Written corrective feedback across different levels of EFL students’ academic writing proficiency: Outcomes and implications

Suhartawan Budianto, Teguh Sulistyo, Oktavia Widiastuti, Dwi Fita Heriyawati, Saiful Marhaban


This current research aimed at finding out the impact of different feedback modes, that is indirect corrective feedback and direct corrective feedback, on the writing proficiency of EFL students at the university level. Direct and indirect corrective feedbacks were provided by covering global and local aspects of writing together. This study reported on a 14-week study with 63 students majoring in the English Education Department of an outstanding university in Surabaya, Indonesia. The pre-test was given to 35 students that belonged to a high proficiency level group, whereas 28 students belonged to the low proficiency level. The proficiency level was used to examine whether the corrective feedback was effective for certain levels of learners’ proficiency. An experimental design was run to examine whether there was a noteworthy different impact of direct corrective feedback (DCF) and indirect corrective feedback (ICF) on descriptive essays produced by EFL students. Two groups of participants, DCF group and ICF group, wrote eight topics in which each was treated using different feedback. The results revealed that the DCF is more powerful than ICF and contributes significantly to improve students’ EFL writing, regardless of the students’ level of proficiency (high or low). The outcomes of DCF and ICF in the EFL writing process that do not depend on proficiency level indicates that the use of DCF and ICF is not influenced by proficiency level. In other words, direct corrective feedback is advantageous for both low and high proficiency learners in EFL writing process.


written corrective feedback; direct corrective feedback; indirect corrective feedback; proficiency levels

Full Text:



Alhumidi, H. A., & Uba, S. Y. (2016). The effect of indirect written corrective feedback to Arabic language intermediate students’ in Kuwait. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 12(28), 361-374.

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102-118.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409-431.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193-214.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207-217.

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191-205.

Bruton, A. (2007). Vocabulary learning from dictionary referencing and language feedback in EFL translational writing. Language Teaching Research, 11(4), 413-431.

Bruton, A. (2009). Designing research into the effects of grammar correction in L2 writing: Not so straightforward. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(2), 136-140.

Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2010). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 1-13.

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267-296.

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107.

Ene, E., & Kosobucki, V. (2016). Rubrics and corrective feedback in ESL writing: A longitudinal case study of an L2 writer. Assessing Writing, 30, 3-20.

Eslami, E. (2014). The Effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback techniques on EFL students’ writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 445-452.

Evans, N. W., Hartshorn, K. J., & Strong-Krause, D. (2011). The efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback for university-matriculated ESL learners. System, 39(2), 229-239.

Farid, S., & Samad, A. A. (2012). Effects of different kind of direct feedback on students’ writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 66, 232-239.

Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329.

Frear, D., & Chiu, Y. H. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 24-34.

Guénette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 40-53.

Hosseiny, M. (2014). The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skill. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 668-674.

Jamalinesari, A., Rahimi, F., Gowhary, H., & Azizifar, A. (2015). The effects of teacher-written direct vs. indirect feedback on students’ writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192(June), 116-123.

Kao, C. W. (2013). Effects of focused feedback on the acquisition of the two english articles. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 17(1), 1-15.

Karbalaei, A., & Karimian, A. (2014). On the effect of type of teacher corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance. Indian Journal of Scentific Research, 7(1), 965-981.

Khanlarzadeh, M., & Nemati, M. (2016). The effect of written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy of EFL students: An improvement over previous unfocused designs. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 55-68.

Kusumaningrum, S. R., Cahyono, B. Y., & Prayogo, J. A. (2019). The effect of different types of peer feedback provision on EFL students' writing performance. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 213-224.

Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 69-85.

Lewis, M. (2002). Giving feedback in language classes (1st edition). SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

Liu, Y. L. (2008). The effects of error feedback in secong language writing. Journal of Second Language Acquisition and Writing, 15, 65-79.

Mirzaii, M., & Aliabadi, R. B. (2013). Direct and indirect written corrective feedback in the context of genre-based instruction on job application letter writing. Journal of Writing Research, 5(2), 191-213.

Montgomery, J. L., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(2), 82-99.

Petchprasert, A. (2012). Feedback in second language teaching and learning. US-China Foreign Language, 10(4), 1112-1120.

Shao, X. (2015). On written corrective feedback in L2 writing. English Language Teaching, 8(3), 155-168.

Shoaei, H., & Kafipour, R. (2016). The effect of gender, experience, context and proficiency on teachers’ and learners’ perception of corrective feedback. International Journal of English and Education International Journal of English and Education, 5(3), 38-54.

Soori, A., Kafipour, R., & Soury, M. (2011). Effectiveness of different types of direct corrective feedback on correct use of English articles among the Iranian EFL Students. European Journal of Social Sciences, 26(4), 494-501.

Tootkaboni, A. A., & Khatib, M. (2014). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback on improving writing accuracy of EFL learners. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 7(3), 30-46.

Truscott, J. (2001). Selecting errors for selective error correction. Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics, 27(2), 93-108.

Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. P. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292-305.

van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1-41.

van Gelderen, A., Oostdam, R., & Van Schooten, E. (2011). Does foreign language writing benefit from increased lexical fluency? Evidence from a classroom experiment. Language Learning, 61(1), 281-321.

Wu, W. C. V., Yen, L. L., & Marek, M. (2011). Using online EFL interaction to increase confidence, motivation, and ability. Educational Technology and Society, 14(3), 118-129.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16569

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View Journal Stats