Sensory Rooms, Maybe Not?

Stuff or people?

That was the thought echoing in my mind on reading a story on how Sensory Rooms Help Students with Disabilities from the May 30th Teaching Magazine. Such sensory rooms

...stem in part from a 1970s Dutch philosophy known as Snoezelen (pronounced snooze-a-lun), which says surroundings can have a meaningful impact on behavior — like reducing stress and improving communication among elderly patients with dementia, children with autism and people with developmental disorders.

The idea behind sensory stimulation is to control an environment so people can feel protected, either by calming a student before going to class, for example, or offering comforting physical activities that will make a passive child more alert.

"It's supposed to feel very safe and secure, like the inside of a womb," said Gillian Hotz, a neurotrauma researcher at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine.

Anecdotal evidence touts the success of sensory-stimulation rooms, but research on them is fairly recent.

There's no doubt in my mind that Charlie would enjoy hanging in a Snoezelen type environment, at least for awhile. One reason he used to enjoy occupational therapy when he was younger was getting to use the swings, mats, ball pit, and other sensory equipment that seemed to have multiple playground possibilities. Working one-on-one with an OT on his fine motor skills----or with a speech therapist on his lip posture or, for that matter, with a teacher leading him through his lessons---has been the mainstay of Charlie's education. Certainly all the OT's equipment helped. On the other hand, the one (private) autism school Jim and I once visited with the most elaborate OT room (you shoulda seen their swings) had some of the more ..... unruly looking classrooms and a puzzlingly unprofessional staff.

And if, in these times when everyone's crying "budget," you were to choose between getting the equipment or the people.......which would be your choice?