The experience of practitioners who have worked with autistic children in Sensory Rooms. Part 6

This is the final instalment of our discussion of the work of by Dr. Katy Unwin, Dr. Georgina Powell and Dr. Catherine Jones of the Wales Autism Research Centre, School of Psychology, Cardiff University.

The researchers conducted interviews with ten practitioners. They identified six themes reflecting beliefs about Sensory Room (SR) use with autistic children.

These were

1. SRs benefit behaviour, attention and mood.
2. SRs have distinct properties that facilitate benefits
3. The use of the SR should be centred on the child’s needs
4. They are most effective when the practitioner plays an active role
5. They can be used for teaching and learning.
6. However, they can present challenges.

Our first three instalments summarised the findings in themes 1,2, 3, 4 and 5 (see TFH Sensory Rooms Blogs).

The Sensory Room can present challenges.

TFH are advocates of the SR and the first five parts to this extended blog testify to their usefulness. But very little in this world, save love and perhaps the bicycle, is an unalloyed good.

There were three qualifications to the use of the SR.

The first was the observation that in some cases the stimuli of the room could produce negative outcomes. One practitioner noted a possible cause was the child becoming obsessive with a particular piece of equipment, leading to frustration and anger when they were denied its use. This could impinge on the benefits of sharing.

A second comment was that “it sometimes took some time Then you have a child who seems either indifferent or even hostile. Often it is just a matter of patience.”

The third remark was that some of the benefits of the SR, such as the closer relationship that can develop between practitioner and child or between peers could be obtained elsewhere. To ascribe these benefits solely to the use of the Sensory Room was to overemphasise its importance.

TFH has always accepted that it is not just a matter of having a SR. The way it is used, the familiarity of the practitioner with the equipment. the imaginative use of it and, above all, the need to tailor the session to the particular child that is the difference between success and, well not perhaps failure, but a waste of time and resources.

Citations:

Katy L. Unwin, Georgina Powell, Catherine R.G. Jones, A sequential mixed-methods approach to exploring the experiences of practitioners who have worked in multi-sensory environments with autistic children, Research in Developmental Disabilities, Volume 118, 2021, 104061, ISSN 0891-4222, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2021.104061.

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422221002109)

TFH, and indeed everyone working in the Sensory Room field, would welcome any comments arising from this article. If you have conducted or know of any research or observations on behaviour please let us know: John.t@tfhuk.com and we will post it.