Nanjing International School (NIS) is an international school serving approximately 600 students from diverse linguistic, cultural, and learning backgrounds. Rooted in a strong commitment to inclusion, the school entered a significant period of transition during and following the COVID-19 pandemic. During 2022, Nanjing International School experienced a period of significant transition and rapid systems change. The school saw:

A substantial increase (~47%) in students requiring English Language Learning (ELL) support,
Significant staffing turnover (100%) within Learning Support Services (LSS),
Expansion of student support services (50%), including counselling and multilingual support,
Increasing complexity in learner variability across classrooms.

These shifts created both urgency and opportunity. Existing support structures, while well-intentioned, were no longer sufficient to ensure equitable access to learning for all students. School leaders recognized the need to move beyond isolated interventions toward a more coherent, system-wide approach to inclusion. Rather than asking, “How do we support specific students?” the school began asking, “How do we design learning environments where all students can access, engage, and thrive?” This shift became the foundation for a multi-year transformation grounded in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS).

51.6 %

Increase in Teacher Capacity

Teachers reported significant growth in their ability to anticipate and remove barriers, implement flexible instructional strategies, and support learner variability within Tier 1 instruction. The first implementation cohort demonstrated a 51.6% increase in self-reported capacity over baseline measures.

40 -Point

Gains in Student Achievement

Students receiving learning support services demonstrated substantial academic gains within inclusive classroom environments. In some cohorts, students improved from approximately the 20th percentile to the 60th percentile in mathematics within a single academic year.

29 %

Increase in Collaboration & Inclusive Practice

Teacher ratings of collaboration and inclusive practice increased by 21–29%, reflecting meaningful growth in shared planning, multidisciplinary problem-solving, professional trust, and collective ownership of student success.

1. Redesigning Support Structures

The school shifted from predominantly pull-out intervention models toward integrated push-in support and collaborative service delivery.

Key structural changes included:

Embedding LSS, ELL, and counselling staff into collaborative planning meetings (twice on an 8-day cycle, the teaching team and curriculum coordinator met to plan the learning happening in each grade across the PYP),
Restructuring schedules to prioritize co-planning and co-teaching,
Increasing Tier 1 support within classrooms through push- in support,
Strengthening interdisciplinary collaboration around student needs.

Leaders emphasized that sustainable inclusion required shared ownership of learner success rather than isolated specialist support.

2. Building Teacher Capacity

Professional learning became a central driver of implementation.

Over multiple years, the school:

Delivered ongoing whole-school professional learning on UDL and inclusive design,
Enrolled a cross-disciplinary team in MTSS training,
Facilitated teacher-led workshops and peer observation cycles,
Integrated inclusive practices into coaching and collaborative planning.

Rather than positioning inclusion as a separate initiative, leaders intentionally connected the work to everyday instructional practice.

One leader described a critical mindset shift:

“The barriers are not in the learners. The barriers are in the design of the learning.”

3. Embedding Inclusive Planning Practices

The school introduced shared planning protocols focused on:

Identifying barriers to learning,
Designing flexible pathways for engagement, representation, and action & expression,
Clarifying learning goals,
Using student data to proactively design support.

Collaborative planning increasingly included:

LSS teachers,
ELL specialists,
Counsellors,
Curriculum coordinator,
Classroom teachers working together around learner variability.

4. Strengthening Systems and Leadership

Leadership alignment became a key implementation driver.

The work was intentionally connected to:

The school mission,
JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) initiatives,
IB Approaches to Teaching,
Broader strategic planning processes.

Leaders also emphasized the importance of relational trust and a culture of experimentation.

One leader described the importance of creating “highly flexible, creative environments that are also highly predictable and structured so all students can thrive.”

The Impact

Teacher Capacity and Practice
Student Access and Engagement
Academic Growth
Collaboration and Culture

Teacher Capacity and Practice
Survey and interview data revealed meaningful growth in teacher confidence, collaboration, and understanding of inclusive practices over time. Teachers in the Earlier cohort reported an average Capacity Growth rating of 4.38 on a 5-point scale, compared to a Prior Baseline average of 2.89, representing a 51.6% increase. Teachers in the 2023–2024 cohort reported an average Capacity Growth rating of 3.87, compared to a Prior Baseline average of 3.36, representing a 15.2% increase. The second cohort’s higher baseline likely reflects the growing influence of earlier learning and implementation efforts across the system, as the earlier cohort's work began to shape school practices, strengthen team collaboration, and build a shared understanding of inclusive instruction.

Teachers increasingly reported:
- Greater ability to anticipate and remove barriers to learning,
- Stronger use of flexible instructional strategies,
- Increased collaboration with support teams,
- Growing confidence in supporting learner variability within classroom instruction.
Interview data reinforced these findings and highlighted a significant shift in professional mindset and practice. Across interviews, participants described moving away from viewing support as something external to classroom teaching toward understanding inclusive design as a shared responsibility embedded within everyday instruction.

Several teachers described how collaboration and interdisciplinary support structures directly contributed to their professional growth. One participant reflected, “The choice and the freedom and the collaboration and the way everyone is just willing to work together and have a multidisciplinary approach to things.”

Another teacher described how inclusive practices became more embedded within classroom decision-making over time: “There are many choices… and the choices are often co-created with the students.”

Teachers also connected their increased confidence to concrete instructional shifts and greater understanding of learner variability. One participant explained, “Clear is kind… direct language is so much more accessible.”

Another reflected on the practical impact these approaches had on student engagement and regulation, “It has been such a game changer… to reduce the frequency of behavior incidents where students lose control and to support student de-escalation.”

Teachers also emphasized that inclusive practices increasingly became integrated into their instructional identity rather than functioning as isolated strategies or initiatives. One participant summarized this shift by stating, “Before coming to NIS, I used to think inclusion meant including everyone, but now I believe there are many ways to learn using UDL, choice, and collaboration so every student can belong and succeed.”

Together, the survey and interview findings suggest that teacher capacity development — supported by collaboration, coaching, and ongoing reflective practice — became one of the strongest drivers of the school’s inclusive systems transformation.
Student Access and Engagement
Leaders and teachers consistently reported improvements in:
- Student engagement
- Participation
- Ownership of learning
- Classroom belonging and equity
Qualitative evidence suggested that students benefited from:
- Increased access to flexible supports
- More responsive classroom environments
- Stronger emotional regulation structures
Several leaders described noticeable reductions in behavioral escalation when proactive supports were embedded within classroom systems rather than delivered reactively.
Academic Growth
School data demonstrated encouraging patterns of academic growth across multiple cohorts, including students previously receiving intensive support services. Internal MAP and literacy data showed consistent upward trends over the four-year implementation period, with several cohorts demonstrating high growth patterns in both literacy and mathematics despite increasing learner variability and support needs.

In some cases, students previously receiving intensive Learning Support Services (LSS) demonstrated particularly significant academic growth within inclusive classroom environments. For example, across the learning support roster, around 40% of students improved from the 20th to the 60th percentile in mathematics within a single academic year, representing an average gain of about 40 percentile points, while others increased from the 21st percentile to the 55th percentile in reading achievement over the same period.

Leaders reported that students who had previously required intensive pull-out support were increasingly demonstrating success within Tier 1 classroom environments. In several grade levels, students identified for targeted support demonstrated growth rates comparable to — and in some cases exceeding — cohort expectations.

Survey and interview data also revealed strong perceptions of increased student engagement, agency, and participation. Across leadership interviews, participants repeatedly connected these outcomes to:
- Stronger Tier 1 instructional systems
- Collaborative planning structures
- Proactive barrier removal
- More flexible classroom design
One leader reflected on the significance of this shift:

“We mapped students that were coming from the learning support model, and we have data that proved that our approach made them grow.”

Another leader emphasized that the observed gains were not the result of isolated interventions, but rather stronger classroom systems:

“This is growth because they’re embedded in a program that’s meeting their needs at the Tier 1 level.”

Leadership teams also described visible improvements in classroom participation, emotional regulation, and engagement among students historically perceived as “struggling learners.” They reflected on students who had previously experienced significant behavioral and academic challenges:

“Kids who were so frustrated and angry and lost… now come in with a smile, have friends, are doing well academically, and are thriving socially.”

Importantly, participants consistently attributed these gains not to isolated intervention programs alone, but to stronger inclusive systems, collaborative structures, and more intentional classroom design.
Collaboration and Culture
One of the strongest themes emerging from the teacher interviews was the growth of a collaborative and psychologically safe professional culture. Survey data reflected this shift as well, with later teacher cohorts reporting collaboration and inclusive practice ratings above 4.0 on a 5-point scale, compared to approximately 3.1–3.3 in earlier cohorts, representing an increase of approximately 21–29% and suggesting meaningful growth in shared practice and team culture over time.

Teachers consistently identified:
- Shared planning
- Peer collaboration
- Multidisciplinary problem-solving
- Coaching
- Professional trust
as key drivers of implementation success.

Across interviews, teachers repeatedly described collaboration as one of the most transformative aspects of the school culture. Some of the teachers' reflections highlighted this theme.

“Everyone’s door is open. There are many people to help you with lots of different things… I was able to have the time and the space to play with things.”

“Inclusion now is probably at the forefront of my practice… It’s part of my essential toolkit.”

“I’ve become more confident and less fatalistic when things go wrong. I see there are alternatives.”

Over time, participants increasingly described inclusion not as a separate initiative or specialist responsibility, but as a shared instructional mindset embedded within the culture and daily practices of the school community.

Emerging Challenges

Despite substantial progress, leaders emphasized that the work remains ongoing and aspirational.

Key challenges identified included:

Implementation consistency across teams
Onboarding and training for new staff
Balancing multiple frameworks and initiatives
Strengthening training for teaching assistants (TA’s)

Several leaders also identified the need to deepen shared understanding of UDL language and transfer inclusive planning more consistently into daily practice.

Key Takeaways

Inclusion Requires System Design

Inclusive education cannot rely solely on intervention programs or specialist teams. Sustainable inclusion requires intentional redesign of schedules, collaboration structures, planning systems, and classroom practices.

Tier 1 Instruction Is the Leverage Point

Strengthening universal classroom instruction created the conditions for more sustainable support across the school. Rather than focusing exclusively on intervention, the school prioritized designing learning environments that proactively reduced barriers for all learners.

Leadership Alignment Matters

The alignment between mission, leadership messaging, professional learning, and implementation structures created coherence across the initiative.

Leaders consistently modeled inclusion as both a pedagogical and cultural responsibility.

Culture Enables Implementation

Trust, collaboration, and psychological safety were essential conditions for change.

Teachers repeatedly described the importance of being able to experiment, collaborate openly, and learn through trial and refinement.

Inclusion Is an Ongoing Process

Participants consistently described the work as iterative rather than complete.

The school’s next phase includes: Strengthening Tier 1 consistency to transition to intentional T2 and T3 interventions; Deepening Teacher Assistant (TA) training; Ensuring inclusive practices transfer consistently into daily classroom planning; and Moving from strong individual practice toward systematic sustainability.

Ready to see the difference. Contact us to discuss your district's needs and how our program can help you achieve your goals.

Make an Impact

Washington State inclusion rates continue to rise

Case Study

How teachers transformed their classroom with UDL

Impact in Action

Learn how we can support your team with improving student outcomes.

Professional Learning

Learn More

Case Study

Building Inclusive Systems Through MTSS: A Primary School Case Study at Nanjing International School

“Kids who were so frustrated and angry and lost… now come in with a smile, have friends, are doing well academically, and are thriving socially.”

The Challenge

Fragmented Systems of Support

Overreliance on Pull-Out Intervention

Inconsistent Capacity for Inclusive Tier 1 Instruction

Results At a Glance