The University of Dodoma University of Dodoma Institutional Repository http://repository.udom.ac.tz

Humanities Master Dissertations

2016 The challenges facing Tanzanian sign language learners: A case of special schools for the deaf

Benjamin, Andrew

The University of Dodoma

Benjamin, A. (2016). The challenges facing Tanzanian sign language learners: A case of special schools for the deaf. Dodoma: The University of Dodoma. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12661/1123 Downloaded from UDOM Institutional Repository at The University of Dodoma, an open access institutional repository. THE CHALLENGES FACING TANZANIAN SIGN LANGUAGE

LEARNERS: A CASE OF SPECIAL SCHOOLS FOR THE DEAF

By

Andrew Benjamin

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts in Linguistics of the University of Dodoma

The University of Dodoma

October, 2016 CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certifies that she has read and hereby recommends for acceptance by the University of Dodoma a dissertation entitled The Challenges Facing

Tanzanian Sign Language Learners: A Case of Special Schools for the Deaf, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Linguistics of the University of Dodoma.

Signature: ......

Dr. Rafiki Y. Sebonde

(Supervisor)

Date: ......

i DECLARATION

AND

COPYRIGHT

I, Andrew Benjamin, declare that this dissertation is my own original work and that it has not been presented and will not be presented to any other university for a similar or any other degree award.

Signature: ......

No part of this dissertation may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written permission of the author or the University of Dodoma. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am, firstly and foremost, thankful to the Almighty God without whose mercy, this dissertation would not have reached this stage.

I would also like to express my heartfelt appreciation to my supervisor, Dr. Rafiki Y.

Sebonde, who dedicated her significant time to supervise me from the beginning to the end of this dissertation. Without her remarkable contribution, guidance, encouragement and cooperation during the whole process of study, this dissertation could not have come to this status. May the Almighty God bless you!

Lastly, my sincere appreciation goes to all friends, MA Linguistics colleagues and academic/non-academic members of staff of the University of Dodoma. Thank you for your genuine support and God bless you.

iii DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to my beloved mother, Rahel Hosea Mkosaa, who raised and laid the foundation of my education and career. May the Almighty God bless you!

iv ABSTRACT

The study intended to examine the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners. It, specifically, focused on the examination of those challenges which Sign

Language learners face while learning their language. It also focused on investigating the causes of challenges facing TSL learners. The study also aimed at finding out possible solutions towards eradication of the challenges. It was guided by the

Linguistic Interdependence Theory propounded by Jim Cummins (1981). The study employed a purposive sampling method. The data were gathered through questionnaires, semi-structured interview, lesson observation and documentary review from two special Deaf and Hard of Hearing schools in Dar es Salaam and

Dodoma region.

The findings of the study revealed that, TSL learners were facing a number of challenges. The language itself was neither taught as a subject to TSL learners nor examined by schools or NECTA. The research also found that, TSL teachers and learners were using the normal curricula which were designed for hearing pupils. The findings revealed further that most of the challenges facing TSL learners were caused by policies, curricula and lack of awareness of hearing community towards

Deaf/Hard of Hearing matters including their Sign language.

The study, therefore, recommends intensive awareness campaigns for Deaf/Hard of

Hearing matters including their TSL for the aim of changing the hearing community‟s attitude towards Deaf people. It also encourages the establishment of new special curriculum for the Deaf which would accommodate the teaching of TSL as a subject and use it as a medium of instruction to all Deaf schools and units. It is further recommended that, further researches should be conducted to examine linguistic aspects of the TSL since the TSL is linguistically a comprehensive language like normal spoken languages.

v TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTIFICATION ...... i DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT ...... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... iii DEDICATION ...... iv ABSTRACT ...... v TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... xi

CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO THE STUDY ...... 1 1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background of the Study ...... 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem ...... 5 1.3 Objectives of the Study ...... 5 1.3.1 General Objective ...... 5 1.3.2 Specific Objectives ...... 5 1.4 Research Questions ...... 6 1.5 Significance of the Study ...... 6 1.6 The Scope of the Study ...... 7 1.7 Chapter Conclusion ...... 7

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 8 2.0 Introduction ...... 8 2.1 Theoretical Framework ...... 8 2.2 Literature Review ...... 11 2.2.1 The Concept of Sign Language ...... 11 2.2.2 Tanzanian Sign Language ...... 12 2.2.3 Sign Language and Education ...... 13 2.2.4 Tanzanian Deaf Education ...... 15 2.2.5 Challenges Facing Sign Language Learners in Special Schools ...... 16 2.2.6 Suggested Solutions towards Eradication of Problems Facing Sign Language Learners in Special Deaf and Hard of Hearing Schools ...... 28 vi 2.3 Research Gap ...... 35 2.4 Chapter Conclusion ...... 36

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 37 3.0 Introduction ...... 37 3.1 Research Design ...... 37 3.2 Population and Area of the Study ...... 37 3.3 Sampling Technique and Sample Size ...... 38 3.4 Methods of Data Collection ...... 39 3.4.1 Questionnaires ...... 39 3.4.2 Semi-structured Interview ...... 40 3.4.3 Lesson Observation ...... 40 3.4.4 Documentary Review ...... 40 3.5 Data Analysis ...... 41 3.5.1 Data Gathered through Questionnaires ...... 41 3.5.2 Data Gathered through Semi-structured Interview ...... 41 3.5.3 Data Gathered through Lesson Observation ...... 42 3.5.4 Data Gathered through Documentary Review ...... 42 3.6 Research Ethics ...... 42 3.7 Reliability and Validity of Data ...... 43 3.7.1 Reliability ...... 43 3.7.2 Validity ...... 43 3.8 Chapter Conclusion ...... 43

CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS ...... 44 4.0 Introduction ...... 44 4.1 Challenges Facing Tanzanian Sign Language Learners ...... 44 4.1.1 Overcrowded Classes ...... 45 4.1.2 Lack of TSL Books ...... 47 4.1.3 Shortage of TSL Learning Aids (Apart from Books) ...... 51 4.1.4 Most of TSL Learners are Born of Hearing Parents ...... 54 4.1.5 Lack of Early Deaf and Hard of Hearing Identification Programmes ...... 56

vii 4.1.6 Parents Do Not Give Necessary Support to their Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children ...... 58 4.1.7 Incompatibility of the Curriculum ...... 62 4.1.8 Tanzanian Sign Language is Not One of the Subjects Taught and Examined by NECTA ...... 65 4.1.9 Unpleasant TSL Learning Environment ...... 67 4.1.10 Most of the Education Inspectors are not Conversant with TSL ...... 71 4.1.11 Some of the Teachers are not Conversant with TSL ...... 72 4.1.12 Lack of Qualified Special Education Teachers ...... 76 4.1.13 General Inadequacy of Government Support ...... 78 4.2 Causes of the Challenges Facing Tanzanian Sign Language Learners ...... 79 4.2.1 Shortage of Special Education Colleges/Universities ...... 80 4.1.2 Insufficient Number of Deaf Schools in Tanzania ...... 81 4.2.3 Inadequate Researches about Tanzanian Sign Language ...... 82 4.2.4 Unclear Policies and Curricula ...... 84 4.2.4.1 Education and Training Policy (1995) ...... 85 4.2.4.2 The Tanzanian Pre-Primary Educational Curriculum (2013) ...... 87 4.2.4.3 The Tanzania Primary Education Curriculum (2013) ...... 88 4.2.4.4 Curriculum for Certificate in Teacher Education Programmes in Tanzania (2013) ...... 88 4.2.4.5 Curriculum for Diploma in Teacher Education Programmes in Tanzania (2013) ...... 89 4.2.4.6 Education and Training Policy (2014) ...... 90 4.2.4.7 The Pre-Primary School Curriculum and Syllabus (2016) ...... 90 4.2.4.8 The Primary Education Curriculum STD I-II (2016) ...... 91 4.2.4.9 The Primary Education Curriculum STD III-VI (2016) ...... 91 4.2.5 Lack of Awareness on Deafness and their Language ...... 92 4.3 Solutions towards Eradication of Problems Facing TSL Learners ...... 94 4.3.1 A Need for Awareness Campaign on TSL and Deaf/Hard of Hearing Matters 94 4.3.2 Development of the Deaf Special Education Curriculum ...... 97 4.3.3 A Need for Developing a Genuine Government Support towards Deaf Special Education ...... 99 4.3.4 The Need to Oversee Special Education Training ...... 100

viii 4.3.5 Introduction of Early Deaf/Hard of Hearing Identification/ Screening Programmes ...... 101 4.3.6 Introducing a Comprehensive TSL Training for Teachers of the Deaf ...... 102 4.3.7 The TSL be Taught and be Examinable Subject to All Levels of Deaf Education ...... 104 4.3.8 The Compilation and Development of a Well Researched TSL Dictionary.... 106 4.3.9 Making TSL Teaching and Learning Materials Available ...... 107 4.4 Reflection of the Theoretical Framework to the Findings ...... 108 4.5 Chapter Conclusion ...... 109

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 111 5.0 Introduction ...... 111 5.1 Summary of the Study ...... 111 5.2 Conclusion ...... 113 5.3 Recommendations ...... 113 5.3.1 General Recommendations ...... 114 5.3.2 Recommendations for Further Researchers ...... 115 REFERENCES ...... 116 APPENDICES ...... 123

ix LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1: Teachers‟ Responses on whether the Number of Learners Affects TSL Learning in Their Classes ...... 45 Table 4.2: Responses of TSL Learners on the Availability of TSL Books and Other Materials ...... 48 Table 4.3: Teachers‟ Responses about Whether Their Schools Have Enough TSL Books ...... 48 Table 4.4: Teachers‟ Responses about the State of TSL Teaching and Learning Materials ...... 51 Table 4.5: Teachers‟ Responses on Whether They Taught TSL Learners from Deaf Parents ...... 54 Table 4.6: Teachers‟ Responses on the Parents‟ Support to TSL Learning ...... 59 Table 4.7: Learners‟ Responses on whether Their Parents are Capable of Using TSL ...... 59 Table 4.8: Teachers‟ Responses on Their Flexibility of the Curricula to the Teaching and Learning ...... 62 Table 4.9: Teachers‟ Reponses on whether they are Satisfied with the TSL Teaching and Learning Environment and Facilities ...... 68 Table 4.10: Learners‟ Responses on the Satisfaction with Schools Facilities and Learning Environment ...... 68 Table 4.11: Teachers‟ Responses about whether they Attended to Special Needs Education Colleges ...... 73 Table 4.12: Teachers‟ Responses about whether the TSL Training Obtained from Special Needs Education Colleges/Universities is Enough ...... 74

x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CHAVITA Chama cha Viziwi Tanzania (Tanzania Association for the Deaf)

DFC Disability Friendly Centre

DPO Disabled People‟s Organisation

ETP Education and Training Policy

HI Hearing Impairment/Impaired

LAT Lugha ya Alama Tanzania

MoESTVT Ministry of Education, Science, Technology and Vocational

Training

MoEVT Ministry of Education and Vocational Training

MOE Ministry of Education

NECTA National Examinations Council of Tanzania

SASL South African Sign Language

SEKOMU Sebastian Kolowa Memorial University

SNE Special Needs Education

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TIE Tanzania Institute of Education

TSL Tanzanian Sign Language

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Science and Cultural Organizations

ZSL Zimbabwean Sign Language

7th QEC Seventh Quality Education Conference

xi CHAPTER ONE

BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO THE STUDY

1.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the background information of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study, research questions, significance of the study and the scope of the study.

1.1 Background of the Study

According to Baker-Shenk and Cokely (1991) as cited in Mesthrie et al (2004), Sign

Languages are the languages used by Deaf people as their primary means of communication. Unlike spoken languages which rely on sound and hearing, Sign

Languages are visual-gestural languages perceived through the eyes, not the ears and using body movement instead of sound. Sign Languages are ordinary human languages and are used to communicate about the same things hearing people communicate about using spoken languages. Contrary to common beliefs among hearing people, Sign Languages are not pantomine-like systems of gestures, universally understood and restricted in content and expression. They are autonomous natural languages with the same degree of linguistic complexity and expressive range as spoken languages (Mesthrie et al, 2004). Baker (1999) sees Sign

Language as a fully developed and authentic language which allows its users to communicate the same complete meaning as does a spoken language. According to him, signing is a very extensive, structurally complex, rule-bound and complete means of communication. Sign Language can perform the same range of functions as a spoken language and can be used to teach any aspect of the curriculum. Johnston &

Schembri (2007) refer to Signed languages as the natural languages of Deaf

1 communities. They refer to these languages as the scientific study of visual-gestural languages of Deaf communities rather than the auditory-oral languages of hearing people.

Baker (ibid) asserts that, Sign Language is not gesturing since gesturing is relatively, unsystematic and is used in an adhoc way to express a small number of basic ideas

(e.g., pointing to something that is wanted). We all use non-verbal communication to add emphasis to our speech but the use of Sign Language tends to help Deaf people interact with one another, socialization into Deaf culture, identification with Deaf people, and engagement in Deaf society's cultural activities and their shared values, meanings, and understandings. Baker (1999) says that like spoken languages, Sign

Languages are rule-governed and structured at different levels of analysis: semantics, syntax, morphology and phonology. Kyle and Woll (1985) as cited in Mesthrie et al

(2004) say that just as spoken words are combinations of different sounds; signs are also made up of individual components. Zeshan (2000) says that Sign Language researches have shown that, four components are important for the identification and distinction of individual signs: the location of the sign in space, the hand shape used to make the sign, the type of movement made by the hands and the orientation of the palms of the hands.

According to Johnston and Schembri (2007), the recognition of signed languages may be traced back to the work of Plato in Ancient Greece. In his philosophical work, Cratylus (written in 360 BC), Plato wrote that if we had no voice or tongue,

„should we not, like the Deaf and dumb, make signs with the hand and head and the rest of the body?‟ In the eighteenth century, the French philosopher René Descartes suggested that the Sign Languages of Deaf people represented examples of true

2 human languages (Rée, 1999). Similar beliefs were shared by nineteenth-century scholars such as Edward Tylor in Britain, Wilhelm Wundt in Germany and Garrick

Mallery in the United States of America (Kendon, 2004). The educator Roch-

Ambroise Bébian even attempted to develop a writing system for Sign Languages based on his discovery that signs could be analysed into smaller components

(Fischer, 1995). Unfortunately, for a number of reasons, however, Sign Language research went into decline during the early twentieth century, and many of these earlier insights were forgotten.

Johnston and Schembri (2007) say that the modern Sign Language linguistics may, often, be considered to have begun with the publication of Sign Language Structure by William Stokoe in 1960. Stokoe presented persuasive evidence that American

Sign Language (ASL) was indeed a language with a grammar and vocabulary independent of English. This was followed five years later by the Dictionary of

American Sign Language on Linguistic Principles (Stokoe, Casterline & Croneberg,

1965). Stokoe‟s publications were, however, preceded by work published in Dutch by Bernard Tervoort in 1953. Tervoort, recognised signing as a language, but his study was less influential than the later work by Stokoe.

Sign Language research started in the United Kingdom and Europe in the mid-1970s, and began in Australia in the 1980s with the work of Trevor Johnston. Since the

1980s, signed language research began to become a truly international field of research, with research papers published on signed languages from South and

Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa and South America. In 2004, at the Eighth

International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, in

3 Barcelona (Spain), papers on over 25 signed languages, from all parts of the world, were presented.

On the other hand, Mreta and Muzale (2001) assert that, Sign Language in Tanzania is a relatively, new field of linguistics. Tanzanian Sign Language (henceforth TSL) was firstly established by Tanzania Association for the Deaf in 1993 for the function of unifying the Deaf people in the country. The Tanzania Association for the Deaf

(1993) estimates that, the number of Deaf in Tanzania is about five hundred thousand but only one per cent stands a chance to use the TSL. The TSL has become an official language in very recent years (Batamula, 2009). It was announced as an official language for the Deaf of Tanzania in July, 2007. Ever since, private sector and the government have established deliberate efforts to make sure that Deaf/Hard of Hearing people, learn and use TSL in their daily life activities. There are approximately seven (special) schools for the Deaf in Tanzania which are all funded and run by churches, parents of Deaf children, and/or other NGOs. There are also about 14 Deaf units that are attached to mainstream schools. Many of these units offer boarding as well (Batamula, 2009). Apart from these (special) schools and units for Deaf/Hard of Hearing, there are also mainstream schools which practice Inclusive

Education. Polat (2011) stresses that, inclusive education aims at building a society that promotes equal opportunities for all citizens to take part in and play their role in development of the nation. Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners in special schools, units and in inclusive schools use TSL as their medium of instruction. Deaf/Hard of

Hearing learners are facing a number of challenges in learning TSL. The study at hand therefore, intended to examine the challenges facing TSL learners.

4 1.2 Statement of the Problem

Although the National Policy on Disability in Tanzania (2004) recognizes the importance of education as key to developing the potential of children with disabilities and does suggest that they should be given priority, it also acknowledges that the education system in Tanzania is largely inaccessible to these children.

Despite the deliberative efforts taken by the government and private sector in promoting education for the Deaf and especially in learning TSL, there is still only one per cent of the Deaf Community which stands a chance to use TSL according to

CHAVITA (1993). The Deaf and Hard of Hearing are still facing a number of challenges towards learning TSL in special schools, units and inclusive classes.

Therefore, this study intended to examine the challenges facing TSL learners, investigate the causes of these challenges and, lastly, find out possible solutions towards eradication of challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners in special schools.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The study had a general objective and three specific objectives.

1.3.1 General Objective

The study intended to examine the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners in special schools and, eventually, looks for the possible solutions of these challenges.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

In order to achieve the general objective, the study involved three specific objectives:

5 i. To examine the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners in

special schools.

ii. To investigate the causes of the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language

learners.

iii. To find out possible solutions towards eradication of problems facing

Tanzanian Sign Language Learners.

1.4 Research Questions

The study had the following research questions:

i. What are the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners in special

schools?

ii. What are the causes of the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language

learners?

iii. What are the possible solutions toward eradication of challenges facing

Tanzanian Sign Language learners?

1.5 Significance of the Study

The findings of this research are expected to be beneficial to different education stakeholders in a number of ways. Anyone interested in Deaf and Hard of Hearing education and in special need education in general, will find this study useful since the findings reveal a comprehensive understanding about the challenges facing TSL learners, causes and solutions towards eradication of challenges facing these learners.

The knowledge which has been generated through this study should enable other researchers to develop their studies for the sake of improving the quality of the language itself (TSL) by looking at its structure i.e. lexical unit, syntactical unit as well as semantic portion. The study is expected to create awareness to the hearing 6 community about TSL and other Deaf matters including their rights. The research findings are also expected to influence effective changes on education policies and curricula about TSL teaching and learning.

1.6 The Scope of the Study

The study was conducted in Dar es Salaam and Dodoma regions. In each region, one

Deaf/Hard of Hearing special primary school was studied.

1.7 Chapter Conclusion

The chapter has presented the background information of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study and research questions. The presentation of the significance of the study and the scope of the study has also been done here.

7 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the theoretical framework which guided the current study. It also reviews previous literatures relevant to the study and finally identifies the research gap.

2.1 Theoretical Framework

The study was inspired by the theory of Linguistic Interdependence by Jim Cummins

(1981). The theory says:

“To the extent that instruction in LX is effective in promoting proficiency in LX, transfer of this proficiency in LY will occur provided there‟s adequate exposure to LY (either in school or environment) and adequate motivation to learn LY.”

The basis of this theory is on the belief that all languages share common underlying proficiencies. The theory has been used to explain how children learn a second language by transferring from and building connections with their first language.

According to Cummins (1981), smooth learning of the mother tongue or first language and acquiring the required proficiency, allow a learner to use that proficiency in learning second language only if there is adequate exposure to that language (either in school or environment) and adequate motivation to learn that second language. Cummins (1989a) as cited in Mayer and Akamatsu (1999) writes that linguistic interdependence makes possible the transfer of cognitive/academic or literacy related skills across languages. Therefore, the emphasis of the Linguistic

Interdependence Theory to this study was on the enhancement of smooth learning of the LX (which is the acquisition of TSL) by examining the challenges which hamper the smooth learning of TSL, causes and ways of eliminating those challenges so that

8 proficiency of LX could be tirelessly acquired and transfer that proficiency to the learning of other spoken/written languages (which are Kiswahili and English). As

Mayer and Akamatsu (1999) insist, the argument in Deaf Education, which follows from this theory, is that Deaf children who have a solid L1 foundation in a native sign language, can use this language to buttress their learning of the majority language in its written form, as far as there is good exposure to the majority language through either speech or a manually coded system. The theory has been chosen due to the fact that, all sign language all over the world lack written representations.

Therefore, Sign languages are simultaneously used in education system of Deaf and

Hard of Hearing with spoken languages. As the study sought to examine the challenges, causes and finally find ways to eradicate those challenges so as to enhance smooth learning of the TSL; then it considered the importance of effective instruction of the LX in the promotion of the proficiencies of LX. The application of the Linguistic Interdependence Theory in this study will therefore, count on the building of smooth TSL learning which will lay down a good foundation of teaching and learning spoken languages like Kiswahili and English to the Deaf/Hard of

Hearing learners. In order for the Tanzanian Deaf/Hard of Hearing be conversant with these spoken languages they learn in pre-primary, primary and secondary schools; there must be a barrier-free TSL learning environment which is the primary purpose of this study. As Mayer and Akamatsu (1999) say there is the fact that

[smooth] learning [of] a native sign language can develop the cognitive power that supports broad conceptual and cognitive transfers across languages, and it would appear that a native sign language is both necessary and sufficient for the development of a first language that can be used as a central component in the mediation of experience with profoundly Deaf children. Mulonda (2013) asserts that

9 if Sign Language is recognized as the first language of the profoundly Deaf students, and used as the medium of instruction [in a barrier free context] then, the skills acquired in Sign Language can be transferred to the learning of spoken languages through literacy activities involving the use of written languages. Cummins (2006) as quoted by Mulonda (2013) argues that the Linguistic Interdependence Theory does allow for the transfer of conceptual knowledge, meta-linguistic strategies and specific linguistic elements like initialized sign and finger spelling to the learning of spoken/written languages.

The Linguistic Interdependence Theory has been used in a number of other studies including those in Sign Language researches. A good example of these studies comes from Cummins (2006) whose study was about the relationship between American

Sign Language proficiency and English academic development. The research data clearly show that students (from both Deaf and Hearing school/home [better] backgrounds) who have developed strong ASL proficiency have significantly better prospects for developing adequate English literacy skills. Other researchers who also used the same theory in their Sign Language studies include Mulonda (2013) who investigated a situational analysis on the use of Sign Language in the education of the Deaf in Zambia. He came out with various observations concerning his different objectives but the important one is the importance of teaching Sign Language to the young Deaf pupils in Zambia as a foundation of other subjects and verbal languages.

Quigley & Kretschmer (1982) in their study insisted on the importance of teaching

Sign Languages to DEAF children as a backbone for the deaf children‟s further studies. Vernon & Koh (1970) reported that, Deaf children of Deaf parents who have early exposure to ASL as their first language were superior to Deaf children of hearing parents in the aspect of reading, vocabulary and written language. Newport 10 & Meier (1985) reported that, a fully developed language provides normal cognitive development within children‟s critical period.

2.2 Literature Review

This section reviewed previous literatures relevant to this study. The purpose of this review was to explore past researches conducted in the area of Sign Language learning. The chapter is categorised into: the concept of Sign Language, Tanzanian

Sign Language, Tanzanian Deaf Education, challenges facing Sign Language learners as well as suggested solutions towards eradication of problems facing Sign

Language learners.

2.2.1 The Concept of Sign Language

In the past, many people thought Sign Languages were simply, manual representations of spoken languages while others thought Sign Language was just a collection of meaningless gestures and, therefore, attempted to suppress it in various ways. For instance, Smith (2000) says parents of deaf children were advised not to allow their children to use signs or even gestures as this would spoil their chances of developing speech and lip reading skills, in spite of the fact that, this system was failing the majority of Deaf children.

Today, most people have come to accept that Sign Languages are not literal translations of spoken languages. Their complex spatial grammars are markedly different from the grammars of spoken language predominant in those communities

(Mulonda, 2013). Penn (1993) argues that, Sign Language is a real language, which should be equal in status to all other languages. Deaf people can sign any topic, concrete or abstract. The Deaf do not live apart from hearing people, and they need

11 to communicate with hearing people in order to function socially and economically

(Ricento, 2006).

Therefore, according to Baker-Shenk and Cokely (1991: 47–8) cited in Mesthrie et al

(2004), Sign Languages are the languages used by Deaf people as their primary means of communication. Unlike spoken languages which rely on sound and hearing,

Sign Languages are visual-gestural languages perceived through the eyes, not the ears and using body movement instead of sound. Baker (1999) defines Sign

Language as a fully developed and authentic language which allows its users to communicate the same complete meaning as does a spoken language. According to him, signing is a very extensive, structurally complex, rule-bound and complete means of communication. Sign Language can perform the same range of functions as a spoken language and can be used to teach any aspect of the curriculum.

2.2.2 Tanzanian Sign Language

Tanzanian Sign Language (TSL) is a language used by the Deaf community of

Tanzania. Sign Language in Tanzania is a relatively new field of linguistics that is yet to attract many researchers and linguists in particular (Mreta and Muzale, 2001).

Tanzanian Sign Language (TSL) functions as a unifying tool for the Deaf in the country and, probably, beyond. According to Ethnologue, Languages of the World

(2016), the number of signers in 2008 were 278,000. Historically, again according to

Ethnologue, [Tanzanian] schools for the deaf use different Sign Languages, and some schools teach only speech and lip-reading. More recently, Tanzanian Sign

Language was standardized by the Tanzania Association for the Deaf which is attempting to use it in most schools for the Deaf. Batamula (2009) in line with

Ethnologue says that the language was announced as an official language for the

12 Tanzanian Deaf in July of 2007. Chama cha Viziwi Tanzania (CHAVITA) approximates that, only 1% of the Deaf in Tanzania are conversant with the standard dialect of the TSL since it is not fully used as a medium of instruction to most of the

Deaf schools (CHAVITA, 1993). The TSL standard dialect, came into existence after the first TSL research done by CHAVITA in 1993. Among other things, the research resulted to the compilation of the first version of the TSL dictionary (Mreta and

Muzale, 2001).

2.2.3 Sign Language and Education

The history of Deaf Education, according to Mesthrie et al (2004), has been controlled for the most part by hearing people. It has been characterised by continuing and, often, dogmatic debates. Some educators have supported the use of

Sign Language in Deaf Education (the manual approach), while others have advocated the use of spoken language (the oral approach). A manual approach combining signing (primarily manual sign codes) and speech was used by the so- called „Manualists‟ in the eighteenth century. This system of teaching was developed in Paris by the Abbe Charles-Michel de l‟Epee (1712 – 89) and his successor Abbe

Roch- Ambroise Sicard (1742 – 1822). The oral approach to Deaf Education, initially, propagated by Samuel Heinicke (1727 – 90) in Leipzig and Hamburg, emphasised the advantages of lip-reading and speech, while signing was, often entirely, banned from the classroom. Aiming at integration into the majority hearing culture at all costs, oralist approaches have been supported by many hearing educators, but are opposed by most Deaf people.

The oralist approach gained strength in the course of the late nineteenth century, and the victory was complete when, in 1880 at the International Congress on the

13 Education of the Deaf in Milan, hearing participants voted for the implementation of oralism in all schools for the deaf. The effects of this vote were dramatic: while in

1867 every American school for the Deaf utilised and taught the American Sign

Language (ASL) and manual sign codes to varying degrees, not one school was doing so in 1907. Deaf Education became reduced to speech training, and little time and effort was left for the teaching of the normal school curriculum (Dolnick, 1993) as cited in Mesthrie et al (2004).

Mesthrie et al (2004) further assert that, the growing concern about the educational performance of deaf children in the 1960s (with illiteracy rates of over 30 per cent among deaf adults), and the first results from early sign-language research, led to a reconsideration of the oral approach, and as a result a method termed Total

Communication was widely, propagated in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Total

Communication makes simultaneous use of spoken language and different sign systems including fingerspelling, manual sign codes (such as the Paget–Gorman system) and to some extent Sign Languages. It was believed that the use of manual sign codes whose grammatical and syntactic structure represented the oral language would ease the acquisition of literacy in the majority hearing language among deaf children. This seemingly logical assumption, however, proved to be problematic.

Research has shown that the production of a proposition (a unit of meaning) in manual sign codes takes on average twice as long as the production of a proposition in spoken language. The proposition rate between Sign Languages and spoken languages is, however, equivalent. The reason for this is that the spatial organisation of sign-language grammar allows for the simultaneous production of lexical signs as well as grammatical and morphological indicators.

14 2.2.4 Tanzanian Deaf Education

The 2012 National Census calculates a population of approximately 45 million citizens. According to the World Health Organization and the National Bureau of

Statistics, about 3,400,000 of the population are disabled and 700,000 have hearing loss. Some researchers estimate about 50 to 60 per cent of all hearing loss in developing countries is preventable. Often, this hearing loss is caused by preventable diseases such as Rubella or chronic and severe ear infections that are left untreated

(Batamula, 2009). As predicted by Batamula (2009), there are more Deaf children than space available in schools for the Deaf or Deaf programmes in the country.

There are approximately seven schools for the Deaf. These schools are mostly boarding ones where majority of the pupils live in housing on campus. The schools account for the education of approximately 1,000 deaf and hard of hearing pupils annually. None of these schools are run by the government. They are all funded and run by churches, parents of Deaf children, and/or other NGOs, though the government does provide the salaries for the teachers. The schools follow their own set of policies and manage everything from within, leaving the government in the dark (though probably not purposefully) about enrolment, teaching pedagogy, and other important issues. There are also about 14 Deaf units that are attached to the mainstream schools. Many of these schools offer boarding facilities as well. They provide schooling for only about 500 Deaf or hard of hearing children.

According to Batamula (ibid), all the Deaf schools and units which are attached to the mainstream schools have long waiting list for a number of deaf children which in real sense cannot be enroled due to lack of space, human resources and other resources. This may be the reason which has been pressing the government to

15 introduce inclusive education, which in fact faces lots of challenges to Deaf and many other disabled pupils (Chaula, 2014).

2.2.5 Challenges Facing Sign Language Learners in Special Schools

Earlier studies revealed various challenges which may face Sign Language learners during the process of acquiring or learning Sign Languages:

The South African Department of Basic Education (2013) observed the challenge of early deaf identification which also causes the majority of deaf children not have early access to basic programmes for stimulation and development of Sign

Language. Since majority of deaf children are born by hearing parents and thus enter school without the requisite language, this poses another challenge to Sign Language learners who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Mulonda (2013) says that children naturally acquire their language from home during their infancy. This situation is not the case for 95% of the Deaf children born from hearing families. These children do not have access to the acquisition of the first language early enough. They reach school with restricted linguistic and social preparation. The impact of this on the structure of the school is that the school must prepare the children for acquisition of a first natural language, for second language acquisition, socialization and development of world knowledge. These tasks, generally undertaken naturally in their infancy at home, will take place in school

(Adoyo, 2002). This may imply that schools may not have the additional time and resources needed to undertake this task of educating the Deaf in their mother tongue right from the scratch.

16 Other challenges revealed by South African Department of Basic Education are: about 80% teachers in schools for the Deaf are unable to use Sign Language, no nationally approved South African Sign Language curriculum, very few Deaf learners progress beyond grade 12, Deaf learner boarders do not have access to hostels and support staff equipped with Sign Language, not all classes for the Deaf have Deaf Teacher Assistants, majority of schools for the Deaf do not have requisite equipment for example, for recording learner assessment activities, teachers are not provided with guidelines for utilising workbooks and few schools have audio equipment and audiologists.

Mpofu and Shumba (2012) came up with other challenges facing Sign Language learners and Deaf pupils in general as incompatibility of the curriculum (for example, content, teaching strategies teacher preparation), the Sign Language teachers‟ negative attitudes and the truth that the physical learning environments for children with disabilities in most schools and units are not user-friendly. There is lack of support systems involvement (formal and informal) in the teaching and learning.

Also, there are unsuitable educational approaches which are employed by Sign

Language teachers in teaching Sign Language learners, the nonexistence of sign- word equivalence, especially in teaching signers by using oral-aural and total communication approaches, polysemy, comprehension of non-literal meaning, grammar and little or no attention paid to literacy development in early childhood

(the primary language environment). Other challenges are: inter-language differences

– syntax, absence of literacy development throughout primary and secondary education and specific areas – prepositions, phrasal verbs etc (Martin, 2009).

17 Batamula (2009) asserts that there is a challenge of lack of qualified teachers capable of using TSL in teaching Deaf children. Her study aimed to unearth the overview situation of Deaf Education here in Tanzania, and came up with the challenges facing

Deaf Education in general. Batamula‟s study was somehow different from this one which specifically intended to examine the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign

Language learners and suggest solutions. Because of these differences, the researcher expected to come up with different results which would be helpful for Tanzanian

Sign Language learners.

Swanepoel (undated) a psychologist at St Vincent School for the Deaf (South

Africa), in his article titled “Equal right, Equal opportunity: Education and disability” says that, Deaf children are enrolled at school exceedingly late (often between the ages of nine to twelve years) thus, further exacerbating the barriers to learning.

Departmental Policy is also a barrier in that there are maximum ages allowed for each grade; there is lack of agreement amongst teachers, therapists and principals within one school and even less agreement, amongst sister Deaf schools, as to which communication and educational method should be used (strictly oral, strictly Sign

Language or a bilingual approach). Nevertheless, teachers and therapists alike are currently not required by law to have any specialized qualification or experience to work in a school for Deaf learners in South Africa. The consequence of this is that, teachers and therapists are faced with learners whom they cannot communicate with and therefore, have to learn South African Sign Language (SASL) on the job. In some cases, outside service providers or universities are recruited to train teachers in

SASL. However, learning to educate and communicate with Deaf learners are not skills that can be imparted in workshops or short courses. This is because, methodology and communication require years to master. In contrast, during short 18 courses, the focus is on rudimentary signs which are not sufficient to teach academic content. Another challenge facing Deaf learners is extremely low expectations of their abilities from both parents and teachers. A high percentage of Deaf children in

South Africa comes from impoverished backgrounds where their most basic needs

(food, water and housing) are not met. A harsh reality of this situation is that, parents/guardians need to focus on day to day survival for the family (and often also the extended family) making it nearly impossible to address the demands their disabled child‟s needs place on them. The communities in which Deaf children live are not always close to their schools and many of them have to travel long distances

(leaving home at 4am to be at school by 7:30 am). These children arrive at school hungry, fatigued and unable to concentrate. Many schools do not have the luxury of providing meals. Children often act out their frustrations in class which is met by punishment from teachers. Again, several Deaf schools still have the option of boarding facilities but whilst these facilities may have vast benefits (especially for the development of the child's language); very young Deaf children are separated from their attachment figures for extended periods of time. Incidents of abuse by peers, teachers and hostel staff are also rife in certain boarding facilities.

Maruff and Sofiyat (2011) assert that the challenges facing disabled children hinder the students‟ personal, vocational, academic and social adjustment due to general inadequacy of educational funding. Nigerian education is not adequately funded, and this also has effects on the education of students with disabilities. Certain educational materials, facilities and equipment which could have enabled them to learn without tears are not adequately provided. There is lack of adequate specialists and para- professionals such as the physiotherapists, the pathologists, the braillists and Sign

Language interpreters. Those available are not enough to service the population of 19 students with disabilities. Ojerinde and Ladipo (1999), cited in Oladejo (2001) reported that the architectural designs of most of the institutions where the education of students with disabilities take place, did not take into consideration, the disability nature of these people. There is also a challenge of poor and ineffective implementation of the policies formulated towards the betterment of the education of students with disabilities. This has been the usual case with almost all educational policies in Nigeria.

Muiti (2010) revealed the challenges of communication barriers between teachers and their Sign Language learners, difficult in explaining abstract concepts for example, in teaching cultural and religious practices, lack of hearing devices, workload (of teachers) being too big, lack of adequate learning resources, teachers are just average in their communication using Sign Language and inadequate training is another problem. The parents do not give their children necessary support to enable them learn effectively. These parents also do not know how to communicate with their children using Sign Language meaning that they do not help their children in any way which can be a hindrance to effective learning. Inadequate teaching and learning resources, teachers using classrooms with no acoustic treatment and half of them not proficient in Sign Language, inspections not regularly done, and teachers rarely attending in service courses meaning that they are not equipped with current trends of education for learners with Hearing impairment (HI) are other challenges.

Mulonda (2013) reveals the challenges of lack of adequate Sign Language training of the teachers of the Deaf. As a result of this, teachers wrongly signed words at times.

This was also compounded by the the notion that Sign Language was a shallow language, lack of resources for Sign Language, since only one Sign Language book

20 and the Sign Language dictionary were found being used by teachers. The study further revealed that, parents were facing a challenge of communication with their children as well as the challenge of small number of schools offering education to

Deaf and hearing impaired pupils.

Mreta and Muzale (1999) revealed the challenges facing Tanzania Sign Language learners that most Deaf children do not get easy access to Sign Language because they are usually born into hearing families who do not sign. They further revealed that Deafness tends to be primarily seen by hearing people as a medical condition requiring cure, and speech is the dominant educational approach. They assert that, although there is good evidence that learning Sign Language does not interfere with the learning of speech, signing may not be advocated until past the critical learning period when speech has proved too challenging. These challenges however, came from a study which was intended to find out the influence of Kiswahili on the

Tanzanian Sign Language. Their study was much different from the current one which intended to investigate the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners and find out possible solutions to eliminate those challenges. The current study then, intended to unearth different findings which would specifically, help TSL learners in learning their language.

Sign Language learners also face the challenge of isolation/Deaf stereotype because some people believe that giving education to Deaf people is wastage of resources and that Deaf people are not productive and important to the socio-economic processes.

Therefore, Deaf people are excluded from the educational systems hence to employment opportunities (Global Deaf Connection, 2010). Another challenge facing Sign Language learners is about teaching methods. Some of the hearing

21 teachers use normal teaching methods to teach Sign Languages to Deaf pupils, methods which are otherwise used to teach hearing pupils in normal classes. There is also a challenge of shortage of specialists and academic staff (Maddern, 2010).

The Education for the Deaf lacks specific system. This challenge leads Deaf children learn different languages from their parents (ethnic languages), primary school

(Kiswahili) and in secondary school (English), consequently there is inconsistence and lack of proficiency in all those languages (Possi, 1999).

Hearing impaired students in inclusive classes experience problems of following and understanding instructions, lack of adequate Sign Language interpreters in classroom, and lack of teachers‟ assistance inside and outside the classroom (Safder et al, 2002). The study above confirms the findings by Fuller, Healey, Bradley &

Hall (2004) who have reported about the obstacles faced by the handicapped at university level. The results of their study indicated that there were many barriers in inclusive instruction such as the fast rate of teachers‟ speech during lectures, difficulty in participating in discussions and answering questions.

In her study, Chaula (2014) reveals the challenges of insufficient teaching and learning materials which would simplify the teaching and learning processes particularly to special needs pupils. These are large number of students within a single class which, exactly, goes against the needs of special need pupils and it affects the sitting plan, unclear policies on inclusive education, lack of support from the government and lack of collaboration between teachers and parents. There are also challenges of inadequate number of teachers, lack of fund in supporting inclusive education and negative attitude of teachers and parents. The study was

22 specifically focused on challenges that teachers face in inclusive education while the current one dealt with the challenges facing TSL learners in Deaf special schools.

Adoyo (2007) sees curriculum as one of the challenges to the education of disabled children that need to be carefully designed and adapted. The timing for the completion of the curriculum is also unrealistic for the Deaf people as the teaching and learning processes are slowed down due to the processes involved. Also a Deaf child in an inclusive class may not get individual attention from the teacher as the number of pupils in the regular classes is, normally, high due to free primary education as well as due to the broad regular curriculum. Therefore, adaptation by the teacher to the needs of those who are Deaf might be difficult. In addition, because schools in Kenya are ranked according to the mean scores obtained in national examinations, regular head teachers may be uncomfortable with the Deaf for fear of lowering their mean scores based on the low expectations. This challenge was also expressed by Johnson et al (1989) who claimed that, in the past, some schools for the

Deaf were denied examination registration of candidates by the district education officers for fear of lowering the schools mean scores. Also, teachers in special schools, have negative attitudes towards learning Kenyan Sign Language. This results in incompetence of the teachers in the medium of instruction once placed in a regular classroom where they find it difficult to teach the curriculum content effectively. Although parents have the rights to choose where their children should learn and since many of the parents still view Deafness as a curse, they might find it difficult to have their children share classes with their Deaf counterparts. Since

Kenya has acute shortage of Sign Language interpreters, therefore, it may be very difficult to supply adequate interpreters in regular schools in Kenya to assist the deaf.

Lack of social and academic interactions due to language barrier may lead to 23 isolation and loneliness on the part of the deaf. Deaf children who would otherwise get educational financial support in schools for the deaf would lose the same because donours do not support regular schools. A move towards normalization is also seen as a disregard to the linguistic and cultural difference that exists between the Deaf and hearing.

On the other hand, Musengi and Chireshe (2012) reveal shortage of material resources and inadequacy of human resources; teachers‟ and/or interpreters‟ incompetence towards Sign Language as challenges that face Zimbabwean Sign

Language learners. Another challenge is that, most mainstream teachers acknowledged that teaching deaf children was difficult for them. Some said they were not conversant with appropriate skills and language for use. Again, large class sizes and inflexible time-tabling which did not allow for individualized attention most likely resulted in an attempt to cheat the system as seen in the allegation that certain teachers simply asked the Deaf pupil to copy others‟ work. Incomprehensible

Sign Language dictionary which does not accommodate all signs of ZSL was another challenge, and curriculum did not meet the needs of special needs children.

MoEVT (2009) sees poverty as the overarching factor causing barriers to special needs education in Tanzania. Education policies and strategies cannot ignore this root cause. Poverty is closely linked with „vulnerability‟ which refers to a risk of an adverse outcome (e.g. ill-health, impoverishment, exclusion). Poverty is a root cause of other challenges like: environment (such as long distance to school, inaccessible environments for wheelchair users, unsafe or unsuitable surroundings for girls, inappropriate school buildings, nomadic lifestyle, cultural and traditional customs and beliefs); curriculum and teaching (such as inappropriate teaching methods, lack

24 of learning materials or assistive devices, irrelevant curriculum design and development, unfair examination system, poorly and inadequately trained teachers) as well as policies that restrict attendance through age-limits, education arrangements not respecting life style or culture, poorly paid and poorly respected teachers, unequal distribution of support to learning and teaching and ineffective management.

The study which revealed these challenges aimed at the formulation of the National

Strategy on Inclusive Education.

Eunice et al (2015) reveal inadequate or total lack of very important teaching and learning materials such as a revised curriculum, trained teaching force, proper physical facilities, as well as other resources and equipment for the special learners in these schools as challenges facing disabled learners. The study also established that teacher preparedness in terms of training and experience posed a great challenge to Special Needs Education (SNE) implementation. Other barriers are the socio- cultural factors whereby the society greatly contributes to the negative attitude towards learners with special needs in education and that the reasons for such failure are the cultural beliefs and values in the society. Parental factors has as well contributed to the problem of exclusion in that the parents of pupils with learning difficulties suffered extreme stigmatization by the members of the society. Some parents were also found to be ignorant about their child‟s incapability since they had not taken their children to the area assessment and placement centre in the county.

School-based factors such as unavailability of instructional materials, lack of an SNE learner-centred inclusive curriculum and inadequate teaching strategies are other challenges. Most of the physical facilities are highly unsuitable for the SNE pupils.

Toilets, playgrounds, play materials, classrooms and building designs are not adapted

25 to accomodate the SNE pupils. The play fields were littered with objects, stones, grass and pieces of wood thus exposing the learners to great dangers.

Lewis and Little (2007) see that to balance work on increasing educational access/enrolment with efforts to improve the quality of education is another challenge. Inclusive education is often perceived as interventions for individual groups, and a vision of a unified system in which formal, non-formal, mainstream and segregated provision work together towards a common goal of quality, inclusive education for all although it seems still to be some way off. There is confusion as to how to allocate funding to inclusive education. How to collect data on marginalization problems, in particular how to work better with communities/stakeholders to identify the most hidden of excluded children. Reform of teacher education in order to deliver higher quality education is important for all the countries, but inclusive education is not routinely covered in these reform discussions. They further state that curriculum reform appears important for the reviewed countries, but creating reform which is based on stakeholder input and which enables local flexibility to suit learners‟ needs remains a challenge.

The Disabled People‟s Organisation (DPO) Mentoring Project (2013) identifies three big challenges that children with disabilities face in accessing pre‐primary and primary schools. These challenges include: environmental barriers which refer in particular to barriers in the built environment and which also cover lack of access to communication and information. Various elements in environmental barriers include: poor infrastructure, distance from home to school, an absence of supportive facilities such as wheelchairs/tricycles and an unfriendly physical environment for students with disabilities. The other challenge is attitudinal barriers. This stems from negative

26 myths and beliefs about the causes of impairments and the capabilities that persons with disabilities have. This often leads to high levels of stigma and discrimination against people with disabilities as well as low expectations of their capabilities which are particularly relevant to children with disabilities. The attitudinal barriers involve a lack of parental support for education of children with disabilities where parents feel ashamed of their children, discrimination from the community, discrimination and maltreatment from non‐disabled students at school, discrimination and maltreatment from teachers at school, and lack of parental support to children with disabilities. This happens when partners withdraw support after giving birth to a disabled child, negative traditional beliefs among the community about disability and the persistence of the idea that disability is caused by witchcraft or bad lack and lack of awareness about the rights of persons with disability. Another challenge is institutional barriers which have to do with issues rooted in policies, practices and cultural norms. Institutional barriers include: an absence of the skills needed to teach children with disabilities, an absence of/few special units in schools and pre-primary classes for students with disabilities, an absence of/few special schools for children with disabilities, an absence of supportive aids/facilities in schools, poverty facing families of children with disabilities, lack of specific government support, lack of security, lack of awareness about disability issues particularly on the rights of children with disabilities in families, absence of health services for children with disabilities at school and lack of extra time for teaching children with disabilities.

This study dealt with the issues of access to and provision of pre-and primary education to children with disabilities in Tanzania. The current study was about the challenges of learning TSL as a language of Deaf/Hard of Hearing personnel. The findings of these studies therefore, were expected to be different.

27 2.2.6 Suggested Solutions towards Eradication of Problems Facing Sign

Language Learners in Special Deaf and Hard of Hearing Schools

Various scholars have been working on the solutions of eradicating challenges facing

Sign Language learners. The following are the proposed solutions to those challenges facing Sign Language learners according to their studies:

Safder et al (2002) recommend that, as teachers are not proficient in using Sign

Language, then, they should be encouraged to learn Sign Language with the help of students with hearing impairment, their colleagues, and above all, by attending training workshops and refresher courses on Sign Languages. The teachers should exhibit devotion and dedication in performing their duties regarding students with hearing impairment and hence try to give additional time to these students in and out of the classrooms. The teachers of the Deaf students should show some flexibility in using assessment procedures according to the needs of Deaf students and the stated course objectives. The concept of inclusive education should be incorporated in the curriculum of all teacher training institutes and colleges of education. All institutions dealing with higher education should establish a Disability Friendly Centre (DFC) where every student with special needs may get registered at the time of admission so that he/she could claim for adequate supportive services during the course of his studies.

The South African Department of Basic Education (2013) also offered various solutions towards eradication of Sign Language learners‟ challenges. Those solutions are: the development of the SASL curriculum which would be used by all South

African Deaf schools and units; developed teacher guides for workbooks utilisation since most of the workbooks seemed to have no teacher‟s guides and hence caused 28 more challenges to teachers; progressively training teachers on early identification of hard-of-hearing and Deafness and progressively training teachers in specialised skills on Deafness and Deaf culture.

Mpofu and Shumba (2012) suggest that, curriculum should be made flexible enough so that each learner is challenged to do his/her best regardless of being at Deaf school or units attached to mainstream schools. Therefore, it is equally important that teachers in private schools or public primary schools and their administrators be encouraged to accept that greater inclusion will result in improved teaching and learning of all. There is a need for development of genuine government support and leadership for more inclusive centres/schools from the government. Supportive systems involvement (formal and informal) in teaching and learning of children/learners are of paramount importance at any level of education in any state, developed or under developed, and this cannot be considered a dream come true at any point.

Martin (2009) recommends that, parents should foster the use of lip-reading and, according to the degree of hearing impairment, consider the use of hearing aids.

Above all, most interpersonal communication should be conducted through a language in a visual-manual modality. This is because, the intra-mental processes of the Deaf are carried out in signs, and a language deriving from the same code would occupy the same position as speech in a hearing individual.

Adoyo (2007) recommends various solutions with regard to Sign Language learners‟ challenges. First, personnel involved in the teaching in an inclusive setting with the

Deaf or hearing impairment should be appropriately trained and be bilingual in spoken (written) language as well as Sign Language. Secondly, regular and special 29 needs teachers should acquire competence in strategies for effective inclusion for the

Deaf, which deal with attitudes and behaviours of professional staff, whether hearing or Deaf. Additionally, regular teachers should create a healthy communicative environment for the entire class and they should encourage classroom participation as well as being able to control the pace of discussion with pauses in between communication turns.

Furthermore, the specialist teacher of the Deaf should be prepared to disseminate information on psychology and culture of Deaf people to the regular teachers and pupils. This will assist the regular teacher as well as enhancing the establishment of effective communication and culture. The information so provided can also promote understanding and possibly create positive attitudes to other hearing and Deaf students. Also, children in the inclusive settings should have access to Deaf adults.

Social contact and support to the children and their parents is crucial for the social- emotional and linguistic development. In the absence of an established Deaf indigenous Sign Language, the inclusive process can be very challenging and therefore, it requires careful facilitation. Further, Deaf adults should be involved as

Sign Language instructors in inclusive settings as they are often the best teachers in

Sign Language.

Adoyo also recommends that, deaf and hearing children should be encouraged to use

Sign Language for social interaction and for academic purposes. Teachers in inclusive classes whether regular or special should recap the lesson through Sign

Language for the Deaf students or alternative spoken and Sign Language during the lessons. Necessary arrangements for interpreter/teachers of Sign Language should be made to visit the school on a regular basis. Deaf adults should be employed in the

30 school to support the Deaf child and to facilitate communication between children, teachers and classmates. As Deaf children‟s language skills develop, serious reading lessons should be introduced as these offer the most important medium of learning for the child and in communicating with others. Books and other written materials to the level of pupils should also be provided. The school infrastructures e.g. paths should be made appropriate for training in orientation and mobility, taking care of the architectural barrier that could hamper mobility and likely pose threats to safety especially for the Deaf and Blind. Strong policies, documented goals and objectives governing the implementation of inclusion process should be put in place. Such policies should address issues regarding language of instruction in an inclusive setting, language with a negative connotation towards the excluded, requirements on competence and quality of teachers in inclusive settings.

There should be awareness campaigns/workshops geared towards attitude change by hearing teachers and the hearing society at large towards Deafness and language. The change should involve significant changes in conceptions and role behaviour. Strong awareness of the need to go inclusive should be created. Stakeholders (parents, pupils, managers, communities) should be consulted and involved in the elaboration of the plans. Social mobilization and development of communication strategies/materials to support and create awareness for inclusion of Deaf people in the communities should be put in place. The curriculum should be flexible to allow for appropriate adaptation with a content that is relevant to real lives and future, taking cognizance of gender, cultural identity and language background. Categories of children suitable for inclusion should be clearly defined, as not all hearing impaired children can be included in a regular classroom. Children with severe to mild hearing impairment will need hearing aids in an inclusive class. Teachers in the 31 inclusive classes should be able to use the aids and to communicate in Sign

Language so as to increase the student–teacher interaction and to facilitate learning.

Issues of class size and availability of in-service teacher education programmes should be of prime concern.

Maruff and Sofiyat (2011) say that private individuals and Non-Governmental

Organizations should be encouraged to establish more special schools as well as vocational and rehabilitation centres. Educational materials and facilities that would be needed by students with disabilities should be made available at affordable prices and be within the reach of the poor.

Muiti (2010) suggests that, Ministry of Education (in Zambia) should oversee their special education training so that school inspectors can be aware of what to inspect in the special schools and units. They should also do frequent supervision to assure standards in the special primary school and units in the districts. The government should also ensure provision of adequate teaching and learning resources.

Mulonda (2013) also recommends that, the Zambian government introduces early hearing screening for children between 0 and 6 months in order to come up with early intervention programmes. The Government needs also to introduce early language intervention for children with hearing impairment. This is because, early language intervention improves literacy for Deaf children. The government needs to introduce comprehensive training in Sign Language as a language for teachers of the

Deaf. Through the Ministry of Education, the government should also introduce Sign

Language as a taught and examinable subject in schools. The compilation and development of a well-researched Zambian Sign Language Dictionary that will incorporate all the existing variations of signs used in all the parts of the country by 32 the Deaf should be of prime importance. The government should develop more Sign

Language teaching resources. These should be in the form of Sign Language story books, picture strips, Sign Language video tapes, charts, pupils and teachers‟ books and many more in order to improve the teaching of Sign Language in schools. The government should also train the parents of Deaf children in Sign Language in order to provide language experiences to their children as early as possible. This will expose the Deaf children to the normal language development trajectory just like their hearing peers.

Musengi and Chireshe (2012) suggest that, schools should invite native signers such as adult members of the Deaf community in order to provide continuous training in

Sign Language to Deaf, hearing pupils and their teachers and, schools should employ the services of relatively educated, hearing people with native-like competency in

Sign Language in order for them to act as interpreters. It is vital that Sign Language be considered as a complete legitimate language just like any spoken language.

Therefore, ways should be found to ensure all teachers and pupils master it in order to include Deaf learners who need it in order to participate in learning activities.

The Seventh Quality Education Conference - 7th QEC (2014) says that the implementable Inclusive Education and achievement of quality education for all will depend on having and allocating prescribed curriculum and clear methods of assessment; promoting in-service training and on-going retraining; improving and providing efficient and sufficient facilities and infrastructure; allocating adequate fund for Inclusive Education services in schools and at district level; parental involvement as well as guidance and counselling for parents and accessible transport for pupils.

33 Eunice et al (2015) suggest that, there should be a need for all secondary school teachers to receive in-service training in special educational needs and for those joining the fresh training; a common unit should be designed on special educational needs, especially, on Sign Language and Braille machines and reading of Braille text books to equip them with appropriate skills in readiness for integrated classrooms.

The community which includes parents should be sensitized on its role in ensuring success of inclusive education. Parents should be made to understand that giving birth to disabled child is not a curse hence they should expose these children to all the opportunities available for education in order to maximize their potentialities.

The government should allocate funds to schools to help them procure special facilities for special needs education such as talking books, talking calculators,

Braille machines and computers for ICT in education. The government should also increase fund allocations to schools, especially those from regions without adequate resources. Funds should be channelled to public schools to aid in development project such as building of properly designed classrooms and toilets. The government should make all the possible efforts to improve and modify the existing physical facilities to make sure they are barrier-free and therefore easily accessible to all learners. It should also increase the budgetary allocation to SNE in its annual budget.

Teacher training should be enhanced, especially, through in-service training of the classroom teacher and more colleges established for those willing to undertake training in the SNE field and those already in existence upgraded to offer quality teacher training. Creation of mass awareness among all the stake holders on the plight of learners with special needs and especially, establish collaboration between the teachers and parents. This will go a long way in changing the negative attitude towards implementation of the SNE programme.

34 The DPO mentoring project (2013) recommends more awareness campaigns on the importance of inclusive education for children with disabilities. It states that the focus of these campaigns should be towards increasing the awareness of parents of children with disabilities and primary school teachers in particular. These two groups are central to improving enrolment and educational progress. Involving local government officials in advocacy of disability rights - although local government has a mandate to ensure all children are receiving appropriate education, they are rarely held to account for what they are providing for children with disabilities. Increasing community awareness on the Persons with Disabilities Act and in particular work with parents to help them understand what their rights are as well as increasing social protection and income generating opportunities for parents of children with disabilities is all what is needed. This is due to the fact that many families with disabled children face serious economic hardships. Government social protection schemes, livelihoods programmes and adult training opportunities need to be targeted, specifically towards households in which there is a disabled member. This will include encouraging community members to participate in addressing the barriers faced by persons with disabilities and lobbying the government on the issue of disbursing capitation grants for children with disabilities in schools. Therefore, it is important that the real costs of the inclusion of children with disabilities are made known so that grants can take proper account of their needs.

2.3 Research Gap

From the above presentation, it can be argued that Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners are learning Sign languages through special Deaf schools, units attached to mainstream schools, and in inclusive schools in difficult environment. It has also

35 been noted from the above presentation of the previous studies that, Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners are still facing a number of challenges in learning Sign languages. The Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners are still facing the challenges of learning their language because previous studies dealt with the challenges facing

Deaf Education or learners with special needs education in general. None of those researches, to the level of the researcher‟s understanding, specifically investigated the challenges of learning Sign language as an important language of Deaf and Hard of Hearing persons. None of the above previous studies also examined the causes and finally the solutions towards eradication of the challenges facing learners of the Sign languages. This is why the Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners are still facing a number of challenges during their language learning. The study at hand therefore, intended to examine the challenges facing TSL learners in special Deaf and Hard of Hearing schools, investigate the causes of those challenges and suggest possible solutions for the aim of addressing the available number of challenges facing Tanzanian Sign

Language learners.

2.4 Chapter Conclusion

The chapter has presented the introduction, the theoretical framework of the study and the review of the literatures related to the study at hand. The chapter has ended by identifying the research gap.

36 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This chapter covers research design, the area of the study, sample size and sampling techniques, data collection instruments, validity and reliability of data, data analysis techniques and ethical considerations.

3.1 Research Design

The study employed a qualitative approach for the purpose of obtaining primary actual and valid data. The study intended to investigate the challenges facing

Tanzanian Sign Language learners by using the information collected from the field.

The data were collected through questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, lesson observation and documentary review. The analyses of data began immediately after collection. The data of the study were gathered in two phases. The first phase involved the pilot study. The second phase involved the collection of data for the actual study. The purpose of involving two phases of data collection was to maintain reliability and validity of data.

3.2 Population and Area of the Study

The target population of the study included the special TSL teachers and the TSL learners in special primary schools for the Deaf/Hard of Hearing children. The TSL learners are the ones who experience the challenges while learning the TSL and the teachers also experience the same challenges which face their pupils. The study was carried out in two special primary schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing children.

The schools are: Buguruni Viziwi Primary School in Dar es Salaam and Dodoma

Deaf School in Dodoma. They were chosen because they were using TSL as a 37 medium of instruction and they are special for TSL learners only. Both schools are boarding and accommodate pupils from all over the country.

3.3 Sampling Technique and Sample Size

The study employed purposive sampling technique in selecting respondents who were involved in this study. The study used this technique because some of the respondents were Deaf and some of them were teachers with normal hearing. And for pupils, who are either Deaf or Hard of Hearing, the researcher selected those who were able to read and write in Kiswahili language.

For the purpose of gathering valid data which would suit the research‟s objectives, the sample of 47 respondents was selected. The sample included 30 TSL learners, 15 from each school. Five (5) Deaf teachers and three (3) hearing teachers were selected from school A. Two (2) Deaf teachers and seven (7) hearing teachers were selected from school B. The learners were selected because they were the ones who were learning TSL and experiencing the challenges associated with learning the TSL.

Those seven (7) Deaf teachers from both schools were selected because they experienced the challenges of learning TSL while they were at school and they are noticing the challenges facing their learners while they were teaching. The teachers revealed causes of those challenges and offered solutions toward eradication of the challenges. The hearing teachers helped in revealing the challenges, causes and solutions too. Hearing teachers helped the researcher and Deaf people‟s communication in various occasions.

38 3.4 Methods of Data Collection

The data for this study were gathered through questionnaires, semi-structured interview, class observation and documentary review. The reason behind using these techniques was to collect reliable and valid primary data.

3.4.1 Questionnaires

There were two different designs of questionnaires. The first design was used by the researcher to collect information based on the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign

Language learners from thirty (30) pupils who were Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners.

This questionnaire had close ended questions and involved TSL learners who were capable of reading and writing in Kiswahili language. One hearing teacher from each school helped the researcher to select 15 TSL learners from standard five to seven.

The questionnaires were administered by the researcher and helped by a hearing teacher.

The second kind of questionnaire was designed for Deaf teachers. The questionnaire consisted of open and close ended questions. Through the assistance of one hearing teacher from each school, questionnaires were distributed and administered to Deaf teachers for the purpose of collecting the challenges which were facing TSL learners during language learning. After that, the questionnaires were collected from pupils and teachers. Themes were extracted from open ended questions and the SPSS software was used to extract information from closed ended questions. Both data from open and close ended questions helped the researcher to arrive at the conclution of the study findings.

39 3.4.2 Semi-structured Interview

The researcher conducted semi-structured interview to hearing teachers from both schools. The purpose was to extract detailed information concerning the challenges facing TSL learners, causes of those challenges and solutions towards eradication of the challenges facing TSL learners. The interviewees were informed about the research and its importance. Appointments were made and the interviews were conducted in accordance with the arrangements. Guiding questions were asked to the interviewees and they were allowed to respond freely. When a certain question was not comprehended, the researcher reframed it. The researcher recorded the interview and took note for significant points.

3.4.3 Lesson Observation

The researcher attended several classes in both schools for the aim of gathering information about sitting plans, number of pupils in one class, suitability of the teaching and learning approach, teaching and learning resources, teachers and learners TSL competencies as well as availability and usability of TSL books. The researcher used lesson observation guide to observe things as they were really happening in real contexts. This technique was also used to crosscheck the responses revealed by TSL learners and teachers through other techniques.

3.4.4 Documentary Review

The researcher used this technique to review two Education Training Policies (that of

1995 and 2014) and several curricula produced as a result of those two policies. This technique was mainly used for the purpose of gathering information about causes of the challenges facing TSL learnners. The researcher aimed to know how the reviewed documents contribute to the challenges facing TSL learners. 40 3.5 Data Analysis

The data gathered from the field through various techniques (questionnaire, semi- structured interviews, lesson observation and documentary review) were analyzed as follows:

3.5.1 Data Gathered through Questionnaires

As it has been noted above, the data collected through questionnaires aimed at examining the challenges facing TSL learners which were the research‟s objective number one. After data collection, the findings were extracted from questionnaires, organized and analysed. The data from closed ended questions were analysed through the help of a computer softwere called SPSS. The data were fed into the softwere and Tables were drawn. These Tables helped the researcher to arrive at the conclusion of the challenges facing TSL learners. Open ended questions were used to establish various themes which helped the researcher to arrive at the conclusions.

3.5.2 Data Gathered through Semi-structured Interview

Data gathered through semi-structured interview were intended to provide answers to all three research‟s objectives which were to examine the challenges facing TSL learners, to investigate the causes of the challenges facing TSL learners and solutions towards eradication of those challenges facing TSL learners. The coding of data gathered through this technique was carefully done. Various themes were extracted from the coded data. The data were then organised and analysed. The themes obtained helped the researcher to arrive at the conclusion. The researcher used some expressions related to what had been said to support specific points.

41 3.5.3 Data Gathered through Lesson Observation

Data gathered through lesson observation were aimed to crosscheck and support all data obtained through other techniques such as questionnaires, semi-structured interview and documentary review. This technique also intended to help the researcher see what was happening in real TSL learning contexts. The data were organized and analyzed. Various themes which supported the findings from other techniques were then obtained and several conclusions were drawn.

3.5.4 Data Gathered through Documentary Review

This technique was meant to collect data concerning objective number two, which was about the causes of the challenges facing TSL learners. The researcher reviewed various documents including education policies and curricula. He noted down different areas of those documents which cause challenges to TSL learners. The findings obtained were organised and then analysed. Various themes concerning causes of challenges facing TSL learners were then established.

3.6 Research Ethics

To ensure that ethical issues were observed in this study, the researcher collected a permission letter from the University of Dodoma authority. The letter was then taken to the respective districts where the researcher obtained permission for data collection within the respective special schools. The school authorities were consulted and allowed the researcher to proceed with data collection. Upon meeting with the respondents, the researcher explained clearly the research purpose and objectives. The researcher assured the respondents that the data to be collected would be kept confidential and would only be used for research purposes. Since the

42 research involved primary school pupils, the guidance of their teachers was a key to its success.

3.7 Reliability and Validity of Data

Under this subsection, the reliability and validity of the data is confirmed.

3.7.1 Reliability

For the purpose of ensuring reliability, the study at hand was preceded by the pilot study. The pilot study used questionnaires, semi-structured interview and lesson observation techniques. The researcher aimed to test if these techniques are reliable to the study. The results of both studies yielded the same findings to confirm the reliability of this one. The use of four different methods such as questionnaires, semi- structured interview, lesson observation and documentary review to collect the same information was also used to ensure data reliability.

3.7.2 Validity

The researcher took enough time in collecting data with the four methods chosen so as to collect rich and valid information. His involvement with real environment enabled him to collect detailed, varied and enough information that provided a full and revealing picture of what was going on in TSL learning and teaching. After collecting enough information, the researcher gave feedback to some of the respondents to reduce misinterpreting the meaning of what they had said and perspectives they had towards TSL learning and teaching.

3.8 Chapter Conclusion

This chapter has given the introduction, presented the research design, population and area of the study, sampling technique and sample size as well as methods of data collection. It has also presented data analysis, research ethics and validity of data.

43 CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the findings of the study as they were gathered from the field.

The study intended to investigate the challenges facing Tanzania Sign Language learners; the case of Deaf special schools. The study was guided by three research objectives which were to examine the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners in special schools; investigate the reasons as to why these challenges face

Tanzanian Sign Language learners in special schools and find possible solutions towards eradication of problems facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners.

The presentation is based on all the data collected through questionnaires for teachers, interview schedule for teachers, questionnaires for pupils; personal class observation by the researcher as well as documentary review.

4.1 Challenges Facing Tanzanian Sign Language Learners

The study reveals various challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners.

Teachers and pupils were asked about the challenges facing TSL learners. The following are the themes designed from responses obtained from the questionnaires, interviews, lesson observation and documentary review. These are: overcrowded classes, lack of TSL books, shortage of TSL learning aids, most of TSL learners are born by hearing parents, lack of early Deaf and Hard of Hearing identification programmes, parents do not give necessary TSL learning support to their Deaf/Hard of Hearing children and incompatibility of the curricula. Others are TSL is not one of the subjects taught and examined by NECTA, as well as unpleasant TSL learning environment. Other themes are: most of the education inspectors are not conversant

44 with TSL, some of teachers are not fluent in TSL, lack of qualified special education teachers and, general inadequacy of government support towards Deaf/Hard of

Hearing education.

4.1.1 Overcrowded Classes

The study reveals the challenge of a big number of Tanzanian Sign Language learners within a single class. When teachers were asked about the number of learners in their classes and if that number was affecting TSL teaching and learning,

6 (60%) out of 10 teachers said the number of learners in their classes was big and it was affecting the TSL teaching and learning. Four (40%) out of 10 teachers said their classes had the required number of learners. According to Save the Children (2002), the required number in Sign Language class should not be more than ten.

Table 4.1: Teachers’ Responses on whether the Number of Learners Affects TSL Learning in Their Classes

45 During the interview, teachers further revealed that the number of Deaf and Hard of

Hearing learners in their classes was beyond ten. The classes had up to a maximum of 25 learners per class.

Respondent B1 said that: …my class has 15 TSL learners, this number affects much the TSL learning processes. It is not easy to take care of every learner during learning process. And as you can see, I am the only teacher in this class. I don’t have any assistant therefore, taking care of every learner is a hard task. A teacher has to teach one learner after another by doing so the time allocated for a period will not be enough.

According to the size of the special designed Deaf/Hard of Hearing classrooms, the big number of learners results into the „row‟ sitting plan (i.e. one pupil sitting behind the other) while the TSL learners have to sit in U-shaped plan. The U-shaped sitting plan helps TSL learners in lip reading while seeing clearly how their teachers sign the language.

Respondent A3 added …the number of TSL learners in our classes exceeds 20 and the teacher has to teach all subjects for that class. How possible will this be while the TSL learners need great care?

Through classroom observation, the researcher witnessed that most of the TSL learners‟ classes in both schools were overcrowded. It was observed that, most of these classes ranged between 10 and 25 TSL learners. This number of learners was seen to affect the TSL teaching and learning processes as their sitting styles were disturbed, that is, instead of sitting in u-shaped plan, they were sitting in “row” styles. The number also affected the speed of delivering materials since the TSL teachers had to come across each and every learner to make sure he/she understood the lesson.

The findings above correlate to that of Save the Children (2002) which revealed that class sizes in special schools should be small; usually less than ten children, and sometimes should be as small as to have only two pupils. All classes are also 46 required to have support assistants as well as a teacher. These findings are also consistent with those by Chaula (2014) who says that large class size was among the challenges because the teachers complained that they had many pupils in the class who needed support but it became a challenge because they could not manage all of them. Pima (2012) also says that an overcrowded class for instance, makes it difficult for the teacher to maintain ideal special needs education classroom management.

Adoyo (2007) says that a Deaf child may lack attention from the teacher since the number of pupils in the classes is normally high due to free primary education. Ogot et al. (2009) as quoted by Kimani (2012) also support the findings of this study about how overcrowded classes hamper the learning of deaf and hard of hearing learners.

They say that among other challenges highlighted, is that of large class size.

4.1.2 Lack of TSL Books

Another challenge revealed by the study was lack/shortage of TSL books. When the

TSL learners (pupils) were asked if their schools had TSL books, out of 30 learners,

6 (20%) said YES while 24 (80%) said NO.

47 Table 4.2: Responses of TSL Learners on the Availability of TSL Books and Other Materials

When teachers were asked about the availability of TSL books, 2 (20%) said YES while 8 (80%) said NO. The table below shows:

Table 4.3: Teachers’ Responses about Whether Their Schools Have Enough TSL Books

Respondents who said that the TSL books were available in their schools were referring to the presence of the TSL dictionaries which were of course not in good

48 number. And for those who said no, it means they had not even seen these TSL dictionaries.

During interview, all the teachers agreed as to the importance of having TSL books which would be a great companion for teachers and learners of Tanzanian Sign

Language. However, the challenge within the context of the study was that, the only books owned by these Sign Language teachers were a few copies of the Tanzanian

Sign Language Dictionary, something which implied that the Deaf learners schools were not properly equipped in terms of teaching and learning materials especially books.

Respondent A3 said: …the school doesn’t have TSL books. I was lucky to have a TSL dictionary which I bought when I was taking my special education certificate. We don’t have any TSL book here.

The dictionary itself is, in fact, not easily found. Even if the dictionaries were available, these schools didn‟t have enough funds to buy these books which are important to TSL teachers and learners. The small realized budget was channeled to buying textbooks stipulated in pre-primary and primary school curricula.

Respondent B1 added: …my class has only two TSL books which are TSL dictionaries. The one compiled by CHAVITA and another dictionary called TANZATOTO designed specifically for young TSL learners. Those are the only books I have. I don’t have TSL books for teaching TSL activities, that is, Swahili activities, Science activities and the like. In fact, the available dictionaries are not enough for TSL learning.

Lesson observation also showed that there were very few TSL dictionaries. These few TSL dictionaries were owned by equally few TSL teachers. The lack of TSL books poses a challenge to both TSL learners and teachers since they do not have any place to refer to when they meet new concepts and when they think they have time to add some new signs. The TSL learning would be fruitful if all of the Deaf learners learning resources were written in Sign Language. It would also be helpful for the 49 pre-primary class teachers to have TSL textbooks and their teachers‟ guide books which would be used in teaching TSL for beginners.

As indicated in the findings above, respondents from all schools (TSL teachers and learners) had the same opinion that TSL learners were faced with the challenge of severe lack of TSL books which was hindering the smooth TSL language learning. In line with this, Mitiku et al (2014) say that lack of institutional and learning materials may result into the difficulty for special needs education learning. In relation to this,

Eunice et al (2015) reveal that, special needs pupils are faced with different challenges including unavailability of instructional materials. Unavailability of books

(learners‟ and teachers‟ copies) hampers smooth sign language learning. Ministry of

Education (2000) also reveals that library services are not extended to special needs education teachers and learners. In addition to this, Udoba (2014) reveals that lack of teaching materials is one of the challenges facing special needs education learners.

Udoba (2014) further says that lack of teaching materials is usually associated with budgetary constraints allocated to the schools by the Government. In line with this,

Muiti (2010) says that shortage of Sign Language books to Sign Language learners hampers to smooth learning. Among other challenges, Pima (2012) reveals lack of textbooks and reference books to Tanzanian special needs education pupils. Contrary to this study, Kimani (2012) reveals that the textbooks as identified by her study were mostly available in the units and schools for Deaf learners, however, they were rarely used by the learners due to their design which seemed not to respond to their learning needs. Long complex sentences, long paragraphs and pages of text without illustrations were among some of the features that were highlighted as contributing to the learners‟ difficulties in comprehending what they read in the texts.

50 The challenge as it has been discussed above was seen to hamper smooth TSL teaching and learning to the researched special schools. The learners were forced to use textbooks designed for their hearing counterparts that were not suitable to their language learning needs. The only available TSL book was the dictionary which was also not comprehensive. To have effective learing, the TSL‟s books are to be designed (text, reference and teachers‟ guide) so as to simplify the TSL learning process.

4.1.3 Shortage of TSL Learning Aids (Apart from Books)

The research also revealed the shortage of TSL teaching and learning materials.

Teachers were asked whether the available TSL teaching and learning aids such as real things, pictures, drawings, charts, objects etc. were enough for smooth learning of the language. Four (40%) said they were a bit adequate while 6 (60%) said the

TSL aids were inadequate.

Table 4.4: Teachers’ Responses about the State of TSL Teaching and Learning

Materials

51 The teachers‟ interview, further revealed the challenge of visual TSL learning and teaching materials to deaf learners. As we know, Deaf people „hear‟ through eyes; so apart from TSL books, visual teaching and learning aids such as real things, pictures, drawings, charts, objects, video CDs/DVDs etc. would be of great importance to their Sign language learning processes. Despite their importance in teaching and learning TSL, respondents reported that these materials were not often found and used in their classes.

Respondent B3 said: …special education teachers are required to prepare visual TSL teaching and learning materials. For the case of our school, these materials are not enough. We try our level best to use real things and drawings to make them understand some of the concepts we teach, but in fact, they are not enough for their smooth TSL learning. The school and government do not bring enough materials and fund for aids designation. We are also occupied with various roles to the extent that we don’t have enough time to prepare TSL teaching and learning materials.

Respondent B2 also said: …TSL teaching and learning materials are of great importance to TSL learners. But these materials are not enough to our school. The government doesn’t give enough funds for buying resources which could be used for TSL learning materials preparation. For example, if you want to draw a certain picture for your learners, you cannot find manila cards. We sometimes need real things but we cannot afford to buy them.

The lesson observation done by the researcher shows that the use of these materials is better emphasized in lower classes, that is, pre-primary classes and standard 1 to 2.

These classes were at least found with visual material including drawings and few real things which were somehow helpful for the teaching and learning of TSL. Some of the upper classes were empty and very few of them had few materials which were also not used in the lessons which the researcher observed.

According to the research‟s finding, respondents agreed to the importance of visual

TSL teaching and learning materials for this language and that the absence of teaching and learning aids hamper the smooth learning of the sign language. These 52 results are consistent with the findings of DPO Mentoring project (2013) which found among other challenges facing SNE, the absence of teaching and/or supportive aids/facilities in schools. These aids were very few and were not available in some of the classes/schools. The findings are also in line with Chaula (2014) who also sees insufficient teaching and learning materials as a barrier to SNE learners. Her findings reveal that teaching aids are very important in teaching learners in a classroom since a good lesson presentation should comprise of all the essential tools which will help the learners understand well the lesson. On the contrary, insufficient teaching resources make it difficult for the teachers to deliver the materials and for the learners to understand the lesson. The findings go in line with MoE (2000) which also saw that the lack of specialized equipment and teaching and learning materials are a challenge to SNE learners. Karakoski and Strom (2005) shed more light on this challenge that SNE learners are faced with lack of specialized equipment and teaching and learning materials suitable for children with disabilities. Muiti (2010) also experienced the challenge of making learning materials and teaching resources since teachers would need expertise and money which they did not have. Mulonda

(2013) reveals a challenge of lack of learning materials prepared in Sign Language.

The ODC 050 (2013) also saw poor supply of teaching and learning materials and specialized equipment as a challenge which hinders smooth TSL learning. These findings are also in line with the World Data in Education (2006/2007) that SNE learners are facing a challenge of lack of specialized equipment and teaching and learning materials.

The discussion above shows the importance of using these visual enhancers so as to simplify the TSL learning processes. The TSL learners are Deaf and/or Hard of

53 Hearing, therefore, they need much visual real things, pictures or drawings to accompany their learning process since their eyes are their ears.

4.1.4 Most of TSL Learners are Born of Hearing Parents

The study revealed that most of the TSL learners (Deaf and Hard of Hearing pupils) were born of hearing parents who did not have access to TSL training therefore they were not able to impart basic TSL skills to their children in the right time before they joined special schools. When asked whether TSL learners were born of deaf or hearing parents, all 30 (100%) learners said that they were born of the hearing parents.

The teachers were also asked whether they had ever met TSL learners whose parents were also Deaf. Seven (70%) said NO while 3 (30%) said YES.

Table 4.5: Teachers’ Responses on Whether They Taught TSL Learners from Deaf Parents

54 The interview further revealed that, the majority of Deaf children were born of hearing parents and thus came to school without the basic TSL language skills. Deaf children as well as their hearing counterparts are expected to acquire their language naturally at home in their infancy. As Adoyo (2002) says, this is not the case for

Deaf and Hard of Hearing children whom, according to the findings, are born of hearing parents, who force them first to speak, and then shift to local signs if the former method fails. These children do not have access to the acquisition of the first language early enough. They come to school with restricted linguistic and social preperation. Therefore, the school must prepare the children first for acquisition of a first natural language [which is the Tanzanian Sign Language], second, for second language acquisition, and third, for socialization and development of world knowledge. In fact, the schools may not have the additional time and resources needed to undertake these tasks of educating Deaf and hard of hearing in their mother tongue right from the scratch.

Respondent B2 said: …for my experience, I have ever met with only one child who was born of Deaf parents. His father was a Deaf. The experience shows that a child with Deaf parents has the ability to acquire TSL faster than the one with hearing parents. In this context, the TSL becomes a language of day to day communication at home as well as school.

Respondent B1 also added: …a learner whose parents are Deaf/Hard of Hearing can easily understand the language compared to their counterparts who are born of hearing parents. He/she learns and communicates through TSL from his/her Deaf parents and we only add signs to what his/her parents had already taught him/her.

The findings show that most of the TSL learners were born of hearing parents most of whom were not conversant with the language hence they were not able to impart these children with basic skill of TSL. In this case, the learners start learning their formal language in late ages compared to their hearing counterparts since their parents who would be the first persons to teach them the Sign Language, are not 55 conversant with it. These findings are in line with previous researchers‟ findings such as South African Department of Basic Education (2013) which observed that majority of Deaf children were being born of hearing parents and thus they entered school without the requisite language thus posing to them. Adoyo (2002), reports that

95% of the Deaf children are born in hearing families. Therefore, these children do not have access to the acquisition of the first language early enough. Mreta and

Muzale (1999) also say that among other challenges facing Tanzania Sign Language learners is that most Deaf children do not get easy access to Sign Language because they are usually born into hearing families which do not sign. These findings are contrary to Mulonda (2013) who says that Deaf children are required to acquire their language naturally from home in their infancy. This challenge has direct effect to the linguistic development of TSL learners and their teachers since the time and effort employed to teach TSL from the scratch could be used to teach other TSL language skills.

4.1.5 Lack of Early Deaf and Hard of Hearing Identification Programmes

Another challenge which faces TSL learners is the lack of early Deaf and Hard of

Hearing identification and/or screening programmes. The responses show that the absence of early identification/screening of Deaf/Hard of Hearing programmes, deny

TSL learners‟ parents access to basic/comprehensive TSL training which would help them communicate to their children and teach them basic signs of the language which would be good foundation to the comprehensive TSL learning when joining their special schools, units attached to mainstream schools or even inclusive schools.

Batamula (2009) says that some parents would want to know how to teach their child to communicate so that they would understand what the child wanted or needed.

56 When asked whether the government had any early Deaf and Hard of Hearing identification programmes which would be of great importance to the beginning of teaching and learning of TSL, all 10 (100%) of the teachers said there was no such programmes.

The interview findings further revealed that, some of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners did not start learning TSL in an appropriate age. They always used local signs which help them communicate with their family members. This is due to lack of early Deaf identification programmes which would help both Deaf children and their parents to have early access to at least basic TSL skills. These basic TSL skills to Deaf children would build a foundation to the start of comprehensive TSL learning in their special schools.

Respondent B3 said: …our government doesn’t have early deaf identification programmes which would help most of the hearing parents have an access to basic TSL training. These training could help them teach and communicate with their children which would therefore be good foundation for the TSL learning in schools.

The findings show that, there is a great need of establishing screening programmes for Deaf and Hard of Hearing which would also help to prevent/cure some diseases which if left untreated, might cause Deafness/Hard of Hearing to these children.

According to Batamula (2009) some researches estimate that about 50-60 percent of all hearing losses in developing countries are preventable. This hearing loss is often caused by preventable diseases such as Rubella or chronic and severe ear infections that are left untreated. Some of the children she met in the schools for the Deaf have no tympanic membranes or hardened membranes from scaring as a result of chronic otitis media. There were also children with mild hearing loss who were attending schools for the Deaf or were in Deaf programmes. These children could function well in a regular classroom with the use of hearing aids. Therefore, early Deaf/Hard 57 of Hearing early identification/screening programmes would be helpful not only in linguistic development of TSL learners but also in treating/curing diseases which cause Deafness. The findings are fairly consistent with Department for International

Development - DFID (undated) which observes that a challenge of poor identification and screening services to Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners denies early access to Sign language learning of Deaf and Hard of Hearing. The findings are also consistent with South African Department of Basic Education (2013) that the challenge of early Deaf identification/screening programmes causes the majority of

Deaf children not to have early access to basic programmes for stimulation and development of Sign Language.

4.1.6 Parents Do Not Give Necessary Support to their Deaf and Hard of

Hearing Children

The findings show that parents of Deaf and Hard of Hearing pupils do not provide necessary support to their children in TSL learning. When asked whether the parents of TSL learners were necessarily supporting their children in learning the language, 3

(30%) said YES while 7 (70%) said NO.

58 Table 4.6: Teachers’ Responses on the Parents’ Support to TSL Learning

Pupils were also asked to see whether their parents were conversant with TSL. The responses revealed that, about 10 (33%) said YES while 20 (67%) said NO. Table

4.7 shows these responses.

Table 4.7: Learners’ Responses on whether Their Parents are Capable of Using

TSL

59 On the other hand, interviewees reported that most of the parents of TSL learners were not giving necessary support to the teaching and learning processes of TSL since most of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing parents were seeing Deafness as a curse.

They saw these schools as a place to dump their children and hide themselves from that shame of having Deaf or Hard of Hearing children. It was revealed that, some of these parents didn‟t have an access to TSL and for those who had the opportunity, they did not want to use it. This create a challenge for such learners, specifically when they went back home from school. Back at home, they got into contact with their parents who appeared more of hindrance than help because they did not support them in increasing their language knowledge. Some of the parents even refused to buy their Deaf children TSL learning materials such as exercise books, pencils, pens etc. Yet again, some of the parents changed their mobile phone numbers so that they could not be reached when needed by the teachers for their children‟s learning assistance. As it has been seen before, most of these parents and family members are hearing ones who do not know how to communicate through TSL. Therefore, they can‟t then help their deaf and Hard of hearing children in any way in the processes of learning TSL.

Respondent B4 said: …when these learners come back from vacation (especially young TSL learners of pre-primary classes or standard one and two) they soon forget the formal TSL and instead use some of the local signs which their parents or family members usually use to communicate with. We then have to start afresh by teaching formal TSL to these young learners.

Respondent B3 added: …there is one parent who lives here in Dodoma; he has a child in standard five. He once asked whether it was possible to let his child stay at school until he finished his studies. He doesn’t want to see his child back home. There was one parent also who left his child here at school for 4 consecutive years consecutively without even paying him a visit.

60 The study shows that most of the parents of Deaf and hard of hearing learners are not supportive to their children in the TSL learning processes. The negative attitude against deafness, TSL ignorance and sometimes poverty of these parents may be among the contributing factors for this behaviour. The study confirms the findings by

Muiti (2010) who says that parents do not give their children necessary support to enable them learn effectively. These parents also do not know how to communicate with their children using sign language meaning that they do not help them in any way which can be a hindrance to these children‟s effective learning. Mulonda (2013) says that the parents face a challenge in communicating with their children which means they can‟t give necessary Sign Language learning support to them. Chaula

(2014) says that there is lack of collaboration between parents and SNE learners‟ teachers something which causes learning difficulties to pupils.

The parents‟ lack of support to the Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners challenges the smooth TSL learning of these pupils. Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners are required to learn TSL from their parents since infancy. They do not need to begin learning TSL at school for the first time. Instead they need to have persons whom they can communicate with since they come from schools for vacation or daily for those who are not in boarding schools. They need to do some practices of what they learn from schools, but they can‟t do that if their parents and other members of the families are not conversant with the language. The parents are also required to provide Sign

Language resources to their children. In fact, the parents‟ support to their children for

TSL learning is not enough so they need to necessarily add the value of it for the smooth TSL learning activities.

61 4.1.7 Incompatibility of the Curriculum

Another very big challenge revealed by the study is the use of curricula which were purposely designed for normal (hearing) learners. The TSL learners do not have a special curriculum which has been designed with regard to their special education needs. The present curricula are not flexible enough to meet the needs of TSL learners and their language. When asked about the flexibility of the curricula used in teaching and learning of TSL, only 1 (10%) out of 10 teachers said YES (that is the curricula used were flexible enough to the teaching and learning of TSL) while 9

(90%) said NO.

Table 4.8: Teachers’ Responses on Their Flexibility of the Curricula to the Teaching and Learning

During the interview, teachers said that all the pre-primary and primary school curricula used to teach in Deaf and Hard of Hearing schools were designed for normal (hearing) pupils. Therefore, the contents, teaching and learning methods, number of periods, time allocated for a single period and syllabus, teaching and learning materials, and etc. favoured hearing learners most. Some exercises like singing, reading loud and storytelling were not intended for TSL learning. The

62 curricula themselves expressed that they were intended to be used within schools which use Swahili as their medium of instruction while Deaf and Hard of hearing schools use TSL as their medium of instruction. Respondents saw curriculum as one of the challenges that needed to be carefully designed and adapted in order to facilitate the development and implementation of TSL learning for the Deaf and

Hard of Hearing learners. Therefore, it is recommended here that the curriculum should be flexible and able to facilitate and respond to children‟s diversities and that it should provide different opportunities for practice and performance to learners in terms of content, methods and levels of communication. The issue of content of the curricula also received respondents‟ attention. The Deaf and Hard of Hearing teachers claimed that the curricula were full of content which would not help their pupils. They said for example that, their learners had to learn few and short important issues instead of what they were required to learn under the curricula at the time. If they could have their own special curriculum which would have very few and important topics, they would have enough time to learn TSL too. The TSL would also be indicated in their special curriculum and it would be taught as an independent subject.

Speaking of curricula, respondent A3 said: The curricula we use in pre-primary and primary schools are not compatible with our learners. The time allocated, the content and examination (NECTA) is not compatible with the needs of our learners. This is because they need a long time to learn few things. The TSL itself is not allocated to the curriculum since it is meant for hearing learners.

According to educational policies and curricula reviewed by the researcher, former and current curricula encourage the teaching and learning of spoken languages which are Kiswahili and English language for the case of our country. Therefore, teaching and learning activities in pre-primary schools‟ curriculum and the language competences for the primary schools‟ curricula (Standard I-II and III-VI) are 63 designed to help learners acquire competences of Swahili and English languages.

The timing for the completion of the curriculum (with regard to the time given to each period i.e. 20 minutes for pre-primary class and 40 minutes for primary school classes) is unrealistic for the Deaf people and Hard of Hearing as the teaching and learning processes are slowed down due to the processes involved.

The findings from the study show how the available curricula are incompatible with the needs of TSL learners in terms of contents, competences, skills, time, teaching and learning methods and materials and teaching and learning activities. These findings are firmly consistent with The South African Department of Basic

Education (2013) that, there is no nationally approved South African Sign Language curriculum for South African Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. The study also confirms the findings by Mpofu and Shumba (2012) that incompatibility of the curriculum (for example, content, teaching strategies, teacher preparation) challenges the Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. Adoyo (2007) sees the curriculum as one of the obstacles or tools to Deaf learners that need to be carefully designed and adapted in order to facilitate the development and implementation of a proper SNE. The timing for the completion of the curriculum is not realistic for the Deaf people. Therefore, the curriculum should be flexible and able to facilitate and respond to children‟s intellectural diversities and that it should provide different opportunities for practice and performance in terms of content, methods and levels of communication. Musengi and Chireshe (2012) also say that in the context of Zimbabwe at their time, the operating curriculum posed a challenge to SNE pupils since it did not meet the needs of special needs children. These findings are also in line with MoEVT (2009) which posits that irrelevant curriculum design and development results into unfair examination system to SNE. 64 These findings suggest that the designing and development of the new special curriculum for the Deaf/Hard of Hearing will have to take into account all the needs of TSL learners including time allocation and contents.

4.1.8 Tanzanian Sign Language is Not One of the Subjects Taught and

Examined by NECTA

It was revealed from the study findings that, TSL was not taught as a subject and it was not examined as other subjects within the schools or by NECTA – the responsible organ for standard seven leaving examinations. It was also noted that, the language was not taught in accordance with the age or understanding of the learners.

Rather the TSL learners were only taught signs which helped them only in normal communication and in learning other subjects. Both TSL learners and teachers were asked whether the language was taught as a subject or examined by NECTA. Their responses were as follows: all 30 (100%) TSL learners said it was neither taught as a subject nor examined by NECTA. All 10 (100%) teachers said the TSL was neither taught as a subject nor examined by NECTA.

Apart from teachers and pupils‟ responses to questionnaires, the interview conducted to teachers explained further that, TSL was not taught as a subject at any level except pre-primary classes where teachers tried to help their learners master the language so that they would be using it as a medium of instruction at pre-primary level and when joining primary school education. With a particular focus on the foregoing, respondent A1 for example said:

TSL is not taught as one of the subjects the learners have to learn in these levels of education. The curricula we use do not stipulate the teaching of TSL in pre-primary and primary school. This language is only taught in pre-primary class so as to be used as a medium of instruction at this level and primary school level. 65 The responses of the study show that, if the TSL would be taught as other spoken languages (i.e. Kiswahili and English), the learners in pre-primary classes would be learning only basic signs and in the following levels they would be slowly growing with the language according to their level of understanding which would be far from what they might have been doing at pre-primary level. As it was revealed, teachers of

TSL for instance, did not have any guiding book which stipulated the amount of skills or competences the learners of that level would have to acquire. This study then, confirms the findings of Mulonda (2013) who says that the Zambian Deaf learners were facing a challenge of not being taught Zambian Sign Language as a subject. Wakumelo (2009) noted that, one factor that has contributed to lack of familiarity with the Sign Language for teachers and some pupils might be because it is not taught as a subject in schools from Grade One onwards. Instead, it is only used as a medium of instruction in some cases. The above study is contrary to Chupina, cited in Mulonda (ibid) who reports that Swedish Sign Language became the language of instruction as well as a taught subject itself in 1995. Since then, special education schools and mainstream schools have been using the same curriculum which includes Sign language as a subject.

As the findings of the study show, there is a great need of using a curriculum which clearly states the use of TSL as a medium of instruction. In fact, as it was observed, there was no seriousness of teaching Sign Language as a language than teaching Sign vocabularies in both schools. In pre-schools where Sign Language was said to be taught, learners were mainly taught iconic signs which imitate actual actions of activities like waking up, wearing clothes, brushing teeth, washing face and/or body, combing hair and wearing shoes. The learners are not taught how to write these words or actions. If the learners will only be taught these signs, the challenge 66 towards adding various signs which would be used in various contexts and building both TSL language skills will be a terrible reality to grapple with.

4.1.9 Unpleasant TSL Learning Environment

The findings showed that the schools‟ general environment as well as teaching and learning environment did not facilitate smooth TSL learning for the Deaf and Hard of

Hearing pupils. Both teachers and learners themselves were asked whether their environment were suitable enough for the teaching and learning of TSL in and outside the classes. The responses show that neither teachers nor learners were satisfied with the teaching and learning environment as the following presented statistics show: 4 (40%) out of 10 teachers said YES (meaning that the environment influenced TSL learning) while 6 (60%) out of 10 teachers said NO (meaning that the environment and school facilities did not facilitate TSL learning) as it is shown in

Table 4.9 below:

67 Table 4.9: Teachers’ Reponses on whether they are Satisfied with the TSL Teaching and Learning Environment and Facilities

When learners were asked about their satisfaction with the schools‟ facilities and environment, 8 (26.7%) out of 30 learners said YES; while 22 (73.3%) said NO as

Table 4.10 below shows:

Table 4.10: Learners’ Responses on the Satisfaction with Schools Facilities and

Learning Environment

68 Responses from interview also show that schools have to put deliberate efforts to make their environment of TSL learning friendly by ensuring the availability of real things, pictures, drawings, banners and other aids which would help their learners learn the language when they are either in or outside the classes. The classes also have to be designed to accommodate and fulfill the needs of Deaf (TSL) learners in terms of size, facilities and having the required light to facilitate the learning and communications through sign language. On this particular regard, respondent B2 said:

...we are now using rooms which were not designed for classes. These rooms are small to the extent that the learners are not arranged in u- shaped plan. The deliberate efforts have already been taken and the construction of classroom is now underway.

Again, Respondent B4 added:

…the school has only one place which has TSL alphabets where TSL language learners practise themselves when they are outside their classes. There is also only one place (behind the administration building) where there are some pictures expressing signs of few concepts of TSL. Very few classes have sign language teaching and learning materials which simplify the learning of TSL. The school also lacks various sign language charts which could facilitate the easier learning of TSL.

In school A, the number of classrooms was good but the problem was the number of learners within those classrooms. These classrooms were designed to accommodate a maximum number of 10 learners but the actual number of learners in those classrooms was seen to be above 20. According to the size of these classrooms, learners were not able to sit in u-shaped plan. Contributing on this aspect,

Respondent A3 said:

…the challenge of electricity is big too. The school doesn’t have enough funds to cover electricity bills. Sometimes it happens that, Deaf and Hard of hearing find themselves in darkness. These learners are not in good position of learning or communicating if they cannot see each other. The number of matrons and patrons who have to help the learning of TSL outside the class while the teachers are not 69 around is not satisfactory. Most of the learners in these schools live in campus while their teachers don’t have houses around the school surroundings. If the teachers would be living around the school, they could enhance the learning of TSL even after classes.

The researcher‟s observation also showed that the learning environment of TSL did not influence language learning in/outside the classes. This is because, the classes were overcrowded to the extent that sitting arrangement was interfered. The learners were not in u-shaped sitting plan in most of the classrooms. Again, most of these classes did not have teaching resources such as TSL books and other learning materials and where those materials were available, they were not used. Likewise, there were insufficient Sign Language alphabets in walls of the classrooms. Outer parts of the classrooms also lacked drawings or pictures which would help TSL learn outside the class. There was a challenge of electricity at school A. It was revealed that sometimes the school failed to pay electric bills something which made the Deaf learners stay in dark rooms. The number of teaching and non-teaching staff in both schools was also not satisfactory.

The findings of the study then, conclude that the schools‟ general environment would likely influence smooth TSL learning. These findings confirm the findings by Mpofu and Shumba (2012) that the physical learning environment for children with disabilities in most schools and units is not user-friendly. Ojerinde (1999) as cited in

Maruff and Sofiyat (2011) reported that the architectural designs of most of the institutions where the education of students with disabilities was given, did not take into consideration the disability nature of these people. MoEVT (2009) says that inappropriate school buildings are one of the challenges facing SNE pupils. Eunice et al (2015) argue that the improper physical facilities hinder proper learning of SNE learners. The DPO Mentoring Project (2013) also reports that poor infrastructure,

70 absence of supportive facilities and an unfriendly physical environment for students with disabilities as barriers to SNE learners. TSL learning environment of Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners will continue to be unpromising if it will be left as it is. The deliberate efforts should make sure that TSL learning environment are improved so as to help Deaf learners.

4.1.10 Most of the Education Inspectors are not Conversant with TSL

The study found out that, special schools were often visited by education inspectors for the inspection purposes but the challenge was about the inspectors‟ competence towards the language used as a medium of instruction in these special schools. All

10 (100%) teachers said that the inspectors were visiting their schools and also said that these inspectors were not conversant with TSL as a medium of instruction in these schools.

During interview, teachers‟ responses further revealed that education inspectors often pay visits to special schools but their TSL communication skills were questionable. It was learnt that when they came to these schools, they would always look for schemes of work, lesson plans, lesson notes and they would examine some documents related to administration issues. They did not go to classrooms to see what exactly was being taught to TSL learners. They did not talk about the quantity and quality of the content the learners were given simply because of the communication barrier. On this particular aspect, respondent A1 said:

…the education inspectors are not conversant with TSL, what I always do is to take them into the classrooms, start teaching my learners using TSL. What I find is that, the inspector remains in dilemma he cannot follow the lesson because of the language barrier.

71 Respondent A3 also added that:

…education inspectors who inspect these special schools are not required by any Tanzanian law or even regulations to have any TSL special skills or competence to inspect special Deaf and Hard of hearing schools.

The findings above show that education inspectors posed a challenge when it came to insuring the quality of education of persons with disabilities and especially the TSL teaching and learning since they could not follow what was going on simply because they couldn‟t communicate in the Sign Language. This study is contrary to the findings by Muiti (2010) whose findings show that inspections were not regularly done in schools of special needs education. This study shows that education inspectors were regularly visiting the special schools but had no TSL competences hence they could not follow what the learners were learning and the teachers teaching concerning TSL. With regard to this observation, it is argued here that if the inspectors will not equip themselves with the knowledge of TSL, they cannot ensure the quality of education in these schools.

4.1.11 Some of the Teachers are not Conversant with TSL

The study revealed that some of the teachers employed to teach TSL learners were not competent in the TSL language, the medium of instructions to Deaf/Hard of

Hearing special schools. This was because some of them had not gone to special needs education colleges or universities which would give them at least some basic knowledge of TSL. When asked whether they went to special education colleges/universities, 4 (40%) teachers said YES while 6 (60%) said NO:

72 Table 4.11: Teachers’ Responses about whether they Attended to Special Needs Education Colleges

When asked whether the TSL training they got from special needs education colleges or universities was enough to make someone conversant with teaching TSL as a subject or medium of instruction, 3 (30%) said YES while 7 (70%) said NO. Table

4.12 clarifies these responses:

73 Table 4.12: Teachers’ Responses about whether the TSL Training Obtained from Special Needs Education Colleges/Universities is Enough

The interview responses revealed also that some of the teachers were not conversant with TSL which would help them either teach the language or use it as a medium of instruction. Most of the newly employed teachers in these schools who were either from special education college (i.e. Patandi) or the university which offers special education (i.e SEKOMU) were not conversant with TSL as a medium of instructions.

They are given periods and classes to teach while they couldn‟t even communicate with their clients. According to responses, training given in those colleges/universities is not enough to make them fluent in TSL, what they do is learn

TSL when they are at their working stations.

Respondent A1 insisted: …despite this challenge, some of those teachers who are not capable of communicating with TSL learners have negative attitude towards learning TSL when are in these special schools. Our learners are able to teach you how to communicate by TSL, some of our teachers cannot even communicate with pupils when they are on duty! What do they do then in their classes? In order to be conversant with TSL, the teacher has to learn a minimum of two signs per day from his/her colleague.

74 The findings show that most of the teachers were not coversant with TSL and this could be the result of either not attending to special needs education college/universities or the quality of training offered in those colleges/universities was not satisfactory. The research confirms the findings of various previous studies like the South African Department of Basic Education (2013) which reports that about 80% of the teachers in schools for the Deaf were unable to use Sign Language in South Africa. Batamula (2009) reveals that some of the teaching staff seemed to know very few signs, they were using voices when signing those few signs they knew and they just finger-spelt the first letter of many words they did not know what a given sign stood for. The consequence here was that the Deaf pupils wouldn‟t hear what their teachers were talking about and hence this led to the lack of understanding. Muiti (2010) reports the challenge of communication barriers between teachers and their Sign Language learners. Mulonda (2013) also says that teachers do wrongly sign words at times. Musengi and Chireshe (2012) also say that teachers and/or interpreters‟ incompetence towards Sign Language poses a challenge to SNE learners.

The TSL teaching and learning will not be successful if teachers are not competent with the language. This competence should be obtained through comprehensive training offered in special needs education colleges/universities and shouldn‟t be relied on seminars, in-service training or workshops only. As Swanepoel (undated) says, learning to educate and communicate with deaf learners are not skills that can be imparted in workshops or short courses. Instead, methodology and communication require years to master. During short courses, the focus is on rudimentary signs which are not sufficient to teach academic contents.

75 4.1.12 Lack of Qualified Special Education Teachers

The study revealed the challenge of shortage of special education teachers especially those capable of using TSL in teaching Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners. During the interview, the study revealed that the government was the responsible organ for employing special education teachers in special schools and schools for the Deaf

Education in particular. However, the study found that, most of the teachers being sent to these schools were not special education teachers. For example, 4 out of 7 teachers who were interviewed from school A and B went to normal teachers‟ colleges. They were coming to these Deaf and Hard of hearing special schools without TSL competences which could be obtained only from special education colleges or universities. It seems that teachers were at the time not required by law or any education regulation to have any specialized qualification or experience (for instance being conversant with Tanzanian Sign Language) to work in a school for

Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners here in Tanzania. In school A for instance, some of the Deaf personnel had been recruited so as to address the challenge of lack of special Deaf and Hard of Hearing teachers. These Deaf personnel were being used as teachers while they hadn‟t taken any pedagogical training.

Respondent A3 said: …even the Deaf special education teachers who are annually produced from colleges and/or universities are not enough. The very few of the Deaf teachers we have here didn’t go to colleges. They were employed because of their disability to help their fellow Deaf. You know, at the college we don’t only learn TSL; we also learn pedagogical knowledge and how to handle these Deaf learners. You can then imagine what they do if they didn’t go to college to have these skills.

Hearing teachers then cannot plainly communicate with Deaf learners and therefore have to learn TSL while at their working station. In some cases, in both schools, the study discovered that some members from CHAVITA were recruited to train

76 teachers in TSL. However, learning to educate and communicate with Deaf learners are not skills that can be imparted in workshops or short courses. Rather, the methodology and communicating with TSL or any other spoken language require years to master. During short courses, the focus is only on basic signs which are not sufficient in communication or in teaching academic contents to the Deaf learners.

Respondent A1 said: …in fact, I haven’t gone to Special Education College. I learnt TSL when I was first brought at this Deaf special school. In fact, I learnt it from my pupils and colleagues.

Respondent B2 also added: …I didn’t go to any Special Education College. I learnt my TSL the first time, I came here.

The study revealed a shortage of TSL teachers to the extent that some of them who were not conversant with the language were also overloaded. The research also noticed that the numbers of teacher trainees were not enough to meet the needs of special schools. This is why normal teachers were employed in some cases. The study confirms the findings by Chaula (2014) who says that SNE learners were facing the challenge of inadequate number of teachers. Musengi and Chireshe (2012) reported that, in Zimbabwe Sign Language learners were faced with a challenge of inadequate human resources. The study is also in line with Adebis et al (2014) who said that special needs education learners were faced with a barrier of inadequate and unemployment professionals. Eunice et al (2015) also say that Deaf learners are faced with a challenge of lack of teachers and shortage of professionally trained qualified staff. The World Data on Education (2006/07) says that there is an insufficient specialist teacher for special needs education. Pima (2012) says that some of the problems confronting special needs education in Tanzania include lack of enough special needs teachers and professionals.

77 According to the study, acute shortage of TSL teachers in special schools constitutes many challenges facing Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. The few available teachers are overloaded to the extent that TSL learning does not smoothly run.

4.1.13 General Inadequacy of Government Support

The study, through interview responses, also revealed that the government of

Tanzania has given itself a responsibility of educating its people. It provides education by designing and implementing education policies, curricula, syllabi and books designation; training, employing and paying teachers as well as assessment, accreditation and certification. The government tries its level best to fulfil this duty for normal (hearing) learners. But in the case of special needs education for the

Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners, the reality is far from normal. This is because, most of the Deaf and Hard of hearing schools were established by NGOs and the government was only offering food, employing and paying salaries for teachers.

Also, most of these schools lacked funds which led to the inadequacy of educational materials, various facilities and equipment which could enhance the learning of TSL without tears. It was also revealed that, these schools were not offered capitation grants which would be useful for covering various expenses such as buying TSL books like dictionaries, resources for making TSL teaching and learning materials, sign language charts etc. The respondents believed that the government support could also fall into designing of special Deaf and Hard of Hearing curricula, the TSL syllabus, educating a number of TSL teachers and all other important learning needs of Deaf children as it was usually doing to their hearing learners‟ counterparts. The government could also contribute in establishment and development of Deaf/Hard of

78 Hearing schools. This act would help to address the challenge of overcrowded classes and hence smooth TSL learning.

Respondent A2 said: …the government support to the TSL learning is not enough. It only offers teachers, their salaries, and food for pupils. The government is required to build more special schools for Deaf learners, supply learning materials including books and special curriculum for Deaf Education. It would be better if it meets all the learning requirements of TSL learners.

This study‟s findings on this particular aspect are in line with the findings by the

DPO Mentoring Project (2013) which identifies the lack of specific government support as one of the challenges facing SNE pupils. As it was revealed, the government was not disbursing capitation grants for children with disabilities and it did not recognize the presence of disabled students in pre and primary schools.

The research found that, inappropriate government support towards Deaf/Hard of

Hearing education and TSL learning specifically, hampers the smooth learning of this language. If this challenge persists, the TSL learners will remain in overcrowded classes, lack learning materials, shortage of qualified teachers and more other challenges which are the results of insufficient support by the government.

4.2 Causes of the Challenges Facing Tanzanian Sign Language Learners

The study revealed various reasons which contribute to the challenges facing TSL learners. The following themes were mainly obtained through interview, lesson observation and documentary review. These were shortage of special education colleges/universities, insufficient number of Deaf schools in Tanzania, inadequate researches about TSL, unclear policies and curricula and lack of awareness on

Deafness and its language.

79 4.2.1 Shortage of Special Education Colleges/Universities

One of the challenges revealed by the study was lack of qualified special education teachers especially those capable of using Tanzanian Sign Language in teaching Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners. This challenge was caused by shortage of special education colleges/universities. The very well known public college which offers special needs education training is Patandi Teachers‟ College. There is also one university which offers a degree in special needs education. This is the Sebastian

Kolowa Memorial University (SEKOMU).

Respondent A3 said: There is only one teachers’ college which offers a certificate and diploma of special education and TSL training. It is called Patandi. There is also a famous university called Sebastian Kolowa Memorial University (SEKOMU) which offers a degree on special needs education.

The research also revealed that another cause of shortage of qualified TSL teachers was the difficulty that teachers face in teaching Deaf pupils compared to normal learners. Because of this, some of the Deaf special teachers chose to work with normal schools instead of Deaf special schools for the deaf resulting into shortage of qualified TSL teachers in these Deaf and Hard of Hearing special schools.

Respondent B3 said: …deaf learners catch fast what they learn and, fast they forget it. Therefore, you have to repeat and repeat one thing for a very long time compared to normal pupils.

Respondent B1 added that …those teachers who got special (TSL) education have to work in special (Deaf) schools. It is funny to see that they are not working in special schools while there is a shortage of TSL teachers and the government/schools employ normal (non- special education teachers to special schools. Most special education teachers say that why should they bother themselves to teach in special schools while there are many normal schools and are equally paid.

The findings above, confirm the findings by ODC (2013) which reports that shortage of special education universities which offers special needs education teachers‟

80 training is a root cause of shortage of qualified special education teachers. The document asserts that, currently, special needs teachers in higher education are insufficiently professionally equipped. This is because, special needs education is not given much attention; furthermore, the training in conformist universities is hypothetically done. For example, the teaching training is done once in special school in SEKOMU (formerly SEKU Co.). Consequently, teachers produced will not be efficient and effective in teaching. The study is also in line with MoE (2000) which says that there is only one special need Teachers Training College that has been established at Patandi in Arusha. The establishment of this college aimed at training more specialized teachers to cope with the mushrooming schools and units, the need that has not yet been fulfilled.

As it was revealed by the study, shortage of colleges/universities has been responsible for the shortage of qualified special needs education teachers which in turn has been hindering smooth SNE learning including TSL learning. This situation needs to be taken care of so as to help special education sector and Deaf Education specifically.

4.1.2 Insufficient Number of Deaf Schools in Tanzania

The challenge of big number of TSL learners within a single class is mainly said to be caused by shortage of deaf schools in Tanzania. As it has been said in section 4.1 above, one of the challenges facing TSL learners is overcrowded classes. There is also a long waiting list of Deaf learners in nearly every Deaf special schools and units according to Batamula (2009). Overcrowded classes and long waiting lists in all

Deaf special schools are the challenges caused by insufficient available number of

Deaf special schools according to interview‟s responses. For example:

81 Respondent B1 said: …there should be a good number of Deaf special schools. For example, our school has a lot of TSL learners because sometimes we enroll them for the purpose of helping them. What should they do if we cannot do that? It would be better if every district or region had its Deaf special school or a number of TSL learners units.

This challenge is also said to be caused by schools not having enough facilities (like good number of classrooms, teaching and learning materials, hostel facilities etc.) and human resource (personnel) who would allow equal and proper learners‟ distribution in terms of streams within a school.

These findings are consistent with the study by Batamula (2009) who said that there were more Deaf children than spaces available in schools for the Deaf or Deaf programmes. She also said that, not only are the lack of spaces in the school a problem, but resources also cause a big discrepancy in the quality of education received in many of these schools. This study is also consistent with World Data on

Education (2006/7) which says that there were [only] 18 schools for the Deaf [which evidently may cause/result into overcrowded classes for the TSL learners].

Insufficient number of Deaf schools/units denies the TSL learning opportunity to many Deaf/Hard of Hearing children. It also denies smooth TSL learning opportunity for the Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners who are enrolled in Deaf special schools or units attached to mainstream schools due to various challenges like overcrowded classes which also affect learners‟ sitting plans as well as distribution of inadequate available TSL learning resources.

4.2.3 Inadequate Researches about Tanzanian Sign Language

The study revealed that, the challenge of inadequate resources for TSL and the immaturity of the language itself were the challenges caused by inadequate

82 researches about the language since it was said to be a relatively new field of linguistics here in Tanzania. As it has been noticed earlier, the language lacks teaching resources such as learners‟ books as well as teachers‟ guide and the only complete signs it has are those basic ones. These challenges are mainly caused by inadequate researches. If the language had been researched enough, there could have been enough signs, teaching and learning books and the TSL would probably have its own curriculum for Deaf special schools, units attached to mainstream schools or in inclusive education which is another relatively new field for educating learners with special education needs. The following are the responses from interview conducted to teachers concerning shortage of TSL‟s researches:

Respondent B4 claimed that: …the TSL as a language is said to be not well researched that’s why we only have dictionaries which are also not much comprehensive. May be, if the CHAVITA and other institutes did more researches, we could have enough literatures or even teaching and learning materials of TSL.

Respondent A3 added that: …the responsible education organs are not committed to TSL and Deaf Education in general. You can see the Tanzania Institute of Education (TIE) which is required by the current Education Policy to prepare textbooks for pre and primary education, preparing books for hearing learners only. Why shouldn’t they collaborate with CHAVITA and other stakeholders to prepare TSL learning and teaching resources?

The findings above align with those by Mreta and Muzale (2001) who argue that there were only three researches [up to the time they were doing their research] which in one way or another dealt with the challenges facing Deaf people or their language (TSL). Those researches were done by CHAVITA (1993), Possi (1999) and

Mreta and Muzale (1999). Due to this fact, it is difficult to have a comprehensive language which has enough and comprehensive teaching and learning resources like various editions of dictionaries, other teaching and learning books, curriculum, etc.

83 4.2.4 Unclear Policies and Curricula

The study revealed that most of the challenges facing TSL learners in Deaf and Hard of Hearing special schools, units attached to mainstream schools and in inclusive schools were caused by unclear national educational policies and curricula which did not clearly state how special needs education had to be run here in Tanzania. The reviewed documents show that, historically, Deaf/Hard of Hearing and special needs education in general has been left in hands of religious institutions, NGOs or parents of disabled children. For instance, The ODC (2013) document says that, special needs education in Tanzania has been developed and supported by efforts of non- governmental organizations. The first services (residential special schools) for the children with disabilities in Tanzania were provided by religious organizations. The first school for the blind (blind boys) was established in 1950 by the Anglican

Church while the Roman Catholic Church started the first school for Deaf children in

1963. Services for persons with physical disabilities were founded by the Salvation

Army in 1967. The first government school in the field of special needs education was [then] established in 1982. The school provided services for children with mental retardation. Limited services for children with autism and deaf-blindness were established in 1984. Batamula (2009) says that there are approximately seven schools for the Deaf in Tanzania. However, none of these schools are run by the government. This lack of coordination can help to explain why research on Deaf

Education in Tanzania is so limited. Because of this discrepancy, all schools follow their own set of policies and manage everything from within, excluding the government (though probably not purposefully) from enrollment, teaching pedagogy, and other important issues. World Data on Education (2006/7) reports that, there are

140 primary schools for children with special needs in Tanzania Mainland. Among

84 those schools, 15 out of 140 special schools are run jointly by the government and charity organizations; the rest are run by only charity organizations. Special school establishments include: 25 schools for the blind; 18 schools for the deaf; 89 schools for the mentally handicapped; 4 schools for the physically handicapped; and 1 school for the deaf and blind. There are also 22 resource centres for the visually impaired.

The above trend has its reflection on national education policies as well as education curricula. The review of the Education and Training Policy (1995); Education and

Training Policy (2014); the Pre-primary School Education Curriculum (2007);

Primary School Education Curriculum (2007); Curriculum for Certificate in Teacher

Education Programmes in Tanzania (2009); the Curriculum for Diploma in Teacher

Education Programmes in Tanzania (2007); the Pre-primary school curriculum and syllabus (2016); the Primary Education Curriculum [STD I-II] (2016) and the

Primary Education Curriculum [STD III-VI] (2016) documents reveal the following:

4.2.4.1 Education and Training Policy (1995)

The 1995 Education and Training Policy is the first education policy document for

Tanzania since independence. One of the prime aims of this policy was to promote access and equity through making access to basic education available to all citizens as a basic right. It aimed also at expanding, improving and screening gifted and disabled children so that they are given appropriate education and training. The ETP systematized and formalized among other things pre-primary education for the children aged 5-6 years which aimed at identifying children with special learning abilities or difficulties and then take appropriate corrective measures (pg. 3). The policy noticed on page 18 that, despite all effort to make education accessible, certain groups of individuals and communities in society lacked access to education. Some

85 had had no access to this due to their style of living. One of those groups of individuals are the Deaf. Therefore, the government was required to promote and facilitate access to education to disadvantaged social and cultural groups. The government was also required by the policy, to ensure that adequate resources were made available and provided to enhance access and equity in education (pg. 22).

Explaining about teachers for special needs in education, the policy insisted that, “the children with special needs in education, apart from other disadvantages, suffer from inadequate access to education. For those who are in schools, they experience a serious lack of qualified and competent teachers. Therefore, admission into courses offered in teachers‟ education institutions shall take into account the necessity for teachers of children with special needs in education” (pg.46). The policy stipulates that, the medium of instruction for teachers‟ education at certificate level shall be

Kiswahili and English should be a compulsory subject while for diploma and degree level, teacher education and training, English shall be used except for foreign language teaching and Kiswahili be a compulsory subject (pg. 49). On language teaching, the ETP insists on the promotion of teaching Kiswahili, English and other foreign languages in the whole education and training system. Kiswahili and English were compulsory subjects for all learners from pre-primary to ordinary level secondary education. The ETP-1995 gave no priority to the teaching and learning of

TSL. The Deaf Education also was not given an important attention. The policy didn‟t encourage the establishment and development of Deaf special schools although it insisted on the special education teachers‟ training. The TSL was not one of the languages taught/used as a medium of instruction in either level of education.

The government was also required to make teaching and learning material available to all schools including deaf special schools the dream which never came into reality.

86 4.2.4.2 The Tanzanian Pre-Primary Educational Curriculum (2013)

The curriculum was developed for young children aged 5-6 years. It has a total of 6 subject activities and religion. Those subject activities include: Swahili, English,

Mathematics, Science, Sports and Games as well as Arts Activities. The number of activities is big for the deaf learner to have time to learn TSL. The TSL is a language used by Deaf learners in special schools and it is not one among the activities they are required to learn. On page 3, the curriculum says that the medium of instructions for pre-primary school will be Kiswahili and English language will be taught as

“English Learning Activities”. The policy and curriculum say nothing about what has to be a medium of instructions for Deaf learners in special schools. The language skills emphasized in the pre-primary curriculum are listening, speaking, reading, writing, numeracy, creativity and communication skills in Kiswahili and other foreign languages (pg. 3-4). The language competence and skills expected to be acquired by pre-primary learners accommodate most hearing learners than Deaf learners. The curriculum stipulates that, pre-primary learners will have 5 periods of

20 minutes daily which makes 25 periods per week. However, the time allocated here is not compatible with the need of TSL learners. This is because, they need much time compared to hearing needs. Generally, the curriculum is biased against hearing learners and their spoken languages. This is due to the reason that the TSL learners‟ needs were not taken into consideration at all. The TSL as a language has not even been mentioned by this curriculum which means that, the whole curriculum was meant for hearing learners only.

87 4.2.4.3 The Tanzania Primary Education Curriculum (2013)

The curriculum seems to be destined for hearing learners only. It says for example that, the medium of instruction for all primary schools shall be Kiswahili, and

English language will be taught as a compulsory subject. The challenge to Deaf learners is that their TSL language has not been given any chance at this level of education. General competence expected for the learners of this level include reading, writing, numeracy, creativity and communicating through Kiswahili and

English languages (pg. 5-6). The competence a learner is expected to have, especially in language, is based on spoken languages which are Kiswahili and English only.

TSL competence is not a case here. The other challenge in this curriculum is the time allocation. The learners have to spend 7 year to complete this level of education. The contents of the primary education take almost ten years for a Deaf learner to complete. The time and periods allocation were designed only to cover the needs of hearing learners and not TSL and Deaf learners in general.

4.2.4.4 Curriculum for Certificate in Teacher Education Programmes in

Tanzania (2013)

The curriculum offers three types of teachers‟ certificates which are: pre-primary education certificate course, primary education certificate course and physical education certificate course. The medium of instruction in all these education certificates under this curriculum is Kiswahili and English is one of the subjects studied. The curriculum shows no interest in TSL learning by being either a medium of instruction or one of the language subjects studied in all colleges or Special

Education College which trains teachers for learners with special needs education.

Apart from other curricula, this one speaks about facilities for students with

88 disabilities. On page 26 for example, it speaks about U-SHAPED classes for Loss of

Hearing and Deaf learners. By speaking about how their classes should be and leaving out what they have to learn, its language of instruction is not compatible with learning needs of the Deaf. On contraly, the curriculum has to stipulate the learning needs of teachers for Deaf children, what do they have to acquire in TSL, the time allocation in terms of periods, minutes per periods and they have to be examined through TSL.

4.2.4.5 Curriculum for Diploma in Teacher Education Programmes in Tanzania

(2013)

The medium of instruction in Diploma Teachers‟ Education level is English.

Kiswahili, on the other hand, remains as a subject taught in certain subject combinations. The courses offered under this curriculum are Teacher Education

Diploma Course in Secondary Education, Teacher Education Diploma in Primary

Education and Teacher education Diploma Course in Early Childhood Education.

The concern here was with the Teacher Education Diploma in Primary Education because the level of education that was being investigated under this study was primary education. The language competencies for Diploma education are to communicate effectively using English and Kiswahili languages. Again, even with this curriculum, the TSL is not considered as a medium of instruction or a subject taught in this level of education which trains teachers of learners with special needs.

There are colleges which offer Deaf special education (Patandi being one of them) but the curriculum which guides the syllabi says nothing about the language. The

TSL then seems to be taught as an extra subject and it is not examined. This baing the case, then it is unlikely that there will be enough qualified teachers of learners with special needs including Loss of Hearing and Deaf. 89 4.2.4.6 Education and Training Policy (2014)

The 2014 ETP has some advanced interests on the Tanzanian Sign Language teaching and learning. The policy declares that TSL will be used in some levels of education and training though it does not specifically declare where, at which level and who are the kinds of learners will be using the language. On page viii for example, the policy says: “the government will promote the use of Kiswahili,

English, TSL and other foreign languages in education and training. The policy will also encourage the use of Kiswahili, English, other foreign languages and TSL in communication”. The policy insists on the teaching of Kiswahili, English, other foreign languages and TSL in various levels of education and training. Despite its interest on TSL as one of the languages to be promoted, in 3.2.1.8 the policy says, the government will make sure that Kiswahili, English and other foreign languages are effectively taught at all levels of education and training in the country. However, the policy doesn‟t declare that the TSL will be a medium of instruction at any level of education or kind of learners. It also doesn‟t say if the language will be studied as a subject at any level of education and training. As it does to other hearing languages, the policy had to declare that TSL should be a medium of instruction to Deaf learners and should be taught to them say, from pre-primary to university level.

4.2.4.7 The Pre-Primary School Curriculum and Syllabus (2016)

The curriculum has been designed to be used by all Tanzanian children aged 5 including those with special learning needs. The children aged 3-4 may also be enrolled (pg. 3). In explaining about the pre-primary education medium of instruction, on page 5 for example, the curriculum says: “Kiswahili and English languages will be used as media of instructions in pre-primary level”. And this

90 curriculum will be useful to those schools which use Kiswahili as a medium of instruction. (This means that, it is not useful for schools which use other languages like TSL/English as medium of instruction). The time of implementing this curriculum is 1 year. Again, this increases the challenge of time allocation to the TSL learners who need much time to learn according to their needs. The language content stipulated in this curriculum favours most the spoken languages i.e. Kiswahili and

English languages.

4.2.4.8 The Primary Education Curriculum STD I-II (2016)

It is a developed curriculum designed from the Education and Training Policy of

2014 to promote the Reading, Writing and Numeracy skills. On page 2, the curriculum says: “the Reading, Writing and Numeracy skills are the bases of this curriculum. These skills go hand in hand with Speaking and Listening skills”. The bases of the curriculum stipulate that it has been designed for the hearing learners.

The language skills emphasized in the curriculum are for hearing languages which could not be imparted to TSL learners. The TSL has not even been mentioned in this curriculum.

4.2.4.9 The Primary Education Curriculum STD III-VI (2016)

The curriculum insists that, according to the ETP – 2014, Kiswahili and English languages will be used as medium of instructions to all levels of education and training. The curriculum will only be used to those schools which use Kiswahili as medium of instructions. The primary education‟s language competence is to effectively communicate through Kiswahili and English languages (pg. 7). Somehow the primary education curriculum on pages 31-34, speaks about the education of the children with special education needs. The curriculum says for example, about the 91 number of assignments children with special education needs are to be given, the time, learning assistance, teaching and learning materials/techniques, the choice of competences, the medium of instructions and the sitting plans have to be chosen according to the children‟s special educational needs.

According to the above discussion, one may be in the position to realize that policies and curricula are the main causes of many challenges facing TSL learners and special needs education in general here in Tanzania. Apart from documentary review, interviews with respondents also revealed that policies and curricula contribute much to the emergence of challenges facing TSL learners.

Respondent A3 said: …we use the curricula designed for normal (hearing) learners. The time allocated for one period is 40 minutes the same as normal pupils. This time is not appropriate for the case of our learners. In fact, 40 minutes per period is not enough time for TSL learners. How can you teach Kiswahili language for 40 minutes by using TSL as a medium of instruction? You can’t. We only do that to comply with the needs of inspectors, but the learners get nothing in those 40 minutes lesson. Therefore, the special curriculum for our learners could be the solution.

Respondent B3 insisted that: …the books we are using were designed for normal learners. The curricula we use are for hearing learners. It is not easy to use books designed for hearing learners to teach Deaf learners. There are some ‘listening’ or ‘singing’ topics which are not compatible with the disability of our learners. Therefore, there are no books which enable them to learn comfortably.

Respondent B1 also said: …we use the normal curriculum and syllabus designed for hearing learners with a lot of contents and words while the time allocated for periods is not compatible with our learners.

4.2.5 Lack of Awareness on Deafness and their Language

Another cause of most of the challenges facing TSL learners is lack of awareness on

Deaf issues as well as TSL. Most of the parents, society, political leaders, policy makers and curricula developers and implementers are not aware of the Deaf and

92 their basic rights including the right of being educated. Lack of awareness to most of the stakeholders of the Deaf education causes negative attitudes. This negative attitude in turn leads to most of the challenges facing TSL learners here in Tanzania.

Challenges like policy issues, lack of government support, and insufficient support of

Deaf parents to their children are caused by negative attitudes towards different Deaf matters which is also a result of lack of awareness. As Batamula (2009) says for example, while there is a strong presence of community and respect, those with disabilities and their families are typically looked down upon. These disabilities are often considered a curse from wrong doing. The ODC (2013) also says that the increased provision of education for the handicapped in the country has been held back by many causes one of them being the pessimistic attitude of society. This study is in line with the findings of Adebisi et al (2014) who consider negative attitude as the greatest barrier to the field of education of special needs. Negative attitudes towards the field in terms of funding and political will to implement its policies, in turn leads to negative attitudes to its clients. Students with disabilities continue to face negative attitudes and stereotypes in the education system. Lack of knowledge about and sensitivity to disability issues on the part of some educators, staff and students make it difficult for students with special needs to equally access educational services with the so called „normal‟students. It is not until government and our political leaders rise up to che challenge and pay particular attention to learners with special needs with the purpose of increasing their participation in community life, societal prejudices will continue to abound. As DPO mentoring project (2013) suggests, the need for attitude change remains important. When communities change their negative attitudes towards persons with disabilities and

93 become aware of their rights and potential contributions, the challenges facing learners with special needs education [Deaf learners being the one] will be reduced.

4.3 Solutions towards Eradication of Problems Facing TSL Learners

The study uncovers various solutions which if taken into account, may help to overcome various challenges facing Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. These solutions are in the form of themes obtained through interview sessions, review of various documents and lesson observation. These themes are: awareness campaigns on TSL and Deaf/Hard of Hearing matters, development of the special education curriculum, developing a genuine government support towards Deaf special education, the need to oversee special education training, introduction of early Deaf/Hard of Hearing screening programmes, introducing a comprehensive TSL training for teachers of the

Deaf, the TSL be a taught and examined subject at all levels of Deaf Education, the compilation and development of a well researched TSL dictionary and making TSL teaching and learning materials available.

4.3.1 A Need for Awareness Campaign on TSL and Deaf/Hard of Hearing

Matters

The research reveals an existing ignorance about TSL and Deafness which in fact leads to negative attitudes of the hearing society. As literature show, the parents of the Deaf/Hard of Hearing children believe that bearing a Deaf child is a curse one gets after committing a certain mistake in the society. Batamula (2009) for example, says that these disabilities [Deaf/Hard of Hearing] are often considered a curse from a wrong doing. It was also unearthed by the study that, the society was not aware of

TSL which it thought was not as complicated as spoken languages. That is why its attitude to learning was much negative. As Johnston & Schembri (2007) say,

94 sometimes it is mistakenly believed that signed languages are nothing more than forms of pantomime and gesture. It is often meant that signs and rules for their combination are made up on the spot. Communication between signers, it is sometimes believed, is achieved by simply pointing at objects, drawing pictures in the air or by acting out descriptions of events. People often use the term „sign language‟ to refer to this kind of improvised visual-gestural communication that occurs when two people who do not speak each other‟s language meet. The policy makers, planners and various implementers have negative attitude too against TSL and Deafness, that is why there is no enough documentation, number of deaf special schools, units etc. due to the lack of awareness on Deaf matters. The number of TSL speakers is too small (only 1% of Tanzanian Deaf Community have a chance to use

TSL according to CHAVITA (1993)) because of lack of awareness which at the end results in the negative attitudes of the community in learning the language. Teachers are also said to have negative attitude towards Deafness as pointed out by Musengi and Chireshe (2012) that, although the UNESCO (1994) convention highlights that

Deaf learners may need to use Sign Language as medium of communication; the idea appears to be hampered in ordinary schools as shown by Kiyaga and Moores‟s

(2009:149), who report that teachers of Deaf children in sub-Saharan Africa in general cannot sign and do not view Sign Language as a complete language. They add that, the Zimbabwe‟s indigenous-traditionalist culture largely views disability negatively and many people experience shame and blame if there is a person with a disability in their family. The study then, views serious awareness campaigns about

Deafness and TSL as a crucial solution towards negative attitudes which contribute to institutional, environmental and attitudinal challenges facing TSL learning in Deaf special schools and units.

95 Respondent A3 said for example: …some of the parents hide their Deaf children up to the age of 18 to 20 years without taking them to schools. This is may have been caused by negative attitude due to lack of awareness. What is needed here is to educate them to take these children to school where they can be able to learn TSL and other life skills. We try to teach basic signs of TSL to parents in informal environment which help them to communicate with their Deaf children. We advice the government to develop an environment which will allow parents to learn TSL and various Deaf matters including their rights.

This recommendation of the study is supported by the suggestions of other researchers like Adoyo (2007) who suggests that, there should be awareness campaigns/workshops geared towards attitude change by hearing teachers and the hearing society at large towards Deafness and language. This change should involve significant changes in conceptions and role behaviour. Stakeholders (parents, pupils, managers, communities) should be consulted and involved in the elaboration of various plans regarding Deaf matters. Social mobilization and development of communication strategies/materials to support and create awareness for inclusion of deaf people in the communities should be put in place. The study is in line with the findings by Musengi and Chireshe (2012) on the importance of considering Sign

Language as a complete legitimate language just like any spoken language and on their recommendetions to find various ways of ensuring all teachers and pupils master it in order to include Deaf learners in learning activities. The study is also consistent with the findings by Eunice et al (2015), who recommend on the creation of mass awareness among all stakeholders on the plight of learners with special needs and especially on the need to establish collaboration between teachers and parents. This will go a long way in changing the negative attitude towards implementation of the SNE programme. They also add that, the community which includes parents should be sensitized on its role to ensure success of children with special needs education. Parents should be made to understand that giving birth to a 96 disabled child is not a curse hence they should expose these children to all the opportunities available in education in order to maximize their potentialities. The study also agrees with the findings of the DPO mentoring project (2013) which recommends more awareness campaigns on the importance of education for children with disabilities. The focus of the campaigns should be towards increasing the awareness of parents of children with disabilities and primary school teachers in particular, since these two groups are seen as central to improving enrollment and educational progress.

4.3.2 Development of the Deaf Special Education Curriculum

It was revealed by the study that, most of the challenges facing TSL learners are caused by policies and curricula issues. Most of the challenges here are due to the use of education policies and curricula which favour hearing learners most. The curricula for example, do not accommodate the learning of TSL in the special Deaf schools. The study therefore, urges the government to develop a Deaf special curriculum which will put into consideration the learning needs of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners including their language which is TSL.

Respondent B1 said, for example: …even the syllabus [curriculum] we use is meant for hearing learners, which is full of various topics and words while the time allocated for its implimentation is not enough for TSL learners. There should have been developed a special curriculum, special TSL syllabus, books and even special examinations for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing learners. These examinations should be prepared and marked by Deaf special teachers.

Respondent B3 added: … the curriculum we use was designed for hearing learners, the time allocated for it then is not enough for our TSL learners. We of course need a TSL special curriculum which will be used by all Deaf school as well as Deaf units.

97 These findings are consistent with the study by The South African Department of

Basic Education (2013) which proposed the development of the SASL curriculum which would be used by all South African deaf schools and units. The study is also in line with Adoyo (2007) who suggested that curriculum should be flexible to allow for appropriate adaptation with a content that is relevant to real lives and future, taking cognizance of gender, cultural identity and language background. He also says that strong policies, documented goals and objectives governing the implementation of inclusion process should be put in place. Such policies should address issues regarding language of instruction in an inclusive setting, language with a negative connotation towards the excluded, requirements on competence and quality of teachers in inclusive settings. The difference between his study and the findings of the study at hand is that, his study dealt with challenges facing sign language learners in inclusive education while this study focuses on the same challenges in special

Deaf schools. The 7th QEC (2014) also recommends on having and allocating prescribed curriculum and clear methods of assessment when special needs education learners are included in mainstream schools. Chaula (2014) suggests that educational policies should be reviewed to take full account of individual differences and situations. The importance of Sign Language as the medium of communication among the Deaf, for example, should be recognized and provision be made to ensure that all Deaf students have access to education by using Sign Language. She also says that, there should be revision of curriculum to make it flexible so that teachers have room to use different teaching styles to achieve the same objectives.

98 4.3.3 A Need for Developing a Genuine Government Support towards Deaf

Special Education

The government is urged to have enough contribution in various issues as far as Deaf

Education is concerned. In collaborating with private individuals and Non-

Governmental Organizations, the government is encouraged to establish more special

Deaf schools as well as units. It is also encouraged to properly disburse its budgetary issues so that it may provide more educational materials and physical facilities that would be needed by learners with disabilities at affordable prices and within the reach of the poor.

Respondent B1 said: …you know for example, here we have a big number of learners within a single class because we have a shortage of Deaf schools and units here in Tanzania. The head teacher decides to enroll these pupils because he thinks if he doesn’t do this, where else would they go to get their education? I urge the government and other stakeholders to establish a number of Deaf schools to the extent that every district should have at least one Deaf special school. The government also has to motivate TSL teachers because teaching TSL is not an easy task compared to educating hearing learners.

The findings above are in line with the solutions suggested by DPO mentoring project (2013) that there is a need to lobby the government on the issue of disbursing capitation grants for children with disabilities in schools. It is important that the real costs of the children with disabilities are made known so that grants can take proper account of their needs. The findings above are also consistent with the recommendation made by Eunice et al (2015) that there should be a need for the government to allocate funds to schools to help them in procuring special facilities for special needs education. In this context, the government should also increase fund allocations to schools especially those from regions without adequate resources.

These funds should be channelled to public schools to aid them in development project such as building of properly designed classrooms and toilets. The study is

99 also in line with the recommendation given by the 7th QEC (2014) which recommends on the allocation of adequate fund but special for Inclusive Education services in schools and at the level of districts.

4.3.4 The Need to Oversee Special Education Training

The study recommends on the importance of the government to crosscheck the whole special education training so as to be aware of what is going on with regard to the education of children with special needs education. The study reveals that the special needs education is mostly left in the hands of NGOs, religious institutions and parents of these children. Therefore, the government is urgued to start working upon this education so as to come to grips with the actual learners‟ needs and their challenges, and then come up with various ways to eradicate the existing challenges.

It has been revealed that the government offers inspection services to all Deaf special schools and units. However, the education inspectors who inspect Deaf/Hard of

Hearing schools are mostly not conversant with TSL so they are usually at loss of what is being taught and the challenges associated with the language. The study then, recommends that the government through the Ministry of Education, Science,

Technology and Vocational Training (MoESTVT) should have to oversee its special education training so that education inspectors are made aware of what to inspect in the special schools and units. They should also do frequent supervision to ensure standards in the special Deaf primary school and units in the country. The government should ensure that all education inspectors who inspect special Deaf schools are required by law to be aware of what is going on in Deaf/Hard of Hearing education and have training on Tanzanian Sign Language. Speaking of the

100 importance of educational inspectors in Deaf Education and their ability to communicate through TSL:

Respondent A3 said: …they usually come to our school, but they cannot communicate using TSL. They inspect as they always do to normal schools. The challenge is even serious when they enter the classes. They don’t know sign language so they can’t correct anything to a TSL teacher. What I expect from them is to see how I teach, to see how competent I am in that subject matter and a medium of instruction I use. They also want to know if learners understand what I teach. Therefore, I argue them to acquire the TSL first before coming to inspect TSL special schools.

The study reflects the findings by Muiti (2010) who also suggested that, the Ministry of Education should oversee its special education training so that school inspectors are made aware of what to inspect in the special schools and units. These inspectors should also do frequent supervision to ensure upholding of educational standards in the special primary school and units in the districts.

4.3.5 Introduction of Early Deaf/Hard of Hearing Identification/ Screening

Programmes

The study recommends introduction of early Deaf/Hard of Hearing screening programmes which are important for the early identification of Deaf/Hard of Hearing children. The early Deaf/Hard of Hearing identification programmes will help the government in introducing early language intervention programmes for children with hearing impairment. The early language intervention will help improve Tanzania

Sign Language literacy to deaf children early before they join special schools. This will also help in comprehensive training of the parents of deaf children in Sign

Language in order to provide language experiences to their children as early as possible. This will also help to expose a Deaf child to the normal language development stages just like their hearing peers. On this particular regard,

Respondent B3 said: 101 …there is no early deaf identification programmes, as I told you earlier for instance for my case, I discovered that my child was Deaf. The child was not speaking, when I tried to call her, she didn’t respond. If the government would have these early identification programmes it would help to impart the TSL knowledge to parents who would in turn help TSL learners early enough before coming to school much later. By this doing, the parents would have laid a good TSL foundation where teachers would have to begin teaching.

The findings above are consistent with the findings by Mulonda (2013) who recommended that, the government should introduce early hearing screening for children between 0 and 6 months in order to come up with early intervention programmes. This is because early language intervention improves literacy in deaf children. These findings are also in line with the South African Department of Basic

Education (2013) which proposes the progressive training of teachers on early identification of Hard-of-Hearing and Deafness. The study is also consistent with

Adebisi et al (2014) who assert that children who have difficulty in learning receive the help they need as soon as possible and that parents of children with special needs should have access to suitable childcare.

4.3.6 Introducing a Comprehensive TSL Training for Teachers of the Deaf

In order to properly address the challenge of TSL teachers‟ incompetence, the study recommends the introduction of comprehensive TSL training to teacher trainees while still in special needs education colleges/universities. The study reveals that

TSL which is a medium of instruction for Deaf/Hard of Hearing children is taught as an extra subject and it is not examined while trainees are in the special needs education colleges/universities. The colleges/universities curricula have to accommodate the teaching and learning of TSL as an important subject for trainees who wish to teach Deaf/Hard of Hearing children. The TSL has to be used as a medium of instruction for these trainees and be examined as other subjects.

102 Therefore, it is recommended that, the Ministry of Education through the responsible organ (i.e. National Council of Technical Education – NACTE) introduce a comprehensive training of the TSL such that, all special Deaf Education teacher trainees become capable of communicating through and using TSL as a medium of instruction. In line with the above recommendation, Respondent A3 said:

…the TSL should be made an important subject taught and examined in special teachers training. I think it would be better if Deaf special teachers would be taught all subjects through TSL as their medium of instruction. The time allocated for the learning of TSL during teachers’ training should be maximized. The number of tutors should also be increased to cope with the equally increasing number of the trainees. During our time at Patandi, we only had one TSL teacher. In my opinion, it would be better if all tutors would be capable of using TSL which would be used as a medium of instruction to other subjects.

The study also recommends incompetent teachers to learn TSL from their colleagues and Deaf/Hard of Hearing pupils so as to be able to use the language as a medium of instruction. The study also calls for in-service TSL training, seminars and workshops for the Deaf/Hard of Hearing teachers in order to equip them important in their teaching.

The findings above are in line with the recommendation made by Safder et al (2002) that teachers are not proficient in using sign language, they therefore, should be encouraged to learn it with the help of students with hearing impairment, their colleagues and above all, by attending training workshops and refresher courses on

Sign Languages. The South African Department of Basic Education (2013) also proposes the progressive training for teachers in specialised skills on Deafness and

Deaf culture. The study is related to Adoyo (2007) who recommended that personnel involved in the teaching in an inclusive setting with the Deaf or Hearing Impairment should be appropriately trained and should be bilingual in spoken (written) language as well as Sign Language. However, contrast is made between the two studies that 103 whereas Adoyo‟s research dealt with Deaf personnel in inclusive education context, the current one delt with Deaf personnel in special education context. Yet, these studies are similar because they both deal with Deaf learners although in various contexts. Again, the findings of this study on this particular context are in line with

Mulonda (2013) who recommended the government to introduce comprehensive training in Sign Language as a language for teachers of the Deaf. The findings also are relevant to the 7th QEC (2014) which recommended the promotion of in-service training for teachers of special needs education. However, the study is partially related to the findings by Eunice et al (2015) who recommended that there should be a need for all secondary school teachers to receive in service training in special educational needs and for those joining the fresh training; a common unit should be designed on special educational needs especially on Sign Language and Braille machines and reading of Braille text books to equip them with appropriate skills in readiness for integrated classrooms. The similarities among these studies are that, all do recommend on improving the teachers‟ skills on using languages of special needs education children. But the former insists on improving not only Sign language but also Braille which is not the case for the study at hand. The other difference between these studies is, one deals with primary school‟s pupils and the other deals with secondary learners. In contrast, the current study, deals with TSL and Deaf

Education, while the former dealt with special needs education learners in general.

4.3.7 The TSL be Taught and be Examinable Subject to All Levels of Deaf

Education

The study revealed that TSL was neither taught as a subject nor examined in either

Deaf/Hard of Hearing special schools or units. The study then, recommends teaching of TSL as a subject from pre-primary schools to high levels of Deaf/Hard of Hearing 104 education so as to make TSL learners grow gradually with the language. The need to have a special designed curriculum for education for the Deaf will give a room for the TSL language in all levels of their studies. The government through the TIE should introduce a well developed curriculum which will make a Tanzanian Sign

Language be a compulsory taught and examinable subject in Deaf special schools and at least be an optional subject to normal schools as it is the case with other spoken languages like Kiswahili and English. This will be helpful in the act of increasing the number of TSL speakers and as a result of guaranteeing the growth of the language. The TSL is said to be a new language with a very limited number of speakers and signs. Therefore, by making it a subject taught and examined in all pre- primary or primary school education levels, its growth would be guaranteed. This will help the TSL learners learn the language while at home since their counterparts will be able to communicate with them when performing various home activities. As it was revealed, the TSL learners were currently not able to play with their hearing counterparts due to the communication barrier they were facing. Therefore, the TSL learners who are not in boarding schools lack places to practise what they learn while in schools since their peers and sometimes family members or parents are not conversant with the language they use. When eacting to this particular aspect,

Respondent B3 said:

…the TSL is not taught as a subject and it is not examined. It is only used as a medium of instruction to these Deaf special schools. However, it would be much better if the language would be taught as a subject to special schools and all normal (hearing) schools. Again, more researches should be done to increase knowledge through availability literature. We should all know that, being Deaf is not an option. Anyone at anytime may become a Deaf. Having TSL competence would help hearing people communicate with deaf. It became hard for the deaf learners to communicate when mixed with normal hearing society. For example, when I get back home, my child doesn’t have enough friends compared to the hearing counterparts. She only communicates with me or just watches television. 105 This finding is consistent with the study by Mulonda (2013) saying the government through the Ministry of Education should also introduce Sign Language as a taught and examinable subject in schools.

4.3.8 The Compilation and Development of a Well Researched TSL Dictionary

The study noticed that, the available TSL dictionary has very few signs. It lacks a lot of signs used by most of Deaf/Hard of Hearing personnel all over the country. The study therefore, sees the importance of incorporating all the existing signs used in all parts of the country by the Deaf and Hard of Hearing people into TSL dictionary.

The government in collaboration with various individuals (researchers) and NGOs should also develop Sign Language story books, picture strips, Sign language video tapes, charts, pupils and teachers‟ books and many more with the aim of improving the teaching of Tanzanian Sign Language in schools. This will also help the growth of the language by making it be able to be used in various contexts.

Respondent B1 said: …yes, as I have told u that, TSL learners sit for the same examinations as hearing learners. These exams in complete disregard that we teach for example a science subject by using books designed for normal learners. Those who set these exams nevert ask themselves that, ‘yes, we examine these Deaf pupils; did we provide TSL’s science books? Again, they have to consider preparing a well TSL dictionary which will incorporate all existing signs and books of various genres like TSL story books, picture strips and TSL charts.

Again, respondent A1 said: …the only Sign language book the school has is a Dictionary. The dictionary itself is not much comprehensible. Therefore, various researches have to be introduced so as to develop and compile a dictionary which will incorporate all existing signs.

The compilation of a comprehensive dictionary should also go hand in hand with making it available for all TSL teachers, learners and other TSL users who need it as their companion during teaching, learning and using the language.

106 The study on this particular aspect, is consistent with the findings by Mulonda (2013) who writing in the context of Zambia, also recommended that development and compilation of a well researched Zambian Sign Language Dictionary that would incorporate all the existing variations of signs used in all parts of the country by the

Deaf should be of prime importance. The different between these two studies here is that, the current study is dealing with Tanzanian Sign Language whereas the former dealt with the Zambian Sign Language.

4.3.9 Making TSL Teaching and Learning Materials Available

The study also noticed the shortage of TSL teaching and learning materials in

Deaf/Hard of Hearing special schools. Therefore, it recommends to the government/organizations which run these schools to make sure that all the TSL teaching and learning materials including TSL teaching and learning books and other materials apart from books be brought in the reach of teachers and learners of TSL.

The teachers have to make and use TSL teaching and learning materials in every lesson they to teach. They are urged to use real things or other materials created according to their environment and nature of the lesson they teach. Reacting to this particular regard, respondent A1 said:

…teaching and learning materials are important ingredients in teaching TSL. If you are talking about a cup for example, you need to have a cup or its picture. Teaching and learning materials are as important as the topic itself. A Deaf learner cannot learn properly without these materials. We teachers lack resources for preparing teaching and learning materials. But I encourage my colleague to make materials with regard to the needs of the topics, learners and contexts.

Again, Respondent A3 added: …the TSL teacher is the one responsible for teaching and learning materials preparation. Using teaching materials for TSL learners simplifies much the process of learning. Teachers are then much encouraged to prepare and use

107 teaching materials. The government and schools are also encouraged to make TSL teaching and learning material resources available.

The findings above are consistent with those of Mulonda (2013) who recommended to the government to develop more Sign language teaching resources. These teaching resources should be in the form of Sign Language story books, picture strips, Sign

Language video tapes, charts, pupils and teachers‟ books and many more in order to improve the teaching of Sign Language in schools. In rejoinder, the South African

Department of Basic Education (2013) suggested the development of teacher guides for workbook utilisation since most of the workbooks were seen to have no teacher‟s guides thus leading to more challenges to teachers. Again, Maruff and Sofiyat (2011) suggested that, educational materials and facilities that would be needed by students with disabilities should be provided at affordable prices and be within the reach of the poor. Muiti (2010) also recommends to the government to ensure the provision of adequate teaching/learning resources. Chaula (2014) also suggests that, there should be provision of teaching and learning materials which might be helpful for teachers in order to help learners with special educational needs. Again, Adoyo (2007) suggests the use of aids and communication through Sign Language so as to increase the student–teacher interaction and to facilitate learning.

4.4 Reflection of the Theoretical Framework to the Findings

The study was guided by the theoretical framework called Linguistic

Interdependence Theory propounded by Jim Cummins (1981). The basis of this theory is on the belief that all languages share common underlying proficiencies.

Cummins (2006) asserts that although the surface aspects (e.g. pronunciation, fluency, etc.) of different languages are clearly separate, there is an underlying cognitive/academic proficiency that is common across languages. This common

108 underlying proficiency makes possible the transfer of cognitive/academic or literacy- related proficiency from one language to another. Mayer and Akamatsu (1999) then insist that in Deaf Education, by relying on this theory, Deaf children who have a solid L1 foundation in a Native Sign Language can use this language to buttress their learning of the majority‟s language in its written form. A claim of building a sold L1 foundation in a Native Sign Language to Deaf children from the Linguistic

Interdependence Theory was the basic framework of the study at hand. The study opted to find ways which would enable the building of a solid foundation of TSL which is an L1 to Tanzanian Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. Those ways were to examine challenges facing TSL learners, find out causes of those challenges and finally come with solutions which would help eradicate the challenges which TSL learners were likely to face. The study at hand then, managed to reveal various challenges facing TSL learners, causes and finally recommends for the solutions which will help to eradicate the TSL learning challenges. The recommendations of eliminating challenges facing TSL learners revealed by this study will then help to build a solid foundation of TSL which is a L1 to Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. The solid TSL proficiency will then, help Deaf children acquire proficiencies of L2 which are spoken/written languages [which are Kiswahili and English]. The findings of the study has well reflected the basic claim of the theory by helping TSL learners build a solid foundation of their L1 which as a result help them learn spoken/written languages.

4.5 Chapter Conclusion

This chapter has presented the data and discussed the findings from the field. It reveals that, TSL learners are faced by a number of challenges which hamper smooth

109 learning of the language. It also presents a number of causes which contribute to the existence of those challenges facing TSL learners. The chapter also offers the solution which, if put into practice, will help eradicate those challenges facing TSL learners. The presentation of the reflection of the findings to the theoretical framework has also been done in this chapter.

110 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Introduction

This chapter summarizes the whole study. The chapter has been divided into four subsections which cover introduction, summary of the findings, conclusion and ends with the recommendations which the researcher thinks would help to improve the standard of TSL learning in Tanzania.

5.1 Summary of the Study

The study based on examining the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners. It was guided by three specific objectives. These objectives were: to examine the challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners; to investigate the causes of challenges facing Tanzanian Sign Language learners and to find out possible solutions towards eradication of problems facing TSL Learners.

Data collection process included responses from special Deaf primary schools‟ teachers and pupils. The researcher was able to conduct a semi structured interview with seven (7) teachers from both schools. Thirty (30) pupils and other ten (10) teachers from both schools answered questionnaires. Documentary review and lesson observations done by sitting in the classroom during normal class lesson were other data collection techniques employed in the study at hand.

On the question of challenges facing TSL learners, the study revealed that, the learners were facing challenges such as studying in overcrowded classes, lack of TSL books and shortage of TSL learning aids. The study also revealed that, most of the

TSL learners in these schools were born of hearing parents, there was lack of early

111 Deaf and Hard of Hearing identification programmes, parents did not give necessary

TSL learning support to their Deaf/Hard of Hearing children. The study also noted that incompatibility of the curricula was not one of the subjects taught and examined by NECTA. It also noted unpleasant TSL learning environment. Other challenges registered are that most of the education inspectors were not conversant with TSL, some of teachers were not conversant with TSL, there was lack of qualified special education teachers and also there was general inadequacy of government support to

Deaf/Hard of Hearing education.

With regard to the causes of challenges facing TSL learners, the study revealed that, there was shortage of special education colleges/universities, insufficient number of

Deaf schools in Tanzania, inadequate researches about TSL, unclear policies and curricula and lack of awareness on Deafness and its language.

With respect to the solutions towards eradication of challenges facing TSL learners, the study recommends on the awareness campaigns with regard to TSL and

Deaf/Hard of Hearing matters, development of the special education curriculum, developing a genuine government support towards Deaf special education, the need to oversee special education training and the introduction of early Deaf/Hard of

Hearing screening programmes. The study also suggested the introduction of a comprehensive TSL training for teachers of the Deaf, the TSL be a taught and be examined subject to all level of Deaf Education, the compilation and development of a well researched TSL dictionary and making TSL teaching/learning materials available. By so doing, the challenges facing TSL learners will then be eliminated.

112 5.2 Conclusion

The findings of the study show that, the TSL learners are faced with a number of challenges during the whole process of learning the TSL. According to the findings of the study, most of the challenges are mainly caused by the negative attitudes of the hearing community which include policy makers, parents, teachers, leaders etc. The negative attitude was revealed to be caused by lack of awareness as far as TSL and

Deaf Education/matters were concerned. The other challenges noted were mainly caused by the use of incompatible education policies and curricula.

The study therefore, recommended for more awareness campaigns on Deaf/Hard of

Hearing matters including their language and the right of being educated like their hearing counterparts. The findings of the study also, recommended the development of an education policy which would give a way of designing a special Deaf

Education curriculum. The special Deaf curriculum should clearly state that, TSL be taught and be examinable subject as well as being a medium of instruction to

Tanzanian Deaf/Hard of Hearing learners. The study also recommends on the deliberate efforts by the government and other stakeholders to minimize or eradicate the challenge of shortage of special education teachers by increasing teachers‟ trainees‟ enrollment in special education colleges and universities. The curricula in those special education colleges or universities should be redesigned so as to accommodate TSL as a taught and examinable subject.

5.3 Recommendations

For the sake of building a solid foundation of Sign language learning, general recommendations and recommendations for further researches are provided below.

113 5.3.1 General Recommendations

With respect to the presented findings, discussion and conclusion, several issues would need to be addressed in order to enhance smooth learning of the TSL in special Deaf/Hard of Hearing pre-primary and primary schools. The following recommendations are among the issues that can be addressed to enhance smooth learning of TSL:

The government should take full responsibility for the education of Deaf/Hard of

Hearing. These responsibilities should not only be left in the hands of NGOs, religious institutions and parents of Deaf children. Instead, the government should join hands with these stakeholders so as to make Deaf Education and TSL learning as a dream come true.

The government is also advised to establish a comprehensive TSL training for the teachers of the Deaf in order to increase the number of competent TSL teachers. In- service training should also be encouraged so as to help normal teachers employed in

Deaf special schools or units to teach well and profesionally.

The government through the responsible ministry is encouraged to develop a special education curriculum which will meet the education needs of Deaf learners including the use of TSL as a medium of instruction and teaching/learning it as a subject.

The awareness campaigns should also be of great importance for the purpose of changing the negative attitudes of the hearing community on matters of TSL and

Deaf Education in general.

114 The government in collaboration with the Tanzanian Association for the Deaf, colleges/universities which offer special needs education for the Deaf should review and develop a new version of the Tanzanian Sign Language Dictionary. This should involve the compilation and development of a well researched Tanzanian Sign

Language Dictionary that will incorporate all the existing variations of signs used in all the parts of the country by the Deaf.

5.3.2 Recommendations for Further Researchers

It has been noted above that the study at hand, covered only two special schools from two regions. It is therefore urgued that, other researchers to investigate challenges facing TSL learners in special schools, units attached to mainstream schools and in inclusive schools of other reagions in order to make comparisons. Other researchers are also asked to carry out researches for the purpose of establishing a comprehensive version of the TSL dictionary which would include all the signs used by Deaf community all over the country. Since Mreta and Muzale (2001) established that TSL is a complete Sign language than a Signed language, the study then, recommends further researchers to study the linguistic aspects of TSL language.

Their researches should base on phonological, morphological and syntactical aspects of the Tanzanian Sign Language.

115 REFERENCES

Adabisi, R.O et al (2014), “Barriers to Special Needs Education in Nigeria”, International Journal of Education and Research, Vol. 2, No. 11.

Adoyo, P. O. (2007), “Educating Deaf Children in an Inclusive Setting in Kenya: Challenges and Considerations”, Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 2.

Baker, C. (1999), “Sign Language and the Deaf Community”, in Fishman, J. A. (ed), Handbook of Language & Ethnic Identity, Oxford University Press, New York.

Baker-Shenk, C. and Cokely, D. (1991), American Sign Language: A Teacher’s Resource Text on Grammar and Culture, Clerc Books, Gallaudet University Press, Washington, DC.

Chaula, G. J. (2014), Challenges Teachers Face in Implementation of Inclusive Education in Primary Schools in Tanzania: A Case Study of Two Primary Schools in Tanzania, Unpublished Dissertation, Hedmark University College.

Chirwa, M. (Undated), Inclusive Education, A Study of Opportunities and Challenges for Children with Disabilities: A Case of Zambia, Unpublished, Linnaeus University.

Chupina, K. (2006), “The Role of Sign Language in Sweden”, [http://www.1711. com/my711.Php?tab=2&articles=125], site visited on July 30, 2015.

Cummins, J. (1981), “The Role of Primary Language Development in Promoting Educational Success for Language Minority Students”, in California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework, Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center California State University, Los Angeles, 3-49.

Cummins, J. (1989a), Empowering Minority Students, California Association for Bilingual Education, California.

Cummins, J. (2006), “The Relationship between American Sign Language Proficiency and English Academic Development: A Review of the Research [1]”, The University of Toronto, [http://www2.hihm.no/minoritet/KonfOkt06/ASL%20Lit%20Review%N ov%202006.rtf] site visited on June 28, 2016.

116 Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage.

DFDI (undated), Education for Children with Disabilities: Improving Access and Quality, Guidance Note, Unpublished DFID practice paper, UKaid.

Dolnick, E. (1993), “Deafness as Culture”, Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 272, No. 3, 37–53.

DPO mentoring project (2013), Access to and Provision of Pre‐Primary and Primary Education to Children with Disabilities in Tanzania, Unpublished report, Dar es Salaam.

Ethnologue Languages of the World (2016), Tanzanian Sign Language, [https://www.ethnologue.com/language/tza], site visited on June 22, 2016.

Eunice, A. L. et al (2015), “Challenges Facing Implementation of Inclusive Education in Public Secondary Schools in Rongo Sub- County, Migori County, Kenya”, IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Vol. 20, No. 4, Ver. VI, 39-50.

Fischer, R. (1995), “The Notation of Sign Languages: Bébian‟s Mimographie”, in H. Bos & G. M. Schermer (eds.), Sign Language Research 1994: Proceedings of the Fourth European Congress on Sign Language Research, Munich, September 1-3, 1994, Signum Press, Hamburg, 285- 302.

Ganiso, M. N. (2012), Sign Language in South Africa: Language Planning and Policy Challenges, Unpublished Thesis, Rhodes University.

Global Deaf Connection (2010), Problems and Needs, [httpwww.Deafconnection.org/index.php?page =volunteer], site visited on May 25, 2015.

Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania (2016), Mtaala na Muhtasari wa Elimu ya Awali, Haijachapishwa, Wizara ya Elimu, Sayansi Teknolojia na Ufundi, Dar-es-Salaam.

Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania (2016), Mtaala wa Elimu Msingi Darasa la I na la II, Haijachapishwa, Wizara ya Elimu, Sayansi, Teknolojia na ya Ufundi, Dar-es-Salaam.

Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania (2016), Mtaala wa Elimu Msingi Darasa la III – VI, Haijachapishwa, Wizara ya Elimu, Sayansi, Teknolojia na Ufundi. 117 Johnston, T. & Schembri, A. (2007), Australian Sign Language (Auslan): An Introduction to Sign Language Linguistics, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Kalakoski, J. & Strom, K. (2005), Special Needs Education in Tanzania: A Fact- finding Mission Final Report, Unpublished report, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland and Ministry of Education and Culture, United Republic of Tanzania.

Kendon, A. (2004), Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kimani, C. W. (2012), Teaching Deaf Learners in Kenyan Classrooms, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, The University of Sussex.

Lewis, I. & Little, D (2007), Report to NORAD on Desk Review of Inclusive Education Policies and Plans in Nepal, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zambia, Unpublished report.

Linette, A. & Opere, A. L. (2015), Influence of School Based Factors on Participation of Learners with Special Needs in Primary Education in Naivasha Municipality, Nakuru, Kenya, Unpublished, University of Nairobi.

Maddern, K. (2010), “Dilemmas in the Deaf Community”, [Tes Newspapers.www.tes.co.uk], site visited on May 25, 2015.

Martin, V. (2009), Language Learning and Deafness, Unpublished, Masaryk University.

Maruff, O. A. & Sofiyat, O. A. (2011), “Educating Students with Disabilities in Nigeria: Some Challenges and Policy Implications”, European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 3, No.1.

Mayer, C. & Akamatsu, C. T. (1999), “Bilingual-Bicultural Models of Literacy Education for Deaf Students: Considering the Claims”, Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Vol. 4, No. 1.

Mesthrie, R et al (2004), Introducing Sociolinguistics, (Second Edition), Edinburgh Edinburgh University Press, 22 George Square.

Miles, S. et al (2003), Learning from Difference: Understanding Community Initiatives to Improve Access to Education, Unpublished.

118 Ministry of Education and Culture (1995), Education and Training Policy, Unpublished, Dar-es-Salaam.

Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (2000), Education in a Global Era: Challenges to Equity, Opportunity for Diversity, Paper Presented at the Fourteenth Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers, (14 CCEM) Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 27 – 30.

Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Mainland and Zanzibar (2008), The Development of Education, Unpublished National Report of the United Republic of Tanzania.

Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (2009), National Strategy on Inclusive Education 2009-2017, Final Draft, Unpublished, 2-48. Ministry of Labour, Youth Development and Sports (2004), National Policy on Disability, Unpublished, Dar-es-Salaam.

Mitiku, W. et al (2014), “Challenges and Opportunities to Implement Inclusive Education”, Asian Journal of Humanity, Art and Literature, Vol. 1, No. 2.

Mmbaga, D. R. (2002), “The Inclusive Classroom in Tanzania: Dream or Reality?”, Stockholm: Institute of International Education, Vol. 59, University of Stockholm.

Mpofu, J. & Shumba, A. (2012), “Challenges Faced by Students with Special Educational Needs in Early Childhood Development Centers in Zimbabwe as Perceived by ECD Trainers and Parents”, Anthropologist, Vol. 14, No. 4, 327-338.

Mreta, A. Y. & Muzale, H. R. (1999), A Report on the National Workshop: A Seminar for CHAVITA Leader and Members on the White Paper, No. 1, Morogoro.

Mreta, A. Y. & Muzale, H. R. (2001), The influence of Kiswahili on Tanzanian Sign Language, University of Dar-es-Salaam, Dar es Salaam.

Muiti, M. J. (2010), Hindrances to Effective Learning of Pupils with Hearing Impairment in Meru, North District, Kenya, Unpublished, Kenyatta University.

Mulonda, M. (2013), A Situational Analysis on the Use of Sign Language in the Education of the Deaf in Zambia: A Case of Magwero and St Joseph Schools for The Deaf. Unpublished M.A. Education (Special Education), The University of Zambia. 119 Musengi, M & Chireshe, R. (2012), “Inclusion of Deaf Students in Mainstream Rural Primary Schools in Zimbabwe: Challenges and Opportunities”, Stud Tribes Tribals, Vol. 10, No. 2, 107-116.

National Bureau of Statistics (2013), Population Distribution by Administrative Units: Key Findings, Unpublished report of 2012 Population and Housing Census, Dar-es-Salaam.

Newport, E. L. & Meier, R. P. (1985) “The acquisition of American Sign Language”, in Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The Cross-Linguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum.

Oladejo, M. A. (2001), “Educating Nigerian Disabled Students: Problems and Prospects in the Educator”, Journal of School of Education, Federal College of Education (Special), Oyo, 15-24.

Phiri, M. O. K (Undated), Malawi Deaf Education at a Crossroads: Research on the Challenges Deaf Learners Face in Mainstream Education Settings, DeafNET Centre of Knowledge, Worcester, South Africa.

Pima, M. J. (2012), Six Years of Implementing National Policy on Disability in Tanzania: A Study of Primary School Teachers’ Perspectives on Influence of the Policy in Special Needs Education, Unpublished Master‟s Thesis, Oslo University.

Possi, M. K. (1999), “Kiswahili Kama Lugha ya Kufundishia Wanafunzi VIZIWI katika Shule za Sekondari Nchini Tanzania”, Journal of the Institute of Kiswahili Research, University of Dar es Salaam.

Pritchard, P. (2005), “Provision for the Education of Deaf Pupils in Norway”, [http://www.batod.org.uk], site visited on July23, 2015.

Quigley, S., & Kretschmer, R. (1982), The education of deaf children, University Park Press, Baltimore, MD.

Rée, J. (1999), I See a Voice: A Philosophical History, Flamingo (HarperCollins), London.

Republic of South Africa (2013), Challenges Faced by Blind and Deaf Learners Regarding Facilities, Equipment and Braille Material, A paper prepared and presented by Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration, Department of Basic Education.

120 Ricento, T. (2006), An Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method, Blackwell, Oxford.

Safder, M. et al (2002), “Problems Faced by Students with Hearing Impairment in Inclusive Education at the University Level”, Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, Vol. 6, No.2, 129 -136.

Schein, J.D. (2010), Deaf Culture in the Education of Deaf Pupils, New York University (USA) and University of Alberta (Canada).

Signed Language (2010), “Academic Advantages of Sign Language”, [www.signed .language.co.uk/AcademicAdvantageOfSignlanguage], site visited on April 5, 2015.

Smith C. (2000), “A history of British Sign Language”, [http://www.deafsign. com/ds/index.cfm?scn=article&articleID=48], site visited on April 31, 2016.

Stokoe, W. C. (1960), Sign Language Structure: An Outline of the Visual Communication Systems of the American Deaf, Linstok Press, Silver Spring, MD.

Stokoe, W. C. at el (1965), A Dictionary of American Sign Language on Linguistic Principles, Gallaudet College Press, Washington, DC.

Taasisi ya Elimu Tanzania (2013), Mtaala wa Elimu ya Awali Tanzania, Haijachapishwa, Wizara ya Elimu na Mafunzo ya Ufundi, Dar-es- Salaam.

Taasisi ya Elimu Tanzania (2013), Mtaala wa Elimu ya Msingi Tanzania, Haijachapishwa, Wizara ya Elimu na Mafunzo ya Ufundi, Dar-es- Salaam.

Tanzania Institute of Education (2013), Curriculum for Certificate in Teacher Education Programmes in Tanzania, Unpublished, Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Dar-es-Salaam.

Tanzania Institute of Education (2013), Curriculum for Diploma in Teacher Education Programmes in Tanzania, Unpublished, Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Dar-es-Salaam.

Tervoort, B. (1953), Structurele Analyse van Visueel Taalgebruik Binnen een Groep dove Kinderen, Unpublished Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.

121 The ODC 050 (2013), Introduction to Special Needs Education, The Open University of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam.

The Seventh Quality Education Conference (2014), Conceptions And Perceptions About Inclusive Education, Teacher’s Knowledge and Adoption of Inclusive Education for Children with Intellectual Impairment: The Case of Inclusive Primary Schools in Bunda District-Mara, Unpublished, Dar es Salaam.

Udoba, H. A. (2014), Challenges Faced by Teachers when Teaching Learners with Developmental Disability, Unpublished Master‟s Thesis, University of Oslo.

UNESCO (1994), The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. World Conference on Special Needs Education, Access and Quality, Salamanca Spain.

UNESCO (1994), Framework for Action on Special needs, Jomtein, Thailand.

Vernon, M. & Koh, S. (1970), “Effects of Manual Communication on Deaf Children's Educational Achievement, Linguistic Competence, Oral Skills and Psychological Development”, American Annals of the Deaf, Vol. 116, 527-536.

Wizara ya Elimu na Mafunzo ya Ufundi (2014), Sera ya Elimu na Mafunzo, Haijachapishwa, Dar-es-Salaam.

Woll, B. Et al (2004), “Multilingualism: The Global Approach to Sign Languages”, in Lucas, C. (ed.) The Sociolinguistics of Sign Languages, Cambridge University Press, New York.

World Data on Education (2006/07), “Principles and General Objectives of Education”, (Sixth Edition), United Republic of Tanzania.

World Health Organization (2004), “Disability and Rehabilitation Status”, Geneva, Switzerland,[http://search.who.int/search?ie= utf8&site=default_ collection&client=WHO&proxystylesheet=WHO&output=xml_no_dtd& oe=utf8&q=Disability+and+Rehabilitation+Status+2004&Search=Search &sitesearch=http://www.Deafsign.com/ds/index.cfm?scn=article&article ID=48], site visited on July22, 2015.

Zeshan, U. (2000), Sign Language in Indo-Pakistan: A Description of a Signed Language, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Philadelphia/ Amsterdam.

122 LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: DODOSO KWA WALIMU

Utangulizi

Dodoso hili ni kwa ajili ya utafiti unaokusudia kubaini “Changamoto zinazowakabili wanafunzi wanaojifunza Lugha ya Alama Tanzania (LAT)”, sababu zinazopelekea changamoto hizo pamoja na suluhisho litakalosaidia kupunguza au kumaliza kabisa changamoto hizo. Utafiti huu ni kwa lengo la kukamilisha mafunzo ya shahada ya pili ya isimu (MA. Linguistics) katika Chuo Kikuu cha Dodoma. Mtafiti anaomba ushirikiano wako kwa kusoma kisha kujibu maswali kwa usahihi ili matokeo ya utafiti huu yasaidie kutatua changamoto mbalimbali zinazokabili zoezi la ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa Lugha ya Alama Tanzania. Mtafiti anakuahidi na kukuthibitishia kuwa, majibu utakayotoa yatatunzwa kwa usiri mkubwa na kutumiwa kwa lengo la kukamilisha utafiti huu tu.

Tafadhali, jibu maswali yote.

Weka alama ya vema sehemu inayohusika na weka jibu sehemu iliyoachwa wazi.

1. Umesoma wapi elimu ya msingi? (shule) ______sekondari? ______2. Ni lugha ipi ya kufundishia iliyokuwa ikitumika katika mafunzo yako ya elimu ya msingi? ______sekondari? ______3. Je, umepata mafunzo ya kufundisha elimu maalumu? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 4. Kama jibu ni NDIYO, mafunzo hayo umepata katika chuo gani? [taja jina la chuo] ______5. Je, ni mahali gani hasa ulipojifunza LAT? Nyumbani? ( ) Shule ya msingi? ( ) Shule ya sekondari? ( ) Chuo cha ualimu? ( ) 6. Je, mafunzo ya LAT uliyopata yalitosha kukufanya uanze kufundisha elimu hii maalumu? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 7. Je, una ufanisi mkubwa katika matumizi ya Lugha ya Alama ya Tanzania (LAT)? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 8. Je, uwezo wako wa kutumia LAT umeongezeka au umepungua ukilinganisha na ulivyokuwa wakati ukitoka chuoni? Umeongezeka ______Umepungua 9. Kama uwezo huo umeongezeka/umepungua ni kwa sababu gani?______10. Je, miundombinu ya shule hii inawezesha/inahamasisha ujifunzaji wa LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( )

123 11. Je, shule ina vitabu vyovyote maalumu vya kufundishia LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 12. Je, kuna kiongozi cha mwalimu kinachokusaidia kutumia kitabu cha LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 13. Hali ya zana za kufundishia na kujifunzia ikoje katika shule hii? Zinajitosheleza ( ) Wastani ( ) Haba ( ) 14. Ni nani hutayarisha zana hizo? Mwalimu mwenyewe ( ) Shule ( ) Serikali ( ) 15. Je, darasa lako lina wanafunzi viziwi waliozaliwa na wazazi viziwi? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 16. Kama jibu ni NDIYO, kuna tofauti ya ujifunzaji LAT baina ya wanafunzi wenye wazazi viziwi na wale wenye wazazi wasio viziwi? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 17. Kama kuna tofauti ya ujifunzaji LAT, ni wanafunzi gani huelewa haraka LAT? Wenye wazazi viziwi ( ) wenye wazazi wasio viziwi ( ) 18. Je, wanafunzi huanza kujifunza LAT katika umri gani wawapo hapa shuleni? Miaka ___ 19. Je, umri huu wanaoanza kujifunza LAT hapa shuleni hapa mwafaka kuanza kujifunza lugha? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 20. Kama jibu ni HAPANA, kwa mtazamo wako, ungependekeza waanze kujifunza LAT katika umri gani? ______21. Je, wanafunzi huwa na maarifa ya awali ya LAT wanapofika shuleni kuanza masomo yao? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 22. Darasa lako lina wanafunzi wangapi? …….. Je, idadi hii ni sahihi au ni kubwa na hivyo kusababisha changamoto katika ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa LAT? ______23. Je, wazazi wa wanafunzi wako wanamchango/msaada wowote katika ujifunzji wa LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 24. Je, mtaala uko huru (flexibility of the curriculum) kwa kiwango cha kuruhusu ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa LAT kulingana na mahitaji ya wanafunzi na mazingira? [mfano: mada, mbinu za kufundishia, maandalizi ya mwalimu, muda wa vipindi n.k] Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 25. Je, wanafunzi wanao muda wa kutosha kufanya mazoezi/kutumia LAT ndani na nje ya darasa? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 26. Unatumia mbinu gani katika ufundishaji? ______27. Je, kuna tofauti baina ya mfumo wa LAT na mfumo wa Kiswahili [mfano sintaksia ya lugha] Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 28. Kama jibu ni NDIYO, je, tofauti hizo zinaathiri ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa LAT kwa namna moja au nyingine? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 29. Je, kuna tofauti yoyote katika lugha ya Alama inayofundishwa shuleni hapa na inayofundishwa katika shule zingine hapa Tanzania? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( )

124 30. Kama jibu ni NDIYO, je, tofauti hizi zinaleta changamoto katika mawasiliano baina ya watumiaji wa LAT kutoka shule moja na nyingine? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 31. Je, LAT ni moja ya masomo yanayopimwa na Baraza la Mitihani la Taifa? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 32. Kwa maoni yako, Je, ni wapi wanafunzi hawa (Deaf and hard of hearing) wanapaswa kusoma? Shule maalumu ( ) Shule za Kawaida [jumuishi/mchanganyiko] ( ) 33. Je, serikali imeweka utaratibu wowote maalumu wa kuwabaini watoto viziwi mapema (wakiwa na umri mdogo) Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 34. Je, kuchelewa kuwabaini watoto viziwi kunaathiri vipi ujifunzaji wa LAT? ______35. Je, unajisikiaje kuitumia, kuifundisha na kufundisha kwa kutumia Lugha ya Alama Tanzania? Vizuri ( ) Kawaida ( ) Vibaya ( ) 36. Nini matarajio yako kama mwalimu kwa wanafunzi hawa? ______37. Je, wakaguzi hufika mara ngapi kwa mwaka shuleni hapa?______38. Je, wakaguzi hao wanaweza kutumia lugha ya alama (LAT)? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 39. Kama jibu ni HAPANA, je, unawasiliana nao vipi ili kuwasaidia kutimiza wajibu wao? ______40. Ulikabiliwa na changamoto gani ulipokuwa ukijifunza lugha ya alama shuleni/chuoni kwako?

a) ………………………………………………………………………… b) ………………………………………………………………………… c) ………………………………………………………………………… d) ………………………………………………………………………… e) …………………………………………………………………………

41. Je, nini kilikuwa chanzo cha changamoto za ujifunzaji LAT ulipokuwa shuleni? Serikali ( ) Mazingira/miundombinu ya shule ( ) Walimu ( ) LAT yenyewe ( ) Wazazi/walezi ( ) Mwanafunzi mwenyewe ( )

125 42. Je, changamoto hizo [katika kujifunza LAT] zilisababishwa na nini?

a) ………………………………………………………………………… b) ………………………………………………………………………… c) ………………………………………………………………………… d) …………………………………………………………………………

43. Kwa kumbukumbu zako, nini kilifanyika ili kukabiliana/kupunguza/ kuziondoa kabisa changamoto zilizokuwa zikikukabili ulipokuwa ukijifunza LAT?

a) ………………………………………………………………………… b) ………………………………………………………………………… c) ………………………………………………………………………… d) …………………………………………………………………………

44. Kwa mtazamo wako, unadhani wanafunzi wa LAT wanakabiliwa na changamoto zipi?

a) ………………………. b) ………………………. c) ……………………… d) ……………………… e) ………………………

45. Unadhani changamoto hizi zinasababishwa na nini?

a) ……………………………. b) ……………………………. c) ……………………………. d) ……………………………. e) …………………………….

46. Kwa maoni yako, nini kifanyike ili kuondoa changamoto zinazowakabili wanafunzi wanaojifunza LAT?

a) ……………………………… b) ……………………………… c) ……………………………… d) ……………………………… e) ………………………………

126 47. Je, changamoto wanazokabiliana nazo wanafunzi wako wakati huu ni sawa na ulizokuwa ukikabiliana nazo wakati ukijifunza LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 48. Kama jibu la swali la 47 ni HAPANA, tofauti ya changamoto hizo ni nini?

a) ………………………………………………………………………… b) …………………………………………………………………………

49. Kwa maoni yako, wadau wafuatao wanawajibika ipasavyo katika kufanya ufundishaji, ujifunzaji na utumiaji wa LAT kuwa rahisi?

a) Serikali: Ndiyo ( ) Wastani ( ) Hapana ( ) b) Chama cha Viziwi Tanzania: Ndiyo ( ) Wastani ( ) Hapana ( ) c) Shule: Ndiyo ( ) Wastani ( ) Hapana ( ) d) Walimu: Ndiyo ( ) Wastani ( ) Hapana ( ) e) Wazazi/walezi: Ndiyo ( ) Wastani ( ) Hapana ( ) f) Jamii: Ndiyo ( ) Wastani ( ) Hapana ( )

50. Una maoni yoyote juu ya LAT?

………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………

Asante kwa ushirikiano wako!

[email protected]/0764129824

127 APPENDIX 2: DODOSO KWA WANAFUNZI WA LAT Utangulizi Dodoso hili ni kwa ajili ya utafiti unaokusudia kubaini “Changamoto Zinazowakabili Wanafunzi Wanaojifunza Lugha ya Alama Tanzania (LAT)”, sababu zinazopelekea changamoto hizo pamoja na suluhisho litakalosaidia kupunguza au kumaliza kabisa changamoto hizo. Utafiti huu ni kwa lengo la kukamilisha mafunzo ya shahada ya pili ya isimu (MA. Linguistics) katika Chuo Kikuu cha Dodoma. Mtafiti anaomba ushirikiano wako kwa kusoma kisha kujibu maswali kwa usahihi ili matokeo ya utafiti huu yasaidie kutatua changamoto mbalimbali zinazokabili zoezi la ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa Lugha ya Alama Tanzania. Mtafiti anakuahidi na kukuthibitishia kuwa, majibu utakayotoa yatatunzwa kwa usiri mkubwa na kutumiwa kwa lengo la kukamilisha utafiti huu tu.

Tafadhali, jibu maswali yote.

Jaza nafasi iliyoachwa wazi au weka alama ya vema sehemu inayohusika.

1. Una umri wa miaka: …………. 2. Je, unajifunza Lugha ya Alama [LAT] darasani/shuleni kwako? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 3. Je, unatumia LAT katika mawasiliano/masomo yako? ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 4. Je, unawasiliana na nani kwa kutumia LAT? Walimu ( ) Wanafunzi wenzako ( ) Wazazi/walezi ( ) Wote ( ) 5. Je, una vitabu vya kutosha pamoja na zana nyingine za kujifunzia LAT? ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 6. Je, una muda wakutosha kujifunza LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 7. Je, miundombinu ya shule inawezesha/hamasisha ujifunzaji wa LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana 8. Je, una mzazi yeyote kiziwi? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 9. Kama jibu ni NDIYO ni mzazi yupi kiziwi? Baba ( ) Mama ( ) Wote ( ) 10. Je, wazazi/walezi wako wanaweza kuwasiliana kwa kutumia LAT? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 11. Je, kuna mwanafunzi mwenzako yeyote aliye tayari kukusaidia kujifunza LAT muwapo darasani? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 12. Je, walimu wako wanatimiza mahitaji yako ya kujifunza LAT bila ubaguzi wowote? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 13. Unapenda lugha gani itumike zaidi katika kujifunzia masomo mengine? LAT ( ) Kiswahili ( ) Kiingereza ( ) 14. Je, LAT ni moja ya masomo unayofanyia mitihani ya Baraza la Mitihani la Taifa ya kumalizia elimu ya msingi? Ndiyo ( ) Hapana ( ) 128 15. Kwa maoni yako, ni mwalimu yupi kati ya hawa ungependa zaidi akufundishe? Anayesikia ( ) Kiziwi/mwenye usikivu hafifu ( ) 16. Ungependa kufanya nini baada ya kumaliza elimu ya msingi? Kuendelea na masomo ya sekondari ( ) Kujiunga na mafunzo ya ufundi ( ) Kufanya biashara ( ) Kukaa nyumbani na wazazi ( ) 17. Je, unakumbana na changamoto gani katika kujifunza LAT?

a) …………………………………………………………………………… b) …………………………………………………………………………… c) …………………………………………………………………………… d) ……………………………………………………………………………

129 APPENDIX 3: MWONGOZO WA USAILI KWA WALIMU

1. Umesoma wapi elimu ya msingi na sekondari? 2. Ni chuo gani ulichopatia mafunzo ya elimu hii maalumu (LAT)? Na umebobea katika eneo gani la elimu hii maalumu? 3. Je, ni wapi ulipojifunza LAT, kabla ya kuanza kufundisha elimu maalumu? 4. Je, mafunzo ya LAT uliyopata yalitosha kukufanya uanze kufundisha elimu hii maalumu? 5. Kama hukupata mafunzo maalumu ya LAT, uliwezaje/ulianzaje kufundisha/kuwasiliana kwa kutumia LAT? 6. Ulichukua muda gani kuanza kuwasiliana/kufundisha kwa ufanisi kwa kutumia LAT? 7. Je, una ufanisi mkubwa katika matumizi ya Lugha ya Alama ya Tanzania (LAT)? 8. Je, uwezo wako wa kutumia LAT umeongezeka au umepungua ukilinganisha na ulivyokuwa wakati ukitoka chuoni? 9. Kama uwezo umeongezeka/umepungua ni kwa sababu gani? 10. Umewahi kuwa na ndoto ya kusomea elimu maalumu tangu ukiwa mdogo? 11. Kwa nini uliamua kuanza kujihusisha na elimu hii maalumu? 12. Jamii inakuchukuliaje unapowasiliana kwa kutumia LAT na kwamba wewe ni mwalimu wa viziwi? 13. Unajisikiaje kutumia na kufundisha LAT? 14. Je, miundombinu ya shule hii inawezesha/inahamasisha ujifunzaji wa LAT? 15. Je, shule ina vitabu vyovyote maalumu vya kufundishia LAT? 16. Je, kuna kiongozi cha mwalimu kinachokusaidia kutumia kitabu cha LAT? 17. Hali ya zana za kufundishia na kujifunzia ikoje katika shule hii? 18. Ni nani hutayarisha zana hizo? 19. Je, darasa lako lina wanafunzi viziwi waliozaliwa na wazazi viziwi? 20. Kama jibu ni NDIYO, kuna tofauti ya ujifunzaji LAT baina ya wanafunzi wenye wazazi viziwi na wale wenye wazazi wasio viziwi? 21. Kama kuna tofauti ya ujifunzaji LAT, ni wanafunzi gani huelewa haraka LAT? 22. Je, wanafunzi huanza kujifunza LAT katika umri gani wawapo shuleni hapa? Miaka ___ 23. Je, umri huu wanaoanza kujifunza LAT shuleni hapa ni mwafaka kuanza kujifunza lugha? 24. Kama jibu ni HAPANA, kwa mtazamo wako, ungependekeza waanze kujifunza LAT katika umri gani? 25. Je, wanafunzi huwa na maarifa ya awali ya LAT wanapofika shuleni kuanza masomo yao? 26. Darasa lako lina wanafunzi wangapi? 27. Je, idadi hii ni sahihi au ni kubwa na hivyo kusababisha changamoto katika ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa LAT? 130 28. Je, wazazi wa wanafunzi wako wana mchango/msaada wowote katika ujifunzaji wa LAT? 29. Je, huwa unakamilisha somo uliloandaa ndani ya muda uliopangwa wa kipindi? Kama sivyo, unatatua vipi changamoto hii? 30. Huwa unakamilisha muhtasari mwishoni mwa mwaka? Kama sivyo, kwa nini? 31. Je, mara zote unafanikiwa kuzitafsiri dhana mbalimbali unazofundisha kwenda katika lugha ya alama. (unaweza fafanua zaidi hilo). 32. Je, kuna wakati hutokea mawasiliano yakavunjika katika mchakato wa ufundishaji-ujifunzaji darasani? Kama ndivyo, unatatuaje changamoto hii na unaizuiaje isijitokeze wakati mwingine tena? 33. Je, wanafunzi wako huanza kujifunza LAT katika umri gani? Je, muda huu ni mwafaka katika ujifunzaji wa LAT? 34. Wanafunzi wanapata muda wa kutosha kufanya mazoezi ya kutumia LAT? 35. Je, LAT ni moja ya masomo yanayotahiniwa na Baraza la Mitihani la Taifa? 36. Je, serikali inatoa mchango unaostahili kwa shule zinazotoa elimu hii maalumu? 37. Je, LAT inachangiaje/inaathiri vipi ujifunzaji wa masomo mengine? 38. Kuna zana zozote unazitumia katika kukusaidia katika ufundishaji? 39. Mbali na vitabu, ni zana zipi nyingine unatumia katika ufundishaji? 40. Ni zana gani zinazotazamika/onekana (visual teaching-learning resources) unazotumia mara kwa mara katika kufundishia LAT? 41. Unatumia mbinu gani katika ufundishaji? 42. Je, kuna tofauti baina ya mfumo wa LAT na mfumo wa Kiswahili [mfano sintaksia ya lugha]? Kama jibu ni NDIYO, je, tofauti hizo zinaathiri vipi ufundishaji na ujifunzaji wa LAT? 43. Je, kuna tofauti yoyote katika lugha ya Alama inayofundishwa shuleni hapa na inayofundishwa katika shule zingine hapa Tanzania? Kama jibu ni NDIYO, je, tofauti hizi zinaleta changamoto gani katika mawasiliano baina ya watumiaji wa LAT kutoka shule moja na nyingine? 44. Je, unapata msaada wowote katika kufundisha LAT kutoka kwa wazazi wa wanafunzi wako? 45. Je, una hudhuria mafunzo kazini yoyote ya TSL? Kama ndivyo, ni mara ngapi, baada ya muda gani, nani huendesha mafunzo haya na hugharamiwa na nani? 46. Je, kuna haja yoyote ya kuifanya LAT kuwa somo la lazima kwa wanafunzi wote Tanzania? Kama ndivyo, kwa nini? 47. Unadhani ni mahali gani mwafaka pa kuwafundishia wanafunzi wasiosikia/wenye usikivu hafifu kulingana na mahitaji yao? [katika shule maalumu/shule jumuishi]. 48. Nini matarajio yako kama mwalimu kwa wanafunzi hawa? 49. Je, wakaguzi hufika mara ngapi kwa mwaka shuleni hapa? Kwa kawaida wakaguzi hukagua mambo gani hasa?

131 50. Je, wakaguzi hao wanaweza kutumia lugha ya alama (LAT)? Kama hawajui lugha ya alama wanawasilianaje na wewe pamoja na walimu viziwi katika kutimiza majukumu yao? 51. Ulikabiliwa na changamoto gani ulipokuwa ukijifunza lugha ya alama shuleni/chuoni kwako? 52. Je, nini kilikuwa chanzo cha changamoto za ujifunzaji LAT ulipokuwa shuleni? [Serikali, Mazingira/miundombinu ya shule, Walimu, LAT yenyewe, Wazazi/walezi au wewe mwenyewe]? 53. Je, changamoto hizo [katika kujifunza LAT] zilisababishwa na nini? 54. Kwa kumbukumbu zako, nini kilifanyika ili kukabiliana/kupunguza/kuziondoa kabisa changamoto zilizokuwa zikikukabili ulipokuwa ukijifunza LAT? 55. Je, changamoto zinazowakabili wanafunzi wako katika kujifunza LAT ni sawa na zilizokukabili wewe wakati unajifunza LAT? 56. Kwa maoni yako, changamoto hizi zinasababishwa na nini? 57. Nini kifanyike ili kuondoa changamoto zinazowakabili wanafunzi wanaojifunza LAT na hatimaye kufanya ujifunzaji kuwa rahisi? 58. Ni changamoto zipi nyingine zinazokukabili wewe kama mwalimu wakati wa kufundisha LAT? (changamoto zako zinasababishwa na nini, nini kifanyike ili kuziondoa?) 59. Nini kifanyike ili kuongeza idadi ya watumiaji wa LAT? 60. Serikali ifanye nini ili kuongeza ari kwa walimu wa elimu maalumu?

132 APPENDIX 4: LESSON OBSERVATION GUIDE

Areas to be considered during observation

1. Class size

a. The number of learners in a class a. The size of the room b. sitting style

2. Available teaching and learning resources and how they are used during instruction a. Chalkboard

i. size ii. quality

b. Textbooks

i. Distribution in class ii. Quality

c. Others 3. Language used during instruction

a. TSL b. Kiswahili c. English

4. Mode of communication

a. Sign language only b. Simultaneous communication

5. The influence of school facilities in learning of TSL. 6. Teacher‟s fluency in TSL. 7. Pupils‟ fluency in TSL. 8. Participation of deaf and hard of hearing in learning compared to hearing pupils. 9. Teacher‟s responses to pupils with special needs education without discrimination. 10. Teacher‟s speed in delivering materials. 11. The school‟s general environment.

133