| 1. |
Matthew Armstrong, Exploring Face-to-Face vs. Online Feedback Approaches in Academic Writing Courses, The Asian Conference on Education 2023, 2024.02. |
| 2. |
Matthew Armstrong, Feedback in L2 Academic Writing: Prescriptive or Developmental?, The Asian Conference on Education 2022, 2023.01, In Academic Writing Courses, there are various ways in which students can receive feedback on their writing: teachers can provide prescriptive feedback (direct error correction), guided developmental feedback (inquiry-based learning process), a combination of both or they can encourage collaborative peer feedback. Constructive peer feedback provided at the opportune time, helps learners to clarify their own ideas, develop a critical eye when reading their classmates’ writing, and nurture reflective thinking. The central question which guided this research was: Which type of feedback do students feel is most beneficial to the writing process? Feedback was provided on two writing assignments mid-semester and at the end of the semester via Google Docs. All comments were written in the Google document so the teacher could monitor the quality of feedback. A survey administered to students at the end of the semester determined which style of feedback students preferred and at which point of the writing process it was most effective. Conclusions point to a combination of different types of feedback at the most opportune times for student to assist with their writing development.. |
| 3. |
McCarthy, T.M. & Armstrong, M. I.,, Overcoming Language Barriers and Boundaries: Video-Mediated eTandem, Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée. No spécial, 2021(2), 183-202, 2021. ISBN 978-1-105-52912-2 (as part of a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) Project No. 19K00791)., 183-202, 2021.02. |
| 4. |
Armstrong, M. I., & McCarthy, T. M., , Active Participation in a SciTech Community: The Impact of Collaborative Peer Review, In P. Clements, R. Derrah, & R. Gentry (Eds.), Communities of Teachers & Learners. JALT. 215-223, 2021. (as part of a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) Project No. 19K00791). , 215-223, 2021.01. |
| 5. |
McCarthy, T. M., & Armstrong, M. I., Developing an Informal Tandem Learning Scheme for Young Researchers and Academics, The Asian Conference on Education 2019: Official Conference Proceedings , 747-756, 2020.11. |
| 6. |
Matthew Armstrong, Tanya McCarthy, Peer-Assisted Learning: Revisiting the Dyadic Interaction Process in L2 Academic Writing, Asian EFL Journal , 21, 3, 6-25, 2019.05. |
| 7. |
Matthew Armstrong, Literature and Language Teaching: Bridging EGAP and ESAP, The PanSIG Journal, 1-9, 2017.11. |
| 8. |
松村瑞子；大津隆広；内田諭；下條恵子；岡本太助；Haswell, C., McCarthy, T., Laker, S. Armstrong, M., Aleles, J., Guinn, M., Authentic Reading: A gateway to Academic English., 2016.04. |
| 9. |
Matthew Armstrong, Using Literature as a Means of Teaching Language and Culture, The Journal of Literature in Language Teaching, 4, 2, 7-24, 2015.12, Abstract
This paper illustrates how a literature course was organized in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context to help students increase critical thinking and make intercultural connections through short stories. Rather than focusing on linguistic elements through sometimes-contrived language in EFL textbooks, meaningful input was provided through the use of authentic materials. Short works of literature by both well-known and less well-known authors were the main source of input due to their length, descriptive writing styles and deep connections to various cultures. Students used all language skills to decipher the meanings in the text, as well as their knowledge and experiences to find connections with the setting, characters, themes, story plots, as well as cultural and historical references. Student reflections revealed that where there was some improvement in reading, listening and lexis, students benefitted mostly from learning how to engage more deeply with the reading material.
Key words: Literature in the L2 classroom, EFL instruction, critical thinking, intercultural awareness, reflection.  |
| 10. |
Matthew Armstrong, Piggybacking Academic Vocabulary Instruction: Explicit Instruction of Academic Vocabulary Within an Existing Course of Study, Collected Articles on The English Language, 54, 2013.03. |
| 11. |
Matthew Armstrong, Autism spectrum disorders and the inclusive classroom: A review of joint attention and implications for student success., Kyushu University Journal of English Department, 59, 2010.04. |
| 12. |
Matthew Armstrong, Communicative student-centred testing alternatives, Fukuoka JoGakuin Education Forum, 13, 2010.04. |
| 13. |
Matthew Armstrong, Using student writing to plan and develop a vocabulary course of study., Fukuoka JoGakuin University Kiyo, 43, 2007.04. |
| 14. |
Matthew Armstrong, Raising Student Grammatical Awareness: Model Consciousness Raising Grammar Tasks with the verbs to be and to have
, Fukuoka Jogakuin University Educational Forum No. 10, 10, 2008.03. |
| 15. |
Matthew Armstrong, Trials of a Reflective Teaching Journal, Fukuoka Jogakuin University Junior College Bulletin No.
No. 18, 2008.02. |
| 16. |
Matthew Armstrong, A qualitative inquiry into value assessments and motivation., Fukuoka JoGakuin Education Forum, 9, 2007.04. |
| 17. |
Armstrong, M.I. & Brajcich, J., Integrating Extensive Reading within the Curriculum, Fukuoka JoGakuin University Kiyo, 42, 2006.04. |
| 18. |
Matthew Armstrong, Affective Inertia: Willingness to communicate in context., Fukuoka JoGakuin Education Forum, 8, 2006.04. |
