Exploring the English Language Needs of Pharmacy Students: A Case Study from Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, Fes

English has become the global lingua franca of science, research, business, and technology. Recognizing its importance, the Moroccan Ministry of Higher Education has mandated English language learning across all academic disciplines. However, effective integration requires tailoring instruction to address the particular needs of students in each field of study. Despite numerous studies examining what Moroccan students from various disciplines consider their main learning priorities in English for Specific Purposes classes, no research has specifically addressed the needs of pharmacy students. This study fills this gap by investigating the English language skills needed by undergraduate pharmacy students at Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University in Fez, Morocco. Using a questionnaire, data were collected from 98 pharmacy students to examine their self-perceived English proficiency, language needs, and preferred methods of instruction and assessment. The findings offer valuable insights for designing English for Medical Purposes (EMP) courses adapted to address precisely the language demands facing pharmacy students.

Introduction

English has progressed from simply being a medium of international communication to becoming a fundamental instrument for both academic and professional success. As the lingua franca of fields such as medicine, business, science, technology, education, and diplomacy, English proficiency is now a necessity rather than a choice. Recognizing its growing importance in academia and the professional world, the Moroccan tertiary education system has integrated English language learning into the curricula of all programs. However, since different fields of study require distinct language skills and knowledge, there has been a growing emphasis on English for Specific Purposes (ESP) as opposed to English for general communication (Basturkmen, 2010). The rationale is that a one-size-fits-all approach is inadequate. For instance, it would be ineffective to teach medical students using the same methods and materials designed for economics students.

ESP is essentially an approach that places learners at the center of the learning-teaching process by focusing on the language and communicative competencies they need to function effectively in their specific professional fields (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987). It represents “an eclectic approach that takes the most useful, successful, and valid ideas from other theories and practices, combining them into a consistent whole” (Anthony, 2018, p. 10). To design an effective and engaging ESP course, Anthony (2018) highlights four essential pillars that teachers must consider: needs analysis, learning objectives, materials and methods, and evaluation. Dudley-Evans and St John (1998) identify needs analysis as the central stage in ESP course design, while Richterich and Chancerel (1987) describe it as an essential preliminary step. This is logical because needs analysis helps teachers identify learners’ specific needs and subsequently design courses that satisfy the individual necessities of their students (Woodrow, 2018).

A considerable body of research has investigated the English learning needs of students from different academic disciplines in Morocco, including networking and telecommunications engineering students at the National School of Applied Sciences of Fes (Dahbi, 2017); science graduates at the École Normale Supérieure (ENS) in Rabat (Biddouet al., 2019); computer engineering students at the National School of Applied Sciences in Berrechid (Mahraj, 2019); students in the Department of Renewable Energy Engineering at the Higher School of Technology of Fes (Hattani, 2019); engineering students majoring in agricultural studies at the Agronomic and Veterinary Institute Hassan II in Agadir (El Ouardi & El Fatihi, 2021); and engineering students across various institutions such as the École Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers (ENSAM), École Mohammadia d’Ingénieurs (EMI), École Nationale de l’Industrie Minérale (ENIM), and Écoles Nationales des Sciences Appliquées (ENSA) in Fes, Oujda, and Agadir (Akhajam & Elkarfa, 2022).

Given the absence of prior research on the English language needs of pharmacy students, this study seeks to fill this gap and contribute to the literature on English for Specific Purposes (ESP) within the Moroccan educational context. As primary stakeholders in the learning process, students are uniquely positioned to provide insights into their level of English proficiency, English language needs, and preferred methods of instruction and assessment to ensure course effectiveness. Therefore, this case study, conducted with undergraduate pharmacy students at the Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University in Fes, aimed to achieve the following objectives:

1. To assess pharmacy students’ perception of their English proficiency.

2. To investigate the English language competencies needed by pharmacy students

3. To determine students’ preferred learning activities.

4. To identify students’ preferred assessment methods.

Review of the Literature

Over time, the scope of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) has expanded. Initially, ESP was primarily focused on helping learners in technology and commerce (Benesch, 2001). As the field evolved, a clear distinction emerged between these two major branches. One branch is English for Academic Purposes (EAP), which defines the English necessary for studying a specific academic field, such as English for Medical Purposes (EMP), English for the Law (ELP), and English for Business and Economics (EBE). The other branch is English for Occupational Purposes (EOP). It relates to the English used to execute tasks integral to a particular profession, such as English for doctors and English for secretaries (Dudley-Evans & St John, 1998; Belcher, 2009; Basturkmen, 2010).

Generally speaking, English for Specific Purposes (ESP) refers to courses that “set out to teach the language and communication skills that specific groups of language learners need or will need to function effectively in their disciplines of study, professions, or workplaces” (Basturkmen, 2010, p. 17). This definition highlights the key distinction between ESP and General English. More specifically, ESP focuses on addressing the particular language needs of learners within professional or academic contexts, whereas General English aims to develop learners’ overall language skills without regard to their field of study or work (Belcher, 2009).

It is crucial to emphasize that English for Specific Purposes (ESP) should not be reduced to a course focused solely on teaching field-specific vocabulary. Instead, it represents a tailored approach to language instruction, in which content and teaching methods are carefully designed to align with learners’ unique goals (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987). Anthony (2018) echoes this perspective, describing ESP as “an eclectic approach that takes the most useful, successful, and valid ideas from other theories and practices, combining them into a consistent whole” (p. 9).

In the same vein, Flowerdew and Peacock (2001) argue that “a critical step in designing the ESP curriculum is accepting that the methodologies and approaches valid in any other area of ESL are not necessarily the most appropriate for ESP” (p. 177). Therefore, ESP practitioners must adopt a flexible and innovative mindset, ensuring that all aspects of course design—curriculum, teaching methods, and material selection—are aligned with the specific needs and objectives of their students within a particular academic or professional context.

According to Anthony (2018), there are four key pillars that ESP teachers must consider to design an effective and engaging language course tailored to learners’ specific needs: needs analysis, learning objectives, materials and methods, and evaluation. While all these pillars are crucial, researchers widely agree that needs analysis is the cornerstone of successful ESP programs (Belcher, 2009; Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998; Hutchinson & Waters, 1987; Woodrow, 2018). In fact, needs analysis is the defining feature that distinguishes ESP from English for general purposes (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987).

Needs analysis involves gathering data that are essential for designing a curriculum tailored to the specific learning requirements of a designated group of students (Li, 2014). However, determining the specific information to gather has been a topic of ongoing discussion and research over the years (Basturkmen, 2010). Researchers have proposed various types of needs. For instance, Hutchinson and Waters (1987) categorize needs into target needs and learning needs. Both Brindley (1989) and Robinson (1991a) distinguish between objective needs and subjective needs, while Berwick (1989) draws a sharp contrast between perceived needs and felt needs.

These diverse classifications underscore the intricate and multifaceted nature of needs analysis. Long (2005) noted that such a complexity is expected. He insightfully compares conducting a needs analysis to teaching a language. Neither can be done in just one way (p. 4). Moreover, the challenge lies in the fact that needs analysis is not a one-time task but a continuous process that must be carried out multiple times. Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998) emphasize that needs analysis should be conducted prior to a course to determine “the what and how of a course” (p. 121). Robinson (1991b) further argues that needs analysis “should be repeated so that it can be built into the formative process” (p. 8). This ongoing process ensures that the evolving requirements of the learners are consistently addressed throughout the course.

According to Rahman (2015), the fundamental components for assessing learners’ language needs are the following three:

• 1- Present Situation Analysis (PSA): PSA works alongside target situation analysis (Robinson, 1991b) and is particularly valuable in ESP settings because it serves to evaluate learners’ current level of English proficiency and their prior knowledge before instruction begins (Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998). According to Jordan (1997), the three key sources for gathering this information include the learners themselves, the educational institution, and the prospective workplace.

• 2- Target Situation Analysis (TSA): TSA in ESP “refers to the tasks and activities learners use or will use English for in the target situation” (Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998, p. 124). In essence, TSA defines the precise language skills and knowledge required for learners to succeed in a particular job or field of study. This concept was first proposed by Munby (1978), who emphasized the communicative demands that learners are likely to encounter in the target situation. As with PSA, learners, future employers, and educational institutions can provide valuable insights.

• 3- Learning Situation Analysis (LSA): According to Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998), LSA focuses on the subjective and felt needs of learners. It seeks to understand how learners learn most effectively, rather than simply identifying what they need to learn (West, 1997). Hutchinson and Waters (1987) also included learning needs in their model, suggesting that LSA should address questions related to learners’ motivations for taking the course, their preferred learning strategies, and their unique learning characteristics.

Materials and Methods

This study involved pharmacy students from the Faculty of Medicine, Pharmacy, and Dentistry at Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah University of Fez. I shared a link to the online questionnaire with student representatives from the first, second, and third academic years. These representatives were then requested to disseminate the link within their respective WhatsApp groups. To ensure confidentiality, the representatives notified the participants that their responses would be used solely for research purposes and that their identities would remain anonymous. A total of 98 students completed the questionnaire.

The instrument used in this study was adapted from previously conducted studies on language needs analysis for English for Medical Purposes (EMP) (Karimnia & Khodashenas, 2018; Kayaoğlu & Akbaş, 2016; Rinawatiet al., 2022; Vahdany & Gerivani, 2016). It consisted of five sections. Each section was designed to address one of the objectives of the study. The first one covered demographic information. The second section aimed to identify students’ perception of their English proficiency. Their responses were measured using a four-point Likert scale: weak = 1, fair = 2, good = 3, and very good = 4.

The third part of the questionnaire examined the specific English language skills that pharmacy students regarded as essential for their academic and professional growth. Participants evaluated the significance of several sub-skills within the four language areas—reading, listening, speaking, and writing—using a four-point Likert scale (0 = not important, 1 = somewhat important, 2 = important, 3 = very important). The fourth part focused on students’ preferences concerning different modes of instruction. Their responses were collected using a four-point scale (0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2 = somewhat, 3 = very much). The final part investigated how students preferred to assess their progress in English language learning. A five-point Likert scale was employed for this section (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree).

Before administering the questionnaire, two experienced English for Specific Purposes (ESP) professors from different institutions were invited to review the instrument for face and content validity. Afterward, three pharmacy students were asked to complete the questionnaire to assess the clarity and comprehensibility of its items. Feedback from both the professors and the students was carefully considered and incorporated into the final version. Once the data was collected, it was coded and entered into the SPSS software program in order to be organized and analyzed using the descriptive statistical measures of percentages, frequencies, means, and standard deviations.

Results and Discussion

Participants’ Demographics and Attitudes Toward English

As shown in Table I, ninety-eight pharmacy students participated in this study, with 65.3% female and 34.7% male. Their ages ranged from 17 to 22 years old. The sample was distributed across three academic years, with the largest group in the first year (40.8%), followed by third-year students (34.7%) and second-year students (24.5%).

Table I. Participants’ Demographics and Attitudes Toward English (n = 98)

	Response options	Frequency and percentages
Gender	–Male	– 34 (34.7%)
	–Female	– 64 (65.3%)
Academic year	– First-year student	– 40 (40.8%)
	– Second-year student	– 24 (24.5%)
	– Third-year student	– 34 (34.7%)
I regard English as an important tool for my academic advancement and career success	– Strongly agree	– 37 (37.8%)
	–Agree	– 48 (49%)
	–Undecided	– 10 (10.2%)
	–Disagree	– 03 (3.1%)
	– Strongly disagree	– 00 (00%)

To gain insights into participants’ attitudes toward English language learning, they were asked whether they viewed English as important for their studies and professional development. The results show that the vast majority recognized its importance, with 37.8% strongly agreeing and 49% agreeing. These findings clearly indicate that pharmacy students view English proficiency as essential for succeeding in their studies and for pursuing future professional opportunities.

Pharmacy Students’ Self-Reported English Proficiency

The participants were asked to self-assess their English proficiency in various areas using a four-point Likert scale (weak = 1, fair = 2, good = 3, very good = 4). A higher score indicates a higher perceived level of proficiency. As summarized in Table II, the overall mean score (M = 2.58, SD = 0.609) suggests that pharmacy students’ English proficiency was at a moderate level. When examining each area of language proficiency individually, reading and listening were perceived as the strongest skills, with mean scores of 2.86 and 2.74, respectively. As shown in Fig. 1 below, over two-thirds of the students rated their abilities in these skills as ‘good’ or ‘very good.’ Grammar and pronunciation also appear to be areas where students feel confident, with more than half reporting a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ level, and only 7% reporting a ‘weak’ level in these components of language proficiency. Writing (M = 2.48) vocabulary (M = 2.44), and speaking (M = 2.42) presented more challenges compared to grammar and pronunciation. While half of the participants rated their vocabulary and writing skills as ‘good’ or ‘very good,’ 12% reported a ‘weak’ level in these areas.

Table II. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Self-Reported English Proficiency (n = 98)

Skill	Mean	Std. D
Pronunciation	2.62	0.806
Writing skills	2.48	0.828
Reading skills	2.86	0.760
Speaking skills	2.42	0.759
Listening skills	2.74	0.777
Grammar	2.53	0.735
Vocabulary	2.44	0.774

Fig. 1. Pharmacy students’ self-reported English proficiency.

Pharmacy Students’ English Language Needs

Participants evaluated the significance of various micro-skills within the four main language areas—reading, writing, speaking, and listening—through a four-point scale (0 = not important, 1 = somewhat important, 2 = important, 3 = very important).

Reading Skills

The findings clearly show that pharmacy students prioritize reading skills that can help them understand laboratory manuals (M = 2.07, SD = 0.922) and research papers (M = 2.05, SD = 0.830), as presented in Table III and Fig. 2. Additionally, the ability to read and analyze graphs, charts, and tables was considered crucial, with an average score of 2.00 (SD = 0.786). Overall, the results imply that students value these skills for conducting research, performing laboratory experiments, and comprehending scientific information. Interestingly, students appear to place less emphasis on lessons targeting vocabulary development specific to pharmacology and medicine (M = 1.73, SD = 0.937). A possible explanation lies in the perception that time should be invested in skills that are more difficult to acquire independently, compared to terminology that they can learn through various resources.

Table III. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Reading Skills (n = 98)

Reading skill	Mean	Std. D
Reading pharmacology and medical books and laboratory manuals	2.07	0.922
Understanding vocabulary related to pharmacology, medicine, and healthcare	1.73	0.937
Reading research articles	2.05	0.830
Interpreting graphs, charts, and tables	2.00	0.786

Fig. 2. Importance of reading skills among pharmacy students.

Writing Skills

As can be seen in Table IV, the results clearly indicate that pharmacy students prioritized the writing skills necessary for composing research papers (M = 2.06, SD = 0.823). This is unsurprising, as the ability to produce scientific studies is critical for their studies and future careers. Writing skills for professional communication were also highly valued (M = 1.91, SD = 0.826), reflecting the students’ recognition of the importance of clear written communication with healthcare stakeholders. Interestingly, skills such as taking notes from written sources (M = 1.82, SD = 0.901) and writing laboratory reports (M = 1.71, SD = 0.885) were considered less critical for inclusion in an EMP course. A possible explanation is that the language of instruction for pharmaceutical studies in Morocco is French; therefore, students are already accustomed to using it for note-taking and report-writing. These tendencies are further visualized in Fig. 3.

Table IV. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Writing Skills (n = 98)

Writing skill	Mean	Std. D
Writing lab reports	1.71	0.885
Note-taking from written sources	1.82	0.901
Writing research papers	2.06	0.823
Writing skills in English for professional correspondence	1.91	0.826

Fig. 3. Importance of writing skills among pharmacy students.

Listening Skills

The results show that students prioritize listening skills that enable them to follow presentations and discussions at conferences, seminars, and workshops (M = 2.39, SD = 0.683). Listening skills to understand healthcare-related information from various media sources (M = 2.16, SD = 0.833) and lectures (M = 2.10, SD = 0.793) were also highly valued. These findings suggest that pharmacy students recognize the importance of acquiring knowledge and staying updated on the latest developments to succeed in their studies. Listening skills for understanding professionals in the pharmaceutical industry (M = 2.08, SD = 0.808) were viewed as slightly less important. One possible explanation is that students anticipate the EMP course to focus on skills directly relevant to their current studies, while listening skills specific to the pharmaceutical industry may be considered less urgent at this stage of their academic journey. The findings are displayed in Table V and Fig. 4.

Table V. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Listening Skills (n = 98)

Listening skill	Mean	Std. D
Understanding professionals in the pharmaceutical industry	2.08	0.808
Understanding healthcare-related information from various media sources (news, documentaries, podcasts)	2.16	0.833
Following presentations and discussions in conferences, seminars, and workshops	2.39	0.683
Understanding and following lectures	2.10	0.793

Fig. 4. Importance of listening skills among pharmacy students.

Speaking Skills

The findings show that students placed the greatest emphasis on developing speaking skills for delivering oral presentations (M = 2.20, SD = 0.837). This was closely followed by skills for communicating with pharmaceutical professionals (M = 2.10, SD = 0.818) and engaging with international peers and professors (M = 1.99, SD = 0.958). These findings suggest that students recognize the importance of conveying complex information effectively in academic and professional contexts. Participants placed less emphasis on improving their ability to participate in class discussions in English (M = 1.80, SD = 0.930). This may be because the primary language of instruction in Morocco is French. The results are presented in Table VI and Fig. 5.

Table VI. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Speaking Skills (n = 98)

Speaking skill	Mean	Std. D
Communicating with international peers and professors	1.99	0.958
Giving oral presentations	2.20	0.837
Communicating with pharmaceutical professionals	2.10	0.818
Participating in class discussions	1.80	0.930

Fig. 5. Importance of speaking skills among pharmacy students.

Relative Importance of the Four Language Macro-Skills

As shown in Fig. 6, the relative importance assigned by students to the four language skills shows clear variation across the macro-skills. Listening received the highest mean score (2.18), followed by speaking (2.02), while reading and writing scored slightly lower, with means of 1.96 and 1.88, respectively. These findings suggest that students give greater priority to oral communication (speaking and listening) than to literacy-related skills (reading and writing). A likely explanation for this preference is that students perceive the classroom as one of the few environments in which they can practice language relevant to their academic and professional needs. Unlike reading and writing, which can often be developed independently, oral communication proficiency requires interaction and real-life scenarios, making the classroom a critical space for fostering these skills effectively.

Fig. 6. Relative importance assigned to reading, listening, speaking, and writing.

Pharmacy Students’ Preferences for Instructional Methods

To gain insights into pharmacy students’ preferred instructional methods, participants were asked to rate various methods using a four-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much). higher scores indicate a stronger preference for a given method. Learning through technology and working in pair or groups topped the list of preferred instructional strategies, both achieving a mean score of 2.09. These findings, summarized in Table VII, underscore the value of incorporating ICT into education and fostering collaborative learning to enhance student engagement. The results also showed that students favored the use of gamification in the classroom, with a mean score of 1.99. This is unsurprising, as games can make learning more enjoyable and memorable.

Table VII. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Preferred Instructional Methods (n = 98)

Instructional method	Mean	Std. D
Individual work	1.78	0.979
The use of technology	2.09	0.996
Out-of-class assignments and projects	1.66	1.045
Games	1.99	1.000
Pair and group work	2.09	0.953
Lectures	1.63	0.967

Interestingly, out-of-class assignments and projects were less favored, with a mean score of 1.66. As illustrated in Fig. 7, 18% of the participants stated that they did not prefer engaging in out-of-class assignments and projects. A possible explanation could be the heavy workload pharmacy students already have, making them less willing to engage in such tasks. Individual work and traditional teacher-centered lectures were the least preferred instructional methods, with mean scores of 1.78 and 1.63, respectively. The findings suggest that most pharmacy students value a more interactive and collaborative learning environment where they can learn from each other as well as from the teacher.

Fig. 7. Preferred instructional methods among pharmacy students.

Pharmacy Students’ Preferred Assessment Methods

To gain insights into students’ preferred assessment methods, participants responded to a set of statements rated on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A higher mean score indicates greater acceptance and preference for that assessment method. The results presented in Table VIII and Fig. 8 show a clear preference for non-traditional assessment methods. Group projects emerged as the most favored method, with a mean score of 3.35. Peer assessment and self-assessment were the next most preferred methods, with mean scores of 3.33 and 3.29, respectively. Final exams and quizzes, representing traditional assessment methods, were less favored (M = 3.05). Individual assignments received the lowest mean score (M = 2.95), making them the least preferred assessment method among the students.

Table VIII. Descriptive Statistics of Pharmacy Students’ Preferred Assessment Methods (n = 98)

Assessment method	Mean	Std. D
Group projects	3.35	1.269
Individual assignments	2.95	1.350
Peer assessment	3.33	1.383
Self-assessment	3.29	1.193
Final exams and quizzes	3.05	1.402

Fig. 8. Preferred assessment methods among pharmacy students.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Data from the students’ self-evaluations showed that pharmacy students generally rated their language proficiency as moderate to good. This outcome is likely due to the competitive admission process at the Faculty of Medicine, Pharmacy, and Dentistry in Fes, which leads to the admission of brilliant students with strong language skills. Therefore, General English courses may not be engaging or particularly beneficial for this group. A more effective approach would be to introduce Medical English from the first year. The goal is to ensure that students benefit from specialized English for Medical Purposes (EMP) courses early in their academic journey in order to leverage their existing proficiency.

Given the financial and scientific dominance of American pharmaceutical companies and research laboratories, English has become indispensable for researchers seeking international recognition and for professionals aspiring to succeed within the global pharmaceutical industry (Faure, 2016). While the primary language of instruction for pharmacy courses in Morocco remains French, students demonstrated a strong awareness of the crucial role of English in their academic and professional pursuits. This is evident in their favorable attitude toward an English for Medical Purposes (EMP) course and their prioritization of sub-skills related to research and professional communication, such as reading research papers, writing scientific articles, and engaging with pharmaceutical professionals. Consequently, designing EMP courses that prioritize these skills is essential for helping pharmacy students develop the language competence required to succeed in both academic and professional contexts.

This study also revealed a clear preference among students for non-traditional teaching and assessment methods. To address this, EMP courses should incorporate interactive and engaging activities such as group work, technology integration, and gamification, which align more closely with students’ preferences and learning styles. Traditional lecture-based approaches and repetitive exercises should be minimized to maintain engagement and effectiveness. Furthermore, assessments should go beyond the conventional reliance on exams and quizzes and include diverse methods such as peer assessment, self-assessment, and project-based evaluations.

One issue with the current study was its focus on language needs solely from pharmacy students’ perspectives. To gain a more comprehensive understanding, it is recommended that further research incorporate the perspectives of other key stakeholders, namely professors, administrators, representatives from the Ministry of Higher Education, and professionals in the pharmaceutical industry. A multi-stakeholder needs analysis would provide a more holistic view and ensure that the designed courses align with both academic and industry requirements.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.