Iberica 13 ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 iSSN: 1139-7241 / e-iSSN: 2340-2784 https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.45.267 Abstract: The main objective of this paper is to quantitatively and qualitatively analyze the syllabus of the modules related to the training for Spanish for Specific Purposes teachers (TSSPT) in Spanish universities Master’s degrees registered in the RUCT. The paper focuses on the academic outcomes, the contents, and the bibliography from the syllabus. It provides an overview of the university training for future teachers of SSP, which contributes to the advance and innovation of the area. From the 31 master’s degrees selected, 27 modules related to SSP were included. The criteria used in the analysis of the syllabus are from the Routledge Handbook of Spanish Language Teaching (2019), the Libro Blanco from the ANECA in Lengua, Literatura, Cultura y Civilización (2004), and the Vademécum para la formación de profesores (2008). The results indicate that in Spanish universities individual, methodological, and communicative learning outcomes are found. Regarding the contents, the theoretical perspective is found to predominate over the practical one, while business and administrative Spanish are often found. One of the most revealing data from the bibliographical references is that syllabuses promote reference texts published between 2004 and 2005. Keywords: academic outcomes, contents, teaching, Spanish for Specific Purposes teaching, bibliographical references. Resumen Estudio de las guías docentes para la formación de profesores de Español con Fines Específicos en las universidades españolas El objetivo principal de este trabajo es ofrecer un análisis cuantitativo y cualitativo de las guías docentes de las asignaturas relacionadas con la formación Study of the course syllabuses for the training of teachers of Spanish for Specific Purposes in Spanish universities Lucía Gil de Montes-Garín & Carmen Oliva-Sanz Universidad de Córdoba (Spain) l82gigal@uco.es, l72olsac@uco.es 267 ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ de profesores de Español para Fines Específicos (EFE) en los másteres de las universidades españolas inscritos en el RUCT. El presente artículo se centra en los resultados de aprendizaje, los contenidos y la bibliografía de las guías docentes. De esta forma, se esboza el panorama de la enseñanza universitaria de los futuros profesores de EFE que contribuye al avance e innovación docente de este ámbito. De los 31 másteres seleccionados, se cuantifican un total de 27 asignaturas relacionadas con EFE. Los criterios empleados en el análisis de las guías docentes proceden del Routledge Handbook of Spanish Language Teaching (2019), del Libro Blanco de la ANECA en Lengua, Literatura, Cultura y Civilización (2004) y del Vademécum para la formación de profesores (2008). Los resultados indican que en las universidades españolas predominan los aprendizajes individuales, metodológicos y comunicativos. En cuanto a los contenidos, se observa un predominio del enfoque teórico frente al práctico y destaca, por su frecuencia, el español de los negocios y administrativo. Uno de los datos más significativos en el estudio es la fecha media de publicación de las referencias bibliográficas que citan las guías docentes, que oscila entre 2004 y 2005. Palabras clave: resultados de aprendizaje, contenidos, enseñanza, Español con Fines Específicos, referencias bibliográficas 1. Introduction Courses on Languages for Specific Purposes have been taught for over seventy years. These courses are highly specialized, as they are focused on a specific discipline (Vázquez Amador & López-Zurita, 2021, p. 2). Spanish For Specific Purposes (SSP from now on) has been in the picture for forty years and it has gained importance as part of Spanish as a Foreign Language. Given the increase in demand, future teachers of SSP should pay attention to the precise needs of their students and update their courses frequently (Vázquez Amador & López-Zurita, 2021, pp. 3-4). However, although the interest in SSP is undeniable, there is a scarcity of studies available on the current state of training for SSP teachers (TSSPT from now on). Considering this framework, this article sets out to carry out a quantitative analysis based on information on university master’s degrees taught in Spain. The Registro de Universidades, Centros y Títulos (RUCT) provides a list of all the universities’ master’s degrees. The present article focuses on the training for SSP teachers. The objects of study are the course syllabuses for TSSPT modules. These documents are official and allow us to study the training provided. 268 Each country and language has developed differently. The rise of SSP can be traced back to the 1980s, when Spain joined the European Economic Community, today’s European Union (Aguirre beltrán, 2004, p. 1114). The discipline’s success can be noticed in the celebration of international congresses about SSP, as well as in the creation of research groups like the Groupe d’Étude et de Recherche en Espagnol de Spécialité formed in 2006, and publications by authors like Aguirre beltrán (1998, 2000, 2009, 2012) and Gómez de Enterría Sánchez (1999, 2001, 2007, 2009). Following the path of Vázquez Amador and López-Zurita (2021), this study set out to analyze the current situation regarding the training for specialized teachers of SSP, focusing on how teachers are trained in SSP in Spanish universities. 1.1. Objectives The main objective of this study is to outline the current status of TSSPT at universities. This objective is carried out by comparing and contrasting the course syllabus of the modules related to TSSPT taught at Spanish universities, using the general analysis of all the different educational areas where training for SSP teachers is provided by Vázquez Amador and López- Zurita (2021). This study thus aims to contribute to teaching development and innovation in SSP training. To achieve these goals, the study has the following specific objectives: 1. To differentiate between SSP and TSSPT. 2. To determine the SSP formative offers available for teachers in Spanish universities. 3. To establish the most frequent learning outcomes, i.e., the primary learning outcomes for the training of SSP teachers. 4. To study the type of theoretical and practical contents taught in TSSPT courses and their relationship with the learning outcomes expected. 5. To review the bibliographical references that constitute the bases of the taught contents. STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 269 2. Theoretical framework 2.1. Origin and definition of SSP Several perspectives have been used to define the teaching of languages for specific purposes. The Diccionario de términos clave de ELE by the Centro Virtual Cervantes narrows the definition to the learning and teaching that: facilitates the mastery of specialised communication, for instance, the language used by professionals working in a particular work field or by experts working in a particular academic discipline (Martín Peris, coord., 2008)1. However, Hutchinson and Waters (1987, p. 21 in Rodríguez-Piñero Alcalá & García Antuña, 2009, p. 919) define the concept in a broader way as “the approach to language teaching that aims to satisfy the communication needs of a specific group of learners”. Even if the definitions vary, they always consider the teaching of languages for specific purposes as a “polyhedral” object. The study of languages for specific purposes began with the English language under the categorization of English for Specific Purposes in 1970 (Catalá Hall, 2017). As for the Spanish language, it was not until the 1980s and especially the 1990s that SSP was introduced in education, research and publishing (Vázquez, 2004, pp. 1113-1114). Vázquez (2004) and Catalá Hall (2017) agree on the factors that accelerated the development of teaching languages for specific purposes. In the particular case of SSP, several factors were responsible for the development of the discipline, such as the advances in applied linguistics, a rising interest in the study of Spanish at universities, and the greater specialization of society facing scientific, technological, and economic developments as part of the globalization process. Language knowledge and proficiency in foreign languages have become a real demand in society. The main areas in which SSP developed first were commercial, such as Spanish for tourism, business and law, followed by Spanish for the service sector (healthcare), Spanish for academic and institutional communication, and Spanish for the army (Catalá Hall, 2017, p. 43). Nevertheless, the broadening of working opportunities has led to an increase in “the complexity and the growing training needs among LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288270 professionals involved in scientific, economic, or business activities in general” (Vázquez, 2004, p. 1109). That is why studies underline the relevance of a continuous analysis of student’s needs, “the requirements and demands of a learner help the teacher to prepare a unique and learner- focused programme for specific purposes” (Catalá Hall, 2017, p. 43), to create a high-quality, effective formative program. Students have different goals that require the analysis of the “teaching structure, [...] learning organization and management, and [...] teacher training” (Vázquez, 2004, p. 1110). Nevertheless, an updated analysis of the needs of today’s society requires the implementation of training for teachers of Spanish for “immigrants in compulsory school contexts (children and adolescents), language teaching to adult immigrants and language teaching to children” in the SSP training sphere (Rodríguez-Piñero Alcalá & García Antuña 2009, p. 919). However, this is a controversial consideration for authors like Gómez de Enterría (2009), Pastor Cesteros (2004), and Soto (2001): the particularity of this type of teaching is not due to the fact that a particular language modality is to be taught (such as business, medicine or academic language modalities [...]) but to the characteristics that define the learners’ profile and requirements (Soto, 2001 in Pastor Cesteros, 2004, p. 523). The present study does not consider the modules related to the training of teachers of Spanish for children or for immigrants as part of SSP, because they start from a fundamentally different set of conditions. A possible future research path would be to replicate this study by considering those modules and analyzing their differences from the ones studied here. 2.2. Relationship between SFL and SSP The disciplines of Spanish as a Foreign Language and Spanish for Specific Purposes are closely related. In fact, for Sánchez-López (2010, p. 87), the teaching of SSP is an “integration, extension or prolongation” of SFL. In fact, the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) seems to include specific purposes within language learning in general, for example when it establishes that b1 students should “follow much of what is said around them on general topics, provided interlocutors avoid very idiomatic usage and articulate clearly” (Council of Europe, 2020, p. 75). Another similarity shared between SSP and SFL is their focus on the STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 271 different competencies that a student should have, as well as the promotion of realistic materials and up-to-date content (Lafford, 2012, p. 3). Nonetheless, one of the main differences between SSP and SFL programs is their degree of specialization. Whereas SSP programs have an instrumental approach that aims to provide the student with the necessary skills to communicate information and knowledge (Sánchez-López, 2010, p. 85), SFL programs have a clear communicative approach. SSP programs adapt language teaching to the demands made on students in professional and academic communication (Aguirre beltrán, 2004, p. 1110). These programs have an inherently interdisciplinary perspective because SSP requires “an explicit connection between learning the target language in the classroom and using it in professional venues” (byrnes, 2012, in Lafford, 2012, p. 2). The interdisciplinarity comes from the different contexts in which an SSP student and an SFL student have to manage. Therefore, SSP programs have to be designed taking into consideration the students’ necessities, particularly their professional field, e.g., business, engineering, healthcare, law, or tourism (Aguirre beltrán, 2004, p. 1110). Whereas SFL students “have focused on the development of general language proficiency and the use of the target language in academic settings” (Lafford, 2012, p. 3), SSP students need “an in-depth understanding of the target culture to form a basis for establishing personal relationships with potential professional business partners” (Lafford, 2012, p. 4). It is worth mentioning that in their conclusions Vázquez Amador and López-Zurita (2021, p. 18) found, after analyzing different types of studies (courses, degrees, masters), that the training for teachers is scarce and not specialized enough. This contrasts with the training demands and with the SSP definition itself about the specificity of the area. Another characteristic that differentiates SSP from SFL is the student profile. Whereas the training in SFL is focused on students of any age, SSP students have previous general knowledge of Spanish, they tend to be adults in training or professionals from a specific field that requires Spanish for their jobs. besides, SSP courses tend to be short, and in many cases, urgency is a determining factor (Aguirre beltrán, 2004, p. 87). Considering the above-mentioned convergences and divergences between SFL and SSP, it is clear that the research and development of SSP and TSSPT emerge from the global changes that affect all professions (Sánchez-López, 2010, p. 86) and twenty first-century globalization and internationalization. LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288272 3. Methodology 3.1. Object of study This paper conducts a quantitative analysis of three of the components of the course syllabus of TSSPT subjects, namely: the learning outcomes, the contents taught and the bibliographical references cited. We follow the methodology of previous studies such as Vázquez Amador (2021), applied to TSSPT; Castellano Martínez and Rodríguez-Tapia (2022), applied to translation; and Rodríguez-Tapia and Oliva Sanz (2021), applied to terminology. To study the bibliographical references recommended for each subject, the method already mentioned in Rodríguez-Faneca (2020, p. 537) is followed, with which the most frequently cited works can be identified and the coincidences and divergences between the different materials can be measured. It should be noted that to analyze the learning outcomes, the considerations of Vázquez-Amador and López-Zurita (2021) were also taken into account in the drafting of the descriptors for each learning outcome. 3.2. Selected SSP modules In the first place, it was necessary to locate those subjects related to the training of SSP teachers. To this end, we focused on SFL master’s degrees registered in the RUCT (Registro de Universidades, Centros y Títulos) in January 2022. This search provided a list of 31 master’s degrees, from which three were eliminated (UDG, UJA, and UHU)2 because they cease to exist in the academic year 2021/2022. Given that this study aims to provide a current rather than a diachronic overview, the selection of this academic year was set to the most recent year possible, as proposed by Castellano Martínez and Rodríguez-Tapia (2022), so that the data would be up to date. Once the master’s degrees had been selected, we proceeded to analyze the course syllabuses and extract from them the subjects related to the Teaching of Spanish for Specific Purposes. Only 18 of the 28 master’s degrees offer subjects related to the object of study. The universities that do not include training in this regard are UIb, UJI, UDL, UDG, UIMP, OUC, USAL, UNED, UAN, and UNEATLÁNTICO3. Table 1 shows the the master’s degrees that include subjects related to SSP. STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 273 LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288274 * University SSP subjects ECTS Type of subject Universidad Alfonso X El Sabio Español fines específicos 3 Compulsory Universidad de Burgos La enseñanza del español como lengua extranjera con fines profesionales 4 Elective Universidad de Extremadura Español para fines específicos 6 Elective Universidad Internacional Isabel I de Castilla Enseñanza de una segunda lengua para fines y público Específicos 6 Compulsory Universidad de Granada El español de usos específicos 3 Elective El español de los medios de comunicación: Prensa, radio, televisión y otros 3 Elective Universitat Rovira i Virgili Español para fines específicos 3 Elective Universidad de Salamanca Español profesional: negocios y ámbito académico 3 Elective Universidad de Cantabria Aspectos teóricos y metodológicos del español con fines específicos 1 Compulsory El español de los negocios 2 Compulsory Universidad de Navarra Enseñanza de español con fines específicos 4 Compulsory Universidad de Zaragoza El español para fines específicos en la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de ELE 3 Elective Universidad Pablo de Olavide La enseñanza del español con fines específicos 3 Compulsory Universidad de Sevilla Español con fines específicos 4 Elective Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria El español para fines específicos en contextos empresariales 3 Compulsory Universidad de Valladolid Español para fines específicos en ELE 3 Elective Universidad de Córdoba Español para fines específicos y nuevas tecnologías en ELE 4 Elective Universidad a Distancia de Madrid Contextos de enseñanza ELE 6 Compulsory Universidad de León La enseñanza del español con fines específicos 3 Elective Universidad de Alicante Lingüística aplicada al inglés y al español para fines específicos 6 Compulsory El inglés y el español en la lingüística forense 6 Compulsory El inglés y el español en la lingüística computacional 6 Compulsory Table 1. List of university master’s degrees with SSP-related subjects The syllabuses of the 27 courses in Table 1 were analyzed to identify the objectives, the competencies and learning outcomes, the contents, and the recommended bibliography. 3.3. Learning outcomes The learning outcomes (hereinafter LO) analyzed follow this definition: “statement of what a learner should know, understand or be able to demonstrate upon completion of the learning process” (European Union, 2011, p. 4). The different LO analyzed correspond to the sum of the objectives, the competencies, and the learning outcomes themselves, since, in the analysis of each course syllabus, the imprecision in the delimitation and absence of some of the three sections already pointed out by Rodríguez- Tapia and Oliva Sanz (2021, p. 33) can be observed. The list of learning outcomes is based on the one proposed by Rodríguez- Tapia and Oliva Sanz (2021, p. 34) due to the frequent appearance of pedagogical concepts, such as individual, metalinguistic or communicative competencies, which do not belong exclusively to the discipline of Terminology, but to the general level of training, as stated by ANECA (2004, p. 277) as general transversal competences for graduates in language subjects. However, it was necessary to add particular descriptors, due to their high frequency of appearance in the course syllabuses. This is the case of intercultural and sociocultural competence (LO9), general knowledge of the teaching of SSP (LO7), rooted in the relationship between SFL and SSP, and documentary and technological competence (LO6), as a result of the inclusion of new technologies in language learning. To measure the LOs present in each course syllabus, both the number of times the LOs appear in each course syllabus and the number of course STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 275* El español jurídico 3 Compulsory El español económico-financiero 3 Compulsory Tecnologías de la información y el conocimiento aplicadas al inglés y español para fines específicos 6 Compulsory El español del turismo y el ocio 3 Compulsory El español de la medicina y las ciencias de la salud 3 Compulsory & T syllabuses in which the LO is present were counted. Table 2 shows the learning outcomes. Table 2. List of descriptors for the study of learning outcomes 3.4. Contents The selection of contents comes from the fields studied in one of the reference works (Sánchez Lobato & Santos Gargallo, 2004), as well as the most frequent specific contents detailed in the guides. The only type of applied TSSPT that did not appear in the aforementioned reference book and was included in the analysis is that of the medical and health field (TC6). For an exhaustive analysis of the data, the contents were subdivided into theoretical (TC1 to TC7) and practical (PC1 to PC3). The importance of the practical contents (simulations, projects, assignments, oral presentations, or case studies) is noted in Sánchez Lobato and Santos Gargallo (2004, pp. 1123-1126), so it was considered necessary to establish this distinction to study both paradigms (theoretical and practical) in a complete and individualized manner. Regarding the descriptors for the practical contents, LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288276 * T Code Descriptor Descriptor delimitation LO1 Individual Applies to the learner as an individual. Autonomy, time management, planning, problem-solving, and teamwork. LO2 Metalinguistic Knowledge of the terminology used in the discipline and reflection on the Spanish language. LO3 Communicative Knowledge and use of the linguistic contents appropriate to the situation, communicative skills. LO4 Analytical Interpretation and critical thinking. LO5 Methodological, instrumental, and theoretical Know the different approaches, specific methodologies, and linguistic theories, and develop useful materials for teaching. LO6 Documentary and technological Develop methodologies and didactic and technological resources for teaching-learning. Ability to search for bibliographic information and documentation. LO7 General knowledge of SFL teaching Possess and understand linguistic, literary, and sociocultural knowledge of Spanish that provides a basis for instructing future students in the most relevant aspects of the linguistic system of Spanish and its standard use, within the phonetic, morphosyntactic, lexical, pragmatic, and sociolinguistic levels, and to conduct research in the field of teaching and didactic strategies of SFL. LO8 General knowledge of specific fields of specialization Knowledge of the contextual framework of tourism, economics, law, and economics, etc. LO9 Intercultural and sociocultural Attention to other realities, immigration, and the risk of social exclusion. LO10 Diagnostic Diagnosis, evaluation, and argumentation of errors and solutions. & the course syllabus was understood to comply with descriptor PC2 when only general practical contents are mentioned without specifying the unit to which they correspond or belong to only one of the units. As an example, the UAX guide for “Spanish for Specific Purposes” only mentions the following general practical contents: a) Programming an SSP course b) Development of SSP units and materials (UAX). On the other hand, the course syllabus was considered to comply with descriptor PC3 when each unit has an explicit section for the practical contents to be covered in it. This descriptor is met by subjects such as “Spanish for Specific Purposes” at UNEX, where each unit has a section for the practical contents: a) Spanish for tourism. Contents: Teaching corpus. Strategies and materials for teaching and learning Spanish for tourism. Practical activities for unit 2: Location of Spanish for tourism courses. Analysis of materials and development of activities. b) Spanish for the health sector. Contents: Teaching corpus. Strategies and materials for teaching and learning Spanish for the health sector. Practical activities for unit 6: Location of Spanish for health courses. Analysis of materials and development of activities (UNEX). The distinction and individual analysis between theoretical (TC) and practical (PC) contents allow us not only to establish distinctions between both paradigms but also comparisons between the results to determine if the contents taught are mostly theoretical or if the theoretical content manifests a practical application. The codes are described in Table 3. STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 277 Table 3. List of descriptors for the study of contents 3.5. Bibliographical references As for the works chosen as reference criteria, a quantitative analysis was made of all the references cited in the course syllabus. In the particular case of the Vademécum para la formación de profesores, edited in 2004 by Sánchez Lobato and Santos Gargallo, the decision was made to cite the entire work, since numerous course syllabuses chapters of the work and the work itself were mentioned, thus duplicating the results. This is the case with the UVA, for example. Subsequently, once the frequency of each work had been calculated, the mean was calculated from which the frequencies that equalled or exceeded it would be representative for inclusion in the study. Therefore, 12 works with a frequency of 4 or higher were considered as references. 4. Results 4.1. Analyzed modules Once we had analyzed the 18 degrees in which TSSPS is taught and their subsequent 227 modules related to TSSPT we were able to detect certain particularities. Generally speaking, master’s degrees only include one module related to TSSPT, except for the UGR (“Español de Usos Específicos” and “El español de los Medios de Comunicación: Prensa, Radio, Televisión y Otros”), and the UC (“Aspectos Teóricos y Metodológicos del Español con Fines Específicos” and “El español de los negocios”). These two universities LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288278 * Code Descriptor C1 Theoretical content on SFL TC2 Theoretical contents on SSP TC3 Theoretical content specific to SSP: business and commercial TC4 Specific theoretical contents on SSP: tourism TC5 Specific theoretical content on SSP: legal-economic TC6 Specific theoretical contents on SSP: health and medical TC7 Theoretical content specific to Spanish with Academic Purposes (SAP) PC1 Absence of practical contents PC2 General or single-unit practical content PC3 Practical content of all the units covered & include two modules related to TSSPT. It is worth mentioning the peculiarity of the Máster Universitario en Inglés y Español para Fines Específicos from the Universidad de Alicante. In its curriculum, there are 8 modules related to different SSP areas. Regarding the typology of the modules related to TSSPT, we have to mention that 59.26 % of the analyzed modules are mandatory. However, half of these mandatory modules belong to the UA Master’s degree (29.63  %) whose modules are entirely mandatory. This is a differentiating point from the rest of the modules, where 40.74 % of them are elective. Leaving aside the UA particularity we can appreciate that the modules related to SSP are mostly elective. If we consider the credits assigned to TSSPT modules, we see a variation between 3, 4, and 6 credits. 51.9  % of the modules have 3 ECTS credits assigned; 14.8 % have 4 ECTS credits, and 25.9 % have 6 ECTS credits. Two modules from the UC “El Español para los Negocios” and “Aspectos Teóricos y Metodológicos del Español con Fines Específicos” have the particularity of having only 2 and 1 ECTS credits assigned. 4.2. Learning outcomes At least three of the learning outcomes are present in every analyzed course syllabus. The most frequent learning outcome is the LO1 (individual), with a sum of 129 times which corresponds with 22.7 % of the frequency over the total of LO repetitions. besides, this learning outcome appears in 26 out of 27 of the studied course syllabuses. The only guide where it is not present is the UNIZAR one. On average, the LO is repeated 5 times in each syllabus. The course syllabuses with a higher number of LO1 (individual LO) are those belonging to the UGR and the UA. These show an interest in working individually and independently, and bring out the relevance of facing problems individually and as a team, an ability for real life in aspects such as personal planning, creation, and distribution of classes and time. The second most repeated learning outcome is the LO5, which appears 112 times and has a frequency of 19.7 %. It is present in every course syllabus analyzed. This indicates that the knowledge of approaches, theories, and applications is a key aspect of the creation of materials. Nine syllabuses of the syllabus that have a 5-point LO5 (median value) or a higher number belong to applied SSP modules, whereas only four modules related to generic SSP contents have a LO5 of 5 points or higher. STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 279 The LO3 appears in 25 out of 27 syllabuses (92.59 %), which constitutes a 15.99 % frequency over the totality of LO appearance in the 27 syllabuses. It is a LO focused on results that aim to develop communicative competencies, manage and express information in an appropriate way for its recipients, etc. That is why the second UGR syllabus stands out in this aspect. In the opposite case, we find only two syllabuses that do not include the LO3 (UNAV and UCO). Focusing on these two syllabuses we can see that they are more closely focused on individual learning outcomes than on communicative skills. Following the same path, the LO4 (10.2  %) related to the analysis is only absent in the URV, UNAV, and UNIZAR. In many of the syllabuses, the analysis is closely related to the research and detailed study of the bibliography, as well as to making judgments about their knowledge. Table 4 shows the gathered data from the learning outcomes. Table 4. Data gathered from the learning outcomes On the other hand, the results provided by the TC1 do not correspond to LO7. Although there are more modules containing the LO7 than the TC1, two modules with contents related to SFL do not show the corresponding learning outcomes. These are “Español de Usos Específicos” at URG and “Español profesional: negocios y ámbito” at USAL. It is also worth mentioning that there are no modules containing all the learning outcomes studied in this research. The modules with the highest LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288280 * Code Descriptor Frequency of appearance of the LO Percentage of appearance in the syllabus LO1 Individual 129 22.67 % 96.30 % LO2 Metalinguistic 19 3.34 % 51.85 % LO3 Communicative 91 15.99 % 92.59 % LO4 Analytical 58 10.19 % 88.89 % LO5 Methodological, instrumental, and theoretical 112 19.68 % 100 % LO6 Documentary and technological 27 4.75 % 70.37 % LO7 General knowledge of SFL teaching 58 10.19 % 74.07 % LO8 General knowledge of specific fields of specialization 15 2.64 % 33.33 % LO9 Intercultural and sociocultural 23 4.04 % 55.56 % LO10 Diagnostic 37 6.50 % 74.07 % LO repetitions 569 100 % Course Syllabus 27 number of LO are the UAX and UA ones. This indicates that the master’s degree exclusively dedicated to TSSPT covers a higher number of learning outcomes. In the opposite case, we find syllabuses without half the learning outcomes studied. These are the USAL, UNIZAR, and UPNA. The modules with fewer learning outcomes belong to the general contents of SSP. 4.3. Contents Concerning the theoretical content, it should be noted that theoretical content on SSP (CT2) is frequently found, appearing in 19 of the 27 syllabuses, totalling 57.6  % of the total content. It is not present in the specific subjects on the different fields in which SFL is applied in the UA master’s degree, since the general theoretical content on the discipline is taught in the subject “Lingüística Aplicada al Inglés y al Español para Fines Específicos”. Apart from this exception, only UNEX lacks theoretical content on SSP. This is striking considering that this is a subject with a high number of credits (6) and an exhaustive list of contents in the different fields of application of SSP (tourism, economics, health, etc.). The high number of appearances of TC2 shows the need to establish a theoretical basis for the discipline to be able to support practical and theoretical training in the specific branches. The second most frequent theoretical content is TC3, the specific theoretical content on SSP in business and commerce. This may be due to the needs of the financial and commercial market, but it needs to be checked in future studies to determine which areas require the most professional knowledge of SSP depending on the geographical, political, and economic situation of these areas. This branch of SSP is one of the most frequent in this study and four of the modules studied (USAL, ULPGC, one module at the Universidad de Cantabria, and one at the Universidad de Almería) are entirely related to this subject. Theoretical content related to tourism, the legal-economic field, health, and Spanish for Academic Purposes, CT4, CT5, CT6, and CT7 respectively, are equally frequent, between 24.2 % and 27.3 %. Except for the specific modules for each field of the UA master’s degree, no modules were found to be entirely dedicated to these subjects. The analysis of the practical content shows that 42.4  % of the modules studied have no practical content; the theoretical content taught is not applied in the classroom. This is a relevant fact already echoed by Vázquez STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 281 Amador and López-Zurita (2021, p. 16), who showed that, at a European level, the percentage of special-purpose language programs that included practice was low. However, in contrast to the authors’ assertion “no Spanish university included a practicum in its curricular offer” (2021, p. 16), the present study has found that 13 of the modules studied have practical content in their teaching guides. Among them are the modules of UAX, UbU, UNEX, and UI1, the two modules of URG and UC, URV, USAL, UPNA, ULPG, and UCO. Six of the subjects with practical content only show general or single-unit practical content. This is the case of the UC which includes, in its thematic block 2, the “application of knowledge to the curricular design of Spanish courses in different professional fields” (course syllabus of Universidad de Cantabria4), which contrasts with the USAL, where the theoretical units have a practical section in the form of group work to analyze materials and propose activities. USAL is therefore included in the group of subjects that comply with descriptor TC3 and which constitute 21.2 % of the total. It can be noticed that TSSPT subjects are mostly theoretical and deal with the basic principles of the discipline, but the number of subjects with sector- specific theoretical competencies is slightly lower. About practical contents, it is possible to determine that, although they are present in 48.2 %, they do not in all cases focus on all the theoretical contents taught. The data contrasts with the presence of the learning outcome LO5 in all the guides analyzed. This learning outcome is related to methodological and instrumental competencies and to the practical nature of teacher training, since teachers must be able to create materials focused on each group of students depending on their needs, to teach classes, and to assess their students’ results. 4.4. Bibliographical references Firstly, it is necessary to mention that the bibliographical references are mainly rather old. From the 497 individual bibliographical references that appear on the 27 course syllabuses, only 5 belong to the period 2019-2021; 50.1 % of the references are more than ten years old, and 33.2 % are more than twenty years old. Regarding the most frequent references, we identified REF2 by Cabré and Gómez de Enterría (2006), REF3 by Gómez de Enterría (2009), and REF7 by Aguirre beltrán (1998) with a percentage of 27.3 % and 21.2 % (for both LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288282 REF3 and REF7), respectively. The remaining references have an average presence between 12 and 18 %. The modules from UNILEON and US have the largest number of references, 7 and 8 respectively. This contrasts with the eleven modules whose syllabuses do not refer to any of the studied references. Table 5 shows a list of the most frequent bibliographical references of the course syllabus. Table 5. List of the most frequent bibliographic references in the course syllabuses. It is necessary to point out that the reference texts, which have been selected due to their raised frequency in the syllabuses, belong to general areas of TSSPT. There is no reference text belonging to specific areas of SSP. Regarding the references with a higher practical approach we have to remark on REF4 from Robles Ávila and Sánchez Lobato (2012), and REF6 by Montolío (2000). The practical approach has a moderate presence in the bibliographical references which might be related to the lower presence of practical content in the different modules. STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 283 * Code Bibliographical reference No. of quotations Percentage 5 REF1 Aguirre Beltrán, B. (2012). Aprendizaje y enseñanza de español con fines específicos: comunicación en ámbitos académicos y profesionales. SGEL. 6 18 % REF2 Cabré, M.ª T., & Gómez de Enterría, J. (2006). La ensen !anza de los lenguajes de especialidad: la simulacio"n global. Gredos. 9 27 % REF3 Gómez de Enterría, J. (2009). El español lengua de especialidad: enseñanza y aprendizaje. Arco Libros. 7 21 % REF4 Robles Ávila, S., & Sánchez Lobato, J. (Coords.) (2012). Teoría y práctica de la enseñanza- aprendizaje del español para fines específicos. Analecta Malacitana Anejo, 84. 5 15 % REF5 Alcaraz Varó, E., Mateo Martínez, J., & Yus Ramos, F. (2007). Las lenguas profesionales y académicas. Ariel. 6 18 % REF6 Montolío, E. (Ed.) (2000). Manual práctico de escritura académica. Ariel. 4 12 % REF7 Aguirre Beltrán, B. (1998). Enfoque, metodología y orientaciones didácticas de la enseñanza del español para fines específicos. Carabela, 44, 5-29. 7 21 % REF8 Vázquez, G. (Ed.) (2005). Español con fines académicos: de la comprensión a la producción de textos. Edinumen. 4 12 % REF9 Gómez de Enterría, J. (Coord.) (2001). La enseñanza/aprendizaje del español con fines específicos. Edinumen. 4 12 % REF10 Lacorte, M. (Ed.) (2007). Lingüística aplicada del español. Arco Libros. 4 12 % REF11 Sánchez Lobato, J., & Santos Gargallo, I. (Eds.) (2004). Vademécum para la formación de profesores. SGEL. 6 18 % 5. Conclusions This study set out to outline the panorama of Spanish universities’ training for Spanish for Specific Purposes teachers, through the course syllabuses of the subjects related to TSSPT. The offer concerning TSSPT was determined and the learning outcomes, contents and bibliographical references were studied. The subjects that train teachers in SSP belong, for the most part, to SFL master’s degrees. It is worth mentioning that the study did not focus its attention on SSP courses but on the training of the future teachers responsible for SSP courses. Only one master’s degree (from the UA) was found in which the training is entirely focused on TSSPT. As for the administrative particularities of the subjects dedicated to TSSPT, it has been possible to confirm that this training is most frequently given in the form of optional subjects (except for the UA master’s degree, whose particularities have already been mentioned) with credit rating ranging from 3 to 6 ECTS credits, with 51.9  % of the subjects studied in this study having 3 ECTS credits. Only three subjects do not meet at least half of the LOs analyzed. The most frequent are LO1 and LO3, which implies greater attention to autonomous problem-solving and the correct use of diastratic variation. Concerning the contents, theoretical content is abundant in the subjects analyzed, as opposed to practical content, which could have been omitted in the writing of the guide. Similarly, the percentages of theoretical contents related to SFL are not remarkable, despite the existing relationship between the SFL and SSP. These data show the specificity of the contents taught and the assumption of a theoretical basis on SFL of the future teachers. The practical contents in the master’s degrees studied reveal divergences from the study by Vázquez Amador and López-Zurita (2022, p. 16). These authors claimed to have found no practical contents in the master’s degrees from Cantabria, Córdoba, and Extremadura. This divergence with our study may be due to the analysis of a different subject or academic year since neither of these two aspects is specified. The study of the bibliographic references carried out before the selection of the works that served as references corroborates the conclusions reached by articles such as Castellano Martínez and Rodríguez-Tapia (2022), which emphasize the outdatedness of the bibliographic references used. In the present study, only 5 of the 497 works referenced in the guides were LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288284 published between 2019 and 2021. Of the references found, 50.1  % were published more than 10 years ago and 33.2 % were published more than 20 years ago. These data are particularly striking considering the large number of studies published per year on SSP and TSSPT and the constant novelties to which the technological aspects covered in the modules are ruled. Similarly, it would be useful to include a list of digital resources where students could consult specific aspects and make use of them in their future classes. For this reason, studies such as that by Vázquez Amador and López-Zurita (2022) or this one, in which the shortcomings of the training are determined and possible improvements are pointed out, are necessary. Regarding the bibliographical references, it is interesting to note the similarities between the results obtained by Castellano Martínez and Rodríguez-Tapia (2022) and the ones in our study. In the case of Castellano Martínez and Rodríguez-Tapia (2022, p. 127), it is observed that the most widely cited reference is that of Hurtado (2011 [2001]) with a frequency of 70.4 % over the total number of subjects analyzed, while, in this study, the equivalent reference has a total percentage of 27.2 % (which constitutes our bibliographical reference code REF2). The following frequencies in the study of the mentioned authors range from 51.2  % to 25.7  %. The difference between both frequencies is greater than in the present study, whose frequencies vary between 12.1  % and 18.2  %. Therefore, it can be seen that, in the course syllabus for Translation studies, there is greater homogeneity in terms of the most commonly used references and a common basis for teaching. TSSPT subjects could show greater variability due to the specificity of the contents taught (tourism, health, economics, etc.), which depend on the students’ needs. The panorama of university training for SSP teaching outlined above shows the situation of a module whose training still does not seem to have been differentiated or made independent from SFL training. The subjects dedicated not only to TSSPT but also to the different fields of SSP (bio- health, legal-economic, tourism, etc.) are scarce if one considers the current relevance of the subject and its recent growth. The specialization of today’s world can be seen in books such as Guía para la clase de español con fines específicos (Valero Fernández, 2022), which includes four contents blocks (Arts and Humanities, Health Sciences, Social and Legal Sciences and Sciences, and Engineering and Architecture) focused on very specific disciplines. STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 285 In addition, it should be mentioned that in the present paper, only the course syllabuses of the subjects were studied. This is a rigid textual typology in which it is not always possible to include all the necessary information and which may not reflect the adaptation of the training to the needs of the students in that particular academic year. Likewise, we assume the possibility of variation between the guides and real classroom training, a variation that could be addressed in future lines of research focused on classroom training through a survey for both teachers and students of the subjects studied here. Article history: Received 11 October 2022 Received in revised form 15 March 2023 Accepted 23 March 2023 References LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288286 Aguirre Beltrán, B. (1998). Enfoque, metodología y orientaciones didácticas de la enseñanza del español para fines específicos. Carabela, 44, 5- 29. https://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca _ele/carabela/pdf/44/44_005.pdf Aguirre Beltrán, B. (2000). El español para la comunicación profesional. Enfoque y orientaciones didácticas. In M. Bordoy, A. van Hooft & A. Sequeros (Eds.), Español para Fines Específicos. Actas del I Congreso Internacional de Español para Fines Específicos (pp. 34-43). Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. https://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ele /ciefe/pdf/01/cvc_ciefe_01_0006.pdf Aguirre Beltrán, B. (2004). La enseñanza del español con fines profesionales. In J. Sánchez Lobato & I. Santos Gargallo (Dirs.), Vademécum para la formación de profesores: Enseñar español como segunda lengua (L2)/ lengua extranjera (LE) (pp. 1107-1302). SGEL. Aguirre Beltrán, B. (2009). Consideraciones y criterios para seleccionar, analizar y evaluar materiales curriculares de EFE. In A. Vera Luján & I. Martínez Martínez (Eds.), El español en contextos específicos: enseñanza e investigación (pp. 159-176). Fundación Comillas & ASELE. Aguirre Beltrán, B. (2012). Aprendizaje y enseñanza de español con fines específicos: comunicación en ámbitos académicos y profesionales. SGEL. Aguirre Beltrán, B., Sánchez Lobato, J., & Santos Gallardo, I. (2012). La enseñanza-aprendizaje del español para fines específicos: marco general. In S. Robles Ávila & J. Sánchez Lobato (Coords.), Teoría y práctica de la enseñanza-aprendizaje del español para fines específicos (pp. 18-38). Analecta Malacitana. ANECA (Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad Acreditación). (2004). Libro blanco. Título de grado en estudios en el ámbito de la lengua, literatura, cultura y civilización. https://www.aneca. es/documents/20123/63950/libroblanco_lengua_d ef.pdf/04b2610a-b65f-c858-d531-ecfdfd7ce599?t =1654601680609 Byrnes, H. (2012). German for Specific Purposes. In C.A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley https://doi.org/10.1002/ 9781405198431.wbeal0454 Castellano Martínez, J. M., & Rodríguez-Tapia, S. (2022). La formación en traductología en el grado de Traducción e Interpretación de la Universidad española. Quaderns. Revista de Traducció, 29, 137-157. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/quaderns.65 Cabré, M.ª T., & Gómez de Enterría, J. (2006). La enseñanza de los lenguajes de especialidad: la simulación global. Gredos. Catalá Hall, A. (2017). Qué enseñar en una clase de español con fines específicos: El análisis de necesidades. PhD dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona. http://hdl.handle.net/10803/458442 Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/common- european-framework-of-reference-for-languages- learning-teaching/16809ea0d4 European Union (2011). Using Learning Outcomes. European Qualifications Framework Lucía Gil de Montes-Garín graduated in Translation and Interpreting (French) and Hispanic Philology at the University of Córdoba. She STUDy OF THE COURSE SyLLAbUSES FOR THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF SPANISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES IN SPANISH UNIVERSITIES ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288 287 Series: Note 4. Publications Office of the European Union. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/ files/Using_learning_outcomes.pdf Gómez de Enterría, J. (1999). Las traducciones del francés, cauce para la llegada a España de la ciencia ilustrada: los neologismos en los textos de botánica. In F. Lafarga (Ed.), La traducción en España (1750-1830): lengua, literatura, cultura (pp. 143-156). Universitat de Lleida. Gómez de Enterría, J. (Coord.) (2001). La enseñanza/aprendizaje del español con fines específicos. Edinumen. Gómez de Enterría Sánchez, J. (2007). La enseñanza del español con fines específicos. In M. Lacorte (Ed.), Lingüística aplicada del español (pp. 149-181). Arco Libros. Gómez de Enterría, J. (2009). El español lengua de especialidad: enseñanza y aprendizaje. Arco Libros. Hurtado, A. (2011 [2001]). Traducción y traductología. Introducción a la traductología. Cátedra. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-centred Approach. Cambridge University Press. Lafford, B. A. (2012). Language for Specific Purposes in the United States in a global context: Commentary on Grosse and Vogh (1991) revisited. The Modern Language Journal, 96 (Focus Issue), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4781.2012.01294.x Martín Peris, E. (Coord.) (2008). “Enseñanza de la lengua para fines específicos”. In Martín Peris, E. (Coord.), Diccionario de términos clave de ELE. Centro Virtual Cervantes. https://cvc.cervantes.es/ ensenanza/biblioteca_ele/diccio_ele/diccionario/e nsenanzafinesespec.htm Montolío, E. (Ed.) (2000). Manual práctico de escritura académica. Ariel. Pastor Cesteros, S. (2004). Aprendizaje de segundas lenguas. Universidad de Alicante. Robles Ávila, S., & Sánchez Lobato, J. (Coords.) (2012). Teoría y práctica de la enseñanza- aprendizaje del español para fines específicos. Analecta Malacitana Anejo, 84. Rodríguez-Faneca, C. (2020). La traducción de italiano en los planes de estudio del Grado de Traducción e Interpretación en España. PhD dissertation, Universidad de Córdoba. http://hdl.handle.net/10396/20971 Rodríguez-Piñero Alcalá, A. I., & García Antuña, M. (2009). Lenguas de especialidad y lenguas para fines específicos: Precisiones terminológicas y conceptuales e implicaciones didácticas. In A. Vera Luján & I. Martínez Martínez, El español en contextos específicos: enseñanza e investigación. Vol. II (pp. 907-932). ASELE & Fundación Comillas. https://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/ biblioteca_ele/asele/pdf/20/20_0907.pdf Rodríguez-Tapia, S., & Oliva Sanz, C. (2021). La enseñanza de la terminología en el Grado de Traducción e Interpretación del sistema universitario español: Una panorámica de sus resultados de aprendizaje, bibliografía y contenidos. Terminàlia, 24, 29-42. https://doi. org/10.2436/20.2503.01.166 Sánchez Lobato, J., & Santos Gargallo, I. (Dirs.). (2008). Vademécum para la formación de profesores: Enseñar español como segunda lengua (L2)/ lengua extranjera (LE). SGEL. Sánchez-López, L. (2010). El español para fines específicos: La proliferación de programas creados para satisfacer las necesidades del siglo XXI. Hispania, 93(1), 85-89. https://www. jstor.org/stable/25703398 Soto, B. (2001). La enseñanza de E/L2 para inmigrantes en el marco de la enseñanza para fines específicos. In A. I. Moreno & V. Colwell (Eds.), Perspectivas recientes sobre el discurso. Universidad de León & AESLA. Valero Fernández, P. (coord.). (2022). Guía para la clase de español con fines específicos: Ciencias de la Salud. Eris Ediciones. Vázquez Amador, M., & López-Zurita, P. (2021). Análisis de los programas de formación para profesorado de lenguas para fines específicos en España. Tonos Digital, 41(II), 1-24. http://www. tonosdigital.com/ojs/index.php/tonos/article/view/2 845 Vázquez, G. E. (2004). La enseñanza de español con fines académicos. In J. Sánchez Lobato & I. Santos Gargallo (Dirs.), Vademécum para la formación de profesores: Enseñar español como segunda lengua (L2)/ lengua extranjera (LE) (pp. 1129-1147). SGEL. collaborates in the Department of Language Sciences. She has been a member of the organising committee of teaching and research training activities related to the teaching of Spanish as a foreign language and of innovation projects related to Spanish terminology in university education. She has published several book reviews in journals such as Pragmalingüística, Moenia and Skopos. She has participated in international conferences with papers on Spanish for specific purposes and textual cohesion. Carmen Oliva-Sanz graduated in 2023 in the double degree of Translation and Interpreting and English Studies at the University of Cordoba. She is currently studying a Master in Secondary Education Teaching and a Master in Spanish Language at the University of Cordoba. She has been collaborating with the Department of Language Sciences since 2019, where she has participated in various research projects. She received a collaboration grant from the Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional during the academic year 2021/2022 as well as a research grant from the University of Cordoba during 2022/2023. She has presented papers in several conferences related to Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL), such as the ASELE Conference in Verona in 2022. Her lines of research include terminology, neology, corpus linguistics, SFL and SSP teaching and the translation of literature with a gender perspective. NOTES 1 The quotations in Spanish have been translated into English in order to facilitate the reading of the article. 2 The extinct degrees for the 2021/2022 academic year are: - Máster Universitario en Literatura Europea y Enseñanza de Lenguas de la Universidad de Huelva. - Máster Universitario en Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza del Español como Lengua Extranjera de la Universidad de Jaén. - Máster Universitario en Enseñanza de Español y de Catalán como Segundas Lenguas/Lenguas y Movimientos de Población de la Universidad de Girona. 3 The acronyms used to refer to the different universities come from the IUNE List of Universities (2021). These same acronyms have been used to identify the different master’s degrees. 4 Available at https://web.unican.es/estudios/detalle-asignatura?c=1198&pi=105&a=2023 5 Percentage of citations over the total number of analyzed guides. LUCíA GIL DE MONTES-GARíN & CARMEN OLIVA-SANZ ibérica 45 (2023): 267-288288