Original Research

Early intervention and transition outcomes for children with Down syndrome: Lived experiences of parents, teachers and school stakeholders in South Africa

Mohamed Mosala, Maximus M. Sefotho

Received: 25 Aug. 2025; Accepted: 12 Nov. 2025; Published: 18 Dec. 2025

Copyright: © 2025. The Author(s). Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

Background: Children with Down syndrome (DS) experience developmental delays that complicate their transition from home to school. In South Africa, under-resourced schools, early intervention remains inconsistently implemented despite its potential to enhance developmental and educational outcomes.

Aim: This study explores how early intervention influences the school transition experiences of children with DS in a South African special needs school, focusing on relational, emotional and pedagogical dimensions of this process.

Setting: A qualitative study consisting of N = 7 participants was conducted at a special needs school in Gauteng, South Africa, serving children with diverse developmental profiles.

Methods: A qualitative case study within an interpretivist paradigm was employed. Data were gathered through semi-structured and narrative interviews with parents, teachers and school management, alongside document analysis of inclusive education policies. Ubuntu Philosophy and Resilience Theory framed the analysis, which used thematic methods to identify key patterns.

Results: Four core themes emerged: (1) collaborative communication strengthens transitions, (2) individualised support enables learner adjustment, (3) emotional strain during transition requires sensitive intervention and (4) learning through play and demonstration enhances inclusion. The findings affirm that successful transitions depend on relational care, personalised strategies, community support, not just early diagnosis.

Conclusion: Early intervention supports successful school transitions when embedded in emotionally responsive, culturally grounded, collaborative practices. Ubuntu’s ethic of shared humanity and the relational focus of Resilience Theory provide a valuable framework for understanding inclusion in South African early childhood contexts.

Contribution: This study contributes an African-centred model of early intervention that emphasises culturally relevant, community-based support for children with DS and their families.

Keywords: Down syndrome; early intervention; school transition; inclusive education; parent-school collaboration.

Introduction

The transition from home to school presents a fundamental milestone in the developmental trajectory of children with Down syndrome (DS). As a result of delays in language, cognition and social interaction, this process is particularly complex (Bull 2020; Næss et al. 2015). Although inclusive education has gained prominence globally, children with DS continue to face systemic exclusion in South Africa, resulting from limited early identification, unresponsive pedagogies and underdeveloped intervention systems (Donohue & Bornman 2015; Willoughby et al. 2016).

In South Africa, infrastructural deficits, teacher under-preparedness and cultural stigma further compound these challenges (Cramm et al. 2013; Mantey 2017). Early intervention programmes designed to address developmental, educational and behavioural delays have demonstrated promise internationally, improving readiness for a structured learning environment (Bysterveldt, Gillon & Foster-Cohen 2014; Smith, Næss & Jarrold 2017). However, within the low-resource South African environment, implementation remains inconsistent and fragmented.

Existing studies largely originate from high-income contexts and often fail to account for the realities of developing countries, where limited access to specialists, late diagnoses and weak policy monitoring undermine early developmental support (Alencar et al. 2019; Guzman 2018). In the South African context, where inclusive education is mandated by policy but under-realised in practice, many children with DS enter school without the benefit of sustained early intervention. This study situates itself in this gap, examining how early support mechanisms, when present, shape transition outcomes within a public special needs school in Gauteng, an urban province with diverse socio-economic conditions (Antonarakis et al. 2020; Grove 2021).

Children with DS typically display a distinctive developmental profile that includes difficulties in expressive language, working memory and adaptive behaviour (Bull 2020; Næss et al. 2015). These challenges complicate classroom participation and the acquisition of social routines, particularly in the early years of formal schooling. Without targeted early intervention between birth and age five, these children face heightened risks of delayed literacy, social isolation and emotional distress (Smith et al. 2017). Evidence from high-income countries confirms the benefits of structured early support, yet these models are rarely adapted for resource-constrained South African schools (Alsaied et al. 2015; Antonarakis et al. 2020).

Despite existing policy frameworks, such as Education White Paper 5 on Early Childhood Development (Department of Education 2001a), White Paper 6 on Special Needs Education (Department of Education 2001b) and the Screening, Identification, Assessment and Support (SIAS) Policy (Department of Basic Education 2014), the application of inclusive early intervention remains uneven (Cramm et al. 2013; Donohue & Bornman 2015). Gaps persist in teacher training, parental guidance and intersectoral coordination. Consequently, children’s transition experiences are often marked by anxiety, regression and emotional strain (Matolo & Rambuda 2022).

This study, therefore, interrogates the mechanisms through which early intervention supports or constrains the school transition of children with DS in South Africa. By focusing on the lived experiences of parents, teachers and school management, it seeks to identify contextually grounded strategies that promote equitable transition outcomes in low-resource educational environments.

Research questions

• What components of early intervention are most effective in promoting school readiness for children with DS?
• How do families, teachers and support teams perceive and implement early intervention strategies?
• What structural or policy-related barriers affect early intervention delivery in the South African context?

Rationale and contribution

This research contributes to the discourse on inclusive education by linking early developmental support to successful school inclusion in the under-resourced South African context. It aims to inform policy alignment, strengthen professional practices and foreground Ubuntu-inspired approaches that prioritise relational care, dignity and community support for children with DS.

Conceptual framework

This study is anchored in two foundational frameworks: The African philosophy of Ubuntu and Resilience Theory. Together, they offer a relational and strength-based lens through which to understand how early intervention supports the educational transition of children with DS in South Africa.

Ubuntu philosophy asserts that human identity and growth are realised through connection with others, captured in the maxim ‘umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu’ (Kamga 2018:626), meaning a person is a person through other people. Within educational contexts, Ubuntu emphasises empathy, mutual respect and collective responsibility for every child’s well-being. It challenges the notion of individual achievement by situating inclusion within community care. In early childhood education, Ubuntu can be observed through daily acts, such as collaborative teaching, peer support, shared caregiving and home-school partnerships. These practices embody the Ubuntu principle that belonging and dignity are prerequisites for learning (Horsthemke 2015). By grounding this study in Ubuntu, the research recognises that inclusion is not merely a pedagogical technique but an ethical and cultural commitment. The philosophy informs how participants, parents, teachers and school management construct meaning around care, collaboration and the moral duty to educate every child, including those with disabilities.

Resilience Theory complements Ubuntu by focusing on adaptation and recovery within adverse conditions. It conceptualises resilience as a dynamic process of positive adjustment despite risk (Bertsia & Poulou 2023). For children with DS, resilience is not simply an individual trait but the outcome of supportive relationships, structured routines and consistent care from adults (Koskela et al. 2020). In this study, Resilience Theory helps interpret how children’s coping and adjustment are shaped by their environment, teachers who modify instruction, parents who maintain routines and schools that create emotionally safe spaces.

The two frameworks converge on shared principles of interdependence, community and hope. Ubuntu contributes the ethical foundation, valuing relational humanity and dignity, while Resilience Theory provides the psychological mechanism for how supportive relationships translate into adaptive behaviour. For example, when a teacher provides patient instruction and peers model inclusion, the learner experiences belonging (Ubuntu philosophy) and develops coping strategies (Resilience theory).

Understanding Down syndrome and its early challenges

Down syndrome is a chromosomal condition associated with global developmental delays that affect cognitive function, language acquisition, motor coordination and social interaction (Bull 2020). Children with DS often experience difficulties processing verbal instructions, forming sentences and understanding abstract concepts (Næss et al. 2015). As they approach school age, these challenges become increasingly visible in classroom participation and peer interaction. Delays in expressive and receptive language hinder communication with teachers and peers, which can contribute to social withdrawal, frustration or emotional dysregulation (Smith et al. 2017). Furthermore, many children with DS present with hypotonia, oral-motor dysfunction and sensory sensitivities, which affect eating, speaking and physical engagement in class activities (Kaczorowska et al. 2019; Mohr 2020). Left unaddressed, these hinder participation and self-regulation during early schooling. Recognising these developmental risks early is therefore essential. Early identification allows caregivers and teachers to implement targeted support strategies, such as speech therapy, sensory integration activities and structured routines, which prepare children for learning environments. In this regard, early intervention becomes not only therapeutic but preventative, mitigating the long-term risk of exclusion and academic underperformance.

The impact of early intervention on development and school readiness

Early intervention refers to developmental and educational support from birth to approximately 5 years of age, designed to enhance children’s physical, cognitive and socio-emotional functioning (Alsaied et al. 2015). For children with DS, such intervention includes therapies in communication, physical coordination and adaptive behaviour, often integrated through play-based activities. Evidence shows that early intervention during these formative years strengthens expressive language, memory and independence (Antonarakis et al. 2020). It also improves self-help skills, attention span and social confidence, allowing children to participate more meaningfully in group learning. Structured routines developed during early intervention foster emotional stability, reducing the anxiety and behavioural difficulties often observed during school entry (Bysterveldt et al. 2014). In the South African context, the benefits of early intervention are well recognised in policy documents, such as the Education White Paper 5 on Early Childhood Development (Department of Education 2001a). However, implementation remains uneven, particularly in low-income communities where screening, early assessment and parental support services are limited. Consequently, many children with DS enter formal schooling without foundational support, placing additional strain on teachers and school systems that are not always equipped to deliver differentiated instruction. Early intervention, therefore, serves a dual function: It supports the child’s developmental readiness and strengthens the school’s capacity for inclusion. Its absence not only delays learning outcomes but also perpetuates inequity for children already vulnerable to marginalisation.

The role of families in transition support through early intervention

Families play a central role in the success of early intervention and school transition. As primary caregivers, parents shape children’s daily routines, emotional security and sense of belonging. When parents engage actively in intervention programmes, they help bridge the gap between home and school (Kim & Sheridan 2015). Involving families in intervention planning ensures continuity of strategies across contexts. Parents who receive training in communication and play-based learning can reinforce classroom goals at home, creating consistent experiences that enhance development (Besi & Sakellariou 2019). These collaborative relationships foster mutual trust between teachers and caregivers, promoting shared decision-making and aligning expectations around the child’s progress. Parental engagement also extends to advocacy. In many South African communities, parents of children with DS become key advocates for educational access and inclusion, often compensating for systemic delays in assessment and support provision. Conversely, limited parental involvement can lead to inconsistent routines and emotional instability during transition.

Schools are an environment of continued development and inclusion

Schools represent the next critical environment for sustaining early developmental gains. Successful transitions occur where schools embody inclusive values, have adequately trained teachers and offer adaptive classrooms (Sten & Kalin 2018). In such a context, children with DS can generalise skills acquired through early intervention, participate in peer relationships and experience a sense of belonging. However, systemic barriers frequently disrupt continuity between early intervention and formal schooling. Teachers often report limited training in special education, insufficient access to assistive devices and overcrowded classrooms (Schultz et al. 2016). These constraints reduce their ability to individualise instruction or maintain the emotional and structural consistency necessary for children with DS. Inclusive pedagogy in South Africa, guided by White Paper 6 on Special Needs Education (Department of Education 2001b), advocates differentiated teaching, peer mentoring and flexible assessment practices. Effective schools apply these principles by integrating play-based learning, visual aids and structured routines that accommodate diverse abilities (Dhakshinamoorthy & Dhakshinamoorthy 2018). Moreover, cultivating a positive school culture, one that values empathy and cooperative learning, mirrors the Ubuntu ethos and contributes to children’s resilience and adaptation. Thus, schools must not only provide access but also ensure belonging. Sustaining the child’s developmental progress after early intervention requires teachers to function as co-therapists, advocates and caregivers within an interconnected support system.

Barriers to effective early intervention in the global south

While the early intervention is globally acknowledged, its implementation in low- and middle-income countries remains limited. In South Africa and other parts of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, children with DS frequently face delays in diagnosis, limited access to specialists and inadequate parental guidance (Guzman 2018; Mantey 2017). These challenges are compounded by poverty, cultural stigma and geographical inequities in service provision (Cramm et al. 2013). In rural and township contexts, early screening is often unavailable, and many children reach school age without any structured developmental support. Schools in these contexts carry the dual burden of teaching and remediation, often without specialised personnel or assistive technologies. Teachers may hold positive attitudes towards inclusion but lack the tools and institutional support to enact it effectively (Matolo & Rambuda 2022). Despite the progressive policy framework, including White Paper 5 (Department of Education 2001a), White Paper 6 (Department of Education 2001b) and the SIAS policy (Department of Education 2014), implementation gaps persist. Monitoring mechanisms are weak, and cross-sectoral collaboration between health, education and social services remains limited. The result is a fragmented system, where early developmental support does not transition smoothly into school-based practice.

Research methods and design

This study followed a qualitative case study design to investigate how early intervention supports the transition of children with DS into the school environment. A case study was selected for its ability to provide a deep, contextual understanding of lived experiences in a specific educational environment (Crowe et al. 2011). The study is anchored in an interpretivist paradigm, which acknowledges that reality is socially constructed through meaning-making and interaction (Darby, Fugate & Murray 2019). It aligns with subjective epistemology, where knowledge is derived from personal experience and dialogue between the researcher and the participant (Pellegrino 2021). By focusing on relationships, narratives and institutional processes, the study aimed to capture the emotional, social and structural factors influencing school readiness and transition in children with DS.

Research site

The study was conducted at a public special needs school in Gauteng province, South Africa, which serves children aged 6–13 years with diverse developmental profiles. The school is located in an urban township environment, characterised by mixed socio-economic conditions and limited access to specialist resources. This school was selected for its relevance to the study’s focus on early intervention in under-resourced educational contexts.

Participants

Participants were selected using purposive sampling to ensure relevance to the research objectives. The sample consisted of seven individuals directly involved in supporting children with DS: Three parents, two special needs teachers, one School-Based Support Team (SBST) coordinator and one member of the School Management Team (SMT). All participants had direct experience with the early support, transition and inclusion of children with DS within the school. The small, focused sample was appropriate for capturing in-depth qualitative data and for aligning with ethical considerations of sensitivity and confidentiality.

Data generation

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with teachers, SBST members and the SMT representative and narrative interviews with parents. These interviews explored participants’ experiences, perceptions and practices concerning early intervention and transition. Interview questions were guided by Ubuntu principles of relational dialogue, emphasising empathy, mutual respect and shared reflection. Participants were encouraged to express their perspectives freely, and sessions were conducted in the language of their choice. Where interviews were conducted in local languages, the researcher or a bilingual assistant provided translation during transcription to ensure accuracy. In addition to interviews, document analysis was conducted to examine relevant national policies, including Education Department of education (2001a) of White paper 5, Department of Education (2001b) of white paper 6, The Screening, Identification, Assessment and Support (SIAS) Policy, South African Schools Act (SASA), Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Care and support for teaching and learning (CSTL) Programme, The Children’s Act, Convention on the Rights of the Child Article 23, Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS). This triangulation of data sources enabled a comprehensive understanding of how lived experiences align with policy intentions.

Data analysis

Thematic analysis was employed to interpret qualitative data gathered from interviews and documents, following the model developed by Braun and Clarke (2006). The researchers began by familiarising themselves with the transcripts, generating initial codes and clustering these codes into potential themes. Next, they reviewed and refined the identified themes, defined the content of each theme and produced a narrative linking the findings to existing literature and theory. The themes were constructed inductively from the raw data and triangulated across both interviews and policy documents, focusing on the influence of early support on children’s readiness, family engagement and school inclusion.

Trustworthiness

To ensure methodological rigour, the study applied Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) four criteria: Credibility through triangulation of interviews and documents and participant verification. Transferability is achieved by providing rich, contextual descriptions of participants and the school. Dependability via an audit trail documenting the research process and decisions. Confirmability through reflexive journaling and the minimisation of researcher bias. These measures ensured that the study maintained transparency and reliability while respecting the sensitivity of the research context.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of Johannesburg Faculty of Education Research Ethics Committee on 3 June 2024. The ethical approval number is SEM1-2024-132. Ethical clearance to conduct this study was also obtained from the Department of Education, Gauteng Province on 18 June 2024 for the study to be conducted at the chosen school. The ethics approval number is 8/4/4/1/2. Because the study involved children with disabilities, additional ethical safeguards were observed. Parents provided consent for minors, and an educational psychologist was available for participant support. Confidentiality was upheld through pseudonyms and secure data storage. Interviews were conducted respectfully, reflecting the Ubuntu ethic of care, ensuring that no emotional or psychological harm occurred during participation.

Results

This study presents the key results, structured around four dominant themes that emerged from the data. Each theme integrates verbatim quotations from participants and selected national and international education policy texts to illuminate the contextual realities and systemic frameworks that shape early intervention and transition for children with DS.

Theme 1: Collaborative communication strengthens transitions

A recurring finding across all participant groups was the importance of consistent, timely and inclusive communication between families and schools. Parents described using digital platforms, written communication and direct dialogue to remain engaged in their child’s schooling experience. This theme underscores the necessity of shared understanding, responsive feedback and cross-stakeholder involvement in supporting the learner’s adaptation to the school environment.

Parent 1 indicated:

‘I maintained open and direct communication with the teachers and school management team (SMT) through face-to-face conversations. I utilised SMS notifications and WhatsApp to stay updated … I responded to letters sent by the school … I also used the school driver …’ (Participant 1, Female)

The SMT noted:

‘Collaborative communication can be improved in the following ways: regular check-ins, digital platforms such as WhatsApp, workshops and training, feedback instruments, and collaborative meetings.’ (Participant 6, Female, Deputy Principal and member of School Management Team [SMT])

These practices reflect national and regional policy imperatives. Department pf Education (2001b) page 11 of white paper 6 policy indicated:

Establishing a caring and supportive teaching and learning environment is critical to the success of inclusive education and training.

According to the Department of Basic Education (2025), the Care and Support for Teaching and learning (CSTL) Programme:

The goal of the CSTL Programme is to realise the educational rights of all children, including those who are most vulnerable, through schools becoming inclusive centres of learning, care and support … by addressing barriers to learning and teaching.

A whole-school approach to addressing barriers to learning and ensuring every child receives the support they need to reach their full potential. This evidence reinforces the policy vision that collaboration across the school and home environment is fundamental to transition success.

Consistent, timely and inclusive communication between families and schools is crucial for supporting children’s adaptation to the school environment. Parents use various methods, such as digital platforms and face-to-face conversations, to stay engaged in their child’s education. The SMT acknowledges the need for improved collaborative communication through regular check-ins and workshops. This aligns with national policies that promote a caring and supportive learning atmosphere, emphasising the importance of collaboration between home and school for successful transitions.

Theme 2: Individualised support enables learner adjustment

The need to tailor educational strategies to individual children’s needs was another strong theme. Teachers and support team members stressed the importance of developing Individualised Support Plans (ISPs), scaffolding learning activities and modifying classroom routines to accommodate diverse abilities. These insights illustrate that meaningful transition relies on adapting education to the learner, not the other way around.

Teacher 1 indicated:

‘Working at the child’s pace and adjusting as needed is essential … I assisted him by starting with tracing to help him grasp writing … I created lines for him to write within …’ (Participant 4, Female, Teacher)

The SBST Coordinator indicated:

‘The SBST develops Individualised Support Plans (ISPs) that outline specific strategies and support mechanisms … Various specialists, including occupational therapists and speech therapists, are engaged to provide targeted interventions.’ (Participant 7, Female, SBST Coordinator, Departmental Head and a member of SMT)

Such practices directly align with foundational legal and human rights frameworks on inclusive education.

South African Schools Act (1996) states:

A public school must admit, and provide education to, learners and must serve their educational requirements for the duration of their school attendance without unfairly discriminating in any way. (Republic of South Africa 1996, p. 7)

No learner may be refused admission to a public school on the grounds of disability.

Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006) stated that:

Persons with disabilities are not excluded from the general education system … and receive the support required … within the general education system. (United Nations 2006, p. 7)

This demonstrates how micro-level educational practice reflects macro-level legislative expectations for equity and non-discrimination.

Customising educational strategies to meet individual children’s needs is crucial, as emphasised by teachers and support personnel who advocate for ISPs and adaptable classroom routines. Effective teaching requires working at the child’s pace and providing targeted interventions, such as those facilitated by specialists. These approaches align with legal frameworks like the South African Schools Act and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which mandate inclusive education. Therefore, this demonstrates how personalised educational practices reflect broader principles of equity and non-discrimination.

Theme 3: Emotional strain during transition requires sensitive intervention

The transition from home to school, especially in cases of mainstream-to-specialist school shifts, was reported as emotionally taxing for both children and caregivers. Parents expressed anxiety, grief and uncertainty. However, the data also revealed how support, reassurance and time-sensitive intervention from schools alleviated distress and enabled a more positive developmental trajectory.

Parent 3 indicates:

‘Mornings were the hardest. My child held [onto] me, tears streaming down his face, not wanting to let go … Slowly but surely, things began to improve … Over time, it became clear that the special school was the right place for my child.’ (Participant 3, Female)

The SBST Coordinator states that:

‘We invite parents to meetings to discuss their child’s needs … The SBST supports parents by educating them about their child’s condition and referring them to external organisations.’

These narratives echo the protective intentions embedded in national child welfare legislation.

The Children’s Act (Department of Justice and Constitutional Development 2005) indicates:

Every child has the right to family care, parental care, or appropriate alternative care when removed from the family environment. (Republic of South Africa 1996, p. 20)

United Nations, Convention of the Rights of the Child (1989), Article 23 indicates that:

A mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a full and decent life … in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-reliance … (United Nations 1989, p. 7)

These frameworks reinforce the right to psychosocial stability and affirm the necessity of emotional sensitivity in transition planning.

The transition from home to a specialist school can be emotionally challenging for both children and their parents, often causing anxiety and uncertainty. However, support and timely interventions from schools can significantly ease this distress and lead to positive developmental outcomes. Parents have shared experiences of initial difficulty but have eventually recognised the appropriateness of special education for their children. Relevant legislation, such as the Children’s Act and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, reinforces the importance of psycho-social stability and emotional sensitivity during this transition.

Theme 4: Learning through play and demonstration enhances inclusion

Participants noted that traditional instructional methods often failed to meet the developmental needs of children with DS. Teachers who employed demonstration, play-based learning and movement-based activities reported improved learner engagement, participation and progress. These methods also enhanced speech development and peer interaction.

Teacher 2 indicates:

‘Learning through play is highly effective … we sing songs that include new vocabulary … Jungle gym activities help with speech and reduce shyness … One-on-one time also helps them understand better.’ (Participant 5, Female)

The SMT Member states:

‘We educate parents about the child’s disability, the school’s teaching policies … and how these will benefit their child.’

These adaptive approaches are strongly supported by early childhood and inclusive education frameworks.

Department of Education (2001a) of white paper 5 on Early childhood education indicates:

Early childhood development is the foundation of lifelong learning and development. (Department of Education 2001a, p. 6)

Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS):

The NCS Grades R–12 is sensitive to issues of diversity such as poverty, inequality, race, gender, language, age, disability and other factors. (Department of Basic Education 2011:5)

Every learner is acknowledged as an individual who is different from the next. The curriculum seeks to be inclusive and enable children to achieve their maximum potential. Such findings validate that pedagogical innovation, guided by empathy and supported by policy, is essential in realising inclusive learning for children with developmental delays.

Traditional teaching methods often fail to meet the developmental needs of children with DS. However, innovative approaches such as demonstration, play-based learning and movement activities significantly enhance engagement and progress. Teacher 2 emphasised the effectiveness of learning through play and the importance of one-on-one interaction in fostering understanding and confidence. The SMT emphasises parental education on disabilities and teaching policies to support children’s learning. These adaptive strategies are reinforced by early childhood education frameworks, which advocate for inclusive practices that recognise each learner’s unique potential.

Discussion

This study explored how early intervention supports the transition of children with DS into school environments in South Africa. The findings revealed four key insights: Collaborative communication between families and schools strengthens transitions. Individualised support enables learner adjustment and participation. Emotional strain during transition requires sensitive and sustained intervention. Learning through play and demonstration promotes inclusion and engagement. These findings collectively demonstrate that early intervention, when grounded in collaborative relationships, individualised pedagogy and emotional sensitivity, fosters resilience and belonging for children with DS. They also show that inclusion is most successful when schools operationalise Ubuntu values, care, empathy and shared responsibility, within their everyday practices.

Collaboration and communication between families and schools are crucial, supported by both international and local studies. Research in high-income contexts, such as Kim and Sheridan (2015) and Smith et al. (2017), shows that effective parent–teacher communication enhances transition readiness and emotional stability. This study extends these findings to a South African township school, highlighting that such communication is also vital in low-resource settings. However, while high-income countries have formal support structures, collaboration here often relies on personal relationships and informal tools like WhatsApp, reflecting local resilience but exposing weaknesses in institutional coordination. The second finding emphasises the significance of individualised support, in line with the principles of differentiated instruction and inclusive pedagogy outlined by Bysterveldt et al. (2014) and Donohue and Bornman (2015). Teachers creatively developed ISPs and modified lessons but faced challenges such as inadequate training, limited access to specialists and large class sizes. These issues resonate with the barriers identified by Cramm et al. (2013) and Mantey (2017) in South African full-service schools. The finding that emotional strain during transitions impacts both parents and children aligns with global literature on psychosocial aspects (Alencar et al. 2019; Guzman 2018). While many studies focus on parental stress related to service coordination, this research highlights a deeper emotional narrative shaped by socio-cultural context. Parents’ distress is linked to guilt, stigma, fears and uncertainty about institutional support. The philosophy of Ubuntu illustrates that emotional distress is a collective concern that needs community empathy and care. The findings suggest that learning through play and demonstration enhances inclusion, supporting existing research that shows multi-sensory, experiential learning engages children with developmental disabilities (Bull 2020; Dhakshinamoorthy & Dhakshinamoorthy 2018). This study confirms these results in South Africa and adds that such methods build resilience through successful experiences and peer connections. In resource-constrained schools, play-based learning is both effective and emotionally restorative, fostering joy and confidence where traditional teaching may cause frustration.

The similarities between these findings and existing research confirm that the foundational principles of early intervention, collaboration, personalisation and emotional support are universally applicable. However, several contextual differences distinguish the South African experience. Firstly, while international literature assumes the presence of well-coordinated multidisciplinary teams, this study shows that collaboration in local schools often compensates for systemic gaps. Teachers, parents and support staff form informal networks that substitute for formal structures. This divergence is explained by resource inequality and policy-practice disjuncture, even though policies such as White Paper 6 and SIAS advocate multi-sectoral collaboration, practical implementation is inconsistent. Secondly, the study found that emotional distress during transition is intensified by cultural stigma surrounding disability, a factor less emphasised in Northern literature. Parents’ fear of judgement or exclusion shapes their engagement with schools and influences how children internalise self-worth. Ubuntu philosophy helps interpret this by foregrounding the moral obligation of community care. It suggests that interventions must move beyond individual therapy to community education and social acceptance. Thirdly, differences in instructional strategies reflect contextual innovation. While Western literature often promotes technological or resource-intensive models of inclusive pedagogy, South African teachers in this study rely on play, song and gesture, culturally embedded and low-cost strategies that resonate with children’s lived experiences. These differences highlight the adaptability and creativity of educators working within material constraints, demonstrating that inclusion can be realised through relational and imaginative practices rather than expensive infrastructure.

Through the dual lenses of Ubuntu philosophy and Resilience Theory, the findings reveal that early intervention operates most effectively when relational and emotional dimensions are prioritised alongside developmental goals. Ubuntu provides the ethical foundation for inclusive education, reminding teachers and families that umuntu ngumubtu ngabantu. It reframes inclusion not as compliance but as a collective moral act of care. The teachers’ and parents’ practices of communication, collaboration and empathy embody this ethic in daily routines. Resilience Theory, on the other hand, provides the psychological explanation for how these relationships enable positive adaptation. Consistent communication, individualised support and play-based learning cultivate emotional safety, which in turn strengthens children’s capacity to cope with challenges. In this way, Ubuntu offers the why (the moral imperative), while Resilience Theory explains the how (the mechanism of adaptation). The interplay between these frameworks shows that resilience is not simply an individual attribute but a relational achievement emerging from a network of care. Children’s progress in school is thus the outcome of collective agency, parents advocating, teachers adapting and communities affirming. The findings, therefore, position early intervention as both a developmental and a moral process. Finally, the discussion emphasises that while South African policy frameworks are progressive, their effectiveness depends on the translation of Ubuntu-informed values into practice. This means investing in teacher training that emphasises empathy and relationship-building, improving communication pathways between families and schools and strengthening intersectoral collaboration.

Limitations

While the study provides valuable insights, several limitations must be acknowledged. The research was conducted at a single special needs school in Johannesburg, which, while offering rich depth, limits the applicability of the findings to other regions, particularly rural or mainstream educational environments. Additionally, the participant group was small and intentionally selected; although sufficient for a qualitative case study, the lack of broader demographic variation, such as caregivers from diverse socio-economic backgrounds or children from other provinces, restricts the generalisability of the conclusions. The study also relied on interviews and narratives, which may be affected by social desirability bias, selective memory or the emotional state of participants. Although trustworthiness was addressed through triangulation and member checking, these limitations are inherent in qualitative research. Furthermore, the study focused on a snapshot of transition experiences. It did not track children over time, meaning a longitudinal approach could provide deeper insights into how early interventions affect academic and social development beyond the initial transition phase. While the document analysis included national and international policy texts, the study did not assess the mechanisms or fidelity of their implementation at systemic levels, leaving an opportunity for future research to explore how well policies, such as White Paper 6, are translated into measurable actions at the provincial and district levels. Despite these limitations, the study’s methodological transparency, contextual richness and use of triangulated data sources offer meaningful and credible contributions to the fields of inclusive and early childhood education.

Conclusion

This study examined how early intervention supports the transition of children with DS into school within a South African context, using Ubuntu philosophy and Resilience Theory as guiding frameworks. The findings showed that effective transition depends on collaborative communication between families and schools, individualised support that respects each child’s developmental pace, emotional sensitivity during adjustment and play-based, demonstrative learning that fosters engagement. These elements confirm that early intervention is most effective when it integrates technical support with relational ethics grounded in Ubuntu’s principles of care, empathy and shared responsibility. However, despite progressive policies, such as White Paper 5, White Paper 6 and the SIAS Policy and other legal frameworks, the study revealed persistent challenges, including inconsistent implementation, limited teacher preparation and weak coordination between the health and education sectors. In practice, the resilience of teachers, parents and support teams compensates for these systemic gaps through creative, community-driven solutions that reflect both Ubuntu values and adaptive coping strategies described in Resilience Theory. Therefore, early intervention should be understood not only as a developmental right but also as a moral and social responsibility that depends on collaboration among families, teachers and policymakers. Strengthening communication channels, enhancing teacher training in inclusive pedagogy, embedding emotional and psychosocial support into early programmes, expanding play-based learning, addressing policy-practice gaps and promoting community awareness are essential steps towards realising equitable and sustainable inclusion. This study concludes that the success of early intervention in South Africa rests on the quality of human relationships, where Ubuntu-inspired care and resilience-driven practice enable children with DS to transition confidently, learn meaningfully and thrive within inclusive educational communities.

Acknowledgements

This article is based on research originally conducted as a part of Mohamed Mosala’s Master’s dissertation titled ‘Strategies for the successful transition of learners with DS from home to school’, submitted to the Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Johannesburg in 2025, but published in 2025. The dissertation was supervised by Prof Maximus M. Sefotho. The manuscript has since been revised and adopted for journal publication. The original description is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10210/515450.

The authors, Mohamed Mosala and Maximus M. Sefotho, of this publication received research funding from the Mpedi Family Scholarship, Centre for Neurodiversity, which is developing products related to the research described in this publication. In addition, the authors serve as consultants to the Centre for Neurodiversity and receive compensation for these services. The terms of this arrangement have been reviewed and approved by the Mpedi Family scholarship under the Centre for Neurodiversity in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.

Mohamed Mosala: Conceptualisation, Formal Analysis, Project Administration, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Maximus M. Sefotho: Supervision. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

This work was supported by the Mpedi Family scholarship under the Centre for Neurodiversity.

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its references.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings and content.

References