Children are not born with the same abilities or aptitudes. While every child requires some support, the level of assistance needed can vary significantly because of each child’s unique traits. Those who require more support than their peers are often referred to as children with special needs (Department of Basic Education [DBE] 2014). According to Krämer, Möller and Zimmermann (2021), these children require individualised, practical support to foster academic and social development. Thus, special education facilities are designed to provide this support (Phala & Hugo 2022). Such efforts are crucial in ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities, key components of the Sustainable Development Goals. However, a conducive learning environment must be established for learning to be effective. This means special schools should address indiscipline to create a safe and supportive atmosphere for all learners.

While scholars have not explicitly defined the term indiscipline, they have conceptualised it implicitly as the opposite of discipline, a concept widely examined within the school context. Drawing from scholars such as Potokri and Lumadi (2025), Ama, Moorad and Mukhopadyay (2020), Wolhuter and Van Der Walt (2020) and Segalo and Rambuda (2018), discipline is presented as a fundamental principle in schools that underpins the teaching and learning process. The literature highlights discipline as essential for fostering order, fairness, learner protection, regulation of behaviour among both learners and educators, and the promotion of social cohesion and safety. Weak discipline is often linked to the absence of shared ethical values and a lack of caring concern, empathy, and moral awareness (Ama et al. 2020). Within public and private institutions, discipline remains a cornerstone for the effective functioning of classrooms (Segalo & Rambuda 2018). Consequently, indiscipline, although not always directly defined, is inferred through behaviours that contradict these principles. It is widely recognised as a serious concern in schools because of its disruption of effective teaching and learning (Letuma 2024).

Several studies in the South African context, including those by Sumbane et al. (2023), Mahlaule, McCrindle and Napoles (2024), and Chirowamhangu (2024), have explored the challenges that stakeholders face in special schools. However, none of these studies specifically explored the issue of indiscipline within these schools. Research has highlighted that the unique characteristics of learners in special schools can lead to behavioural challenges, which, in turn, may, directly and indirectly, disrupt the learning environment (Cheng & Toran 2022; Shoko 2024). This suggests that children with special needs often exhibit behavioural issues that affect teachers’ ability to manage the classroom and create a conducive teaching and learning atmosphere, frequently because of their condition. This background forms the basis upon which the study is grounded. In addition, the study was sparked by recognising a biased emphasis in the literature about indiscipline, predominantly centred on mainstream schools, which significantly constrains exploring this issue within special school contexts. The article aims to contribute by enhancing the understanding of indiscipline in special schools.

In South Africa, learners diagnosed with disabilities such as learning disorders, visual impairments or blindness, hearing impairments or deafness, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and intellectual disabilities (ID) are typically referred to special schools. However, before such referrals are made, a systematic process is followed by the Screening, Identification, Assessment and Support (SIAS) Policy (DBE 2014). This policy offers a standardised framework for identifying, assessing, and implementing appropriate support interventions for learners requiring additional assistance to enhance their inclusion and participation in the school environment. It aims to improve access to quality education for vulnerable learners who face a range of barriers to learning, whether in mainstream or special school settings (DBE 2014). These barriers may include family disruptions, language challenges, the effects of poverty, and various cognitive or physical impairments.

The SIAS process is supported by formal documentation and is implemented by educators in collaboration with school-based support teams (SBSTs) and district-based support teams (DBSTs). Learners’ support needs are classified as low, moderate, or high, based on the intensity and frequency of intervention required. This classification informs decisions regarding where the learner will be supported and the responsible personnel. The policy outlines five critical areas of support: the involvement of specialist personnel; access to assistive devices, specialised equipment, and learning support materials; curriculum differentiation to meet individual learner needs; ongoing professional development, including training, orientation, mentoring, and guidance; and improvements in environmental access, which may be provided temporarily rather than continuously (DBE 2014). The nature and extent of the required support to overcome learning barriers are determined by evaluating the current resources available to the learner and the school, the additional support still required, and the resources accessible at the provincial or district level.

Placement at a special school is only contemplated after all other assistance options at the local school have been thoroughly examined (DBE 2014). This indicates that, depending on the procedures followed, the ultimate choice to enrol learners in special schools in South Africa demonstrates that such a child genuinely merits placement in that institution.

Studies have shown that behavioural difficulties seen in educational settings, particularly in special education, are frequently associated with the intrinsic conditions of the learners (Cheng & Toran 2022). This suggests that occurrences of indiscipline in special schools may mainly arise from disability-related behaviours, which are closely and directly linked to the learners’ identified problems (Grigorenko et al. 2020). A continual concern relates to educators’ lived experiences and their interpretations or attributions of such behaviours.

Instances of indiscipline have been observed in special schools (Anderson 2020; Idris & Badzis 2017; Shoko 2024; Van Der Linde 2019), and learners in such schools experience severe prejudice and worse penalties compared to their peers without disabilities (Gage et al. 2021). Research shows that compared to learners in mainstream schools, these learners are more likely to be suspended temporarily from the schools (Anderson 2020). The results led Browning (2019) to assert the need to identify strategies and procedures to assist teachers and administrators in special schools in managing disciplinary concerns. Van Der Linde (2019) has advocated for more studies addressing indiscipline in special schools, citing a paucity of studies within the South African setting and other nations (Florez 2021). Le Grange (2021) asserts that teachers in special schools have many problems with learners, which affect their effectiveness in classroom management and maintaining a good attitude. However, as Van Der Linde (2019) noticed, the limited research focusing on discipline in South African special schools required attention. To contribute to the body of knowledge in the field, this study explored the disciplinary issues the teachers experience in special schools and the contributing factors. The following question guided the article:

What disciplinary issues do teachers experience in special schools, and what are they attributing those to?

This study employed an interpretive qualitative approach and a multiple case study design in two purposively selected special secondary schools. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with four teachers and two heads of departments.

Participants for the study were recruited with the approval of the school principal, who authorised the research by signing a request letter. This letter provided key details about the study, and informational leaflets were distributed to all staff members. Furthermore, a verbal presentation was conducted to clarify the nature of participation and highlight the study’s importance, nature of involvement and the required number of participants. The principal coordinated the scheduling of this session. Participation was open to both teachers and School Management Team (SMT) members, as all roles, as defined by the Personnel Administrative Measures (Republic of South Africa [RSA] 2022), involve teaching responsibilities. The first three staff members who expressed interest were selected for interviews, which were arranged by the researchers on the designated day. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, allowing the researchers to record the interviews. Semi-structured interviews were used to generate data. A combination of open-ended and closed-ended questions during interviews allowed teachers to share their in-depth experiences (Kallio et al. 2016).

An inductive content analysis approach was used to analyse the transcribed data. This method allowed the data to guide the development of themes derived directly from the data rather than predetermined by the researcher (Vears & Gillam 2022). Initially, the researchers reviewed the data to gain a preliminary understanding, followed by open coding to break down the data into smaller, significant segments. These codes were then organised into broader themes or groups based on their similarity and importance without relying on predefined categories. The researchers continuously refined these themes through ongoing comparison with the data to ensure they accurately represented the participants’ experiences.

The final stage of the analysis involved presenting the findings, highlighting the main themes and interpreting them concerning ecological theory, supported by direct participant quotes. Direct quotations were included to enhance the study’s credibility to provide concrete examples and substantiate the researchers’ interpretations. This ensured that the results were grounded in the participants’ experiences rather than the researchers’ biases or assumptions.

Table 1 and Table 2 represent the demographic details of the research sites and the participants for schools A and B.

This study’s findings underscore a complex interplay of disciplinary challenges encountered by teachers in special schools, illustrating a nuanced array of causes that lead to student indiscipline. Disengagement, bullying, and absenteeism are intricately connected to several environmental, family, and societal factors, all of which correlate with Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory. This theory highlights the various levels of impact on a child’s development, with elements from the microsystem (individual interactions) to the macrosystem (broader social circumstances) affecting behaviour.

As noticed in this study, disengagement is evident in learners’ unwillingness to finish or do assignments, which undermines the educational atmosphere. This issue may be somewhat associated with the learners’ disability, but it is also affected by an absence of adequate structure and participation within the learning environment. The study revealed that teachers at special schools frequently used a lenient approach, perhaps in response to the distinct conditions of the learners. This tolerance, albeit well-intentioned, may unintentionally foster a lack of accountability, permitting complacency to endure. Moreover, the curriculum offered, which is similar to that of mainstream schools, may not adequately cater to the specific needs of learners with disabilities, so it may intensify their disengagement and lack of motivation. Maphalala and Adigun (2024) observed that the adaptation of the curriculum for learners with disabilities is often beyond the teachers suggesting a need for relevant stakeholder intervention in this regard.

Bullying is a common problem in special schools, arising from a confluence of variables (Mareš 2018; Robinson et al. 2023). This study found that peer pressure leads learners with impairments to seek control over their peers, frequently instigated by rumours and conflicts. This conduct signifies underlying difficulties of social power and control. The presence or absence of social support networks is crucial in this context. Individuals without confidence or abilities may turn to bullying to attain social dominance (Laursen & Veenstra 2021). The findings of this study revealed that the racial dynamics inside the school exacerbate this issue, as learners from various ethnic origins strive to assert dominance or marginalise their peers. This racial tension signifies more extensive social problems that permeate micro-level interactions among learners, enduring despite the nation’s democratic structure. This is apparent in the historical backdrop and present circumstances, when certain political parties declined to establish a National Government of Unity owing to racial disparities. Societal divisions are reflected in schools, since they frequently mirror the community. Franco, Durkee and McElroy-Heltzel (2021) emphasised the detrimental effects of racial discrimination on conduct and mental health, observing that victims of racism often endure rage and dissatisfaction. Feelings of resentment may exacerbate behavioural problems in special schools, especially among learners who perceive marginalisation by other racial groups.

Absenteeism disrupts the continuity of the educational process. The study found that learners frequently skip many school days and then face overwhelming assignments, resulting in frustration and disengagement. The teachers are placed in a challenging predicament of accommodating these learners by re-instructing material, further interrupting the educational progression for the remainder of the class. Rafa (2017) observed that learners with impairments are 1.4 times more likely to be chronically absent compared to their counterparts without disabilities. This absence can be attributed to external issues, such as inadequate familial support noticed by Rachel et al. (2022), which in this study is attributed to certain families’ disregard for their children’s needs, and the misuse of social assistance money for their own benefits rather than those of the child. This neglect might result in the learners feeling disappointed and demotivated, impacting their behaviour both in school and outside of it. Wolhuter and Van der Walt (2020) assert that parents play a significant role in shaping their children’s attitudes towards behaviour in school. This absence reflects broader structural challenges that may be beyond the school’s control.

From an ecological systems perspective, these disciplinary issues are not isolated; rather, they are the result of an intricate web of interactions between various environmental layers. At the microsystem level, the teacher–student relationship and classroom dynamics are crucial in shaping student behaviour. The leniency of teachers, because of their empathy towards the unique challenges faced by learners with disabilities, can inadvertently create an environment where indiscipline is tolerated. However, this leniency must be understood within the context of the mesosystem, the broader connections between the school and the family. The study reveals that some families fail to provide the necessary support for their children, resulting in unmet emotional and developmental needs that manifest as behavioural issues in school. The inability of families to impart values to their children, especially in the absence of sign language proficiency, contributes to misunderstandings and, at times, misbehaviour. This lack of clear communication between the school and the family creates an environment where disciplinary problems can thrive. Matimba (2023) found that children’s education about morals is being compromised by the failure of parents to teach them proper values. Shoko (2024) also found that being unable to communicate effectively may result in issues perceived as misbehaviour.

Furthermore, the exosystem level, which refers to the indirect influences on a child’s immediate environment, is also a significant factor. Social support systems, including financial aid or peer pressure stemming from money, were found to play a role in encouraging misbehaviour. Learners who receive social support funds may use this money to influence others, fostering peer pressure that leads to indiscipline. This issue is compounded by racial tensions within the school, which can create an atmosphere of competition among learners, exacerbating bullying and dominance struggles.

Finally, at the macrosystem level, broader societal influences such as racial inequality and societal views on disability shape how individuals within the school interact with one another. The fact that special schools in the country cater to a mix of different races can lead to power struggles, with some learners trying to assert dominance over others based on racial differences. This social dynamic contributes significantly to the bullying observed in the study.

The disciplinary issues observed in special schools, such as disengagement, bullying, and absenteeism, cannot be fully understood in isolation. They result from a complex interplay of factors within the school environment, the family context, the social support systems, and broader societal influences. By applying Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory, we may argue that these issues are not merely individual challenges but are shaped by multiple layers of influence. Teachers’ leniency, the curriculum’s lack of adaptation to learners’ needs, family neglect, and social pressures all contribute to the indiscipline observed in these schools. Addressing these issues requires a holistic approach that considers all these layers and their interactions, ensuring that learners with disabilities receive the support they need in their educational and personal development.