it’s releasing staff to attend a workshop or scheduling collaboration time, my focus is on creating the conditions for their expertise to thrive. Leveraging that collective knowledge has been incredibly powerful for our school.
