Studies on teachers’ beliefs about vocabulary learning and teaching have focused, so far, on English as a second language (L2), or foreign language (FL), in different contexts but little attention has been given to other L2s and FLs. In this study, 15 Spanish L2 instructors at large universities were interviewed in order to better understand where they stand when it comes to (1) the importance they give to vocabulary, as compared to grammar, in their classes, (2) how they decide which words to teach, and (3) how they assess students’ word knowledge. These interviews were subsequently analysed following Grounded Theory. Most instructors declared favoring grammar over vocabulary in their courses because the former is seen as more challenging and useful than the latter and because institutional practices and materials also present such a preference. When it comes to vocabulary selection, most of them declared feeling insecure in their decisions due to lack of access to useful resources and to vocabulary goals not being stated clearly anywhere in the syllabi. This lack of clarity when it comes to vocabulary learning goals also results in doubts about the usefulness of even evaluating word learning at all and an overreliance on informal assessments.

迄今为止，关于教师对词汇学习和教学的信念的研究主要集中在不同背景下的英语作为第二语言（L2）或外语（FL），但很少关注其他 L2 和 FL。在这项研究中，采访了 15 位大型大学的西班牙语 L2 讲师，以便更好地了解他们在以下方面的立场：(1) 与语法相比，他们在课堂上对词汇的重视程度，(2) 他们如何决定教哪些单词，以及（3）他们如何评估学生的单词知识。随后根据扎根理论对这些访谈进行了分析。大多数教师宣称在他们的课程中更偏爱语法而不是词汇，因为前者被认为比后者更具挑战性和实用性，而且机构实践和材料也呈现出这样的偏好。在词汇选择方面，他们中的大多数人表示由于无法获得有用的资源以及在教学大纲的任何地方都没有明确说明词汇目标，他们在做出决定时感到不安全。在词汇学习目标方面缺乏明确性也导致人们怀疑甚至评估单词学习的有用性以及过度依赖非正式评估。