ARTICLES

 

Analysis of prospective teachers' opinions on linguistic communication competence: A comparative view

 

 

Antonio Luque de la Rosa^I; Rafaela Gutiérrez Cáceres^I; Inmaculada García Martínez^II; Alejandro Vargas Serrano^III

^IDepartment of Education, University of Almería, Almería, Spain rcaceres@ual.es
^IIDepartment of Didactics and School Organization, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
^IIIDepartment of Education, University of Almería, Almería, Spain

 

 

---

ABSTRACT

In recent decades we have witnessed the progressive implementation of a culture of inclusion making it is essential to provide teachers with training in generic and specific competencies, being the reinforcement of attitudes and views regarding attention to diversity that will be fundamental to ensure the effective implementation of this educational model. Although the study of teachers' views regarding inclusive education has been the subject of much research, we did not find an extensive wide repertoire concerning the opinions of university students on educative attention to specific educational support needs centred in the field of competence in linguistic communication. Thus, with this study we aimed to analyse the opinions of trainee teachers on the development of this key competence in primary education and their training at university. For this, 2 university realities in different international contexts were compared through a mixed descriptive categorical analysis. The main conclusions are that, although there is a consensus about the importance of developing linguistic communication competence, there are considerable differences between the 2 contexts in terms of attention to diversity, teacher education and training, and the provision of resources for its promotion in the classroom.

Keywords: attention to diversity; basic competencies; initial training; linguistic communication; teaching attitude

---

 

 

Introduction

The socialisation process shapes the attitudes of future teachers throughout their lives. Moreover, it is significantly affected by the specific experiences and knowledge they acquire during their initial and in-service training stages (González Petisco, 2024). On the other hand, educational attention to learners to enhance their competence in linguistic communication (hereinafter CLC) and attention to the diversity of specific needs they present in this area is a clear demand in current educational systems (García-Martínez, Sierra-Arizmendiarrieta, Quijano-López & Pérez-Ferra, 2020; Hatipoğlu & Daşkın, 2020).

This is why training in inclusive attitudes and training for the promotion of CLC in future teachers is necessary to facilitate access to knowledge of the needs and limitations in the development of this competence and collaboration with other professional specialists who will share this task in the school environment (Liesa & Vived, 2009; Romero Oliva & Córdoba, 2024).

It is worth noting that, although at a socio-educational or even political level, few people disagree on the importance of inclusive attitudes in teachers to ensure the legislative project, universities make few efforts to promote these attitudes, which is why all education sectors must reflect and debate to promote them among all trainee or practising teachers (Engelbrecht, Nel, Nel & Tlale, 2015; Liesa & Vived, 2009; Yaraya, Masalimova, Vasbieva & Grudtsina, 2018).

Literature Review

Over time, mechanisms have been implemented in Europe that facilitate access to university for all types of students, establishing strategies and resources that bring the educational community closer to a concept of "education for all." Thus, at present, in European and international universities, a variety of actions are carried out that favour advisory and support mechanisms for the university community that promote the importance of developing an inclusive ideology in this context (Konur, 2006).

In this sense, and delving into the specific training qualifications of teaching staff, and their training for attending to the specific needs related to the development of the CLC, a comparative look at the current situation in different countries regarding the initial training for meeting these educational needs, we see that, although most universities offer the new degrees in education adapted to Bologna, there is considerable variance in terms of degrees and specialties that work on this subject in each country, the importance given to them in the training curricula, as well as the different professional profiles that work in the centres (Medina Crespo & Valdés Rodríguez, 2019; Pérez Ferra, Quijano López & García Martínez, 2019).

To this situation must be added that of veteran professionals from previous curricula, since their qualifications will continue to be valid for teaching. This further diversifies the perspectives and training needed in the socio-professional context to develop communication competence in learners in their basic training (Gràcia, Jarque, Astals & Rouaz, 2020).

In this sense, the diversity of situations, demands and perspectives in this implementation of training attention to diversity at a university level, as well as in the training and attitudes of future educational professionals in the development and attention to CLC is remarkable, which is why we propose to compare the opinions of these students in two different contexts - Italy, which stands out for its integrationist character in ordinary schools in Europe in the 1980s, which boosted university inclusion at the end of the 20th century, and Ecuador, which is currently developing an integrationist policy in the university environment that reflects the educational evolution in Central/South America.

The following summary reflects the training/professional situation in these countries on the subject under investigation.

Italy

As mentioned above, Italy is recognised throughout Europe for its integrationist and inclusive social and educational policies. Said inclusive social policies were introduced across the board from the mid-1970s onwards, particularly since the enactment of Law No. 517 of 4 August 1977.

Subsequently, following Law No. 104 of 5 February 1992 - amended in Law 17/1999 -attention to people with disabilities is consolidated at all levels of education, including university (art. 12).

While inclusive postulates have been advancing at a theoretical level since the 1990s, at the same time, the regulatory development of this law has greatly strengthened the focus on special educational needs throughout the country's education system, denoting a maturity in egalitarian educational awareness that is ahead of the rest of Europe and which, in Spain, had slowed down until the beginning of the 21st century (De Mauro, 2004; Sciacca, Sciuto, Signorino, Venuto & Nicotra, 2008).

Thus, in the Italian context, this regulation reinforces the concept of the necessary educative attention in conditions of inclusion for all, without learning being hindered by difficulties or situations deriving from disability (Pavone, 2007), supporting the integral development of the person and the strengthening of communication and social relations in all learners (Law No. 104 of 5 February 1992).

However, this integration process in Italy is not without its critics, as it has to combine the theoretical development we have discussed with periods of economic crisis, scarce funding, and the need for greater coordination between administrations and social entities. It must also contend with inadequate training for teachers specialising in didactic support work as well as generalist teachers meeting all educational needs, including those related to CLC, et cetera (Tostado Díaz, 2019).

In this sense, one of the main obstacles to the inclusion of learners in the classroom and the attention to diversity is related to the attitude and thinking of the teachers themselves, and the rest of the educational community, about the viability and convenience of inclusion, which is seen as a key factor in guaranteeing the success of inclusive processes and individualised attention (Jarvis & French, 1990).

Thus, after this historical basis for promoting inclusivity, combined with the systemic and training obstacles that accompany Western economic systems within the European Union (Rychen & Salganik, 2006), the need arose to establish a set of key competencies that provide a new perspective to training curricula and respond to the demands of new technologies, job requirements and the need to conceive lifelong learning competencies in Europe.

Within this framework, and coinciding with the European policies of other Western countries, CLC in different languages also appears as a guarantee of equity and personal development, as it is responsible for fostering interaction, the construction of a global world, the experience of emotion through music or art, access to mathematical-digital language and the capacity for self-reflection, interpretation, representation and transmission of meanings and experiences (Romero Oliva & Córdoba, 2024).

Ecuador

Although the subject of language promotion in Ecuador is also the object of attention, as it could not be otherwise, the didactics of language and literature did not begin their development and empowerment until the nineteen eighties (Espinoza, Rivas, Lema, Reyes, Calvas & Velázquez, 2019). Prior to this it had been part of other disciplines of a more historical-discursive nature.

In the context of teacher training in Ecuador, training for the development of CLC was framed in two different components from the beginning, similar to the establishment of content in Spain at the end of the century: oral communication and written communication.

These components are structured into respective macro-skills and micro-skills of an operational nature (Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador, 2011, 2012). Most of the training effort has been focused on skills related to reading and writing, with the focus, assessment and specialist attention/training in oral communication development having been neglected to date (Reshetina Platonovna, 2019).

In recent years, the importance of enhancing oral communication in addition to written communication and the need for teachers to be trained in didactic skills to teach it in the classroom has begun to be recognised (Tinoco-Izquierdo, Tinoco-Cuenca & Carchi-Cuenca, 2018). In this sense, communicative competence is understood as a set of knowledge and skills used in the act of communication, covering key dimensions or sub-competencies such as the following (Avendaño & Desinano, 2009): encyclopaedic-cultural competence; discursive competence; textual competence; linguistic or grammatical competence; semantic competence; pragmatic or sociocultural competence; kinaesthetic competence; proxemic competence.

State of the art

Next we present the research collected for our study, grouped according to the categories in which the results are presented.

a) The need to work on CLC in the classroom: didactics and organisation. Regarding the need to work on CLC in the classroom, we find research that points out that there is still a misconception in the educational sphere that this competence is not susceptible to development and improvement (especially concerning the non-written dimension), not requiring the development of planned teaching interventions (Arias Cortés, 2017; Lennox, Westerveld & Garvis, 2017).

Classroom interaction promotes the development of CLC. Numerous studies confirm the advisability of teachers dedicating more time to learners' spontaneous communicative practices (dialogues or conversations) that complement the learning of more complex techniques, supporting the processes of active listening, comprehension and reasoning (Leite Méndez, Rivas Flores, Cortés González & Nuñez, 2012).

Moreover, there is no shortage of studies that stress the need to act on a set of factors that enhance CLC (psychomotor, emotional, socio-affective and cognitive), developing both the socialising and cognitive facets in all learners, for which the training of future teaching staff in this area is essential (González Petisco, 2024; Mendoza, 2012).

Thus, comprehensive actions should be developed that are not based on isolated skills training but through meaningful and functional actions that give meaning to competence development. However, it should also be noted that teacher training in this regard is currently scarce (Roddam & Skeat, 2010; Sánchez Castro, Pascual Sevillano & Fombona Cadavieco, 2023).

b) Attention to diversity in CLC. Studies such as the one developed by Salvador i Liern (2016) highlight the need to address diversity and promote specialised didactics for communicative work in the classroom, which is one of the main shortcomings of education today.

Concerning this aspect, we find research that highlights the role of CLC as a mechanism to compensate for inequalities, as well as a tool that must be used to ensure that the deficiencies of learners with less developed linguistic registers due to their social and family environment are compensated (Salvador i Liern, 2016). Several studies also show that school failure is largely the result of learners' difficulties in making good use of language and mastering CLC (Arias Cortés, 2017).

In terms of attention to diversity, different studies highlight the need for teacher training as a critical factor in making educational inclusion possible (Sánchez Bravo, Díaz Flores, Sanhueza Henríquez & Friz Carrillo, 2008). However, as Sánchez Bravo et al. (2008) point out, most university students, future teachers, contend that 92% of primary education teachers often do not have the required training to deal with learners with special educational needs.

c) Teacher training and professional profiles. Several researchers have contributed to the scant dedication to communicative competencies, especially oral competencies, in primary education teacher training (Núñez Delgado & Santamarina Sancho, 2014). This may be due to the tradition of greater academic prestige of the written language compared to the oral language, the abandonment of classical rhetoric, or the lack of a structured didactic theory for the work and programming of the corresponding activities.

Thus, teaching staff have been acquiring these teaching competencies in an unstructured and experiential way, focusing on their communication skills due to university curricula (González Argüello, Román Fernández & Usó Viciedo, 2017).

Not only is initial training important, but Horne and Timmons (2009) also emphasise the importance of ongoing training and professional development activities in line with the demands of the new inclusive education system and the European Union's competency-based approach.

In this sense, studies such as those conducted by Aguilar-Mediavilla, Valera-Pozo, Buil-Legaz, Guirado-Moreno and Adrover-Roig (2024) or Brinton, Fujiki and Powell (1997), reinforce the idea that the adequate development of CLC can only be achieved through adequate generalised teacher training combined with collaborative approaches with the family and through the support of specialised professionals, the role of these teachers (hearing and language teachers in Spain) being of vital importance when advising other educators and working on the most problematic aspects.

After this journey, a series of doubts arose that motivated our study - a desire to understand the opinions that university students from two different contexts have about the subject of which they are the object: the development of CLC in primary education, covering facets such as its curricular conception and classroom planning, attention to student diversity, and the training of future teachers in the subject.

 

Methodology

The specific objectives of our study were as follows:

• To investigate university students' opinions on the curricular planning and educational resources developed in schools related to the promotion of CLC.

• To determine the ideas expressed by future teachers about the attention to learner diversity in educational centres for the development of CLC.

• To analyse the views stated by the group of students on teacher education related to the development of CLC and specialised professional profiles.

• To explore the ideas and opinions of university students on educative attention to the promotion of CLC according to the variables, gender, age, and university origin.

Given the specific objective previously mentioned, we adopted an exploratory methodological approach where we developed a descriptive and comparative design, taking into account the need to carry out a study in and from the educational practice itself, given its complex and diverse nature, which is the object of study (Nastasi, Hitchcock, Gutierrez & Oshrin, 2022).

Sample

In accordance with the methodological design adopted in this study and the specific objectives previously set out, purposive sampling was used to select university students who voluntarily participated in the research.

A total of 316 students (83.90% [see Table 1]) enrolled for university degrees corresponding to the field of education sciences participated in this study: 171 from the University of Guayaquil (Ecuador) and 145 from the University of Bologna (Italy). The overall mean age was 21.83 years (SD: 4.89; Range: 18-51 years), with 90.80% of the participants aged between 18 and 26 years.

 

 

Data Collection and Analysis Procedure

A survey, one of the most widely used techniques in the field of social science research, was used for data collection (Goetz & LeCompte, 1998). Specifically, we administered a 40-item questionnaire to the sample of university students to determine their ideas and opinions on educative attention in the field of CLC. This data collection instrument makes it possible to collect detailed information from a group of participants using low material and human costs, which is sufficient to meet the objectives set by analysing the results obtained about the aspects of the study.

The questionnaire was developed in an ad-hoc way according to methodological criteria (Hernández-Sampieri & Torres, 2018). It has, in the first instance, undergone a validation process through the system of expert judgement, obtaining an inter-judge agreement of 97% on the relevance of each item for its application. Subsequently, to ensure the instrument's suitability for the object of study, a pilot study was carried out by administering the questionnaire to a group of students from other university contexts. Once this study was carried out, the final version of the questionnaire was obtained with an internal consistency index of over .65 (Cronbach's alpha value: .788). Finally, following the application of the method of two halves, the confidence in the instrument was estimated to be acceptable, with a value of .707 for the first part and .739 for the second part (Gliem & Gliem, 2003).

Concerning the data analysis and based on the theoretical framework, an assessment and classification of the items in the questionnaire was carried out, assigning them to the four categories of analysis or dimensions shown in Table 2. After performing the factor analysis using the principal components method with varimax rotation, the existence of these factors was corroborated, explaining 65.40% of the total variance (the elements show appropriate values), with values of between .53 and .83.

Likewise, the four response options for each questionnaire item were also assigned a numerical score. Thus, strongly disagree equals a score of 1, disagree equals a score of 2, agree equals a score of 3 and strongly agree equals a score of 4. Two categories of classification of the four levels of response were also established: a) rejection: which includes responses 1 (strongly disagree) and 2 (disagree); b) acceptance: which includes responses 3 (agree) and 4 (strongly agree).

Descriptive statistics were used as analysis techniques, including frequency distribution, percentage, means, and standard deviation. Furthermore, for the comparative analysis between the different groups according to the nominal variable considered, gender, age and university, non-parametric statistics were applied, given the nature of the elements in their ordinal sense (the Mann-Whitney U test and the Kruskal Wallis test).

 

Results

In this section we present the most relevant results of our study after administering the questionnaire (see Appendix A for the questionnaire items),

General Descriptive Analysis

In the general descriptive analysis, the overall mean score was 2.84, which refers to an acceptance that is close to the agreed response of future teachers regarding educative attention to the promotion and development of CLC (SD: 0.80).

Among the most outstanding items was Item 33, for which 57.9% of the participants indicated that they strongly agreed with the idea that specific subjects are developed encompassing objectives and contents related to the development of CLC. Likewise, for Item 8, 93% agreed that the support staff in the educational centres specialised in promoting CLC.

Similar results were found for Item 20 (We consider that CLC is developed in educational centres at the Primary Education stage), insofar as 90.8% of the participants accepted the proposed idea. Likewise, 55.5% of participants agreed with the content of Item 34 (When considering assessment in educational centres, techniques and instruments related to CLC are considered to be of interest, with aspects related to CLC appearing in the assessment criteria).

In contrast with students' favourable statements about CLC, 62% of participants rejected the idea that the attention to diversity of active teachers in schools was valued for facilitating the development of CLC in learners (Item 38). Similarly, 57.3% of the participants thought that attention to diversity, which is key to facilitating the development of CLC in pupils (Item 39), was not valued by families. It is also striking that only 42.8% thought that CLC required educational action that considers the diversity of learners when promoting its development (Item 40).

Category Analysis

In this sub-section we present the most relevant results of the analysis in terms of the assignment of the items in relation to the four relative categories of educative attention to the development of the CLC (see Table 3).

When considering the categories as a whole, it was found that the category, Curricular aspects in CLC, had the highest average rating (3.29), followed by the category, Educational resources in CLC, with an average of 2.98. It is significant that the ideas and opinions of the participants about curricular aspects in the development of CLC were favourable, especially in three items: Item 33, with a score of .53 (There are specific subjects that include objectives and content related to the development of the CLC); Item 20 with a score of 3.36 (We consider that CLC is developed in educational centres at the Primary Education stage); and Item 34 with a score of 3.30 (When considering assessment at educational centres, the techniques and instruments related to CLC are considered to be of interest and aspects related to CLC are included in the assessment criteria). In this sense, 93% of the participants agreed and strongly agreed that support staff specialised in the promotion of CLC in schools (Item 8).

However, the categories least valued by the participants were, Attention to diversity in CLC, and, Teacher training in CLC, with an average of 2.45 and 2.67, respectively. Notably, an average of 58.87% of the participants rejected the idea of attention to diversity in the CLC. In particular, Item 38 (Attention to diversity is valued by teachers at the educational centres to facilitate the development of CLC in learners), Item 39 (Attention to diversity is valued by families to facilitate the development of CLC in learners) and Item 40 (CLC requires educational action that considers the diversity of learners when promoting its development), with average scores of 2.32, 2.41 and 2.42 respectively. Similarly, only 49.0% were in favour of the idea of a university qualification directly related to the development of CLC (Item 28).

Comparative Analysis between Subgroups The most significant results of the comparative analysis of the data according to the different groups in terms of the variables, gender, age groups and university origin are presented in Table 4.

Regarding the relationship between gender and ideas, it can be noted that the opinions of female students were significantly more favourable in terms of educative attention to the development of CLC and, specifically, the category, "Educational resources in CLC", the most prominent items being the following (p < .05, Mann-Whitney U test):

• Item 8: Support staff specialised in the promotion of CLC is available in schools (M = 3.47; sig.ⁱ: .003);

• Item 19: The extracurricular activities in the centres, for animation and coexistence, promote CLC in the learners (M = 3.28; sig.: .039);

• Item 22: Mechanisms of family-school collaboration exist in the educational community to promote CLC in learners (M = 3.26; sig.: .018);

• Item 7: In schools, there are teachers specialised in the promotion of CLC (M = 2.64; sig.: .036).

In analysing the results according to age, the group of students younger than 21 years of age stood out as most in agreement with the category, "Attention to diversity in CLC" and especially regarding the following items (p < .05, Kruskal Wallis test):

• Item 30: A favourable attitude towards diversity in education on the part of the educational community members is fundamental to facilitate the development of CLC in learners (M = 2.77; sig.: .001);

• Item 40: CLC requires educational action that considers the diversity of learners when promoting its development (M = 2.57; sig.: .000);

• Item 39: Attention to diversity is valued by families to facilitate the development of CLC in learners (M = 2.54; sig.: .000);

• Item 38: Attention to diversity is valued by teachers at the educational centres to facilitate the development of CLC in learners (M = 2.42; sig.: .009).

In terms of the variable of university origin, we found significant differences between the participants' ideas and opinions on the educational performance related to the development of CLC, with the subjects from the Italian context standing out by expressing themselves favourably about the category, "Curricular aspects in CLC", and, specifically, as expressed in the following items (p < .05, Mann-Whitney U test):

• Item 18: We consider that the CLC is worked on in educational centres at the infant education stage? (M = 3.06; sig.: .029);

• Item 20: We consider that CLC is developed in educational centres at the primary education stage? (M = 3.46; sig.: .022);

• Item 34: When considering assessment in schools, techniques and instruments related to CLC are considered to be of interest, with aspects related to CLC appearing in the assessment criteria (M = 3.37; sig.: .025).

Likewise, Italian participants were more favourable compared to the Ecuadorian group on the following items corresponding to the category, "Attention to diversity in CLC" (p < .05, Mann-Whitney Utest):

• Item 3: In early childhood education centres, attention to diversity is facilitated to promote CLC among learners (M = 3.92; sig.: .000);

• Item 4: Primary schools facilitate attention to diversity to promote CLC among learners (M = 3.60; sig.: .000);

• Item 9: Adequate teacher training is essential to facilitate the development of CLC in learners (M = 3.34; sig.: .006);

• Item 17: The provision of personal resources to schools is essential to facilitate the development of CLC in learners (M = 3.27; sig.: .000).

 

Discussion and Conclusion

In conclusions we highlight the most significant results and their relationship with the theoretical framework through a discursive contrast with previous research:

Thus, we highlight that the group of university students valued the existence of CLC in the curriculum of the compulsory primary education period and the use of personal and material resources for its development.

The data are in line with the argument in studies such as the one conducted by Leite Méndez et al. (2012), confirming the convenience of teachers spending more time with learners to exercise communicative practices.

On the other hand, we found that the opinion about whether or not diversity was attended to in the centres was negative in the sense that it was not sufficiently addressed. Indeed, due to a shortage of personal and material resources the development of this competence was not valued by the teaching staff at the centres or by the families. However, this is in contrasts with the opinion of the future teachers surveyed, who considered such action necessary.

In this sense, studies such as the one by Salvador i Liern (2016) highlight the need to address diversity and promote specialised didactics for communicative work in the classroom, which is one of the main shortcomings of education today.

We can also point out that the students stated that no specific qualifications for the development of this competence existed. However, specialisation towards the profiles of support teacher or teacher for special educational needs exist at universities, including those related to linguistic-communicative development. This highlights the need and importance of promoting the training of future teachers for the proper promotion of CLC in learners.

Similar statements about the lack of emphasis on communicative competencies in compulsory primary education teacher training, especially oral competencies, were recorded in studies such as that by Núñez Delgado and Santamarina Sancho (2014).

In the same vein, we find statements in studies that appropriate CLC development could only be achieved through adequate generalised teacher training coupled with collaborative approaches with the family (Brinton et al., 1997).

Finally, in relation to gender, women were significantly more favourable towards the importance of providing the necessary educational attention to the development of CLC, particularly in the provision of personal and material resources.

In terms of age, the youngest age group (< 21 years) was the one that most strongly agreed with the need to promote attention to diversity in CLC.

Referring to the contrast between contexts/universities, it is statistically significant that the group of university students from the Italian context was more in favour of the need to establish a curriculum that facilitates the development of CLC, defending the existence of adequate attention to diversity when it comes to promoting this competence in pre- and primary schools in their country.

At the same time, this group of Italian students was more positive than the group of Ecuadorian students in supporting the necessary training for all teachers and providing personal and material resources in schools for their promotion.

In this sense, it is worth considering what has been said about the pioneering sense that Italian schools have developed in educational inclusion since the 1990s (De Mauro, 2004), implementing laws that greatly reinforced attention to special educational needs throughout the country's education system, denoting a maturity in egalitarian educational awareness that is ahead of the rest of Europe and which in Spain slowed down until the beginning of the 21st century (Sciacca et al., 2008).

With this regulation the concept of inclusion for all was reinforced in the Italian context (Pavone, 2007), focusing on integral development and strengthening communication and social relations for all learners (Law No. 104 of 5 February 1992).

Thus, at a general level, the main result and contribution of this study is that future teachers in both universities/countries were positive towards the development of CLC in learners in primary education. It defends the idea that in specific subjects in educational centres the objectives and contents related to the development of CLC were attended to and that support staff specialised in the communicative facet and its assessment.

Given that not all the needs and attention to diversity in this area were met, we may emphasise the importance of reinforcing teacher training in the promotion of CLC in learners and the commitment to attention to diversity - aspects in which the Italian context stands out in the European environment.

An analysis of the role of CLC and how training about adequate attention to diversity in the classroom in teacher training in other geographical contexts and on different continents could be possible lines of future studies.

 

Acknowledgement

This study was developed during two "José Castillejo" research stays abroad for young doctors of philosophy (PhDs) at the Università di Bologna, Italy (Ref: CAS14/00225, CAS15/00226). These stays were called and granted by the Secretary of State for education, vocational training and universities of Spain, within the state programme for the promotion of talent and its employability of the state plan for scientific and technical research and innovation, 2013-2016.

 

Authors' Contributions

AL de la R (conceptualisation; investigation; project administration; validation; writing - original draft; writing - review and editing). RGC (conceptualization; formal analysis; methodology; validation; writing - original draft; writing - review and editing). IGM (data curation, formal analysis; acquisition of funding; supervision; validation; writing - review and editing). AVS (data curation; formal analysis; resources; software; validation; writing - review and editing).

 

Notes

i. Asymptotic significance (bilateral test) of the Mann-Whitney U test.

ii. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution Licence.

 

References

Aguilar-Mediavilla E, Valera-Pozo M, Buil-Legaz L, Guirado-Moreno JL & Adrover-Roig D 2024. Eficacia de las prácticas inclusivas para compensar los resultados académicos de escolares con dificultades del lenguaje oral y escrito [Effectiveness of inclusive practices to compensate for the academic results of schoolchildren with oral and written language difficulties]. Revista de Logopedia, Foniatríay Audiología, 44(4):100500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rlfa.2024.100500        [ Links ]

Arias Cortés D 2017. Una puesta en escena: La oralidad como performance en la vida escolar [Staging orality: Speaking as performance in school life]. Cuadernos de Lingüística Hispánica, 30:17148186. https://doi.org/10.19053/0m053X.n30O.6193        [ Links ]

Avendaño F & Desinano N 2009. Didáctica de las ciencias del lenguaje [Didactics of language sciences]. Argentina: Homo Sapiens Ediciones.         [ Links ]

Brinton B, Fujiki M & Powell JM 1997. The ability of children with language impairment to manipulate topics in a structured task. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 28(1): 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.2801.03        [ Links ]

De Mauro T 2004. La cultura degli italiani [The culture of the Italians]. Roma: Laterza.         [ Links ]

Engelbrecht P, Nel M, Nel N & Tlale D 2015. Enacting understanding of inclusion in complex contexts: Classroom practices of South African teachers. South African Journal of Education, 35(3):Art. #1074, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v35n3a1074        [ Links ]

Espinoza EE, Rivas HI, Lema RA, Reyes GN, Calvas MG & Velázquez KM 2019. Formación de competencias comunicativas. Carrera de educación básica. UTMach. Ecuador [Formation of telling competencies. Race of basic education. Utmach]. Revista Espacios, 40(41). Available at https://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n41/a19v40n41p21.pdf. Accessed 8 February 2025.         [ Links ]

García-Martínez I, Sierra-Arizmendiarrieta B, Quijano-López R & Pérez-Ferra M 2020. La competencia comunicativa en estudiantes de los grados de Maestro: Una revisión sistemática [Communicative competence among students' teacher degrees: A systematic review]. Publicaciones, 50(3):19-36. https://doi.org/10.30827/publicaciones.v50i3.15744        [ Links ]

Gliem JA & Gliem RR 2003. Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Paper presented at the Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, Columbus, OH, 8-10 October. Available at https://scholarworks.indianapolis.iu.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/976cec6a-914f-4e49-84b2-f658d5b26ff9/content. Accessed 10 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Goetz JP & LeCompte MD 1988. Etnografía y diseño cualitativo en investigación educative [Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research]. Madrid, Spain: Morata.         [ Links ]

González Argüello MV, Román Fernández I & Usó Viciedo L 2017. Competencia comunicativa en educación primaria. Las percepciones de los maestros sobre acciones y recursos didácticos [Communicative competence in primary education. Teachers' perceptions about teaching actions and resources]. Textos. Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura, 76:43-48.         [ Links ]

González Petisco L 2024. Influencia de las competencias digitales en la metodología aplicada a los procesos de desarrollo de la competencia lingüística, de la comunicación y el lenguaje, en los alumnos de Educación Infantil [Influence of digital skills on the methodology applied to the development of linguistic, communication and language competence in Early Childhood Education students]. Salamanca, Spain: Universidad de Salamanca. Available at https://gredos.usal.es/bitstream/handle/10366/158757/Influencia%20de%20las%20competencias%20digitales%20en%20la%20metodolog%c3%ada%20aplicada%20a%20los%20procesos%20de%20desarrollo%20de%20la%20competencia%20ling%c3%bc%c3%adstica.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed 11 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Gràcia M, Jarque MJ, Astals M & Rouaz K 2020. Desarrollo y evaluación de la competencia comunicativa en la formación inicial de maestros [Development and assessment of communicative competence in initial teacher training]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Superior, 11(30):115-136. https://doi.org/10.22201/iisue.20072872e.2020.30.591        [ Links ]

Hatipoğlu Ç & Daşkın NC 2020. A proverb in need is a proverb indeed: Proverbs, textbooks and communicative language ability. South African Journal of Education, 40(1):Art. #1664, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v40n1a1664        [ Links ]

Hernández-Sampieri R & Torres CPM 2018. Metodología de la investigación [Research methodology]. México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana.         [ Links ]

Horne PE & Timmons V 2009. Making it work: Teachers' perspectives on inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(3):273-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110701433964        [ Links ]

Konur O 2006. Teaching disabled students in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3):351-363. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600680871        [ Links ]

Jarvis KC & French R 1990. Attitudes of physical educators toward the integration of handicapped students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70(3):899-902. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1990.70.3.899        [ Links ]

Legge 4 agosto 1977, n. 517, Norme sulla valutazione degli alunni e sull'abolizione degli esami di riparazione nonché altre norme di modifica dell'ordinamento scolastico [Rules on the evaluation of pupils and on the abolition of the remedial exams as well as other rules for the modification of the school system]. Official Gazette, 224, August 18. Available at https://www.edscuola.it/archivio/norme/leggi/1517_77.html. Accessed 11 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Legge 5 febbraio 1992, n. 104, Legge-quadro per l'assistenza, l'integrazione sociale e i diritti delle persone handicappate [Framework law for assistance, social integration and the rights of disabled people]. Official Gazette, 39, February 17. Available at https://archivio.pubblica.istruzione.it/news/2006/allegati/legge104_92.pdf. Accessed 11 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Leite Méndez AE, Rivas Flores JI, Cortés González P & Nuñez C 2012. Voces para el diálogo. La participación del alumnado en un centro educativo [Voices for dialogue. Participation of students in a school]. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(3):Art 19. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-13.3.1881        [ Links ]

Lennox M, Westerveld MF & Garvis S 2017. Listening to the voices of education professionals involved in implementing an oral language and early literacy program in the classroom. Australian Journal of TeacherEducation, 42(8):16-28. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2017v42n8.2        [ Links ]

Liesa M & Vived E 2009. La adquisición de competencias para la vida diaria. Un estudio de casos: Diferencias de sexo entre personas con discapacidad [Acquisition of daily-life skills. Case studies: Different gender-based disabilities]. In C Mañas Viejo (ed). Construyendo un nuevo discurso. Alicante, Spain: Universidad de Alicante.         [ Links ]

Medina Crespo JA & Valdés Rodríguez MC 2019. La competencia comunicativa profesional en el contexto universitario y organizacional [Professional communicative competence in the university and organizational context]. Conrado, 15(68):238-243. Available at http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/rc/v15n68/1990-8644-rc-15-68-238.pdf. Accessed 7 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Mendoza E 2012. La investigación actual en el Trastorno Específico del Lenguaje [Current research in specific language impairments]. Revista de Logopedia, Foniatría y Audiología, 32(2):75-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rlfa.2012.03.001        [ Links ]

Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador 2011. Estándares de calidad educativa [Educational quality standards]. Ecuador: Author.         [ Links ]

Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador 2012. Guía metodológica para la enseñanza de Lenguaje y Comunicación [Methodological guide for the teaching of Language and Communication]. Ecuador: Author.         [ Links ]

Nastasi BK, Hitchcock JH, Gutierrez R & Oshrin S 2022. Promoting quality of mixed methods consultation research: A synergistic participatory framework. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 32(1):22-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2021.1887743        [ Links ]

Núñez Delgado MP & Santamarina Sancho M 2014. Prerrequisitos para el proceso de aprendizaje de la lectura y la escritura: Conciencia fonológica y destrezas orales de la lengua [Some requirements for reading and writing learning: Phonological awareness and oral language skills]. Lengua y Habla, 18:72-92. Available at https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/5119/511951374006.pdf. Accessed 5 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Pavone M 2007. La dirección escolar en Italia [School management in Italy]. Revista Española de Educación Comparada, 13:53-82.         [ Links ]

Pérez Ferra M, Quijano López R & García Martínez I 2019. Desarrollo de la competencia comunicativa en estudiantes de bachillerato [Development of communicative competence in high school student]. Revista Internacional de Educación y Aprendizaje, 7(1):1 -9. https://doi.org/10.37467/gka-revedu.v7.1893        [ Links ]

Reshetina Platonovna NB 2019. Análisis del desarrollo de la competencia comunicativa oral en los estudiantes del segundo nivel de nuevo proyecto de la Facultad de Enfermería de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador sede Esmeraldas [Analysis of the development of oral communicative competence in second level students of a new project of the Faculty of Nursing of the Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Esmeraldas campus]. Master's degree in Linguistics. Quito, Ecuador: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. Available at https://repositorio.puce.edu.ec/server/api/core/bitstreams/d4a3f5d8-1fff-46d6-91ca-3b6773d4a20c/content. Accessed 5 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Roddam H & Skeat J (eds.) 2010. Embedding evidence-based practice in speech and language therapy: International examples. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.         [ Links ]

Romero Oliva MF & Córdoba MJP 2024. Resolución de problemas y competencia en comunicación lingüística. Dosier Graó, 9:58-61.         [ Links ]

Rychen DS & Salganik LH 2006. Las competencias clave para el bienestar personal, económico y social [Key competencies for personal, economic and social well-being]. Archidona, España: Granada Enseñanza Abierta de Andalucía, Consorcio Fernando de los Ríos Archidona, Málaga Aljibe.         [ Links ]

Salvador i Liern V 2016. Oralidad pública [Public orality]. Textos de Didáctica de la Lengua y de la Literatura, 73:19-25.         [ Links ]

Sánchez Bravo A, Díaz Flores C, Sanhueza-Henríquez S & Friz-Carrillo M 2008. Percepciones y actitudes de los estudiantes de pedagogía hacia la inclusión educative [Perception and attitude of training teachers towards educative inclusion]. Estudios Pedagógicos, 34(2):169-178. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052008000200010        [ Links ]

Sánchez Castro S, Pascual Sevillano MA & Fombona Cadavieco J 2023. Serious games: Efectos en la competencia lingüística a partir de las diferencias socioeducativas del alumnado [Serious games: Effects on linguistic competence from the socio-educational differences of the students]. Revista Complutense de Educacion, 34(4):769-781. https://doi.org/10.5209/rced.80052        [ Links ]

Sciacca S, Sciuto S, Signorino L, Venuto AS & Nicotra G 2008. Sistema educativo italiano: Legislación para atender a alumnos con discapacidad [Italian education system: Legislation to serve students with disabilities]. Doces, 1:1-4.         [ Links ]

Tinoco-Izquierdo WE, Tinoco-Cuenca NP & Carchi-Cuenca C 2018. Una aproximación cualitativa a la educación inclusiva en el contexto ecuatoriano [A qualitative approach to inclusive education in the Ecuadorian context]. Maestro y Sociedad, 15(1):29-10. Available at https://maestroysociedad.uo.edu.cu/index.php/MyS/article/view/3295/2909. Accessed 5 February 2025.         [ Links ]

Tostado Díaz A 2019. Análisis comparativo en la didáctica de lenguas en la Educación Secundaria española, italiana y en el Bachillerato Internacional [Comparative analysis in the didactics of languages in Spanish, Italian secondary education and in the International Baccalaureate]. PhD thesis. Madrid, Spain: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia.         [ Links ]

Yaraya TA, Masalimova AR, Vasbieva DG & Grudtsina LY 2018. The development of a training model for the formation of positive attitudes in teachers towards the inclusion of learners with special educational needs into the educational environment. South African Journal of Education, 38(2):Art # 1396, 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n2a1396        [ Links ]

 

 

Received: 9 March 2023
Revised: 25 June 2024
Accepted: 13 November 2024
Published: 28 February 2025

 

 

Appendix A: List of Questionnaire Items

 

Appendix A - Click to enlarge