Researching with teachers with disabilities in Tanzania: Adaptations and observations

When disability is discussed in education, focus often goes to the learner, — but why do we so rarely focus on teachers with disabilities? How can we engage them in research on teacher professional development? Especially in research that focuses on whether adaptations to those teachers’ needs are being made in schools and at other levels of the education system. Both research tools and processes need carefully adapting to ensure teachers with disabilities can participate equitably. Our blog describes how our team is going about this and the lessons we are learning.

The National Teacher Professional Development Programme for Equity and Inclusion

The programme. MEWAKA (Mafunzo Endelevu kwa Walimu Kazini, or Teachers’ Continuous Professional Development (TCPD)) is an innovative, school-based, technology-supported programme currently being implemented by the government in all Tanzanian schools nationwide. Our 2-year research project*, part of the global Empowering Teachers Initiative, explores issues of teacher agency, and local adaptation as the MEWAKA initiative scales nationally. 

One of our central research questions looks at how adequately the TCPD supports diverse needs and equitable participation of teachers with disabilities. The study explores how well the programme itself, the materials and the activities are adapted, and what more could be done. This includes steps taken to facilitate access to the online learning management system that hosts the TCPD materials, and identifying any unmet technology needs.

 A researcher explains the next steps in a participatory activity to a group of teachers during a focus group discussion. Session is in a yellow schoolroom with chalkboard, desks, and manilla charts on the wall. Participants are seated at desks in a semi-circle around the researcher

Photo credit: EdTech Hub Research team.

Preparing research instruments

Our first round of data collection in 12 schools across 4 regions — Dodoma, Iringa, Lindi, and Mwanza – took place in March 2024. In choosing the sample we made a conscious effort to include schools that have teachers with disabilities; they were deliberately over-represented so that we could collect data informative for our research focus on equity. We realised from the outset that we had to adapt our research instruments and methods too, to accommodate these teachers’ needs — for both ethical and methodological reasons.

To prepare, we invited Prof. Nidhi Singal from the University of Cambridge, who has conducted pioneering work on researching with teachers with disabilities, to review our tools and suggest best practices we could use during data collection processes. As a result, we incorporated items from the well-established Washington Group on Disability Statistics Short Set on Functioning into our teacher survey. Many disabilities are invisible, undiagnosed or unrecognised, even by the person themselves; this tool aims to elicit information beyond the obvious, by asking about capability to undertake everyday tasks. 

We found we needed to customise the tool for the Tanzanian context by adding some follow-up questions though. For example, many people have disabilities but cannot afford or access aids such as hearing aids or glasses to mitigate them. We, therefore, followed up on items that asked about difficulty in seeing or hearing, to explore whether they had such aids and if so, whether they still had any difficulty in hearing or seeing. We also defined ‘disability’ as including long-term illness, throughout our entire tools pack. In the survey, we added an item asking teachers if they have any chronic illness (lasting more than 3 months) which affects their participation in MEWAKA.

In addition to recording the presence of teachers with disabilities, the gender-based tallies of teachers’ contributions during the community of learning (CoL) session observations are now broken down by disability too (there’s a known interaction between gender and disability). We then record whether the frequency of contributions is proportional to the teacher numbers and note any obstacles to their participation. We also discreetly add a symbol to contributions made by teachers with disabilities to manila sheets capturing interactive activity outputs, or we note down during the session which contributions they made.

Adapting the methods

We then set out to be as inclusive as possible in our research processes. During a week-long whole-team training workshop in Dar es Salaam preparing for the data collection, we familiarised the research team with our specially adapted instruments and the most effective practices for respectfully conducting research with teachers with disabilities. We solicited the team’s input too, during the workshop and the full team debrief after completing the data collection. The workshop week included piloting our new tools with hearing — and visually — impaired teachers in local schools in Dar es Salaam. We learned that we need to allow significantly more time to accommodate some disabilities. Some of the specific measures we are taking are:

• We prepared a Braille version of the printed cards for a stakeholder mapping participatory activity we use in focus groups. The cards were printed with  Kiswahili text translations underneath the Braille print so everyone could use them. This way, we avoided singling out any teachers with vision impairment. The tables are turned here: able-bodied teachers are adapting to those with disabilities instead of vice versa.  

Participants completed a card-sorting stakeholder mapping activity using braille and printed text cards. Photo credit: Philbert Komba.

• We adjust our body positioning, orientation and speaking volume as needed to support engagement with hearing-impaired teachers. At times, lip reading or a sign-language interpreter may be used. 
• For teachers with vision impairment, the flip chart activities are orally described; consent forms and survey items are read aloud. Adequate time is planned for this. At times, a peer acts as a scribe. 
• In both cases, some schools have designated colleagues who assist, or whoever is seated closest does so. One special education school has several sign language interpreters.
• The group comes to where teachers with mobility issues are seated and write on manila flip chart sheets on a table surface instead of moving around to sheets on the wall. In one school, the single teacher with a physical disability was able to participate fully; when teachers conducted an activity on the floor, they included him by bringing a chair.
• We ask headteachers about any further local accommodations that could be prepared before visiting each school. For instance, we learned that in some contexts teachers with disabilities are required to have a designated lunch time.
• Upon arrival, we speak to teachers with known disabilities to check what adaptations might suit their needs; they know best. 
• We note down any accommodations that we see being made during Communities of Learning (CoL) sessions and classroom observations.

Teachers listen to a peer during a CoL session. Teachers are in a yellow classroom, seated in a semi-circle around a table. One teacher has space to stretch out his leg and a cane. Photo credit: Calvin Swai.

Proactive teachers support peers with disabilities

It is clear that teachers in this context are very supportive of colleagues with disabilities —they take whatever measures are needed to facilitate their participation in teaching and TCPD. An observed example was how peers accommodated one teacher who previously struggled with ‘mental illness’ through co-teaching or sharing responsibility for classes when she was ill. In another school, the peer facilitator was hearing-impaired himself; he has no hearing aids and relies on asking people to speak loudly. Awareness of that need means that teachers also sit in a semi-circle during CoL sessions to make it easy for him to both hear their responses and to move around for follow-up and presentation. This adaptation to the needs of teachers with disabilities creates a more conducive environment for all teachers to have rich discussions, as opposed to being seated in rows as we have observed in some schools. 

These sensitive responses to colleagues’ needs and teachers’ monitoring of them in turn facilitated our data collection since routines are often already in place to support teachers with disabilities. In one school, however, teachers commented that no expert teacher could assist their hearing-impaired colleague, signalling a need for systematized support across all schools and teachers.

Teachers embrace research adaptations

We found that teachers with disabilities responded very positively to our adaptations, feeling that their needs had been carefully considered and addressed. The Braille cards were used in two regions, where participants were very appreciative to have them available. When piloting our tools in Dar es Salaam, one school which had no teachers with disabilities arranged for two teachers with visual and hearing impairments respectively to be transported to their site; after finishing the extensive pilot activities, those teachers were very keen to stay even longer and tell us more about their needs and experiences. 

This experience highlighted numerous strategies that researchers can use to ensure research processes are inclusive for teachers with disabilities. We greatly look forward to our second round of data collection later this year and learning more from teachers with disabilities about how TCPD programs, as well as research processes, can be made accessible and engaging for them.

Acknowledgements:

The study is co-funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Canada, the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), with partners including Aga Khan Foundation, Tanzania Institute of Education and Aga Khan University. It is part of the “Empowering Teachers Initiative: Teacher Professional Development at Scale,” an IDRC global research for development program jointly implemented by the Foundation for Information Technology Education and Development (FIT-ED) and SUMMA under the TPD@Scale Coalition for the Global South. The views expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of FCDO, BMGF, IDRC or its Board of Governors, FIT-ED, SUMMA, the TPD@Scale Coalition or any of its members.

Footnotes:

*The full research team includes Sara Hennessy, Calvin Swai, Kristeen Chachage, Saalim Koomar, Taskeen Adam, Winston Massam, Fredrick Mtenzi, Aneth Komba, Fika Mwakabungu, Henry Nkya, Jonathan Paskali, Winifrida Mrope, Gervace Anthony, Emmanuel Mutura, Mustafa Malibiche, Vicky Mrosso, Philbert Komba and Hannah Simmons, assisted by Maryam Aboud and Innocent Rwambali.