Collaboration between professionals and mothers to enhance oral communication competence in bilingual children with language disorders in inclusive contexts

Gonzalez, Diana Patricia; Gràcia, Marta; Adam-Alcocer, Ana Luisa

doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1642680

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Educ., 23 December 2025

Sec. Special Educational Needs

Volume 10 - 2025 | https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1642680

This article is part of the Research TopicCultural and Contextual Challenges in the Inclusion of Children with Developmental DisordersView all 13 articles

Collaboration between professionals and mothers to enhance oral communication competence in bilingual children with language disorders in inclusive contexts

Diana Patricia Gonzalez^*

Marta Gràcia

Ana Luisa Adam-Alcocer

Department of Cognition, Development and Educational Psychology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Introduction: Research on the effectiveness of family interventions is essential for enhancing the oral communicative competence of children with developmental language disorders. This study examined mother–child interactions in bilingual Spanish–English families to identify current communication strategies and explore additional ways to foster oral communicative competence development.

Methods: Participants included 10 mothers and their bilingual children (ages 4–6 years) with language disorders, along with a school-based speech-language pathologist from a public school in New York. The Scale for the Assessment of Oral Language Teaching in Family Contexts was used to evaluate mother–child interactions. A collaborative intervention consisting of four school-based workshops was implemented to foster mothers’ awareness of their communicative practices and support them in strengthening their interactions with their children.

Results: During the workshops, mothers engaged in discussions with the school-based speech-language pathologist, reflecting on and refining their communication strategies. By the end of the intervention, some mother–child dyads showed noticeable improvements in the quality of their interactions.

Discussion: The mothers’ evaluations highlight their active engagement in the collaborative process and their commitment to improving communication with their children to support oral communicative competence development.

1 Introduction

The development of oral communicative competence (OCC) is a key pillar of children’s personal, social, and academic growth. While OCC is essential for all children, it poses particular challenges for those with difficulties in communicative functioning, such as developmental language disorder (DLD), childhood apraxia of speech, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). who often face persistent barriers to develop language. It is important to note that ASD presents a distinct profile of communicative difficulties compared to DLD and bilingualism. While children with DLD typically experience persistent delays in language acquisition, children with ASD often show broader challenges involving pragmatic skills, social reciprocity, and interaction management (Tager-Flusberg, 2016; Norbury, 2017). These differences highlight the need to distinguish carefully between populations when analyzing communicative competence. For children with DLD, these challenges often manifest differently in bilingual or multilingual contexts, where the presence of two or more languages should be viewed not as a barrier but as a resource, requiring educational approaches that both respect and build upon children’s full linguistic repertoire. The ability to communicate effectively through oral language, complemented by gestures and facial expressions, not only requires formal language proficiency but also the skill to use it in different contexts and with diverse interlocutors. Furthermore, discourse and interaction management strategies facilitate learning, expression, and knowledge construction (Gràcia et al., 2020; Gràcia and Sánchez-Cano, 2022). These broad demands on OCC help explain why the role of the family, and particularly mother-child interactions, is so central to children’s development.

Children with DLD, particularly those growing up in bilingual or multilingual environments and facing conditions of vulnerability, require interventions that empower their families, foster communication skills, and optimize family dynamics. Evidence-based practices and family-centered interventions, defined as approaches that place families at the core of the decision-making and intervention design by aligning goals with family priorities, cultural contexts, and daily routines, have been shown to have a positive impact on oral language development (Domeniconi and Gràcia, 2018; Ribeiro et al., 2023a,b; Domeniconi et al., 2025a,b). For example, shared book-reading routines with guided parental scaffolding (Domeniconi et al., 2025a), parent-implemented language stimulation strategies (e.g., modeling and expanding children’s utterances), and structured home-school collaboration programs are practices that strengthen children’s expressive and receptive skills while also supporting parents in their role as communication partners. These examples illustrate how daily family routines can be transformed into powerful opportunities for learning when supported by evidence-based strategies (Domeniconi et al., 2025b).

Mother-child interactions play a crucial role in language development, providing the foundation for children’s communication skills. A support network and parental empowerment are key factors in overcoming these barriers and promoting inclusion, understood here as the systematic effort to ensure that children with DLD participate meaningfully in mainstream classrooms alongside peers, with the necessary adaptations and support (Martínez-Rico G. et al., 2024; Martínez-Rico R. et al., 2024). The collaboration between teachers, speech-language pathologists (SLPs), and families is essential for the development of OCC. Professional perspectives on family strengths, participation in decision-making, and active involvement allow for the establishment of goals that strengthen children’s abilities and promote the acquisition of new skills (Verger A. et al., 2021; Verger S. et al., 2021). Thus, collaborative work between families and professionals becomes an effective strategy for fostering quality language interactions and strengthening communication skills. In this context, we analyzed the collaboration and joint reflection between a school-based SLP (SB-SLP) and mothers of Spanish–English bilingual children, with the aim of strengthening their skills and promoting the development of OCC in their children. Building on this perspective, sociocultural and ecological frameworks provide further insight into how families, schools, and communities interact to shape children’s communicative development.

From a sociocultural perspective (Vygotsky, 1978), communication partners such as parents scaffold children’s language use, while Bruner (1983) concept of the Language Acquisition Support System demonstrates how structured interaction supports children with DLD in making meaning. Bronfenbrenner (1979) ecological systems theory further highlights the interconnected roles of family, school, and community in fostering development. Furthermore, children with language difficulties often have a lower academic performance (Dockrell J. et al., 2017; Dockrell J. E. et al., 2017), underscoring the need for effective interventions that actively engage parents, educators, and school-based speech-language pathologists (SB-SLPs) to strengthen communication and learning. The theoretical frameworks referenced here have guided our work from the outset, and in this revision we explicitly acknowledge them to clarify the study’s conceptual positioning. These frameworks underscore the importance of designing interventions that actively engage families and professionals in culturally sensitive ways, especially for children with DLD in bilingual contexts.

Educators and SB-SLP professionals face significant challenges in supporting children in bilingual and multilingual contexts. The preservation of native languages is a fundamental human right, and interventions must be tailored to the complexity of these linguistic environments (Simon-Cereijido, 2022; Kk Nair R. et al., 2023). However, decisions about whether to promote one or multiple languages, which language (s) to prioritize in therapy, and how to balance intervention across home and school settings often lack solid empirical support, making a critical review of existing practices essential to ensuring cultural equity in educational services (Li, 2023; Kk Nair V. K. K. et al., 2023). This highlights the central tension in bilingual interventions: supporting the child’s development while respecting and leveraging the family’s full linguistic repertoire.

In the United States, Spanish-English bilingualism poses particular challenges for assessment of language disorders. Standardized tests are largely based on monolingual English development, which can lead to the under-assessment of children whose home language is not English. This makes it difficult to distinguish between difficulties with second-language acquisition and the presence of DLD (Patiño Zambrano M. et al., 2024; Patiño Zambrano V. P. et al., 2024). Accurate assessment is therefore not only a technical issue but also a matter of equity, as misidentification can delay or misdirect appropriate intervention.

Robinson K. et al. (2020) highlighted the importance of pedagogical contexts that allow children to leverage their translingual and intercultural resources to enhance their linguistic development (Robinson H. et al., 2020). Recognizing and guiding these practices is crucial for children in marginalized linguistic contexts, providing them with greater opportunities to engage with their linguistic repertoires. Furthermore, recent global crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, armed conflicts, and forced displacement, have intensified the challenges related to meeting the needs of bilingual children in vulnerable situations, widening inequalities in health and education (Deal-Williams, 2020; Gregory, 2020). These circumstances highlight the urgency of designing approaches that integrate languages in both assessment and intervention processes to ensure adequate linguistic development (International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, 2011, 2022). Taken together, these contextual factors demonstrate the urgency of family-centered and culturally responsive approaches that can adapt to the realities of vulnerable populations.

An important consideration in supporting children with DLD is that language intervention must incorporate all of the child languages in a culturally sensitive manner. DLDs comprise one of the most prevalent difficulties in child development, affecting approximately 7–10% of children and causing persistent delays in language acquisition (Li, 2023). Therefore, such interventions must be promoted to strengthen the skills of the children and their families. However, challenges related to cultural sensitivity persist. Although psychopedagogical strategies, meaning educational practices that integrate psychological theories and teaching methods to support both learning processes and emotional development, combined with family-centered approaches have shown benefits, further research is needed to guide the provision of evidence-based services (Li, 2023; Kk Nair R. et al., 2023). This suggests that even when evidence -based strategies are available, their effectiveness ultimately depends on their cultural and contextual fit for families.

Various intervention approaches aimed at enriching children’s linguistic environment have been proposed. Some prioritize increasing opportunities for exposure to appropriate language (Tomblin et al., 2019; Bishop and Snowling, 2004). Others emphasize intervention in natural contexts, such as the home or everyday settings, adapting strategies to each child’s interests and needs (Hart and Risley, 1995; Law et al., 2017). These approaches have been shown to be effective in strengthening communication skills in their immediate environment (Lanchares A. et al., 2022; Lanchares C. et al., 2022). The common thread across these approaches is the recognition that naturalistic, family-driven environments are the most effective contexts for promoting language.

Family involvement in education, understood as the active participation of parents in school activities, home-school collaboration, and support for their children’s learning, should be conceived as an interrelation of communication, coordination, and cooperation among the various members of the educational community, with the goal of sharing and achieving common goals. Some research shows limited family participation in educational centers, but numerous studies have highlighted that family involvement is not only a right and a duty but also results in significant benefits for the entire educational community (López-Castro and Pantoja-Vallejo, 2016). This makes it essential to identify tools and strategies that can bridge the gap between schools and families in practical ways.

In this sense, the routines-based interview (RBI) has been presented as a key tool for analyzing family dynamics and designing action family-driven plans that empower caregivers. McWilliam et al. (2020b) reported that RBIs yield positive results when meaningful goals are established for families and caregivers, thus facilitating interventions focused on the family context. This approach not only favors language development at home but also improves family interactions and enriches the child’s communicative environment. Collaboration between families and professionals is essential for identifying and overcoming barriers, addressing challenges, and designing effective solutions (McWilliam and Garcia-Grau, 2019). Thus, the RBI provides a concrete example of how collaborative methods can translate family priorities into actionable goals.

Furthermore, research indicates that parent-led interventions are particularly effective for children with developmental delays, reinforcing the key role of the family in the intervention (Division for Early Childhood, 2014). However, Movahedazarhouligh (2021) highlighted the need for further empirical research to evaluate their effectiveness, opening up new opportunities to strengthen this approach. In line with this, recent findings by Domeniconi et al. (2025a) indicate that brief interventions with low-income families can enhance children’s communication. These findings highlight the broader issue of how families and professionals can collaborate more effectively to sustain children’s communicative growth, and the present study builds on this evidence by emphasizing collaborative work between families and professionals as a shared approach.

Collaboration between families and professionals is essential to support the development of OCC in children with DLD. Nevertheless, in many cases, school professionals make decisions about intervention without fully involving families: they set goals and assign tasks without considering families’ priorities and needs (Law et al., 2019). This lack of active participation can put stress on caregivers, who, in addition to addressing the children’s communication difficulties, may feel overwhelmed or unsure about their role in the intervention (Potter et al., 2022). As such, practitioners should design effective collaboration strategies that not only empower families but also encourage their active participation in the process, promoting support based on mutual understanding and shared decision-making (Klatte I. et al., 2024; Klatte I. S. et al., 2024). In sum, this emphasizes the importance of collaborative, family-centered approaches that recognize parents not just as participants, but as essential partners in intervention.

Overall, the finding revealed that families faced three interrelated challenges in supporting their children’s development. First, concerns about social behavior were common, including aggression, isolation, and difficulties with peer interaction. Second, communication difficulties were widely reported, such as limited vocabulary, unclear speech, and problems with comprehension and task-following. Finally, mothers emphasized the need for external resources and personalized support, noting barriers in managing behavior, sustaining engagement, and consistently applying communication strategies at home and in school contexts. These challenges underscore the importance of collaborative, family-centered approaches to intervention. By situating these challenges alongside the study’s objectives, the analysis highlights the barriers mothers encounter and the opportunities for interventions to strengthen family practices.

The present study addresses these challenges through two main objectives: to analyze the interactions between mothers and their Spanish–English bilingual children with DLD to identify the strategies they employ in relation to the development of OCC, as well as those that require strengthening; and to design and implement a collaborative intervention with the mothers, allowing them to reflect on their practices and improve the quality of their communicative interactions with their children.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Participants and context

As shown in Table 1, 10 mothers and their children, eight boys and two girls, aged 4–6 years, participated in our study. All the children were enrolled in preschool or in first or second grade of kindergarten (ages 5–7 years) at a public early childhood school (ages 4–7 years) in New York City (United States). The families come from a lower-middle socioeconomic level, and most of the children are Spanish–English bilingual, according to their Home Language Questionnaire and New York State Identification Test for English Language Learners scores, showing a greater command of Spanish. All children participating in this study, except one with typical development, have been diagnosed with DLD, apraxia, or autism. Of the 10 children, 7 were diagnosed with DLD, 2 with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and 1 with childhood apraxia of speech. These diagnoses were completed individually by a neurologist, a school psychologist, and an SLP, as part of the evaluations included in their individualized education plan. This information was collected during initial meetings with families who agreed to participate in the study and included in each student’s record. The study’s principal investigator works at the school as an SLP and is bilingual in Spanish and English.

TABLE 1

Table 1. Characteristics of the families participating in the study.

Table 2 presents a summary of the students’ oral language skills at the beginning of the study, detailing their chronological age (from 4 to 5.11 years) and total scores for the subtests on the Bilingual English–Spanish Assessment (BESA) (Peña et al., 2018) manual, Scale scores range from 65 to 130, with scores between 85 and 115 considered within the average range. These scores are derived directly from the standardized BESA protocol. This evaluation was performed by the SB-SLP (who also served as the PI) at the start of the school year.

TABLE 2

Table 2. Bilingual English–Spanish assessment results at the beginning of the study (score by area).

2.1.1 Kindergarten school report (ages 5–6 years)

Table 3 presents the combined ratings from all school assessments contributing to each student’s final kindergarten report card. These ratings incorporate teacher-administered measures of language development, including the MONDO Oral Language Assessment (Clay, 2007), New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (New York State Education Department [NYSED], 2023), and Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System 1 (Fountas and Pinnell, 2010). Scores represent performance on specific items at the start (September) and end (June) of the school year.

TABLE 3

Table 3. Combined ratings from school-based assessments contributing to students’ final kindergarten report card (ages 5–6 years).

2.1.2 Preschool school report

Table 4 shows the results of the assessments administered to preschool students at the start and end of the school year, using the Preschool-4 Developmental Guidelines (5th edition) (Dichtelmiller et al., 2013). The results are organized by indicator and reflect both the start- and end-of-year assessments. The table shows the scores related to the report card areas that assess different oral language skills, grouped into three indicators. These indicators help visualize the progress and areas for improvement of each student in relation to the language skills observed throughout the school year.

TABLE 4

Table 4. Oral language skills assessments in preschool students (aged 4 years) at the start and end of the school year.

Table 4 presents student performance for the three indicators assessed at three points during the school year (beginning, middle, and end). Data were systematically collected for each student at all assessment points to allow for comparison of progress across the indicators over time.

2.2 Instruments

2.2.1 Bilingual English–Spanish assessment

BESA (Peña et al., 2018) is a standardized protocol designed to identify phonological and/or language disorders in children aged 4–6 years who are bilingual or learning English. It helps distinguish between a delay in English acquisition and a language disorder, record children’s language skills and needs, and monitor their progress in both languages. This information can then be used to inform intervention-related decisions.

2.2.2 Routines-based interview

RBI (McWilliam, 2009) is a semi-structured interview used with families, teachers, and caregivers to obtain a detailed description of the child and family’s role in daily routines and activities. During the assessment, the child and family’s strengths, challenges, needs, and priorities are identified.

2.2.3 Self-administered version of the Scale for the Assessment of Oral Language Teaching in Family Contexts (Escala de Valoración de la Enseñanza de la Lengua Oral en Contexto Familiar, EVALOF)

The Scale for the Assessment of Oral Language Teaching in Family Contexts (Escala de Valoración de la Enseñanza de la Lengua Oral en Contexto Familiar, EVALOF) was designed to analyze parent-child interactions during home activities. The version used in this study was the original instrument developed by Gràcia et al. (2023) informed by prior research on parent-child language interactions (Domeniconi and Gràcia, 2018; Gràcia and Sánchez-Cano, 2022; Campos Balog et al., 2022), which guided its structure and scoring EVALOF, in its original self-administered version, consists of 11 items grouped into two dimensions, each scored on a three-point scale (1,2,3), with and additional “NA” (No Answer) option requiring justification in the comment section. The first dimension, “Context and Communication Management,” assesses how the adult manages turn-taking to balance the child’s participation and facilitates communicative interaction through the physical environment during the activity. For example, it analyzes whether “the adult allows the children to participate in the conversation and manages turn-taking to ensure equal participation” (this aspect is only assessed in homes with more than one child).

The second dimension, “Communicative Functions and Strategies,” pertains to whether the child requests information or asks questions, and if the adult expands on the child’s utterances: for example, if “the adult uses routine activities to develop oral language skills.”

The EVALOF (Gràcia and Sánchez-Cano, 2022) was used in its original versions and for this study a third dimension was added “Social and Emotional Language Skills,” with three additional items: “Promotion of Emotional Self-Awareness,” “Recognition and Labeling of Feelings,” and “Development of Emotional Vocabulary.” These items were included to capture aspects of socio-emotional language development not assessed in the original scale, evaluating how adults support children’s emotional understanding and expression. Incorporating these items allowed for a more comprehensive assessment of parent-child interactions, reflecting both linguistic and socio-emotional competencies critical for early childhood development. The total adopted scale therefore includes 14 items.

2.2.4 Final Experience Assessment Questionnaire

The Final Experience Assessment Questionnaire, adapted from previous research (Gràcia et al., 2022), was used to evaluate mother’s perceptions of participating in collaborative work with professionals, including their satisfaction, engagement, and perceived usefulness of the training process and EVALOF methodology. It includes 21 questions grouped into six sections: (1) Tutorial and initial description; (2) Dimensions, items, tools, and decisions; (3) Use of EVALOF; (4) Oral competence; (5) Training process; and (6) Final assessment and comments on the EVALOF methodology. The five response options, on a Likert-type scale, range from strongly agree to strongly disagree.

2.3 Procedure

The study was conducted in six phases.

2.3.1 Phase 1: contact and consent

An informational session was held at the school, facilitated by the study’s principal investigator (an SB-SLP and special education teacher at the school), to explain the purpose and benefits of the study and distribute consent forms to families who wished to participate. The invitation was sent to a total of 48 families: 18 preschool families (ages 4–5 years in an inclusive classroom), 20 kindergarten families (ages 5–7 years in an inclusive classroom), and 10 kindergarten families (ages 4–7 years in a special education classroom). The inclusive classrooms accommodate children with typical development and children diagnosed with DLD, who meet the inclusion criteria established by the New York City Department of Education.

2.3.2 Phase 2: Meetings and evaluation of the children by the teachers

Nine families with children diagnosed with DLD, autism, or apraxia, and one family with a typically developing child, expressed interest in participating in the study. During individual meetings held at the school, the SB-SLP (who also served as the PI) met with each of the mothers to provide detailed guidance on the procedures to be followed during the intervention, ensuring that they understood the steps and expectations. The families submitted the signed consent form and received a printed copy of the EVALOF, which they were asked to complete by following the provided instructions. In addition, student profile sheets were completed with the families prior to the intervention, documenting each child’s demographic information including age, sex, grade, language(s) spoken at home, socioeconomic indicators, and family composition as well as their current language abilities.

All students completed standard academic and developmental assessments routinely used in the school setting on three occasions throughout the school year: at the start (November 2021), in the middle (March 2022), and at the end (June 2022). The specific tests were selected according to each child’s educational level.

Kindergarten students completed the MONDO Oral Language Assessment, theNew York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test, and Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System 1. Preschool students were assessed using the Work Sampling Checklist. Phase 3. RBI and BESA

RBIs were scheduled and conducted with each of the participating families at the school to obtain information that would allow for a deeper understanding of their routines and interactions in the home environment. All interviews were conducted by the SB-SLP. The SB-SLP also used the BESA tool to assess the language development of all participating children, establishing a baseline for their speech and language skills at the beginning of the study.

2.3.3 Phase 4: identification of communication patterns and selection of topics for workshops

The mothers completed the EVALOF (self-administered version). The responses collected served as the basis for designing and developing five workshops.

2.3.4 Phase 5: development of collaborative reflection workshops

The SB-SLP worked together with the mothers primarily through five 1-h collaborative reflection workshops, held over the course of five consecutive months. The sessions were audio-and video-recorded, and the SB-SLP maintained a field journal to capture key observations. The topics were selected collaboratively with the mothers, based on areas prioritized for improving their children’s language, communication, and participation in daily routines, informed by information from the Routines Based Interviews (RBIs) and the EVALOF, which provided a structure framework for identifying family priorities and children’s needs. The sessions were also supported by a conversational methodology and established strategies for fostering OCC. The workshops took place in the school library, with eight to ten mothers in attendance per session. The workshops were structured as interactive meetings, combining group discussions, role-plays, hands-on exercises, debates, and visual and multimedia materials. Power point presentations prepared specifically for parents guided each session, supported by illustrated cue cards, video clips of child interactions, and handouts. Mothers were encouraged to share experiences, reflect on routines, and practice strategies both during sessions and at home.

The first workshop focused on speech and language development, included presentations on typical milestones, video examples, and exercises modeling clear articulation and expanding utterances. The second a focused on promoting vocabulary acquisition, including practical activities such as creating personalized word cards and labeling household objects. The third emphasized oral language and literacy, linking oral language skills to reading and writing, with shared book-reading practice and designing literacy routines. The fourth explored facilitating and expanding oral productions, teaching strategies for sentence expansion (e.g., “car”-red car goes fast”), turn-taking and scaffolding responses during play through role-plays and peer discussions. Finally, the fifth workshop addressed functions of language and communication, examining verbal and non-verbal functions, analyzing video scenarios, and practicing prompts for communication.

Throughout the workshops, discussion prompts guided reflection and exchange of experiences, including questions such as: What challenges have you encountered when applying communication strategies, and how have you addressed them? Which strategies have worked well with your child? How do you perceive your child’s progress compared to school evaluations, and what might explain any differences? Can you share a situation where a strategy helped your child participate better? Which strategies are most useful for motivating interactions, and what challenges might help further improve your child’s educational approach? These prompts fostered collaborative problem-solving and planning for home practice. The combination of structured presentations, guided practice, peer discussion, and visual materials ensured mothers could actively engage, reflect on their practices, and adopt strategies tailored to their children’s needs, making the intervention practical and replicable.

2.3.5 Phase 6: monitoring, evaluation, and follow-up

After each workshop, the SB-SLP collected suggestions and feedback directly from the mothers. Continued support was offered and provided by the SB-SLP on a need basis between sessions through brief individual meetings, phone calls or emails, according to each mother’s preference, consolidating learning and addressing additional questions. These contacts served to reinforce and clarify workshop content without introducing new ideas or strategies. At the conclusion of the five workshops, the SB-SLP collected reassessments of family interactions using the EVALOF tool. These assessments were used to identify areas requiring further improvement, as well as areas that had improved or were showing progress, to inform planning for future workshops.

2.4 Data analysis

The dataset included multiple sources. A total of 10 Routines-Based Interviews (RBIs) were conducted, each lasting 45–60 min and transcribed verbatim. These were examined in an exploratory way, with attention to key phrases that recurred across the data and aligned with EVALOF results. The focus was on identifying patterns of family priorities and experiences rather than quantifying occurrences.

The EVALOF was completed by 10 mothers pre-intervention and again post-intervention. Pre-intervention results were used in a needs-assessment approach, identifying items most frequently rated with the lowest scores to guide the selection of workshop topics. Post-intervention responses were then examined descriptively to identify areas of progress as well as items still requiring support, ensuring that the intervention remained responsive to family-identified priorities.

Workshop data included five sessions (60 min each), yielding one audio recording (50 min), one video recording (50 min), and detailed field notes. These materials were reviewed in depth and interpreted intuitively to capture mothers’ reflections, challenges, and strategies, with emphasis on patterns of interaction and collaborative problem-solving.

Finally, responses from the end-of-intervention evaluation questionnaire were summarized descriptively for closed-ended items and examined qualitatively for open-ended comments, highlighting themes of satisfaction, requests for more sessions, and perceived benefits for children’s language development.

In keeping with the exploratory nature of the study, the analysis drew on an interpretive and intuitive approach (Patton, 2015; van Manen, 1990; Braun and Clarke, 2006; Creswell and Poth, 2018), where researcher sensitivity and reflection were central to identifying meaningful patterns across the data rather than applying a strictly mechanical or frequency-based coding system.

2.5 Ethical issues

This study adhered to the established ethical principles and relevant guidance at the federal, state and local levels for research with school-aged children. Informed consent was obtained from families, ensuring they understood the study objectives, procedures, and right to withdraw at any time. Safeguards were implemented to protect the children, including confidentiality through data anonymization and secure data storage. Cultural and linguistic diversity were carefully considered to ensure interventions were appropriate and respectful. Furthermore, collaboration between families and the SB-SLP fostered an equitable exchange of knowledge. The study was reviewed and approved by the Bioethics Committee of the University of Barcelona (IRB 00003099). Local IRB approval was not required, as the study followed established guidance for minimal-risk observational and parent-intervention research in schools.

3 Results

Overall, the results obtained through the analysis of the RBIs and workshops reflected the mothers’ concerns regarding their children’s development, focusing on three key aspects: social behavior, communication skills, and the need for support. In the RBIs, the mothers highlighted difficulties, such as aggression, isolation, and limited social interaction, as well as language and comprehension problems. The collaborative process helped reveal improvements in children’s communication and emotional self-awareness, according to EVALOF scores. Furthermore, the mothers deemed the workshops and meetings valuable, noting that these encounters allowed them to reflect on their practices and introduce strategies into their daily routines to strengthen communication with their children. Although the mothers faced challenges, they were able to integrate strategies, such as sentence expansion and the use of everyday interactions, highlighting the importance of personalized and continuous support to promote children’s language development and socialization.

The results are presented in relation to the two research questions: first, the analysis of family routines, concerns, and mother-child interactions (RQ1) and second the trends in family communication practices and outcomes of the collaborative intervention (RQ2).

3.1 Family routines, concerns, and interactions (RQ1)

This subsection addresses Research Question 1 by examining mother’s concerns and interactions patterns, as identified through the RBIs and the EVALOF, highlighting both the strategies already in use and the areas that required strengthening.

Table 5 shows the results obtained from the analysis of the RBI transcripts using the developed coding system. This approach allowed for the identification of mothers’ concerns and perceptions about their children’s behavior and communication characteristics. It highlighted observations related to each child’s family, school, and social context, as well as specific comments from the mothers regarding their daily needs and challenges.

TABLE 5

Table 5. Results related to the routines-based interviews.

The results presented in Table 5 highlight that families were primarily concerned about three aspects of their children’s development: social behavior, communication difficulties, and the need for external support. Regarding social behavior, mothers were concerned about aggression, isolation, and lack of interaction with other children. Regarding communication skills, concerns centered around limited language, unclear speech, and difficulties understanding tasks. Finally, mothers expressed a need for more resources and support to help their children, especially regarding behavior management and improved communication, pointing to a search for strategies both at home and school to address these challenges.

Within the framework of our study, the cases of EB and KS were analyzed in depth; they were selected based on the vulnerability of their families in relation to language and communication difficulties, as determined through a combination of mothers’ use of the EVALOF at home, clinical assessments, teacher reports, observational measures, and the RBI. Both children faced significant barriers that affected their social, emotional, and academic interactions, raising concerns among families and teachers. Collaboration between families and professionals involved informal, day-day exchanges, including conversation about the children’s progress, sharing observations from home and school, and jointly considering strategies to support their language development. (Domeniconi et al., 2025a)

3.1.1 Initial worries and concerns of A5’s mother

A5’s mother was concerned that her son had difficulty speaking and became frustrated when he was not understood. As she explained, “Solo se expresa usando se expresa usando una sola palabra y muchas veces no se le entiende”(“He only expresses himself using single words, and often he cannot be understood”). She added, “Cuando le pregunto que quiere, si yo no le entiendo se enoja y se pone a llorar” (“When I ask him what he wants, if I do not understand him, he gets angry and starts to cry”). This frustration at times led him to react by crying or behaving aggressively, especially when he was not given a turn during play. She also noted, “no le gusta compartir sus juguetes ni nada de sus cosas, ni siquiera con su hermano. Yo trato de animarlo a que juegue juegos de mesa con su hermano pero a EB no le gusta tomar turnos” (“He does not like to share his toys or belongings, not even with his brother. I try to encourage him to play board games with his brother, but A5 does not like taking turns”). She also felt uncomfortable in social situations, fearing that her friends would think she could not control her son. Her hope was for A5 to improve his communication skills, learn to better manage his behavior during play, and be able to interact with other children more easily and naturally. This highlights the importance of strategies that would strengthen his language and social skills both at home and at school.

3.1.2 Initial worries and concerns of A10’s mother

A10’s mother was concerned about his communication difficulties and reactions when frustrated. She explained, “A10 habla claro pero no en oraciones completas, él no puede controlar su cuerpo, le da mucha dificultad cambiar de actividades” (“A10 speaks clearly but not in complete sentences; he cannot control his body and has great difficulty changing activities”). She also noted, “A A10 no se le puede decir no porque se pone muy enojado y patea, tira las cosas y él tambien se tira al piso” (“He cannot be told ‘no’ without getting very angry and kicking or throwing things, and he sometimes throws himself to the floor”). She further observed, “No sigue la rutina del juego y no dura mucho tiempo en un juego con otros niños porque no le gusta compartir” (“He does not follow the play routine and does not stay long in games with other children because he does not like to share”). These difficulties sometimes led him to kicke others, thro w objects, or thro w himself to the floor, which worried her. She was also concerned that only she and her husband could manage the situation, making her feel uncomfortable in social settings. At school, the teacher has had to remove toys from the classroom to avoid incidents, highlighting the need to adapt the environment to his needs. Despite these challenges, the family enjoyed spending time together at home and in small parks, where they could better supervise him and create environments in which A10 felt safer and more regulated.

3.2 The trends in family communication practices and outcomes of the collaborative intervention (RQ2)

This subsection examines Research Question 2 by presenting changes in family communication practices, documented with the EVALOF over the intervention period, as well as mother’s perceptions of the collaborative workshops and their impact on children’s oral communication competence.

The trends observed in Tables 6, 7 provide an overview of changes in family communication practices over the 4 month period (February–June 2022). Because of the small sample size (10 mothers and 10 children) and the exploratory design, statistical tests were not performed. Nevertheless, clear qualitative trends emerged. Adults showed greater responsiveness to children’s communicative initiatives, included children more often in conversations, and extended topics to sustain interactions. They also clarified children’s messages and encouraged them to self-assess their communication skills. Modest improvements were seen in fostering children’s emotional awareness, recognizing others’ feelings, and verbalizing emotions. The largest gains occurred in supporting children’s self-assessment and emotional expression, suggesting notable growth in these areas. At the individual level, both A5 and A10 demonstrated progress, particularly in self-assessment and emotional expression. Overall, these results indicate meaningful improvements in family communication practices, while highlighting the need for larger studies to confirm these patterns statistically.

TABLE 6

Table 6. Average EVALOF scores for the initial and final assessments of the collaborative process of the 10 mothers.

TABLE 7

Table 7. Progress of EVALOF scores for A5 and A10 and for their families between February and June 2022.

3.3 Interactions between mothers and their children

The results shown in Table 6 reveal the evolution of interactions in the family context from the perspective of all participating mothers. Some items show an increase, whereas three items (1, 9, and 10) show a slight decrease. Items 4, 7, 11, 13, and 14 show the greatest increase after the intervention process with the mothers was completed. The largest gains were particularly evident in items 11,13, and 14, which related to teaching children to self-assess communication skills, recognize emotions, and use words to express their own feelings. For example, A5’s score on item 11 increased from 0 to 2 and A10’s from 1 to 3, while A5’s score on item 14 increased from 1 to 2 and KS’s from 2 to 3, demonstrating considerable improvements. Items 7,9, and 10 suggested areas that may require further attention, such as aspects of the physical environment and positive assessment of children’s communication. Overall, these findings indicate that the training program had a positive measurable impact on parent-child interactions while also identifying specific areas for continued support in fostering oral language.

According to the scores in Table 7, A5’s family shows mostly stable or slightly increasing scores, indicating consistent progress. For example, scores improved for most questions (for instance, from 0 to 2 for Questions 11 and 13). By contrast, A10’s family shows more gradual progress, with a notable improvement for Question 11, but with less variation in other areas. This suggests that the strategies of A10’s family improved slowly, but with meaningful gains in certain areas.

3.4 Mothers’ perceptions of the impact of collaborative work and their children’s Oral competence

The final assessment questionnaire, completed by the 10 mothers at the end of the training process, gathered perceptions of the usefulness and relevance of collaborative workshops and communications, as well as the impact on their children’s oral skills development. The questions explored topics such as individual and group reflection, changes observed in the children, and their assessment of the activities performed during the course.

C omments such as “It really helped me understand how to help my child” highlight the value of the training process. Additionally, once a month was suggested as an appropriate frequency for meetings.*¹ The average rating for EVALOF and the training process was 8/10, indicating a positive perception among mothers. This score reflects an overall favorable assessment of the training, although it suggests possible areas for improvement to further optimize the training experience.*² The response to Question 21 reflects mothers’ satisfaction with the program and its impact on their children’s development, as expressed in statements such as “Thank you for your advice and tools that helped us improve.”*³

Quantitative ratings also reflected a positive overall assessment. Responses showed that 55.31% of mothers strongly agreed, 44. 07% agreed, and only 0.62% remained indifferent about the effectiveness of the collaborative approach. These results underscore mother’s recognition of the workshops as valuable spaces for reflection, for strengthening their children’s oral competence, and for enriching family-school collaboration. The detailed breakdown of responses is provided in Supplementary material (Table 8).

TABLE 8

Table 8. Results of the final assessment questionnaire completed by the mothers.

3.5 Workshops to promote reflection regarding the identification of difficulties in children’s oral communication

The workshops with mothers focused on offering evidence-based strategies to support the development of their children’s language and communication skills. The content was developed using Research Based Interventions (RBI) and grounded in established guidelines for family-centered practice (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHHS], 2020), as well as empirical research on parent-implemented interventions (Roberts and Kaiser, 2011; Cheng et al., 2023; Carson et al., 2024). The RBI framework guided the selection of topics, activities, and materials, ensuring that each session incorporated strategies proven to promote language development. Key topics included the role of mothers and fathers in intervention, developmental language milestones, and practical approaches to expand sentences, enrich vocabulary, and strengthen non-verbal and conversational communication.

Mothers’ perceptions of the challenges they faced, the strategies they implemented, and the outcomes observed in their children were systematically collected using the EVALOF. The most reported challenges included time constraints for practicing strategies at home (6 of 10 mothers), uncertainty about modeling complex language (4 of 10), difficulty maintaining child engagement (3 of 10), and lack of confidence in applying strategies correctly (2 of 10). To address these challenges, workshop facilitators provided guided demonstrations, role-playing exercises, reflections activities, and opportunities for peer discussion, all developed according to RBI principles. Mothers used EVALOF to document observations and reflect on their child’s progress. As a result, most mothers (8 of 10) reported increased confidence in applying the strategies, and 7 observed measurable improvements in their child’s expressive language, sentence complexity, or conversational turn-taking. Illustrative examples included children beginning to use multi-word sentences more spontaneously and showing greater responsiveness during story telling activities.

Overall, these findings suggest that a structured workshop, developed using RBI principles combined with the EVALOF tool, can effectively support parental engagement and children’s language development. These results align with previous research indicating that parent-implemented interventions improve expressive language outcomes when parents receive scaffolded guidance and instruments to monitor progress.

3.5.1 Challenges in implementing strategies

The mothers mentioned difficulties in integrating communication strategies, such as sentence expansion and vocabulary development, in daily routines, mainly owing to a lack of time or familiarity with their use. To overcome this issue, they adapted the strategies to daily routines, such as during mealtimes or playtime.

3.5.2 Strategies that have worked

The most effective strategies from the mothers’ perspective included sentence expansion, which benefited children with lower language levels, as well as the use of interactive games and everyday situations, which encouraged vocabulary enrichment and the construction of more complex sentences.

3.5.2.1 Perception of progress

The mothers noticed progress in their children’s language, although school assessments did not always match the progress observed at home. They attributed this discrepancy to differences in learning contexts and inconsistency of the strategies used.

3.5.2.2 Examples of successful strategies

The mothers shared that role-playing and the use of non-verbal and conversational language helped their children better participate in activities and conversations, while also improving emotional expression and social interaction.

3.5.2.3 Strategies to encourage social interaction

The mothers agreed on the importance of creating opportunities for socialization, such as inviting friends over or participating in group activities, and positively reinforcing their children’s social behaviors.

3.5.2.4 Proposals for improving the educational approach

The mothers suggested continuing a personalized approach for each child and encouraging parents to use strategies, especially those related to language development and vocabulary development, to reinforce interventions at home.

The workshops highlight how the mothers were able to overcome challenges by integrating communication strategies into daily life, adapting them to everyday situations, including play and family interactions. Strategies such as sentence expansion and the use of daily activities have been effective in improving their children’s language development. Although the progress observed at home did not always coincide with school assessments, the mothers perceived improvements, especially when the strategies were applied consistently. They also emphasized the importance of fostering socialization and suggested a personalized approach and further training to continue strengthening language development at home.

4 Discussion

The discussion is organized in relation to the two research questions: first, the analysis of mothers’ routines, concerns, and interaction patterns (RQ1); and second, the outcomes of the collaborative intervention and mothers’ perceptions of its impact (RQ2).

4.1 Family routines, concerns, and mother-child interactions (RQ1)

Domeniconi et al. (2025a) demonstrated that brief interventions with low-income families can effectively support children’s communicative development. As in the present study, the topics proposed by parents during individual sessions revealed common strategies and themes, which were then used to design a structured group intervention tailored to the actual needs of the participating families. The results obtained, linked to the RBI, allowed for the identification of the children’s initial behavior, which was characterized by intense displays of anger and aggression. This suggests difficulties in regulating emotions, which correlate with the low ratings assigned by mothers to Question 13 of the EVALOF tool. These problems could be affecting children’s social interactions and emotional development, as well as their ability to socialize during play, which is consistent with previous evidence linking parent-child interaction patterns and emotional regulation to children’s developmental outcomes (Dunst et al., 2011; Mahoney and Wheeden, 2014).

In this sense, EVALOF allows family dynamics to be observed and evaluated in their everyday context, without external interference, and also encourages self-reflection within the family environment. When used as an initial screening tool, it offers a rapid way to identify communication patterns in different families in a short period of time (Domeniconi et al., 2017). This finding highlights the importance of incorporating aspects related to emotional regulation in the design of workshops, with the additional goal of improving children’s oral expression. According to Campos Balog et al. (2022), the use of adapted practical models, such as the routines-based model, is especially effective in addressing these difficulties, particularly in diverse family and cultural contexts.

The routines-based model has been successfully implemented across various countries, demonstrating adaptability to diverse cultural and service contexts (McWilliam et al., 2020a), which provides a useful foundation for understanding the following family observations. From the initial assessment, communication challenges were evident, as mentioned by mothers in the RBIs (McWilliam et al., 2020b). Difficulties were identified in areas such as sharing, participating in collaborative play, and maintaining meaningful verbal interactions, underscoring the complexity of the social and communication skills these children require. These findings reinforce the need for targeted interventions in natural settings to improve these interactions and provide evidence of the effectiveness of collaborative intervention in bilingual settings, a relatively unexplored area in research.

These results also reflect a sociocultural-ecological view of development, in which children’s learning is supported through everyday interactions within their immediate environments. Mothers served as mediators of communication and provided scaffolding through modeling, sentence expansion, and responsive feedback helping their children participate more actively in shared routines. Through play and daily activities, families created natural contexts that nurtured both emotional and linguistic growth. This process of co-constructing meaning is consistent with sociocultural perspectives on learning and complements Gràcia and Sánchez-Cano (2022) findings on discourse and interaction management as central components of oral communicative competence (OCC). By linking their children’s emotional regulation to communication routines, mothers became active collaborators in the intervention, demonstrating the value of reflective and collaborative work with families.

In sum, these outcomes correspond to Research Question 1 by showing that families face intertwined social, emotional, and communicative challenges, highlighting the importance of culturally contextualized and family-driven approaches as a foundation for intervention (McConkey et al., 2020).

4.2 Trends in family communication practices and outcomes of the collaborative intervention

The mothers’ requests for help during the workshops reflected a genuine interest in contributing to their children’s development, as well as a need for guidance in addressing specific challenges within the family environment. This commitment highlights the importance of involving families in intervention programs, recognizing their fundamental role in children’s progress. In this sense, Domeniconi et al. (2025a) suggested that future studies could consider additional aspects, such as the emotional wellbeing of the parents and quality of family interactions, which are likely influenced by interventions such as the one in our study. As García Sánchez (2020) suggested, parents must adapt to challenges and take advantage of contextualized learning opportunities to become active agents in their children’s development. We expanded on these findings by providing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of workshops in improving parental self-awareness and the quality of communicative interactions.

Regarding the evaluation of the initial assessments of children on the BESA scale, we observed a notable variation, with scores ranging from 65 to 95. This range underscores the need for personalized analysis to better elucidate each child’s specific functional needs. Fitton et al. (2019) suggested that assessments should address the characteristics of children in bilingual contexts in great detail, which can help refine both the diagnosis and necessary interventions. Our results reinforced the importance of adapting assessment tools for diverse populations and highlighting the relevance of family context in the intervention process.

The collaborative sessions provided a setting for shared reflection and joint adaptation between the mothers and the SB-SLP, consistent with participatory and collaborative design principles (McWilliam and Garcia-Grau, 2019; Verger A. et al., 2021). This process enabled mothers to recognize their bilingual practices as resources, resonating with Li (2023) and Simon-Cereijido (2022), who advocate for interventions that treat bilingualism as an asset rather than a limitation. The mother’s reflections demonstrated how language alternation with everyday interactions supported both linguistic and emotional expression aligning with translingual perspectives (Robinson K. et al., 2020). Throughout the collaborative reflection process, our results indicated improvements in the skills of mothers and children, generating a positive effect on oral language development. This aligns with previous research showing that parent-implemented interventions, when embedded in everyday routines, can produce significant gains in children’s communication skills (Girolametto et al., 2004; Dunst et al., 2011). The close collaboration between the investigator (SB-SLP) and the mothers was crucial for sustain ing the children’s progress over time. However, we observed variations among mothers in the EVALOF scores at the end of the workshops. These differences can be explained by various factors, including adverse situations in some families or a lack of understanding of the context after the initial informational meeting. Domeniconi et al. (2025b) emphasized the importance of understanding both the potential and limitations of brief interventions, as their simplicity and scientific backing facilitate their application in schools and public settings to support families and promote children’s language development. Similar to the studies by Vázquez de Prada Belascoaín (2015) and Domeniconi et al. (2025b), these variations in our results can be attributed to contextual and personal factors. Thus, flexible and personalized strategies must be designed in future interventions.

Reflection on measures of oral competence:

The EVALOF served as the primary tool for monitoring changes in family communication practices and children’s expressive language, while the BESA provided baseline information on bilingual language performance. Together, these instruments offered complementary insights into the expressive and receptive abilities, particularly in areas such as vocabulary, sentence complexity, and turn-taking. However, they were less sensitive to pragmatic aspects of oral communicative competence (OCC), such as topic maintenance, conversational repair, or emotional prosody (Gràcia et al., 2020). This limitation highlights the need for complementary qualitative analyses, such as interactional coding to examine scaffolding processes in mother-child exchanges, conversational discourse analysis to explore pragmatic aspects like topic maintenance and repair, and thematic analysis of caregiver’s reflections to understand how families conceptualize and adapt communication strategies in their daily routines.

Reflection on outcomes measures:

The outcome measures captured meaningful improvements in parental responsiveness and children’s communicative self-awareness. Nonetheless, contextual factors such as economic stress or limited time to practice strategies affected consistency across families. This confirms (Domeniconi et al., 2025b) assertion that the effectiveness of brief interventions depends on flexibility and contextual alignment. Overall, the findings demonstrate that collaborative, mother-child driven interventions can generate measurable change in oral competence while emphasizing the importance of emotional and ecological dimensions in language development.

In conclusion, this finding aligns with Research Question 2 by demonstrating that collaborative, mother-driven workshops can strengthen family communication practices and parental empowerment, while also pointing to the need for more flexible and personalized strategies in diverse contexts.

4.3 Study limitations and recommendations

Some limitations should be considered in the interpretation of our findings. Although this study provides valuable insights into parent-child interactions and collaborative intervention, several limitations should be noted. The sample was small, involving only 10 mother-child dyads, and therefore the finding should be interpreted with caution and cannot be generalized beyond this group. Future studies should expand to include larger and more diverse samples, incorporating fathers, other caregivers, and families from different socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. The absence of a control group also restricts the ability to attribute observed improvements solely on intervention. Although the study included both children with DLD and ASD, the primary focus was on strategies to strengthen oral communicative competence in bilingual children with DLD. The participation of children with ASD provided additional perspectives, but their distinct profiles should be taken into account when generalizing the findings. Incorporating comparison groups in future research would strengthen causal inferences.

In addition, the reliance on parent-reported data may have introduced subjective bias; therefore, future research should integrate parent perspectives with naturalistic and observational approaches to strengthen validity. Standardized assessments, while informative in some contexts, may overlook the pragmatic and cultural dimensions of oral communicative competence in bilingual populations. Longitudinal follow-up and the inclusion of teachers and fathers (not only mothers) in future collaborative frameworks could further enhance ecological representativeness (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Contextual factors may also have influenced outcomes. Some mothers’ lack of full understanding of the study context after the informational meeting such as the purpose and procedures of the training could have affected their active participation. This partial understanding might be explained by the fact that certain concepts introduced in the sessions were relatively distant from their prior knowledge or beliefs about language development and their educational role as mothers. For several participants, this was their first exposure to structured strategies for fostering oral communication at home, which may have made it difficult to relate the proposed activities to their everyday practices. Furthermore, adverse circumstances in some families, including financial difficulties or stress, may have limited the effectiveness of the training. Tailoring interventions more closely to the specific needs and experiences of each family could enhance the impact.

This study also underscores the importance of professionals understanding family dynamics, with interventions addressing both children’s language development and parent emotional wellbeing. Future research should examine collaborative strategies across diverse contexts, assess the long-term impact of such interventions on children’s communicative competence, and evaluate the sustainability of family-centered practices over time.

Despite these limitations, the findings provide meaningful insights into how small-scale, collaborative work with families can support children’s oral language development and strengthen parent-child interactions. The next step should involve developing culturally responsive, family–school–community models that integrate home and school collaboration, enabling sustainable improvement in OCC among bilingual children from diverse backgrounds, in line with recent work in Spanish-speaking contexts that foregrounds family–professional partnerships (Castillo Mardones and Gràcia, 2022; McConkey et al., 2020).

5 Conclusion

Our findings reinforce the need for continued research and collaborative work with families in implementing culturally contextualized strategies that facilitate sustainable oral language development in children. This comprehensive approach, which accounts for the particular realities and needs of families in vulnerable situations, not only contributes to improving children’s language skills but also promotes maternal empowerment and wellbeing, which are key elements for the success of any intervention for language disorders. Furthermore, our findings suggest the need to continue exploring intervention models based on collaboration between families and professionals, as well as to expand research in bilingual contexts to strengthen oral language development in children with DLD.

In addition, the workshops demonstrate that practical strategies such as sentence expansion, vocabulary enrichment, during daily routines, and the use of conversational and non-verbal language can be effectively integrated into family life. These strategies not only supported children’s expressive abilities and participation but also fostered maternal confidence and opportunities for peer learning. While some challenges were reported, including limited time for practice and differences between school and home assessments, mothers valued the workshops as reflective spaces that allowed them to adapt strategies to their own realities. Future research should build on these findings by exploring the long-term effects of such parent-driven, collaborative models in larger and more diverse bilingual populations.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article are not publicly available because they include information from minor participants. Data may be shared upon reasonable request to the corresponding author, subject to parental consent and institutional ethical approval.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by the Bioethics Committee University of Barcelona. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin.

Author contributions

DG: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MG: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Resources, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. AA-A: Validation, Resources, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This article’s publication fee was supported by the University of Barcelona. This work was funded by the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Project “Teacher Development to Improve the Oral Competence of High School and University Students in a Digital Environment” (PID2022-136905OB-C21).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The authors declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHHA] (2020). Family-Centered Practice for Speech-Language Pathology. Rockville, MA: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.