Puan Tursina, Min-Tun Chuang


Most studies have shown that students’ writing performance improves in accuracy over time after receiving written feedback from teachers, but there is little research adequately examining how different types of written feedback help the writing of students with different proficiency levels in general, and in relation to specific aspects of the content and form of writing, nor investigating students’ preferences when receiving feedback. Therefore, to fill this gap, a study was conducted to achieve two research purposes: (1) to assess students’ writing performance after doing revisions based on written feedback, and (2) to understand the preference of students with different proficiency levels toward feedback strategies. The study involved 60 college students; 40 from NCYU and 20 from UT. The students were divided into four groups to receive two types of written feedback—direct corrective feedback in endnotes and indirect corrective feedback in endnotes. Student essays and responses to feedback preference questionnaire were analyzed to answer the problems. The results indicated that significantly, the low proficiency writers who received direct corrective feedback performed better than the low proficiency writers who received indirect corrective feedback. While, no matter whether direct or indirect corrective feedback was received by the high proficiency writers, they performed equally well. Moreover, all students had a positive attitude towards the teacher’s feedback. Also, they preferred receiving direct corrective feedback to indirect corrective feedback focused on content and form.


Direct corrective feedback; indirect corrective feedback

Full Text:



Allwright, R. L., Woodley, M.-P., & Allwright, J. M. (1988). Investigating reformulation as a practical strategy for the teaching of academicwriting. Applied Linguistics, 9(3), 236-256.

Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 227-258.

Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.

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, 191-205.

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, 267-296.

Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. (1990). Feedback on writing compositions: teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: research insights for the classroom (pp. 155-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2000). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2003a). Responding to writing. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 119-140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184.

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

Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 141-163.

Hendrickson, J. M. (1984). The treatment of error in writing work. In S. McKay (Ed.), Composing in a second language (pp. 145-159). Rowley M. A.: Newbury House.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66, 140-149.

Mubarak, M. (2013). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: A study of practices and effectiveness in the Bahrain content. (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Sheffield, Sheffield.

Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-93.

Semke, H. (1984). The effect of red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195-202.


  • There are currently no refbacks.