Research Proposal - Howse Wang

Running head: ELL STUDENTS’ PROFICIENCY 1
A Study on Improving ELL Students’ Proficiency through Technology Tools
Tracy Howse & April Wang
Towson University
Abstract
This study investigates incorporating technology-based tools for improving English Language
Learners’ proficiency. Chinese students need support to increase their ability to effectively
converse. We will compare students’ English proficiency and engagement, hoping to find the
most the most effective technology tool for improving Chinese students. Half of the participants
will utilize web conferencing and the other half will utilize chatbots. Both resources are
supported through previous research and will prove the students with personalized learning
experiences. To collect information about student engagement and preference, we will
administer surveys and lead focus groups about their technology tool. We will then analyze
results from the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) examination to see how their
proficiency improved. These results will give us information about the most engaging and
effective technology device for Chinese ELL students. We will then work to transfer this
knowledge to Chinese ELL students in America.
Keywords: Chinese-foreign cooperation schools, English Language Learner, ELL,
School Library Media, TOEFL, Web-conferencing, chatbots.

A Study on Improving ELL Students’ Proficiency
through Conversational English
Chinese-foreign cooperation schools are emerging throughout China; these schools
introduce advanced educational resources and provide international opportunities for Chinese
students. Unfortunately, these schools are struggling to provide effective instruction, which
leaves students unprepared for international class and further education abroad. As a result, poor
speaking skill are negatively impacting the passing rate of language tests, such as the Test of
English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). This examination is necessary for many students
studying abroad, a central feature to Chinese-foreign cooperation schools (www.ets.org/toefl).
The problem statement guiding our research is as follows: Chinese students need support to
increase their ability to effectively converse. One major assumption is that students need
strategies to help them practice conversational English. Therefore, this study will take place in
China to research how technology improves English proficiency. Since there are fewer
opportunities in their Chinese-speaking schools and communities, we are proposing to
incorporate tools for improving conversational English skills. The tools we choose are
technology-based, giving students a chance to continue English language exposure at home and
abroad.
Statement of Purpose
In utilizing technology tools, we are giving students greater chances at exposure to
English and improving their proficiency. This study relates to educational technology and
instructional design; we will be able to use these results for improving Chinese American ELL
students’ English abilities. Our two primary research questions focus on ways to improve
English proficiency. Do chatbots or web conferencing tools promote greater success on TOEFL
exams? We will also look at engagement, as evident in our second research question: How does
student engagement with technology tools help to explain examination results? The purpose of
this study is to discover how technology-based, individualized learning tools can improve ELL
students’ English proficiency through conversational English.
Theoretical Perspective
Personalized learning is an educational method to tailoring students’ personal needs
through certain curriculum, environment, and educators. In traditional classroom, educators
could utilize different strategies to meet students’ personalized learning, such as layered
assignments, group study, and materials. Technology is convenient to offer choices and
autonomy for students in learning through and then benefits students’ motivation. Typically,
there are several means to realize personalized learning through technology. Educators are able
to design differentiated lessons thought computer software, which we intend to do throughout
our research. Teachers could also share different level’ lessons or assignments and encourage
students to do decision-making in their learning through computer. This will be effective in our
lessons on conversational English.
Lin, Yeh, Hung, & Chang’s 2013 suggestion to use computer technology for tailoring
curriculum sequencing, pacing, and presentation. Such implementation of technology meets
students’ unique needs, interests and abilities as learners. Technology is scientific tool to support
differential instrument, assessment, assignment and data analyzing. Moreover, teachers could use
technology data collecting and analyzing to improve the process of teaching, a key part of our
data analysis through test scores and student perception. Thus, our inclusion of technology is
founded in the theoretical perspective of personalized learning.

Hypothesis
Individualized learning through technology-based tools will improve Chinese ELL
students’ conversational English skills. Between our two technology resources the students are
using, chatbots will produce higher TOEFL test scores due to greater student engagement.
Literature Review
English Learners
Improving English Learner’s proficiency is a widely researched topic, resulting in a
variety of methods and tools. To ensure students are receiving the best training and technology, it
is essential to understand how EL students learn and utilize words through English language
development. In analyzing the differences between English native speakers and Chinese ELL
individuals, quantitative analysis shows that English language learners utilize conjunctions and
connecting words more frequently (Quan, Lihong, Weisser, & Martin, 2015). ELL students are
frequently attempting to coordinate multiple explanations and thoughts. It has also been shown
that students who engaged in literacy-based courses which utilize technology have increased
proficiency in academic performance (Yakimchuk, 2010). It is then reasonable to assume that
building conversational English skills through technology-based literature will give students a
greater proficiency.
Conversational English
Learning conversational English is different from student to student. Improving a
classroom of students’ conversational English skills personalized learning experiences; this can
be difficult to attain through traditional lecture-classroom styles. Using technology tools, as
previously suggested, within the classroom for improving conversational English has shown an
increase in examination scores (Jia & Ruan, 2008). When considering the different types of
technologies within a classroom, students who received a crash course in technology resources
felt overwhelmed (Aytac, 2016). However, those same students felt that CHAT programs, such
as web conferencing with educators or chatrooms, gave them greater access to information and a
deeper understanding. These informal forms of communication help improve conversational
English through a reduction of grammatical, lexical, and mechanical errors (Anduiar, 2016).
Web Conferencing
In analyzing the variety of online tools, one that stands out throughout the literature are
web conferencing classrooms. Web conferencing is a sharing of computer-based content and
resources in an online, real-time conversation. Utilizing these for examination preparation and
teaching English promotes communication skills, increases student participation, and improves
learning (Li, 2017). The one-on-one attention possible throughout these conferences relates back
to the original intention of individualized learning experiences for students.
Chatrooms
Another resource utilized were chatrooms, where students practice conversational
English with each other or Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots. This type of technology also
provides personalized learning experiences, but also allows students to work together in
improving their proficiency. Research proves that scores increased and students with lower
entrance scores had the most improvement (Jia & Ruan, 2008). Thus, in a classroom setting, it is
evident that students were able to help each other and bring the lowest scores up to or above the
initial class average.
Student Perception
Both of these technology tools have been shown to improve proficiency. However, online
resources for improving education require commitment and take-up intention from students
(Duan, He, Feng, Li, and Fu, 2010). If students do not believe in the credibility and necessity for
the electronic resources, then they will reject the assistance. Students have the most positive
behavior towards flexible, personalized learning tools (Zinan, 2017). These tools we have chosen
are flexible, giving students the chance to communicate with peers and educators. Multi-
interactive tools increase scores and a majority of students desire to use the resources throughout
lessons (Jianlan, 2017). Students who desire to use the resources persist throughout the lessons
and have increased scores (Hu & Zhang, 2016). Therefore, our goal in this study is to research
which tools are the most effective and most engaging for students.
Methods
Participants
A total 102 students enroll to utilize the methods in Xi’an Tieyi high school, in Xi’an,
China. Participants are senior Chinese students in grade ten of high school who all are full-time
study. There are four classes, two of 25 students and two of 26 students. There is no
compensation for using the technology tools within class since the educators will be
implementing the antecedents into their daily classes. Students will receive extra credit if they
participate in the focus groups. We will be utilizing two technology tools as our antecedents.
Two classes, totaling 51 students, will be the treatment group that utilizes web conferencing. The
other two classes, also 51 students, will comprise our second treatment group, which will utilize
chatbots in class.
We decided on these particular antecedents through the previous studies outlined in the
literature review. As stated in our hypothesis, we predict that technology-based, individualized
learning tools will create the greatest output for English proficiency improvement. We
determined that technology-based tools would present students with the most individualized
experience. We also found that one of the major themes throughout these articles is student
perception of the technology devices. Hu and Zhang (2016) describe the importance of students’
desire to use technology for its effectiveness. Therefore, we looked for studies with high student
perception of resources. Li’s study of web conferencing in classrooms found it to be effective for
examination preparation as well as promoting student participation (2017). Jia and Ruan also
found that chatbots help facilitate learning, especially for students with the lowest percentage of
scores (2008). Our research will take place over the course of one semester, culminating with
testing these students.
Design
This study is alternative treatment post-test-only with nonequivalent groups design, a
type of pre-experimental design. This design gives us the ability to test two conditions on our
groups, comparing how these affect their test scores. As stated in the literature review,
technology tools are effective for EL students. Therefore, we are not trying to determine if
technology assists with learning English, but rather which tools are the most effective for
students. We also chose this type of design because of nonequivalent groups due to
nonprobability sampling. We have chosen the convenience of implementing these tools within
their regularly assigned classes at Xi’an Tieyi High School.
Our independent variables are the web conferencing technology and the chatbots.
Condition group one, the web conferencing classes, and condition group two, the chatbot classes,
will be exposed to their variables simultaneously and work with their technology tool throughout
the semester. Our dependent variables exist as the three types of prototypic outcomes outlined by
Creswell: direction of change, amount of change, and ease of participant change (2009). We will
use the TOEFL post-test to analyze the direction and amount of change for students’ proficiency
in English. Throughout the semester, we will also analyze the ease of participant change through
our focus on student engagement with technology tools.
Measures
For data collection, we will utilize TOEFL post-test as well as focus groups and student
surveys. The primary measures of improving English proficiency will be the TOEFL tests as
stated above. Created by the Educational Testing Service, this examination is taken online,
measuring a student’s proficiency at using and understanding English at a university level
(www.ets.org/toefl). This test evaluates reading, listening, speaking, and writing skills for
performing academic tasks. For our purposes, we are researching improving students’ overall
scores, but focusing our technology tools on conversational English. All students will complete
the TOEFL examination in December, as per the timeline of this research. In doing so, we will
analyze how students were able to improve proficiency throughout a semester.
Another measure of this proficiency will occur through analyzing students’ comfort with
English prior to their post-test of TOEFL. Since maintaining conversations relies on feeling
comfortable with the topic and language, this study would not be complete without an analysis of
student comfort level. Since we are using technology-based tools for improving conversational
English proficiency, the student surveys will be informal and printed for the class. This will
allow the researchers an opportunity to see conversational English in practice and student
engagement. The survey questions are as follows:
1. Which tool did you use?
a. Web conferencing b. Chatbot
2. On the scale below, please rate how user easy it was to use your tool.
a. Very easy b. Somewhat easy c. Neutral d. Somewhat difficult e. Very difficult

3. Did you enjoy using the tool?
a. Yes b. No c. Indifferent
4. How many hours a week did you use your technology tool?
a. 0-1 hours b. 2-3 hours c. 4-5 hours d. 5 or more hours
5. Will you continue to use your tool after this semester?
a. Yes b. No c. Unsure
6. Did you feel ready going into the TOEFL testing?
a. Yes b. No
7. Do you think your score will increase?
8. Tell us about your overall experience using either web conferencing or the chatbot.
We will also utilize these questions for the focus group but keep them open ended for students to
discuss.
The final artifact used for measuring success of these tools will be two student focus
groups. We will randomly select five students from each class to discuss their experiences with
their specific technology tool, one group per tool. When these 10 students are discussing their
specific technology tool experience and proficiency, we will be asking students about their
engagement when using the resource. Although the surveys will give us an overview of the
students’ feelings towards these tools, our focus groups will give us further insight into what the
students specifically liked and disliked about their resources.
Procedures
To improve student proficiency in conversational English and study the most effective
resources, we will have the classes use two different types of technology: two classes will use
chatbots and two classes will learn through web conferencing. As stated in the Participants
section, students are broken into four classes. This will lead to even distribution since we are
giving the same tools to higher and lower proficiency students.
Our teaching materials are closely connected with the test of TOEFL, which includes
about eighty speaking topics. We will carry out them in one semester from September to
December in 2019 and about sixteen weeks. Also, these topics will distribute to sixteen weeks
and six topics each week. Students will be assigned to practice these speaking topics through
chatbots or web conferencing. On the one hand, educators will instruct students how to answer
these topics’ questions, including models of answers, sentence patterns and vocabularies. On the
other hand, peers could practice more and correct with each other through these tools at any time.
In our view, practicing is the most important thing to improve speaking. These methods not only
teach students how to express in English but also provide more opportunities to speak English
with each other.
Throughout the semester, we will monitor student proficiency within the classroom.
During October, the educator will complete a survey about their students’ comfort level. This
will give them an opportunity to express their feelings about the process. Another student survey
will follow, giving us an understanding of the whole classroom’s commitment to the program.
Finally, the semester will culminate with another TOEFL examination, seeing if there was
improvement on student’s English proficiency throughout our focus on conversational English
skills.
Timeline
August 2019: Introduce students to their technology tools, be it chatbot or web
conferencing
September 2019: Begin the use of these technologies
October 2019: Focus groups
November 2019: Students complete survey about comfort levels
December 2019: Culminating TOEFL examination.
Data Analysis
The data for our research will be collected through pre- and post-TOEFL tests, occurring
at the beginning and end of our semester. The students’ test scores should improve, identifying
higher understanding and application of the English language at a university level. We will
measure the central tendency, looking at the mean, mode, and median to see how the students
scored. We will also utilize TTesting for our two groups, analyzing the difference between these
scores. Our set significance level is a p≤.05. These types of data analysis will give us a chance to
see which group had the highest general scores. However, we are interested in more than an
increase of scores.
Students will take surveys about their comfort with English. As stated in the literature
review, if students do not feel engaged in their English education, they will not improve
throughout their lessons. Similarly, if they do not want to use the resources, they will not. To aid
in collecting information on students’ perception, they will also partake in focus groups. During
these groups, we will analyze their favorite parts of the technology tools and lessons. Combining
these two perception collection methods and the TOEFL test will allow us to determine the most
effective tool. Our data triangulation will allow for us to confidently recommend one.
Anticipated Ethical Issues
The anticipated ethical issues within this research primarily relate to the power dynamics
in classrooms. Often, students feel forced to participate in the studies for external motivation. To
reduce this, we are incorporating the technology tools into every classroom, regardless of student
participation in the research. Therefore, we are not banning non-participants from the enriching
technology tools. The only grade-related incentive will be extra credit for individuals partaking
in the focus groups. We will counteract any bias by offering various forms of extra credit not
related to our study.
In our desire to protect dignity of the participants, we are giving both groups technology
tools supported by research. We felt it was important to offer opportunities to every student
within the study. The technology is also the only change within the classroom, which ensures
that students feel comfortable in the general setting of the study. Finally, we have created a
survey without leading questions. Thus, we are ensuring that students have the opportunity to
accurately state their opinions towards the new tools.
Anticipated Outcomes
Utilizing what we know from the research, we anticipate that students’ grades and
English proficiency will improve. In addition to a general rise in test scores, we believe the group
under the web conferencing condition will have a more significant increase in test scores. The
web conferencing allows students to utilize their conversational English, while also working with
academic content. This combination will give students the ability to improve all facets of
conversational English. And, since it is still a type of personalized learning experience, their
engagement will further motivate them throughout the lesson.
Our goal is to analyze data and effectively recommend resources for Chinese-speaking
students learning English. There are some threats to our study, which do lower our external
probability. The main one being our nonprobaility sampling; we selected the groups based on
classroom convenience and therefore alternative factors could have influenced our study. A
similar threat is a selection threat, in that we are studying students within these international
schooling programs. Therefore, these students could be more perceptive to web conferencing due
to the nature of international schools or online classes.
Regardless of these threats, analyzing this data and seeing improvement, we will be able
to incorporate efficient tools for Chinese EL students within American library media programs.
With our triangulation, we will have evidence on how these technology tools work in classrooms
and how students perceive them. Therefore, we can recommend technology resources to library
media programs and other international schools for improving EL students’ English proficiency.
References
Andujar, A. (2016). Benefits of mobile instant messaging to develop ESL writing. Language
Pedagogy and the Changing Landscapes of Digital Technology 62(63-76). doi:
10.1016/j.system.2016.07.004
Aytac, S. (2016). Use of action research to improve information literacy acquisition of
international ESL students. New Library World 117(7/8), 464-474. doi: 10.1108/NLW-
03-2016-0017
Creswell, J. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches
(4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Duan, Y., He, Q., Feng, W., Li, D., & Fu, Z. (2010). A study on e-learning take-up intention
from an innovation adoption perspective: A case in China. Computers & Education
55(1), 237-256. doi: 0.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.009
Educational Testing Service (2018). The TOEFL Test. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/toefl
Hu, J. & Zhang, Y. (2016). Chinese students’ behavior intention to use mobile library apps and
effects of education level and discipline. Library Hi Tech, 24(4), 639-656. doi:
10.1108/LHT-06-2016-0061
Jia, J. & Ruan, M. (2008). Use Chatbot CSIEC to facilitate the individual learning in English
instruction: A case study. Lecture notes in computer science, 5091, 706-708. Retrieved
from http://www.springer.com/us/computer-science/lncs
Jianlan, W. (2017). Multi-interactive teaching model of college English in computer information
technology environment. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning
12(12), 79-90. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v12.i12.7956

Li, C. (2016). A survey on Chinese students' online English language learning experience
through synchronous web conferencing classrooms. English Language Teaching, 10(4),
140-149. Retrieved from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt
Quan, L. & Weisser, M. (2015). A study of ‘self-repair’ operations in conversation by Chinese
English learners. System 49, 39-49. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2014.10.012
Yakimchuk, D. (2010). Literacy-based technology support for post-secondary second language
learners. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy 112, 1-21.
Retrieved from usask.ca/education
Lin, C. F., Yeh, Y., Hung, Y. H., & Chang, R. I. (2013). Data mining for providing a
personalized learning path in creativity: An application of decision trees. Computers &
Education, 68, 199-210. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.009
Zinan, W. & Sai, G. (2017). Students’ perceptions of their ICT-based college English course in
China: A case study. Teaching English with Technology 17(3), 53-76. Retrieved from
www.tewtjournal.org
Running head: A STUDY ON IMPROVING 17
Appendix A
TOWSON UNIVERSITY
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD
APPLICATION FOR ACCELERATED REVIEW – STUDIES INVOLVING MINORS/LEGAL MINORS
This form should be used for any research that includes minors/legal minors alone or minors/legal minors AND adults. Minors are any individuals who under the age
of majority (i.e., 18 in the state of Maryland) or are not emancipated minors. Legal Minors are anyone over the age of 18 who are not legally capable of consenting to
medical treatment or research on their own behalf. Such individuals will have a legal guardian appointed for them, unless they are wards of the state. The research
must also meet the criteria for one of the accelerated review categories listed below.
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
A. Project Title A Study on Improving ELL Students’ Proficiency through Technology Tools
B. Principal Investigator Tracy Howse; 9487 Angelina Cir. Columbia, MD 21045; 410-905-4542;
(Name, Address, Phone Number, Thowse2@students.towson.edu
E-mail, Fax) Yajuan Wang; 408 campus view drive Towson, MD, 21204; 626-206-6151;
Ywang23@students.towson.edu
C. Is the PI a Student? (circle One) YES If YES (circle one): Graduate Undergraduate NO
If YES, indicate the purpose of the study in the space below (e.g., MA Thesis,
Undergraduate Thesis, Dissertation, etc)
Graduate Research Course Requirement
D. Faculty Advisor for Student PI Rebecca Shargel; 410-704-2617; rshargel@towson.edu

(Name, Address, Phone Number,
E-mail, Fax)
E. Co-Investigator (list all)
(Name, Phone Number, E-mail)* N/A
*Include affiliation if Co-I is not a TU
Faculty, Staff Member or Student
F. Primary Contact Person (If
different from PI or Faculty Advisor) N/A
(Name, Address, Phone Number, E-
mail, Fax)
G. Is the Research Currently YES If YES, Indicate the source in the space below NO
Funded? (Circle one); If NO, then…
Are you Attempting to Secure YES If YES, Indicate the source in the space below NO
Funding for the Research?
H. Age of Participants Age of Minors to be included: 15-16
Age of Legal Minors to be included:___________________
Are Minors/Legal minors capable of providing informed assent? YES NO

• If yes, attach Informed Assent form for Approval
• If no¸ explain why, in Section III.E, below.
Will adult participants be included? YES NO

I. Do you intend to collect information on the following topics?
• Information that could place the person at risk for criminal or civil liability such as illicit drug use, ☐YES ☒NO
underage drinking, or criminal behavior, etc.
• Information that could cause the participant significant distress such as past sexual ☐YES ☒NO
abuse/assault, prior traumatic experiences, etc.
• Sensitive medical or mental health information such as history of STDs, HIV, abortions, ☐YES ☒NO
schizophrenia, etc.
• Reportable information (i.e., child abuse or neglect, elder abuse or neglect, incest, suicidal or ☐YES ☒NO
homicidal thoughts or behaviors, sexual experiences with a USM faculty member)
• Information that could damage the participants’ financial standing, employability, educational ☐YES ☒NO
advancement, or reputation
Revised 12/1/2017
• Collect data with individual identifiers or from voice, video, digital, or image recordings (this ☐YES ☒NO
excludes secondary research of existing data or recordings of public observation)?
**Note: YES to any of these items, Complete the Application for Standard or Full Board Review
NO, to all items, Proceed to Section II. ACCLERATED REVIEW CATEGORIES
II. ACCELERATED REVIEW CATEGORIES

Place a check mark next to the appropriate category that applies to your research.
☐ (1) Research conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings involving normal educational practices,
such as (a) research on regular and special educational instructional strategies, OR (b) research on the effectiveness of
or the comparison among instructional techniques, curricula, or classroom management methods.
☒ (2) Research that only includes educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures,
interview procedures, or observation of public behavior (including visual or auditory recording) AND (a) The study
involves the use of educational tests OR observation of public behavior only AND (b) The Investigator WILL NOT
participate in the activities being observed AND (Check the one’s that apply to your study):
☒ (i) The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human
subjects cannot readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects? OR
☒ (ii) Any disclosure of responses outside of the research would NOT reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal
or civil liability, or be damaging to the subjects’ financial standing, employability, educational advancement, or
reputation
(3) Not Applicable
☐ (4) Secondary research involving the collection or study of existing data, documents, or records containing identifiable
private information, or identifiable biospecimens research for which consent is not required (Also, Answer questions in
section III.I, below) AND (check the appropriate criteria that applies to your research):
☐ (i) The data are publicly available
☐ (ii) The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human
subjects cannot readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects?
☐ (iii) The research involves only information collection and analysis involving the investigator’s use of identifiable
health information when that use is regulated under 45CFR Parts 160 AND 164, subparts A and E, for the purposes of
“health care operations” (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/164.501) or “research” or for “Public health
activities and purposes” (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/164.501).
☐ (iv) The research is conducted by, or on behalf of, a Federal department or agency using government-generated or
government-collected information obtained for nonresearch activities, if the research generates identifiable private
information that is or will be maintained according to specifically federal guidelines.
☐ (5) Research and demonstration projects that are conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency, or
otherwise subject to the approval of department or agency heads (or the approval of the heads of bureaus or other
subordinate agencies that have been delegated the authority to conduct the research and demonstration projects)
If your study meets category (5), it must also fall within one of the following categories (please check any that apply):
☐ (i) Public benefit or service programs;
☐ (ii) Procedures for obtaining benefits or services under those programs;
☐ (iii) Possible changes in or alternatives to those programs or procedures; OR
☐ (iv) Possible changes in methods or levels of payment for benefits or services under these programs.
III. STUDY INFORMATION

In this section, you are being asked to provide information about your study that will help support your selection of an accelerated
review category, above. Although you are asked to provide a brief description, you should be certain to include enough
information so as to support your study’s eligibility for accelerated review.
A. Briefly describe the purpose of the study. Be sure to specify any anticipated benefits of the research (this should not include
compensation for participation).
Our two primary research questions focus on ways to improve English proficiency. Do chatbots or web conferencing tools
promote greater success on TOFEL exams? We will also look at engagement, as evident in our second research question: How
does student engagement with technology tools help to explain examination results? The purpose of this study is to discover how
Revised 12/1/2017
technology-based, individualized learning tools can improve ELL students’ English proficiency through conversational English. We
will offer extra credit for students to participate in the focus groups.
B. Please describe your study population. Be sure to include an estimated sample size.
Our population is 102 students (15-16 years old) from Xi’an Tieyi high school in Xi’an, China. There are four classes we will be
studying; a total of 51 students will receive one treatment and 51 students will receive the other treatment.
C. Is the study being conducted (check all that apply):
☐ i. online i. Complete section IV.B and IV.D
☒ ii. in person ii. Complete section IV.C and IV.D (if applicable)
☐ iii. over the phone iii. Discuss in section III.G and IV.D
☐ iv. By mail iv. Discuss in section III.G and IV.D
☐ v. Other, please specify____________ v. Answer all relevant questions in Section IV, below
____________________________
III. STUDY INFORMATION (continued)

D. Briefly discuss how the anonymity or confidentiality of participants will be protected with respect to recruitment, data
collection, data storage, and sharing of results. If video- or audio-taping will be used, be clear about how consent to tape will be
secured as well as how it will be handled if not all participants consent to be taped. Please also discuss when and how the data/
video- or audiotapes will be destroyed.
The students will participate in written surveys, focus groups, and the TOFEL examination. Confidentiality will be protected
through pseudonyms and analysis of data. Regarding the data collection, their survey responses are anonymous, so their
information will not be linked to this data storage. The data of their TOFEL examinations will be stored through the data collection
tools which will also be used to analyze the information. However, we will unlink the scores to the individuals, therefore just
seeing how grades increased or decreased.
E. If you indicated that minor/legal minor participants are unable to provide informed assent, please explain why, below.
Acceptable reasons include but are not limited to: (a) participants are too young or lack the cognitive capacity to provide assent
on their own behalf; (b) data collection involves unobtrusive observation of participant behavior Also explain how the rights of
minor/legal minor participants will be protected if informed assent is not required.
N/A
F. Briefly describe how you will recruit your participants. If data collection will occur over the phone or by mail, please indicate
the source of that information
We will recruit participants through the four classes. Since these students are all required to take the TOFEL to continue their
education in the international schools, we anticipate higher participation. Regardless, all students will have access to one or the
other technology tools.
G. Will participants be compensated for their time? ☒YES ☐NO

If yes, please describe how and when they will be compensated.
Students participating in the focus group will be compensated with extra credit. Students in the general study will not be
compensated.
H. Which of the following Procedures will you be using (check

all that apply):
☒ i. Administration of surveys or questionnaires i. Attach copies of all surveys/questionnaires OR describe in
Section IV.A, below; Complete Section IV.D, below
☒ ii. Administration of educational tests (i.e., aptitude, ii. Attach copies of educational tests to be administered OR
achievement, cognitive, diagnostic) describe in Section IV.A, below; Complete Section IV.D,
below
Revised 12/1/2017
☐ iii. Unobtrusive observation of public behavior (answer H, iii. Complete Section IV.C and IV.D, below
below) iv. Complete Section IV.E, below
☐ iv. Secondary research on existing data (answer I, below) v. Answer all relevant questions in Section IV, below.
☐ v. Other, please specify_______________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
IV. ADDITIONAL STUDY INFORMATION

A. If measures are proprietary or cannot be included for some other reason, please provide a description (with sample items) of
the measures to be used, or questions to be asked as part of interviews or focus groups.
The survey, attached, will be done through paper-copies. Since the studies are occurring within the classes, teacher will pass out
and collect the surveys. The focus group, similarly, the educators will conduct these groups and ask students. They will be taking
notes about general responses and the ways students perceived using the tools. Since different classes are using different tools,
these focus groups will be divided by device.
B. Indicate the online platform to be used for the purposes of data collection.
N/A
C. Indicate where the study will be conducted. If not at the TU Main campus, include the name of the location and address. If
appropriate, provide the name of the individual who will provide a letter indicating that the PI has permission to conduct the
study at this site.
Xi’an Tieyi high school in Xi’an, China
D. If the study involves unobtrusive observations, testing of educational practices and/or administration of surveys,
questionnaires, or educational tests, briefly describe the study procedures.
To increase English proficiency, students will utilize one of two types of technologies (divided up by classes). Students will be
introduced to their technology tool in August. They will begin using them in September throughout class. In October, we will hold
the focus groups discussing the survey questions and asking their general perception. All students will complete the surveys in
November. Finally, in December, the participants will complete the culminating TOEFL examination.
IV. ADDITIONAL STUDY INFORMATION

E. If the study involves secondary research on existing data, please
answer the following questions:
• Which of the following data will you be collecting/ studying? ☐ Data ☐ Documents ☐ Records ☐ Biospecimens
• Were the data originally collected solely for research ☐YES ☐NO; If YES and available, please attach a
purposes? copy of the IRB approval notice and the approved
broad consent form
• Please indicate the source of the data

☐YES ☐NO
• Are the data publicly available?
☐Direct identifier (e.g., name, ssno) ☐Indirect
• How will the data be identified when you receive them? identifier (e.g., Unique ID number) ☐No Identifier
F. Provide any other information that supports your request for an accelerated review.
N/A
Revised 12/1/2017
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Informed Consent Form /Information Sheet: Please submit a copy of the informed consent form to be used in the study.
If participation is fully anonymous, and the only link between participants and their involvement is the informed consent
form, it is recommended that you make use of an information sheet instead. For online studies, please include the
language you will be using to inform participants about the study. Please also include that you will have participants
indicate their willingness to participate by clicking YES to continue or NO to end the survey.
I have attached:
☒an informed consent form because participants are not anonymous
☐ an information sheet because participants are anonymous
☐content of an online consent form with information on how participants will indicate their willingness to participate
B. Informed Assent Form: Please submit a copy of the informed assent form to be used in the study. If participation is fully
anonymous, and the only link between participants and their involvement is the informed consent form, it is
recommended that you make use of an information sheet instead. For online studies, please include the language you will
be using to inform participants about the study. Please also include that you will have participants indicate their
willingness to participate by clicking YES to continue or NO to end the survey. If you believe that participants are unable to
provide assent, please justify this position in Section III.E above.
I have attached:
☐an informed assent form because participants are not anonymous
☐ an information sheet because participants are anonymous
☐content of an online consent form with information on how participants will indicate their willingness to participate
☐ explained why it is not possible obtained informed assent, above
C. Advertisements: Please include copies of any fliers or advertisements with this application. Please also include the
content of any e-mails or letters that will be sent to participants.
I have attached (check all that apply):
☐ flier(s)
☐ content of an ad
☐ content of an e-mail or letter. I have provided additional details about where and how these recruitment materials will
be used in section III.G, above
D. Copies of Surveys, Questionnaires, Interviews, Focus Group script/questions, etc.: Please include copies of any data
collection instruments that you will be using in this study. If you are unable to attach a copy of the instruments, explain
why and describe the measures in Section IV.A
I have (check all that apply):
☒ Attached copies of data collection instruments
☒ Described data collection instruments in Section IV.A, above
E. Evidence of Human Subjects Protections Training: Please attach copies of the CITI Training (or other NIH approved
Human Subjects Protections training) certificate for all study personnel including the PI, Co-I’s, Faculty Advisor, and
Research Assistants who will have contact with either participants or identifiable data.
F. Other Supporting Documentation: Please attach any other relevant supporting documentation such as letters of support
from participating sites, IRB approval from another institution, etc.
VI. INVESTIGATOR’S ASSURANCES

By signing this form, I certify that
1. The information provided in this application is complete and accurate
2. As PI, or Faculty Advisor for a student PI, I have ultimate responsibility for the conduct of the study, the ethical
performance of the project, and the protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects
3. I will contact the IRB if any of the following occurs:
a. I need/want to modify the study procedures or consent document
Revised 12/1/2017
b. A participant complains about the study (regardless of the reason) or there is an adverse event
c. I become aware of a protocol deviation/violation (e.g., anonymous participants become identifiable)
d. New findings indicate that the study risks, or the risk/benefit ratio has changed
4. I agree that I will not implement any study procedures until either (a) legally effective informed consent has been
obtained or (b) participants have been fully informed about the study via an information sheet and have had the
opportunity to ask questions.
________________________________________________________
Signature of PI Date
________________________________________________________
Signature of PI Date
________________________________________________________
Signature of Faculty Advisor Date
(If PI is a student)
Revised 12/1/2017
Appendix B
Technology Tool Survey
1. Which tool did you use?
a. Web conferencing b. Chatbot
2. On the scale below, please rate how user easy it was to use your tool.
a. Very easy b. Somewhat easy c. Neutral d. Somewhat difficult e. Very difficult
3. Did you enjoy using the tool?
a. Yes b. No c. Indifferent
4. How many hours a week did you use your technology tool?
a. 0-1 hours b. 2-3 hours c. 4-5 hours d. 5 or more hours
5. Will you continue to use your tool after this semester?
6. Did you feel ready going into the TOFEL testing?
a. Yes b. No
7. Do you think your score will increase?
8. Tell us about your overall experience using either web conferencing or the chatbot.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
[We will also utilize these questions for the focus group but keep them open ended for students to discuss.]
Revised 12/1/2017
Appendix C
Informed Consent for Students
Authorization to Serve as a Research Participant
Dear Student,
Our school will be conducting a study within all grade ten classrooms to determine how
we can improve TOEFL examination scores and increase conversational English proficiency. We
are asking permission to use the data collected during this process. Participation in this study
only requires utilizing our new school technology while preparing for the TOEFL examination.
You may ask questions at any point and the principal has already approved this study.
This study will determine which technology tools most effectively improve English
proficiency for conversational and academic reasons. We want to ensure we are supplying all
students with effective and engaging resources. The study will take place at Xi’an Tieyi high
School and will occur during the Fall 2019 semester. During the study, we will collect various
data forms to determine which technology tool was most successful. Possible types of data will
include survey responses, focus groups, and TOEFL examination scores.
Benefits of participating in this study include greater preparation for the TOEFL
examination. Students participating in the focus groups, which will be open to all, will receive
extra credit for their classes. I will not include your name in any report about this study. You also
do have the right to ask us not to include your data in the study or to tell us later if you no longer
want data included.
If you agree to let us use your data in the study, please print and sign your name below.
I give my permission for my data to be used in this study:

_______________________________ _______________________________
Student’s Printed Name Student’s Signature
___________________
Date
Appendix D
Informed Consent for Parents
Authorization for a Minor to Serve as a Research Participant
Dear Parents,
Our school will be conducting a study within all grade ten classrooms to determine how
we can improve TOEFL examination scores and increase conversational English proficiency. We
are asking permission to use the data we collect from your child during this process. Participation
in this study only requires utilizing our new school technology while preparing for the TOEFL
examination. Our phone numbers are 410-905-4542 and 626-206-6151 and the principal has
approved this study.
This study will determine which technology tools most effectively improve English
proficiency for conversational and academic reasons. We want to ensure we are supplying all
students with effective and engaging resources. The study will take place at Xi’an Tieyi high
School and will occur during the Fall 2019 semester. We will introduce new technology tools
into the classroom at the start of the semester. We will then gauge students’ engagement and
confidence in the tools. At the end of the study, all students will take the TOEFL examination.
During the study, we will collect various data forms to determine which technology tool was
most successful. Possible types of data will include survey responses, focus groups, and TOEFL
examination scores.
Benefits of participating in this study include greater preparation for the TOEFL
examination. Students participating in the focus groups, which will be open to all, will receive
extra credit for their classes. Only Tracy Howse and Yajuan Wang will have access to data
collected in this study. Your child’s participation in this project is strictly confidential. Only
Tracy Howse and Yajuan Wang will have access to your child’s identity and to information that
can be associated to your child’s identity.
Use of your data from your child is voluntary and you may contact us at any time if you do not
wish to have your child’s data included in the study.
Please check the appropriate box below and sign the form:
I give permission for my child’s data to be used in this study. I understand that I will receive a
signed copy of this consent form. I have read this form and understand it.
I do not give permission for my child’s data to be included in this project.
_______________________________ _______________________________
Student’s Name Signature of Parent/Guardian
___________________
Date

Research Proposal - Howse Wang

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Proposal - Howse Wang

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: ELL STUDENTS’ PROFICIENCY 1

A Study on Improving ELL Students’ Proficiency through Technology Tools

Tracy Howse & April Wang

experiences. To collect information about student engagement and preference, we will

knowledge to Chinese ELL students in America.

Keywords: Chinese-foreign cooperation schools, English Language Learner, ELL,

School Library Media, TOEFL, Web-conferencing, chatbots.

A Study on Improving ELL Students’ Proficiency

through Conversational English

Chinese-foreign cooperation schools are emerging throughout China; these schools

studying abroad, a central feature to Chinese-foreign cooperation schools (www.ets.org/toefl).

opportunities in their Chinese-speaking schools and communities, we are proposing to

In utilizing technology tools, we are giving students greater chances at exposure to

students’ English proficiency through conversational English.

Personalized learning is an educational method to tailoring students’ personal needs

through certain curriculum, environment, and educators. In traditional classroom, educators

to design differentiated lessons thought computer software, which we intend to do throughout

lessons on conversational English.

curriculum sequencing, pacing, and presentation. Such implementation of technology meets

founded in the theoretical perspective of personalized learning.

Individualized learning through technology-based tools will improve Chinese ELL

Improving English Learner’s proficiency is a widely researched topic, resulting in a

proficiency in academic performance (Yakimchuk, 2010). It is then reasonable to assume that

Learning conversational English is different from student to student. Improving a

be difficult to attain through traditional lecture-classroom styles. Using technology tools, as

deeper understanding. These informal forms of communication help improve conversational

web conferencing classrooms. Web conferencing is a sharing of computer-based content and

to the original intention of individualized learning experiences for students.

Another resource utilized were chatrooms, where students practice conversational

initial class average.

literature review. As stated in our hypothesis, we predict that technology-based, individualized

testing these students.

This study is alternative treatment post-test-only with nonequivalent groups design, a

their regularly assigned classes at Xi’an Tieyi High School.

our focus on student engagement with technology tools.

measuring a student’s proficiency at using and understanding English at a university level

analyze how students were able to improve proficiency throughout a semester.

engagement. The survey questions are as follows:

1. Which tool did you use?

a. Web conferencing b. Chatbot

a. Very easy b. Somewhat easy c. Neutral d. Somewhat difficult e. Very difficult

3. Did you enjoy using the tool?

a. 0-1 hours b. 2-3 hours c. 4-5 hours d. 5 or more hours

5. Will you continue to use your tool after this semester?

6. Did you feel ready going into the TOEFL testing?

7. Do you think your score will increase?

students specifically liked and disliked about their resources.

giving the same tools to higher and lower proficiency students.

with each other.

improvement on student’s English proficiency throughout our focus on conversational English

August 2019: Introduce students to their technology tools, be it chatbot or web

September 2019: Begin the use of these technologies

October 2019: Focus groups

November 2019: Students complete survey about comfort levels

December 2019: Culminating TOEFL examination.

Anticipated Ethical Issues

related to our study.

accurately state their opinions towards the new tools.

engagement will further motivate them throughout the lesson.

to the nature of international schools or online classes.

Pedagogy and the Changing Landscapes of Digital Technology 62(63-76). doi:

Aytac, S. (2016). Use of action research to improve information literacy acquisition of

(4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.