Why?

​

The intention for creating a MSE in a complex needs school stems from an outreach programme at Liverpool School of Art & Design, where I worked with small groups of children from Crosby High School for 5 weeks, teaching them transferrable skills and art techniques, resulting in a final co-designed artwork being made and exhibited in the John Lennon Art & Design Building at LJMU (figure 1). Many of the children did not attend the opening night as they were uncomfortable in doing so. This is because some neurodivergent individuals do not react well to unfamiliar, open plan spaces with a lot of noise. The few that did attend did not want to stay for too long as they could not concentrate for a long period of time or felt uncomfortable in the space due to sensory processing issues. From this, I researched into what is already in place for neurodivergent individuals with this being a growing popularity in sensory rooms.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Brief history:

 

While Multi-sensory environments (MSE) have been used with disabled children in hospitals since the 1970s there is insufficient research into how the co-design of an MSE can benefit neurodiverse individuals. An MSE can be used for multiple reasons, primarily for individuals suffering from Sensory Processing Disorders (SPD) like in autism and, also individuals with dementia. They can be used to “aid learning development, help to relax an agitated person or stimulate and raise alertness levels” (Snoezelen,n.d). Multi-sensory environments (MSE), otherwise known as sensory or 'Snoezelen' rooms, first came to light in the 1970s when two Dutch therapists, Jan Hulsegge and Ad Verheul began experimenting with sensory objects in hospitals with disabled children, their goal was to increase enjoyment and sensory experience for those with intellectual disabilities (Snoezelen,n.d). They first experimented with sensory mobiles above the patient’s bed, which then led to them creating sensory spaces within the institute as a way of getting the children out of bed and allowing them to engage (figure 2). The results were ‘overwhelmingly positive for both verbal and non-verbal patients (Snoezelen,n.d). From this the 'Snoezelen' rooms were used worldwide, resulting in schools, hospitals and community centres etc. using them.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Commercialised MSE:

​

The new craze for commercial sensory objects and rooms have become more apparent on the internet but has the idea of creating something 
for therapy or leisure purposes been overridden by consumerism? Your average sensory room of today would start from approximately £5k, however depending on the size and objects within it can increase to over £20k. In terms of objects in the space, prices can vary due to some being more ‘high-tech’ than others and some of the most basic objects will still be overpriced. Researching into sensory objects has introduced me to videos on YouTube of parents creating ‘DIY sensory toys’ from home for their neurodivergent children (predominantly autistic) due to most commercial, sensory objects being so inaccessible in terms of price. Are individuals being disadvantaged in their health and wellbeing due to consumerism? 

​

When researching into multi-sensory environments I questioned if a co-design approach has been applied when creating them, in any current literature, as this would allow end-users to collaborate in design processes that are to benefit them. It became clear that there is a gap in the use of co-design for the design and implementation of MSE, however co-design approaches are more frequently being used with children and vulnerable adults in alternative activities and technology-based studies.

 

Co-design approach with vulnerable groups:

​

Expanding on this term of ‘co-design’ and the importance of this approach, a research report Codesign with children: The state of the Art (Melonio and Gennari,2012) discusses the benefits of participatory design with children, in this case for computer science. It states that “children are natural partners for codesign … children have unconventional viewpoints … and are always ready to share ideas” (Melonio and Gennari,2012). It also states, “It is critical to support children in the design process because adults do not experience the world as children do and do not have the same insights into the world as a child” (Melonio and Gennari,2012). I would agree that children are a lot more honest than adults and have been less informed about social and political views, therefore give less informed opinions. The report also discusses the approach of co-design with special needs children, “giving children with disabilities a stake in the design of technology gives them a sense of ownership and empowerment” (Melonio and Gennari,2012). Though the subject is technology-based the statements used within it could be applied when co-designing a MSE with neurodivergent children as it gives children a voice in design processes where they are usually overlooked by adults. This would also reinforce the statement of giving the children a ‘sense of ownership and empowerment’ (Melonio and Gennari,2012), over their designs and ideas.

​

Through researching into co-design approaches there is a clear gap in the use of co-design to create sensory environments. However, a study that embeds these themes is A designer’s approach: how can autistic adults with learning disabilities be involved in the design process?
(Gaudion et al,2014). This study consists of multiple stages including the participant (autistic adults), their support workers/ family members and
a designer. “Each explored a person’s interaction and reaction to three environmental, domestic contexts: study one (the garden), study two
(everyday objects) and study three (the interior)” (Gaudion et al,2014). With each stage there were different participation configurations; stage 1
being the autistic adult, their support worker/family and designer, stage 2 the autistic adult and their support worker/family and stage 3 the support workers/family and the designers. The first 2 stages allowed the participant to be the main voice in the choices made, in terms of their own likes and preferences for garden areas and activities, which then resulted in stage 3 being the support workers/family participating in cocreation workshops to “generate their own ideas for the people they support” (Gaudion et al,2014). Though the overall outcome isn’t a specific sensory room the principles of this still apply as it gives the end-users of different environments and activities a voice in what their preferences are. Also, by completing stage 1 and 2 with the end-users involved in the design processes it assisted in the success of stage 3 as the autistic adult’s support workers/ family members where informed of their needs and preferences prior, encouraging them to make decisions based on them instead of what they thought was best for the autistic adult. I wanted to test if this process would be beneficial when co-designing a MSE as having the children, their teachers and parents involved will ensure that the children’s needs are being met and will give the children an opportunity to voice their preferences.

​

When researching I came across just 1 study where a co-design approach was used to create a sensory room, however this was purely for exhibition purposes as opposed to having end-users participate in the design process for something that would benefit them. The study Contours of the Earth (2022) was created by Gregory Herbert and for this project he worked in collaboration with children from 4 primary schools around Liverpool in an Out of the Blue program at the Bluecoat Gallery, where their aim is to give children the chance to create, collaborate and be given opportunities that they normally wouldn’t.  Herbert ran creative workshops with the children over a 9 month period and created a sensory room based on their designs, which was installed at the Bluecoat Gallery for the general public to experience (Figure 3). From this project I have learned multiple significant methods that that can be applied when co-designing a sensory room with neurodivergent children. For example: including all the senses in the space rather than focusing on just one, which is something I have done previously in my exhibition Weird Sensations (2022), where the installation focused on the sense of ‘touch’ . From feedback given by the audience, combined with the example of Herbert’s Contours of the Earth (2022) I have learned this is less effective as many individuals may prefer other sensory experiences over ‘touch’. Another significant example is the activities that were used during this process e.g., creating a model of a space that they most enjoy and would like to see in the sensory room. This approach also validates the statement in the Codesign with children: The state of the Art report that “children are natural partners for co-design … children have unconventional viewpoints … and are always ready to share ideas” (Melonio and Gennari,2012). This is a process that I wanted to include in my creative workshops when co-designing a MSE with neurodivergent children at it would allow them to clearly visualise their designs.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

PAR approach with vulnerable groups:

An example of a study that successfully used participatory action research (PAR) is the Labyrinth exchange (2017) initiated by Elaine McNeill, this project consisted of the inclusion of ‘marginalised communities’ in creating a labyrinth from the individuals clothing, written postcards
and other personal belongings. This allowed the participants to come together and discuss their story and educate others in an act
to seek change. ‘By co-producing a labyrinth art installation, constituents are placed at the heart of the process intended to deepen the policy
makers and health commissioners understanding’ (McNeill,2017). This project progressed onto Lost and Found (Dementia) Labyrinth, where people living with dementia and their relatives presented their belongings and familiar items that would tell their story. What this does is shows that PAR projects including individuals, who some may say are incapable, like dementia, is important for us as researchers and for the individual themselves as it gives them ownership and, also ensures that the information gained is correct as it comes from those with lived experiences. This process could be suitable for working with neurodivergent children to co-design an MSE, as in asking them to bring is some of their personal belongings or sensory toys that they use at home would display their preferences, which may inspire some new designs.

​

Through literature review I can determine that co-design approaches could be utilised for creating ‘Snoezelens’ with neurodivergent children
as the methods used within the case studies can be adapted to this. My aim for this study was to take the methods used within the literature to test if they can be applied when co-designing multi-sensory environments, in hopes of answering my research question.