Transforming curriculum for inclusive education: Insights from a university-led professional development programme in South Africa

Despite South Africa's progressive inclusive education policies, such as Education White Paper 6 and the SIAS policy, a significant gap persists between policy ideals and classroom practice, a gap frequently attributed to the inadequate preparation of in-service teachers. While higher education institutions (HEIs) have increasingly offered Continuous Professional Development (CPD) programmes to address this, the curriculum design and effectiveness of these initiatives remain critically under-examined. This study investigates how the curriculum content and structure of a university-led Short Learning Programme (SLP) on inclusive education equips (or fails to equip) in-service teachers with the knowledge, skills, and values required for inclusive practice in South African schools. This qualitative case study was guided by an interpretivist paradigm, seeking to understand participants' lived experiences and meaning-making within their specific contexts. The study employed a case study design to explore the bounded system of the SLP offered by a South African university to in-service teachers. Ten teachers were purposively selected from five education districts in Limpopo Province: Vhembe, Capricorn, Mopani, Waterberg, and Sekhukhune, with two teachers representing each district. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews (45–60 minutes each) and document analysis of the SLP curriculum guides, module outlines, and relevant policy texts. Thematic content analysis, following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-step process, was used to analyse the data, with findings interpreted through Luckett's (1995) Modes of Learning and Shulman's (1986) Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). The findings reveal that while the SLP provided foundational knowledge of inclusive education policies and concepts, it significantly lacked practical strategies, context-responsive tools, and opportunities for critical reflection. Teachers described the curriculum as abstract, decontextualised, and misaligned with the realities of under-resourced, multilingual, and overcrowded classrooms. Facilitation was similarly limited, relying on lecture-based delivery with minimal interactive or reflexive engagement. The curriculum failed to progress beyond Luckett's foundational mode (Mode 1), neglecting practical competence (Mode 2), personal engagement (Mode 3), and reflexive competence (Mode 4), and failed to integrate Shulman's PCK by failing to bridge theory and classroom practice. These findings have critical implications for curriculum transformation in university-led professional development. They suggest that professional development for inclusive education must move beyond content dissemination to embed experiential learning, foster critical reflection, and centre teacher agency. Without such pedagogical and epistemological shifts, CPD risks reinforcing the very inequalities it seeks to address. This study concludes that for CPD to be transformative, HEIs must co-design curricula with practicing teachers, embed African epistemologies and local knowledge, and strengthen university-school partnerships to bridge the theory-practice divide. The study contributes empirical insights into the curriculum gaps in university-led CPD. It offers concrete recommendations for curriculum designers, teacher educators, and policymakers working toward inclusive, socially just education in South Africa.