Editorial: Speech perception and language development in individuals with special educational needs

Editorial on the Research Topic
Speech perception and language development in individuals with special educational needs

Introduction

Individuals with special educational needs (SEN), including hearing impairment, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), intellectual disabilities, specific learning difficulties, and developmental language disorder (DLD), often face distinct challenges in speech processing and language development. These challenges may reflect reduced access to clear sensory input, differences in attention and learning, and difficulties integrating linguistic and social cues in real time. When such barriers recur across school, clinic, and home settings, everyday communication becomes less frequent and less effective, limiting opportunities for practice and learning. Consequently, communication difficulties in SEN can impede academic progress, social participation, and emotional wellbeing, particularly when demands are high and support is inconsistent.

This Research Topic, Speech Perception and Language Development in Individuals with Special Educational Needs, was conceived to provide a collaborative forum for researchers, educators, and clinicians to share advances spanning theoretical frameworks, assessment and diagnosis, intervention and educational supports, technology-enabled practice, and cultural and linguistic considerations. Across the nine accepted articles, a consistent message emerges: outcomes in SEN are shaped by interactions among sensory access, cognitive-linguistic processes, learning environments, and the quality and availability of supports across home, school, and clinical settings. Importantly, these contributions highlight that progress depends not only on individual capacities, but also on partner behaviors, instructional design, organizational capacity, and the accessibility of resources that enable participation. Collectively, these articles move beyond deficit-only accounts toward practical, context-sensitive approaches to assessment and support that promote inclusion, communication, and sustained engagement.

Communication environments and augmentative and alternative communication (AAC): participation depends on partners and settings

Egeland-Eriksen et al. highlight that effective AAC implementation is enabled by communication-partner knowledge and skills, consistent modeling, accessible materials and aids, supportive attitudes, and organizational conditions that sustain practice. Their findings reinforce that AAC success is not solely determined by an individual's profile; rather, it is co-constructed through everyday opportunities, routines, and shared responsibility across educational teams.

Telehealth delivery in speech-language services: assessment validity, rapport, and parent-mediated implementation

As telehealth expands, Du et al. foreground tele-assessment validity, showing that remote administration can shift parent-child interaction dynamics with implications for fidelity and performance. Building from measurement to service delivery, Hao et al. emphasize rapport as a key facilitator of engagement and learning in tele-practice, while noting barriers such as technology constraints, sensory/attention challenges, and the need for effective caregiver coordination. Together, these studies argue that telehealth effectiveness and equity depend not only on platforms, but on rigorous attention to validity, teachable interactional strategies, and clear caregiver guidance, especially when remote modalities are used to broaden access for diverse and bilingual families.

Structural language and narrative discourse: refining educational planning for ASD and DLD

Two articles address language profiles using complementary levels of analysis. Andreou et al. compare core structural domains (e.g., phonology, morphosyntax and vocabulary), contributing to differential profiling relevant to assessment and intervention planning. Andreou and Lemoni focuses on narrative macrostructure (story structure, complexity, and internal state terms), emphasizing discourse-level skills that are highly relevant to classroom learning and social communication. Together, the two studies highlight the value of pairing standardized assessments with functional language tasks to provide a more complete picture of individuals' strengths, needs, and real-world communication demands.

Pragmatics in syndromic populations: toward ecologically valid profiling

Moraleda Sepulveda et al. compare pragmatic competence between individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) and 22q11.2 duplication syndrome (22q11.2DupS) using naturalistic conversational sampling combined with a pragmatic profiling approach. By foregrounding real-world interaction, this work supports assessment strategies that are clinically meaningful and sensitive to within-syndrome heterogeneity, which is an important step for individualized supports that target functional communication and participation.

Family wellbeing in hearing-loss comorbidity: broadening outcome targets

Alkahtani et al. examined maternal quality of life in families of children with Down syndrome, including those with and without hearing loss. By centering caregiver wellbeing within the context of hearing-loss comorbidity, the study reframes SEN outcomes as fundamentally family-centered, not child-only. From an editorial perspective, it highlights a broader message: addressing hearing-loss comorbidities should be viewed not as an optional add-on, but as a pathway to strengthening participation, sustaining engagement with services, and supporting the relational and social ecology in which development unfolds.

Educational underachievement and contextual determinants: integrating learning conditions with communication

Assogba et al. highlight multi-level predictors of academic difficulties, including cognitive measures, nutritional diversity, household/structural resources, distance to school, and absenteeism. This contribution is a timely reminder that language and learning trajectories are embedded within broader ecological conditions. Designing interventions for SEN populations requires coordination across educational, health, and community systems, particularly in resource-variable contexts.

Early literacy and dyslexia: addressing heterogeneity beyond single-path approaches

Finally, McMurray et al. challenge strictly phoneme-to-grapheme-only approaches for learners showing severe phonological and orthographic difficulties, and highlight the need for broader strategy repertoires. This article reinforces a cross-cutting theme of the Research Topic: SEN populations are heterogeneous, and effective educational responses often require flexible, multi-component approaches tailored to learner profiles and contexts.

Conclusions

Collectively, these nine articles advance understanding of SEN by connecting mechanisms (e.g., speech, language, and related processing) with functional outcomes (e.g., participation and learning) and real-world implementation (e.g., schools, families, telehealth, and community contexts). Across the Topic, several shared priorities emerge: assessment approaches that are ecologically valid and sensitive to within-group heterogeneity; interventions that explicitly incorporate partner training, environmental design, and sustained organizational support; and technology-enabled practice evaluated not only for effectiveness but also through an equity and implementation lens, with careful attention to validity when service delivery shifts to remote modalities. Future work is expected to broaden cross-linguistic and cross-cultural perspectives. It may also adopt integrated measures that link structural language, pragmatics, and participation. In addition, interventions need to be tested over time to understand how supports operate and build across home, school, and clinical settings. With rigorous research and clear pathways to practice, the field may strengthen learning environments and support improved long-term outcomes for individuals with SEN.

Author contributions

ML: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. YC: Writing – review & editing. XQ: Writing – review & editing.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work 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 author(s) declared that generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. ChatGPT (OpenAI; model: GPT-5.2) was used exclusively for language editing (grammar, clarity, and style). The tool did not generate any new scientific content, data, results, interpretations, or references. The author(s) reviewed and verified all AI-assisted text and take full responsibility for the final 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.