Logo

Educational Foundations of speech therapy

Code: 101702
Credits: 9
2026/2027
Degree programme Type Course
Speech therapy FB 1

Contact lecturer

Name :
Nayme Daniela Salas
Email :
nayme.salas@uab.cat

Teaching staff

Patricia Alvarez Cabrera
Jofre Ventura Segura

Group languages

You can consult this information at the end of the document.

Prerequisites

Good command of spoken and written Catalan is essential in order to be able to complete most tasks and activities. All evaluations will be written in Catalan and will not be translated. Sufficient reading comprehension skills in English are recommended, given that there are mandatory readings in this language.  

 

 

Objectives

This course provides insights on the teaching and learning processes of spoken and written language at school, particularly in elementary school. Given that one potential profile for speech therapists (ST) is a ST who works in a school environment, it is regarded as fundamental that Speech Therapy students are offered an overview about the theoretical grounds and the didactic approaches for oral language and literacy processes.

Upon completion of the program, the student will be able to,

  • Know the theoretical foundations and the spoken and written language processes in a school setting.

  • Analyze and value reading and writing processes in their initial stages.

  • Apply adequate strategies to provide support to the development and production of spoken and written language.

  • Conduct critical analyses of teaching materials aimed to teach language (spoken and written).

  • Understand that the effective teaching of spoken and written language has repercussions across the entire curriculum.

  • Be able to integrate different sources of knowledge that influence spoken and written language acquisition: psycholinguistic, linguistic, and didactic approaches.

  • Understand and analyze language teaching and learning processes and interpret intervention approaches.

  • Understand the role of the different languages involved in linguistics education. 

Learning outcomes

  • KM12 (Explain the pedagogical foundations of speech therapy (school organisation, oral and written language teaching-learning processes) and the role of the speech therapist in school.) Explain the pedagogical foundations of speech therapy (school organisation, oral and written language teaching-learning processes) and the role of the speech therapist in school.
  • SM09 (Analyse the results of a scientific study in the field of speech therapy.) Analyse the results of a scientific study in the field of speech therapy.
  • SM10 (Employ language teaching terminology and use it for efficient communication depending on the interlocutors (children of different ages and other professionals).) Employ language teaching terminology and use it for efficient communication depending on the interlocutors (children of different ages and other professionals).
  • SM12 (Distinguish between the different evidence-based research methods and techniques based on practice in Speech Therapy and related disciplines.) Distinguish between the different evidence-based research methods and techniques based on practice in Speech Therapy and related disciplines.
  • SM14 (Design educational projects for students with and without specific needs for speech therapy care and, based on the cases raised, actions to promote people’s communication skills.) Design educational projects for students with and without specific needs for speech therapy care and, based on the cases raised, actions to promote people’s communication skills.

Contents

Theoretical sessions 


Teaching and learning oral language


1.1 Introduction: key concepts in oral language and oral language instruction


1.2 Verbal and communicative interaction: teaching proposals and educational resources


1.3 The school context as a communicative space: oral language as a tool for communication.


1.4 The school context as a learning space: oral language as a tool to reflect upon language.


2. Teaching and learning written language


2.1 The importance of written language from a social, psycholinguistic, and educational perspective


2.2 Writing processes: models.


2.3 Reading comprehension: models


2.4 The role of executive functions in literacy 


2.5 The development of writing and reading comprehension


2.6 Teaching writing and reading comprehension


2.7 Spelling: acquisition, impact on writing processes, and teaching.


2.8 Word identification: acquisition, impact on reading processes, and teaching.


 


Practical sessions



  • School organization 

  • Development of numeracy.

  • Searching, interpreting, and using scientific evidence to support language instruction. 

Learning activities and methodology

Title Hours ECTS Learning outcomes
Whole-class activities. Presentations by the lecturers of the course of the main contents of the program. Students are encouraged to actively participate as much as possible. 60 2.4
Participation in debates on the online campus (Campus Virtual). Online tutorials. In-person tutorials. 19.7 0.788
Small-group activities to discuss in depth issues related to the use of ICTs and language to provide support to the development of spoken and written language 18 0.72
Bibliographical search and article reading. Monographic essays on detection of difficulties and the teaching of written language. Essays on the use of ICT and children’s books for the teaching of literacy 117 4.68

The course puts the student at the center of the teaching-learning process. Under this premise we have planned the teaching methodology and the formative assessment activities, which are detailed below.

Annotation: within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.

Assessment

Continuous assessment activities

Title Weight Hours ECTS Learning outcomes
EV2. Written exam: Written language bloc 2 (individual) 25% of the final mark 2 0.08 KM12, SM09, SM10, SM12, SM14
EV1. Written exam: Written language block 1 (individual) 25% of the final mark 2 0.08 KM12, SM09, SM10, SM12
EV4. Seminar activities (individual and group activities) 30% of the final mark 4.3 0.172 SM09, SM10, SM12
EV3. Written exam: Oral language bloc (individual) 20% of the final mark 2 0.08 KM12, SM09, SM10, SM12, SM14

The assessment for the course will be carried out throughout the academic year through the learning-evidence activities shown in the table below. For students who are deemed assessable, learning-evidence activities that are not submitted will receive a mark of 0.0.


A student who has submitted learning-evidence activities accounting for 40% or more of the final mark will be considered ASSESSABLE and, therefore, will be assigned a numerical mark. Otherwise, that is, if the submissions do not reach 40% of the final mark, the student will be graded as NOT ASSESSABLE.


For further information on the Faculty assessment guidelines, please consult the following link: https://www.uab.cat/doc/DOC_PautesAvaluacio_2026


Learning-evidence activity code Title Weight Format Submission mode Authorship Timing Reassessable? Type of feedback Feedback week
EV1 Written test: written language block 1 25% Written In person Individual First assessment period Yes Tutorial 9
EV2 Written test: written language block 2 25% Written In person Individual Second assessment period Yes Tutorial 20
EV3 Written test: oral language block 20% Written In person Individual Second assessment period Yes Tutorial 20
EV4 Seminars 30% Various modalities Mixed: in person and online, through Moodle Individual and collective Weeks 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 15 No Tutorial 18


The final mark for the course will be obtained from the weighted average of the learning-evidence activities. To pass the course, students must obtain an average mark equal to or higher than 5.0 and a minimum mark of 4.0 in each learning-evidence activity.


If the weighted average is equal to or higher than 5.0, but the minimum-mark requirement is not met in one or more learning-evidence activities, the maximum mark recorded in the official academic record will be 4.5. If the weighted average is below 5.0, the mark recorded in the official academic record will be the final mark obtained, provided that this does not contradict the general assessment criteria for the course.


Resit assessment

Students may be eligible for resit assessment if they meet either of the following conditions:

(a) they have one or more reassessable learning-evidence activities with a mark below 4.0;

(b) they have not reached a weighted average mark of 5.0 across the learning-evidence activities as a whole.


EV1, EV2 and EV3 are reassessable. EV4 is not reassessable, since it consists of seminar activities designed to be carried out during the corresponding sessions, often in groups and under teacher supervision.


The resit assessment will take place during the period established by the Faculty. If the student has one or more reassessable learning-evidence activities with a mark below 4.0, they must reassess those activities. If the student has obtained a mark equal to or higher than 4.0 in all reassessable learning-evidence activities but does not reach a final weighted average of 5.0, the teaching staff will indicate which reassessable learning-evidence activity or activities the student may reassess in order to try to meet the requirements for passing the course.


The resit-assessment system only allows the mark to be increased up to a maximum of 5.0 points per learning-evidence activity. That is, reassessed learning-evidence activities may receive a maximum mark of 5.0. The mark obtained in the resit assessment will replace the initial mark for the corresponding learning-evidence activity and will then be weighted according to the weight established in the assessment table. The resit assessment may not be used to improve the mark of a learning-evidence activity with an original mark (that is, pre-resit) equal to or higher than 4.


After the resit assessment, the course will be considered passed if the student obtains a weighted average equal to or higher than 5.0 and meets the requirement of having obtained a mark equal to or higher than 4.0 in each learning-evidence activity. If, after the resit assessment, the mark for any learning-evidence activity is below 4.0, or if the final weighted average is below 5.0, the course will be failed.


Attendance and seminar activities

Attendance at sessions is not a general requirement for the course. However, the assessable activities for EV4 are carried out during seminar sessions and, due to their characteristics, cannot be replaced by an alternative activity outside the corresponding session.


If a student does not attend a seminar session in which an assessable activity is carried out, they will receive a mark of 0.0 for that activity, regardless of whether the activity is individual or collective. This mark of 0.0 does not prevent the student from completing the remaining assessment activities in EV4 or the other learning-evidence activities, which will maintain their relative weight in the calculation of the final mark.


For example, if in the 9 seminar sessions a student obtains the following marks: 8.0; 4.0; 6.0; 9.0; 0.0; 0.0; 7.0; 5.0 and 6.0, the average for EV4 is 5.0 and, therefore, the student will have passed this learning-evidence activity. In contrast, if the student obtains the following marks: 8.0; 0.0; 6.0; 9.0; 0.0; 0.0; 7.0; 5.0 and 6.0, the average is 4.6 and, therefore, the student will not have passed this learning-evidence activity, although the mark may be averaged with the other learning-evidence activities. If the average mark for EV4 were below 4, the course would be failed, since this learning-evidence activity is not reassessable.


Justification of an absence will be considered for information purposes only and will not make it possible to replace the activity, since seminar activities are designed to be carried out during the corresponding session, often in groups and under teacher supervision.


Single assessment

SINGLE ASSESSMENT MUST BE REQUESTED ONLINE (E-FORM) DURING THE SPECIFIC PERIOD (more information on the Faculty website).


This course offers students the option of completing an assessment concentrated on a single date during the second assessment period. This assessment will consist of three learning-evidence activities:


Code Title Weight Format Submission mode Reassessable?
AU1 Oral exercise on the oral language block 20% Oral In person Yes
AU2 Oral exercise on the written language block 50% Oral In person Yes
AU3 Questionnaire on the seminar syllabus 30% Written In person No


During the oral exercises assessing the content of the oral language and written language blocks, the student will have to answer questions on these topics. To assess the syllabus of the seminar activities, students who choose single assessment will have to answer a questionnaire on:

(a) the content and methodological characteristics of a meta-analytic study that will be provided approximately 10 days before the exam and that may be brought to the exam on the day itself (without annotations or translations of any kind);

(b) aspects of the development and teaching of numerical knowledge and dyscalculia;

(c) aspects of school organisation.


The approximate duration of the single assessment will be 20 minutes for the oral language section, 30 minutes for the written language section, and 3 hours for the questionnaire corresponding to the seminar syllabus.


The final mark for the single assessment will be the weighted average of the three learning-evidence activities. As in continuous assessment, the average mark must be equal to or higher than 5.0 in order to pass the course. It will also be necessary to obtain a mark equal to or higher than 4.0 in each of the three learning-evidence activities. If the weighted average is equal to or higher than 5.0, but the minimum-mark requirement is not met in one or more learning-evidence activities, the maximum mark recorded in the official academic record will be 4.5.


The same criteria for being graded as 'not assessable' and the same criteria for access to resit assessment as in continuous assessment will apply.

After the resit assessment, the course will be considered passed if the student obtains a weighted average equal to or higher than 5.0 and meets the requirement of having obtained a mark equal to or higher than 4.0 in each of the single-assessment learning-evidence activities. If, after the resit assessment, the mark for any learning-evidence activity is below 4.0, or if the final weighted average is below 5.0, the course will be failed.


The review of the final mark will follow the same procedure as for continuous assessment.


Synthesis exam for students in their second or subsequent enrolment

Students in their second or subsequent enrolment may request to take a synthesis exam. This option will allow the course to be assessed through a single exam, without having to complete the seminar activities corresponding to EV4.


The synthesis exam will take place on the date established by the Faculty for the second assessment period and will consist of two parts:


Part Title Weight Format Submission mode Reassessable?
PS1 Written language part 60% Written In person No
PS2 Oral language part 40% Written In person No


In accordance with the Faculty assessment guidelines, the synthesis exam will not have a resit assessment. To pass the course through this modality, students must obtain a weighted average mark equal to or higher than 5.0 and a minimum mark of 4.0 in each of the two parts. If the weighted average is equal to or higher than 5.0, but the minimum-mark requirement is not met in one or more parts, the maximum mark recorded in the official academic record will be 4.5.


Students in their second or subsequent enrolment who wish to take the synthesis exam must request this from the teaching staff responsible for the course within the same period established by the Faculty

for requesting single assessment.


Use of artificial intelligence

In this course, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies is permitted as an integral part of the development of the course, provided that the final result reflects a significant contribution by the student in terms of analysis and personal reflection. The student must clearly identify which parts have been generated using this technology, specify the tools used, and include a critical reflection on how these tools have influenced the process and the final result of the activity.


Lack of transparency in the use of AI will be considered a breach of academic honesty and may result in a penalty in the mark for the activity, or more serious sanctions in severe cases.

In in-person assessment tests, whether oral or written, the use of AI tools will be completely prohibited unless the teaching staff explicitly indicate otherwise.

Bibliography

BASIC LITERATURE*

ALVES, R., LIMPO, T., SALAS, N., JOSHI, M. (2018). Handwriting and spelling. S. Graham, C.A. MacArthur, M. Hebert (Eds.) Best practices in writing, 3rd Edition. The Guilford Press.

COLTHEART, M. (2005). Modeling reading: The dual-route approach. M. Snowling & C. Hulme (eds.), The Science of Reading. London: Blackwell, p. 6-23.

DIAMOND, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135-168.

DUKE, N. K., WARD, A. E., PEARSON, P. D. (2021). The science of Reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 74(6).

FLOWER, L., HAYES, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387.

HAYES, J. R. (2011). Kinds of knowledge-telling: Modeling early writing development. Journal of Writing Research, 3(2), 73-92.

GRAHAM, S., HARRIS, K. R. (2009). Almost 30 years of writing research: Making sense of it all with The Wrath of Khan. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(2), 58-68.

KESANE, I., RUIZ, L. (2010).  Contribucions de la comunitat científica internacional sobre aprenentatge de la lectura i superació del fracàs escolar. Temps d'Educació, 38, 115-134.

LLAURADÓ, A., DOCKRELL, J. (2019). Children’s plans for writing: Characteristics and impact on writing performance. Journal of Literacy Research, 51(3), 336-356.

MCCUTCHEN, D. (2000). Knowledge, processing, and working memory. Educational Psychologist, 35, 13-23.

MORENO FERNÁNDEZ, F. (2002). Producción, expresión e interacción oral. Madrid: ArcoLibros.

NOUWENS, S., GROEN, M. A., KLEEMANDS, T., VERHOEVEN, L. (2021). How executive functions contribute to reading comprehension. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 169-192

PERFETTI, C. A., LANDI, N., OAKHILL, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. M. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.) The Science of Reading. Blackwell Publishing, p. 227-242.

REYZABAL, M . V. (1993). La comunicación oral y su didáctica. València: La Muralla. 

SALAS, N. SILVENTE, S. (2019). The role of executive functions and transcription skills in writing: a cross-sectional study across 7 years of schooling. Reading & Writing, 33, 877–905.

SCARDAMALIA, M., BEREITER, C. (1992). Dos modelos explicativos de los procesos de composición escrita. Infancia y aprendizaje, 15(58), 43-64.

TOLCHINSKY, L. (2013). L’aprenentatge de l’escriptura i les seves dificultats. Ll. Andreu i Barrachina (coord.). Transtorns d’aprenentatge de l’escriptura i de les matemàtiques. UOC.

TREIMAN, R. (2017). Learning to spell words: Findings, theories, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(4), 265-276 

VILA i SANTASUSANA, M. (Coord.) (2002). Didàctica de la llengua oral formalBarcelona: Graó.

 

COMPLEMENTARY LITERATURE

ALVES, R. A., LIMPO, T., JOSHI, R.M. (2020). Reading-writing connections: towards integrative literacy science (Vol. 19). Springer Nature.

ANDREU-BARRACHINA, Ll. (Coord.). (2013).L’adquisició de la lectura i les seves dificultats. Barcelona:UOC.

BIGAS, M., CORREIG, M. (2000). Didáctica de la lengua en la educación infantil. Madrid: Síntesis.

BRUNER, J. (1985). La parla dels infants.  Vic: EUMO.

FERREIRO, E.,& TEBEROSKY, A. (1979). Los sistemas de escritura en el desarrollo del niño. México: Siglo XXI.

FIDALGO, R., & GARCÍA, J. N. (2008). El desarrollo de la competencia escrita a través de una enseñanza metacognitiva de la escritura. Cultura y Educación, 20(3), 325-346.

GENERALITAT DE CATALUNYA. Departament d'Ensenyament (2003). L’ús del llenguatge a l’escola. Propostes d’intervenció per a l’alumnat amb dificultats de comunicació i llenguatge.

GRAHAM, S. & PERIN, D. (2007). Writing next: effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Nova York: Carnegie Corporation.

GRAHAM, S., MACARTHUR, C. A., & FITZGERALD, J. (Eds.). (2013). Best practices in writing instruction, 2nd editon. Guilford Press.

HARRIS, S., GRAHAM., MASON, L., FRIEDLANDER, B. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

LIMPO, T., OLIVE, T. (2021). Executive Functions and Writing. Oxford University Press.

MACARTHUR, C. A., GRAHAM, S., & FITZGERALD, J. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of writing research. 1st Edition. Nova York:Guilford Press.

MACARTHUR, C. A., GRAHAM, S., & FITZGERALD, J. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of writing research. 2nd Edition. Nova York:Guilford Press.

PALOU, J. et al. (2005).  La llengua oral a l'escola: 10 experiències didàctiques. Barcelona: Graó.

RUIZ BIKANDI, U. (2000). Enseñar la lengua oral. dins Didáctica de la segunda lengua en Educación Infantil y Primaria, U. Ruiz Bikandi (ed.). Madrid: Síntesis.

SÁNCHEZ CANO, M. (1999). Aprenent i ensenyant a parlar. Lleida: Pagès Editors.

SÁNCHEZ CANO, M. (coord.) (2009). La conversa en petits grups a l'aula. Barcelona: Graó.

SNOWLING, M. J., & HULME, C. (Eds.). (2005). The science of reading: A handbook. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

TOLCHINSKY, L. (1993). Aprendizaje del lenguaje escritoProcesos evolutivos e implicaciones didácticas. Barcelona: Anthropos.

TOLCHINSKY, L. (2003). The cradle of culture and what children know about writing and numbers before being taught. Psychology Press.

TOUGH, J. (1987).: El lenguaje oral en la escuela. Madrid : Visor /MEC.

 

Software

Not applicable

Course groups and languages

The information provided is provisional until November 30. After this date, you will be able to consult the language of each group through this link. To access the information, you will need to enter the course CODE

Type of teaching Group Language Semester Shift
(TE) Theory 1 Catalan second semester morning-mixed
(SEM) Seminars 111 Catalan second semester morning-mixed
(SEM) Seminars 112 Catalan second semester morning-mixed
(SEM) Seminars 113 Catalan second semester morning-mixed
(SEM) Seminars 114 Catalan second semester morning-mixed