The purpose of these two studies was to examine the state of pre-service and in-service literacy training, self-efficacy, and clinical practice of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and speech-language pathology programs in the United States. Study one analyzed course descriptions and available syllabi from a sample of 50 accredited graduate programs and examined the likelihood of offering literacy coursework in relation to geographical region, Carnegie Classification, or U.S. News & World Report ranking. About one-half of the programs (n = 28) offered a dedicated literacy course or a course that embedded literacy. None of the variables significantly predicted the probability of having literacy courses. However, an R1 or R2 Carnegie Classification was associated with a higher odds ratio of offering literacy courses compared to not having those classifications. Dedicated literacy courses were at least 60% more likely to include literacy assessment or intervention than literacy-embedded courses. Study two was a survey of a nationwide U.S. sample of 444 SLPs. Approximately half (n = 225) of respondents reported taking either a dedicated or embedded literacy course. Only 8.05% felt that their graduate programs prepared them well or very well to assess and treat written language. Approximately 80% of respondents reported receiving in-service literacy training. School-based SLPs reported spending significantly less time on written language intervention than non-school-based SLPs (p < 0.001), a difference not found with spoken language. School-based SLPs had significantly lower rates of agreement regarding their roles with literacy compared to non-school based SLPs (p < 0.001). There were significantly lower rates of self-efficacy in addressing written versus spoken language (p < 0.001). Having received in-service literacy training significantly predicted clinical time spent on written language (p < 0.05), self-efficacy in assessing and treating written language (p < 0.05), and the extent of beliefs regarding their roles with literacy (p < 0.01): effects that pre-service training did not have. In summary, there continues to be a significant need for increased pre-service and in-service trainings in literacy and to investigate reasons for differences in literacy practices and beliefs between school-based and non-school-based SLPs. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]