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.

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.

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.

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.

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.