This version of the course guide is provisional until the period for editing the new course guides ends.

Logo UAB

Educational Foundations of speech therapy

Code: 101702 ECTS Credits: 9
2025/2026
Degree Type Year
Logopedia FB 1

Contact

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

Teachers

Patricia Alvarez Cabrera

Teaching groups languages

You can view this information at the end of this 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 and Contextualisation

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

  1. KM12 (Knowledge) 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.
  2. SM09 (Skill) Analyse the results of a scientific study in the field of speech therapy.
  3. SM10 (Skill) Employ language teaching terminology and use it for efficient communication depending on the interlocutors (children of different ages and other professionals).
  4. SM12 (Skill) Distinguish between the different evidence-based research methods and techniques based on practice in Speech Therapy and related disciplines.
  5. SM14 (Skill) 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.

Content

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. 

Activities and Methodology

Title Hours ECTS Learning Outcomes
Type: Directed      
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
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
Type: Supervised      
Participation in debates on the online campus (Campus Virtual). Online tutorials. In-person tutorials. 19.7 0.79
Type: Autonomous      
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

Continous Assessment Activities

Title Weighting Hours ECTS Learning Outcomes
EV1. Written exam: Written language block 1 (individual) 25% of the final mark 2 0.08 KM12, SM09, SM10, SM12
EV2. Written exam: Written language bloc 2 (individual) 25% of the final mark 2 0.08 KM12, SM09, SM10, SM12, SM14
EV3. Written exam: Oral language bloc (individual) 20% of the final mark 2 0.08 KM12, SM09, SM10, SM12, SM14
EV4. Seminar activities (individual and group activities) 30% of the final mark 4.3 0.17 SM09, SM10, SM12

The assessment of the course will take place throughout the semester in the form of a series of learning-evidence activities, which are detailed in the grid below (EV1, EV2, etc.). Non-delivered activities will receive a mark of 0.0. It should be noted that a student who has delivered activities that amount to 40% or more of the final mark for the course will be regarded as having taken the course and, thus, will have a final mark. Otherwise, the final qualification will be “no presentat” (absent). 

The final grade for the subject will be the result of the weighted mean of all learning-evidence activities. To pass the course, students must have obtained a weighted mean of 5 or more across all learning-evidence activities, and a minimum score of 4.0 in each learning activity. If the weighted mean is equal to or higher than 5, but there are evidences with grades under 4.0, the grade that will be registered in the student’s academic record will be 4.0.

Reassessment: Students may be reassessed of any learning-evidence activities if (1) any of the learning-evidence activities has received a grade under 4.0, or (2) their weighted mean grade does not reach a minimum of 5.0 points. The reassessment process only allows students to obtain a maximum grade of 5.0 for each activity that is reassessed; this means that failed activities may get a final grade of 5.0, at most. Afterwards,the corresponding mark will be weighted, so as to maintain the weight relationship across all other activities. Reassessment cannot be used to increase grades.

For more information on assessment criteria, please visit https://www.uab.cat/web/estudiar/graus/graus/avaluacions-1345722525858.htm.

 

Description

Code

Description

Weight

Format

Authorship

Timing

Recoverable?

Feedback type

Feedback week

EV1

Written exam: 1st assessment of Block 1

25%

Written

Individual

Assessment week in March

Yes

Tutorial

9

EV2

Written exam: 2nd assessment of Block 1

25%

Written

Individual

Assessment week in June

Yes

Tutorial

20

EV3

Written exam: assessment of block 2

20%

Written

<palign="center">Individual

Assessment week in June

Yes

Tutorial

20

EV4

Seminars

30%

Various types

Individual and in groups

Throughout semester

No

Tutorial

18

 

Attendance. Attendance to sessions is not mandatory. However, if a student does not attend a seminar session (in which assessments are carried out every day), he/she will receive a grade of 0.0 in that activity, regardless of whether the activity is carried out individually or in groups. Note that a grade of 0.0 does not prevent students from carrying out the rest of the assessment activities, neither of the Ev4 nor of other learning activities, which will maintain their relative weight in the calculation of the final grade. For example, in the 9 seminar sessions throughout the subject, a student has obtained the following numerical grades: 8.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 0.0, 0.0, 7.0, 5.0, and 6.0 (0.0 indicates sessions where the student was absent from class). The average of these grades is 5.0 and the student will therefore have passed this learning activity. On the other hand, if a student has obtained the following numerical grades in the seminar activities: 8.0, 0.0, 6.0, 9.0, 0.0, 0.0, 7.0, 5.0, and 6.0, the average would be 4.6; therefore, he/she will have failed this learning-activity. Note that whether an absence is justified or not is merely informative. The justification does not exempt the student from the requirement to attend to obtain a grade. Finally, seminar activities may not be reassessed, as they are activities designed to be carried out in class, often in groups, and with the supervision of the teaching staff.

Single assessment. 

TO OPT FOR SINGLE ASSESSMENT, STUDENTS MUST FILL THE CORRESPONDING E-FORM WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED PERIOD (more information at UAB's website)

This subject offers students the option to concentrate all assessment in a single date during the second assessment period (at the end of the course). Such evaluation will consist of two oral exercises (one for the oral language block and another one for the written language block) and a written exercise (to evaluate the content of the seminars, Ev4). The weight ofeach exercise towards the final grade will be equivalent to the continued assessment weights: the oral-language exercice will contribute 20% to the final grade, the written-language exercise will contribute 50%, and the seminar-related exercise will contribute the remaining 30% of the grade. The oral exams to assess the oral-language and written language blocks will consist of asking the student a series of questions about the topics in each block. To assess the topics of the seminars, students who opt for the single assessment option will need to complete a questionnaire about (1) the content and methodological characteristics of a metaanalysis that will be provided the same thay of the exam; (2) aspects about the development and teaching of numeracy and its difficulties; and (3) aspectes on school organization. The oral-language oral exam will have an approximate duration of 15 minutes; the written language oral exam will have an approximate duration of 20 minutes, while the seminar-related questionnaire will require approximately 3 hours to complete.

The final grade of the single assessment will be the weighted mean of the two oral exercises and the seminars’ questionnaire, and must be 5.0 or more to pass the subject. Just like the continued assessment, if the grade in either exercise was below 4, the grade cannot be averaged with the rest and the student would have failed the single assessment. In such instance (fail), the student has the right to be reassessed of the learning evidence(s) that he/she has failed. The reassessment exam will have the same characteristics and duration (two oral exercises and a written questionnaire; about 4 hours.)

Note: All students, whether they are taking the course for the first time or not, will be evaluated using the same criteria and procedure.


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


Groups and Languages

Please note that this information is provisional until 30 November 2025. You can check it through this link. To consult the language you will need to enter the CODE of the subject.

Name Group Language Semester Turn
(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
(TE) Theory 1 Catalan second semester morning-mixed