Tanzania’s improved primary curriculum for 2023 emphasizes learner participation, practical activities, continuous assessment, and contemporary skills, but schools vary in staffing, materials, and infrastructure. This study examines how teachers in Gairo District, Morogoro Region, experience and manage curriculum implementation, focusing on workload, professional learning, resource and curricular alignment, adaptation, morale, and perceived benefits. This qualitative secondary analysis covers 12 unique semi-structured teacher-interview records from six schools, five subjects, and Grades 3 and 4. Hybrid thematic analysis combined deductive coding of workload, alignment, learning, coping, morale, and fatigue with inductive coding of workload mechanisms and negative cases. Teachers described cumulative work: dense timetables, large or combined classes, assessment and examination duties, remedial teaching, substitute-material preparation, and learning during implementation. One teacher reported about 70 teaching periods weekly; this is an individual account, not a verified timetable or district estimate. Uneven formal preparation made peer exchange and school-based learning important. Improvisation, grouping, borrowing resources, using personal devices, and extra time helped sustain instruction, but could shift implementation costs onto teachers. Evidence of curricular layering was limited: one teacher described a competency in current planning documents but absent from new books and potentially examinable, prompting use of an older text; another described studying difficult Grade 7 content associated with the former curriculum. The records do not establish that two complete curricula were generally delivered. No participant directly linked exhaustion, cynicism, resistance, or disengagement to repeated reform. The corpus supports implementation strain and some morale vulnerability, but does not demonstrate reform fatigue. As a bounded secondary analysis without a pre-reform baseline, it cannot estimate prevalence or attribute longstanding capacity constraints to the reform. Findings point to alignment between documents and assessments, protected professional learning, workload-sensitive planning, and realistic provision of materials and infrastructure.