Participatory research with people with disabilities preparing for inclusive employment in Bangladesh

As part of the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office funded Disability Inclusive Development (DID) programme, researchers at the Institute of Development Studies undertook some qualitative participatory research with people with disabilities in two districts in Bangladesh (Rangpur and Rajshahi), who were participating in a programme to train them in skills to enter the job market.

This was conceptualised as an innovation that could be a ‘proof of concept’ for further disability-inclusive training and employment opportunities, for a group of people who are habitually excluded from the job market and are often the poorest in their communities.

The participants were individuals drawn from 2 larger cohorts of men and women with a range of impairments of different types and severities (for example, physical, sensory (deafness and blindness or both), learning and psychosocial difficulties).  Like many disabled people they were mostly living in contexts of poverty and exclusion and experiencing stigma and isolation in their communities, but also sometimes within their families.  All wanted to work in order to contribute positively to their families and communities, and gain respect through having a job and a skill to offer.

The research team wanted to hear about their experiences while on a training programme run by INGOs (ADD International and Sense International, who are partners in the DID consortium) and local partners (including OPDs – Organisations of People with Disabilities). The programme was running in collaboration with ‘master trainers’ skilled in specific trades (for example, tailors, ICT technicians, beauticians).  This was a modification of the well-established STAR programme run by BRAC to promote youth employment, but with adaptations to enable people with disabilities to participate. The idea of inclusive employment is that people with disabilities become part of the ‘mainstream’ workforce, rather than working in separate environments.

N.B. – there are different views about disability-related language.  Some people (including UN agencies) prefer ‘people first’ language e.g. “People with disabilities”, “Women with disabilities” etc.. Others prefer Disabled people, disabled children and so on.  The latter approach is preferred in the UK, as it echoes the Social Model of Disability, which argues that people are disabled by society.  The authors prefer the latter, but have used the two terms interchangeably in this case example, with no particular significance.

What happened

The research team ran 2 initial participatory, disability-inclusive workshops over 4 days in each location, which were then repeated a year later (2022 and 2023). The workshops were facilitated with groups of 6-10 participants (aged approximately 16-40) each place, with some of the same people attending the second time and some new people joining. This enabled the team to see change and progress over time in how the trainees viewed their work placement and training, in their own skills and development and in their aspirations for the future.

In Rangpur, the men and women had a combination of difficulties with vision and hearing, with some having other additional difficulties (such physical, intellectual and psychosocial impairments).

In Rajshahi, the groups were women with a variety of difficulties such as hearing or vision, mobility, learning, psychosocial impairments 

The team aimed to gather the perspectives of all the ‘learners’ (selected from those participating in the training programme), through using participatory, creative and intentionally inclusive methods, which would enable all to join in.

The workshop sessions were planned in great detail, so that there was a balance of types of activities, some with an individual focus (telling your own story) and some where participants shared and discussed ideas together (for example, how are men’s and women’s experiences the same or different?). However, the overall plan was very flexible and was changed each day according to what we had learned about what had worked well on the previous day. Researchers reflected with the whole team (interpreters, documenters, NGO support staff) on what needed to be adapted to make sure all participants could join in equally.

The team used a range of methods, most of which had a visual element, as this helps many people to focus and understand (for example, signs, symbols, pictures, modelling, miming, videoing). For some people the spoken word used without such visual support is difficult or impossible to follow and many participants had low levels of literacy, so written tasks were kept to a minimum. People enjoyed demonstrating with simple props, what they did in their workplaces, using role play, drawings and models of the equipment they were learning to use (for example, computer, sewing machine, fabric, make-up etc.).

Using emoticons to express feelings about different situations worked well, choosing between happy and sad faces on a scale (very happy, happy, okay, bad, very bad). These are followed up with conversations to explore  experiences further and to understand in more detail what they liked, didn’t like and why and to make suggestions for changes in their training programme or for subsequent cohorts. A deliberately evaluation focused aspect was included, although this was not the overt agenda for many of the sessions, which were seeking broader reflections on their lives and what they would like to achieve in the future.

Each day started and ended with a whole group activity to engage everybody (sitting in a circle) and to review what had happened.  The team sought feedback and suggestions from participants and welcomed their ideas (for example, leading some singing and dancing).  There were opportunities for them to help with aspects of the sessions, such as timekeeping and videoing.

Potentially more sensitive or challenge topics were addressed in smaller groups (for example, telling a story about inclusion and or exclusion).  This created supportive and safe spaces for individuals to share experiences and bring up memories that might be hard to talk about in the larger group.

Parents or carers who were attending joined in with some sessions with the learners, but also had some separate parallel sessions where they could tell their story of caring and parenting.

There were individual and joint creative activities, where participants used plasticine,  fabric, decorations to make a full size model of themselves and annotate it with key aspects such as aspirations, interests, likes/dislikes), and to make a joint ‘road to work’ wall frieze, representing facilitators and barriers to moving into work and to use a time chart to project into the future and make plans (eg to own their own shop, or live independently, support a family).

Findings and new knowledge

The key learnings from these workshops were that:

• Demonstrating a truly disability inclusive approach and a range of methods surprises many people! Assumptions are often made that people with severe or complex impairments (and sometimes those with single or mild/moderate ones too) cannot be engaged and included in research and evaluation activities.

• NGO staff and representatives from organisations of people with disabilities often have strong relationships with the people they support. However, there is always more they can learn about being inclusive of all impairment types and about using creative (visual and nonverbal) methods when engaging with people.

• Participants appreciate having opportunities to express their views about a wide range of aspects affecting their lives and wellbeing. For some this was very rare, and they have often grown used to their parents/siblings and others speaking for them and making decisions on their behalf.

• Participants had strong and clear views about the quality of the training they were receiving, about what could be improved and about their own aspirations for their futures.

• Being deliberately and thoughtfully disability-inclusive takes extra time and resources.  This needs to be planned and budgeted for. It requires the whole team to be flexible and alert to any activities or actions that are (perhaps unintentionally) exclusionary or marginalising.

Lessons

The research team were careful to make sure that everyone was able to join in, whatever their impairment type/severity, needs for support and confidence levels.  Some participants who were very shy and reserved initially, visibly changed and became more assertive and expressive during the 4 days.

The researchers trained the local NGO staff and translators to be aware of the need to help people appropriately and in individually tailored ways. An important tip is to ask people directly what help they need, not to make assumptions about this. Disabled people can usually say or indicate this very specifically, and dislike it they are helped either too little (then feeling excluded) or too much (so feeling patronised).

During these workshops the team experienced challenges related to:

Having enough time to train and brief the local team of interpreters, documenters and local staff and to review the workshops afterwards. Everyone is very busy. This could probably have been delivered as online preparation before the workshops.

The range of skills within the groups was a challenge. Some participants had good literacy and were confident with speaking out, others needed more time and support to express their views.  It is necessary to go at the pace of the slowest and adapt activities to suit all.

The team needed to model an affirmative and appreciative attitude to all and be on alert to any instances of discriminatory behaviour between individuals in the groups. These needed handling sensitively.

Many participants (both learners and their parent/carers) would have liked more time to tell their stories and share their concerns as this was a new opportunity for them.

There was little opportunity to feed back to the participants about our findings, to hear from them about the next steps they took, and whether their recommendations for change had been implemented.

There are many challenges (and mitigating strategies) in disability-inclusive research, which are discussed in detail in Disability-inclusive research.