Problem: speech-pathology letters span ear, brain and voice — three anatomies, three evidence sets, one confused writer. Answer in brief: lab-train each pathway separately (hearing, neuro-discharge, voice) with its own lab sheet: required evidence, routing logic, request formula. This guide runs three labs with a worked hoarseness referral, and OET Writing for Speech Pathologists — Course 2 provides letter labs across 23 topic sections.
Lab 1: referral to audiologist
Lab sheet: hearing behaviours observed (response consistency, volume needs, infection history, speech discrimination impact), prior testing with dates and gaps, communication impact in one line, the question (full audiometry? middle-ear assessment? aid candidacy?). Adult and paediatric routes differ — state the pathway explicitly (direct-access audiology vs ENT-first per local rules) so the letter lands in the right queue.
Lab 3: post-stroke discharge to outpatient SLP
Lab sheet: communication diagnosis in functional terms (expressive output, comprehension level, reading/writing impact), swallow status with diet grade, therapy delivered with response, home communication environment, numbered outpatient actions (frequency goals, review triggers, carer training needs). Discharge letters must show trajectory — admission-to-today gains prove rehabilitation potential and justify the outpatient slot.
Work the labs supervised? The full OET Writing for Speech Pathologists — Course 2 runs letter labs for audiology, post-stroke discharge and voice referrals across 23 topic sections with mock tests. Explore the course →
Lab 5: ENT referral for chronic hoarseness
Lab sheet: duration with the red-flag threshold (persistent beyond three weeks), voice use load (teacher? call-centre? singer?), smoking and reflux context, associated symptoms (stridor, odynophagia, neck lump, weight loss — each asked and answered), prior voice therapy with effect. Red-flag positives upgrade to urgent suspected-cancer-pathway language; their absence must be stated to justify routine routing.
Worked example: chronic hoarseness referral
Fictional case, newly written: Mr Osei, 54, teacher, hoarse eleven weeks; 20 pack-year history; no stridor, no lump, no weight loss; reflux symptoms untreated; voice therapy two sessions without change; frustrated, still working.
Shape: duration with occupational load first. Risk factors with negatives that route (no stridor/lump/loss). Therapy tried. Request: “I would appreciate ENT review with laryngoscopy given persistent hoarseness beyond three weeks in a smoker; he understands the reason for prompt review.” Threshold met, negatives routed — roughly 165 words.
FAQs
Why is three weeks the hoarseness threshold?
Persistent hoarseness beyond about three weeks without clear cause warrants visualisation — acute laryngitis resolves faster. State duration exactly; the number routes the case.
Do I grade the voice?
Describe it (breathy, strained, fluctuating through the day) rather than grading scales the reader may not share. Functional impact (classroom endurance) matters more than labels.
What is in the course?
Twenty-three topic sections of letter labs — audiology referrals, post-stroke discharges, voice and hoarseness cases — with 5 complete mock tests.
The matching course
OET Writing for Speech Pathologists — Course 2 labs the three pathways: hearing, neuro-discharge, voice — 23 topic sections with 5 mock tests. For ear, brain and voice letters that route correctly, train here.
Sources and note
- OET Writing format per the official OET site: oet.com — Writing. Thresholds above are illustrative; follow local protocols in practice and current OET guidance for the exam.
- Course details verified from its public staging page (read-only): 23 topic sections, 5 mock tests.
- Case and letter lines are newly written and fictional; other valid structures exist.
Put this into practice
Compare these course outlines and choose the practice that matches your next goal.
