Moses Modisane

Inclusive education in South Africa is guided by constitutional mandates, policy frameworks such as Education White Paper 6 (Department of Education, 2001), and international agreements like the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education (UNESCO, 1994). These frameworks promote the rights of all learners, including those who are neurodivergent, to quality education in supportive and accommodating environments. Neurodivergence encompasses a range of conditions classified under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), including Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Specific Learning Disorders such as Dyslexia and Dyscalculia, Severe Intellectual Disability (SID), Profound Intellectual Disability (PID), and Down Syndrome. In South Africa, the Differentiated Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (DCAPS) was developed to adapt the national CAPS framework to the needs of learners with barriers to learning in LSEN (Learners with Special Educational Needs) schools. However, research indicates a persistent gap between special needs education policy and its classroom implementation. Teachers’ perceptions, levels of training, and access to resources significantly influence how special education is practised. This literature review aims to examine teacher perceptions, professional development, and DCAPS implementation in LSEN contexts, highlighting the challenges and opportunities for bridging the policy-practice gap.

This article critically interrogates the post-apartheid constitutional order in South Africa through the lens of decolonial theory. It argues that while the 1996 Constitution proclaims transformation, equality, and human dignity, it simultaneously reproduces the colonial and apartheid logics it seeks to transcend. Using the concept of neo-apartheid constitutionalism (Madlingozi, 2017), the paper contends that the Constitution sustains bifurcated systems across multiple domains - property, education, health, and justice - entrenching a liberal order that protects privilege under the guise of rights. Drawing on the works of Quijano, Mignolo, Ramose, and NdlovuGatsheni, the analysis situates South Africa's constitutionalism within the global matrix of coloniality, showing how epistemic dependence and economic inequality persist through law. The study further explores how the negotiated transition and the African National Congress's accommodationist constitutionalism displaced the decolonial alternative envisioned by the Pan Africanist Congress, resulting in a reconciliation-oriented Constitution that privileges stability over justice. Through critical examination of constitutional provisions and jurisprudence - including Soobramoney v Minister of Health (KwaZulu-Natal), Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom, and Daniels v Scribante and Another - the paper demonstrates how socio-economic rights are judicially constrained by liberal doctrines of reasonableness and progressive realization. Ultimately, the article calls for an authentic decolonial constitutionalism founded on ubuntu, indigenous jurisprudence, communal landholding, and restorative justice. It argues that the unfinished project of liberation requires not constitutional reform but constitutional re-foundation: a radical delinking from colonial epistemologies and the creation of a pluralist, relational, and reparative legal order grounded in African philosophy.

This article critically examines the alarming rise of student suicides in South African universities through the dual lenses of structural violence (Galtung, 1969) and cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1986). It argues that university environments perpetuate systemic inequalities that disproportionately harm Black working-class students by reproducing epistemic, cultural, and economic hierarchies. Student suicides are therefore not isolated psychological crises but structural manifestations of institutional violence embedded in higher education. Drawing on national mental health surveys, higher education enrolment data, and case-specific studies, the paper highlights the gap between formal access and epistemological access, showing how universities reproduce alienation, symbolic violence, and conditions of psychological distress. The findings reveal that conventional interventions such as counselling and psychiatric support, while important, remain inadequate when broader institutional structures remain unchanged. This study concludes that genuine prevention requires transformative structural change in curricula, institutional cultures, and socioeconomic support systems, situating universities as potential sites of liberation rather than reproduction of colonial and apartheid legacies. the underlying structural conditions that create hostile environments for working-class Black students.

Background: The post-apartheid democratization of South African education produced a system characterized by near-universal enrolment yet persistent and pervasive epistemic inequity. While legislative and policy reforms have expanded formal access - reflected in a 97% school attendance rate among children aged 7–14 (Statistics South Africa, 2022) - these achievements have not translated into meaningful knowledge acquisition for the majority of learners. This paradox constitutes the central problem this article addresses. Objectives: This article pursues three interrelated aims: (1) to critically distinguish formal access from epistemological access as analytically distinct constructs within South African educational discourse; (2) to interrogate through integrated theoretical lenses why structural inclusion has not produced cognitive empowerment; and (3) to derive empirically informed, theoretically grounded policy recommendations aimed at achieving genuine educational justice. Methods: This study employs a systematic critical literature review methodology, synthesising peer-reviewed empirical studies, government education reports, and international comparative assessments published between 2000 and 2024. The analysis is structured through four complementary theoretical frameworks: Freire's Critical Pedagogy (1970; 1998), Bourdieu's Theory of Cultural Capital and Reproduction (1977; 1986), Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory (1978), and Bernstein's Pedagogic Device and Code Theory (1990; 2000). Taken together, these frameworks form a multi-dimensional analytical lens through which to examine the social, cultural, cognitive, and institutional determinants of epistemological access. Results: Empirical evidence reveals a profound retention and learning crisis. Fewer than 40% of learners who enrol in Grade 1 successfully complete the National Senior Certificate (NSC) within the prescribed twelve years (Department of Basic Education [DBE], 2023; Van der Berg et al., 2023). The 2021 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) found that 81% of Grade 4 South African learners cannot read for meaning in any language, ranking the country last among 57 participating nations (Howie et al., 2022). NSC pass rates in the poorest quintile schools remain 29 percentage points below those in the wealthiest quintile. These disparities are not reducible to resource deficits alone; they reflect structural linguistic exclusion, pedagogical authoritarianism, curriculum rigidity, and the misrecognition of diverse cultural capitals. Conclusions: Achieving educational justice in South Africa requires a fundamental reimagining of what access means: not merely physical enrolment, but cognitive empowerment - the capacity to engage critically with, internalise, and apply knowledge within one's sociocultural reality. This demands simultaneous pedagogical transformation, linguistic justice through sustained mother-tongue-based multilingual education (MTBMLE), curriculum reconceptualization that valorizes epistemic pluralism, and assessment reform. The paper argues that education without epistemological access remains education without transformation.

This literature review explores the sociological foundations and historical context of South African higher education in the 1960s, drawing on the theoretical perspectives of C. Wright Mills, Anthony Giddens, and Stewart and Zaaiman. It examines how sociology, as the scientific study of society, provides a framework for understanding the relationship between individual experiences and broader social structures. Central to this discussion is Mills’s (2000) distinction between personal troubles and public issues, which highlights how private hardships such as unemployment, racial exclusion, and educational inequality reflect systemic challenges embedded in social and political structures. The review further integrates Giddens’s (1986) emphasis on the interplay between agency and structure, highlighting the significance of historical awareness in sociological analysis. By situating the South African higher education system within its apartheid-era framework, this study reveals how segregationist policies institutionalized inequality, restricted access to higher education, and shaped the socio-political consciousness of black students. The emergence of student movements such as the South African Students’ Organisation (SASO) under Steve Biko exemplifies the intersection of sociological imagination and collective resistance. Drawing from contemporary scholarship, the review also considers post-apartheid developments and the continuing struggle for equitable education. It concludes that understanding the historical roots of educational inequality through a sociological framework remains essential for addressing enduring disparities in access, opportunity, and transformation in South African higher education.

The article "Our Education System Breeds Racism" by Moses Modisane critically examines how the South African education system perpetuates racial and socioeconomic inequalities. It explores the historical roots of racism in education, particularly how apartheid-era policies created systemic disparities that persist in post-apartheid South Africa. The article argues that racism manifests at personal, institutional, and systemic levels within schools, reinforced by curriculum design, social class distinctions, and differential access to quality education. Modisane highlights the role of private schools and the Independent Examination Board (IEB) in maintaining racial and economic exclusivity. He advocates for an Afrocentric curriculum that addresses African realities and rejects the Eurocentric educational model that fosters inequality. Drawing on critical pedagogy, he critiques the memorization-based learning approach and calls for more vocational schools to accommodate diverse talents. The article concludes that dismantling racism in education requires structural reforms, economic equity, and a shift away from profit-driven exclusionary practices.