Written corrective feedback (WCF) is widely used among writing teachers in attempt to improve students’ language accuracy in their written tasks. Experts of second language (L2) writing stated that WCF plays a significant role in language accuracy development because it is related to the development and improvement of students’ accuracy in second language writing. Corrective feedback can be grouped into direct WCF and indirect WCF. However, results in many past empirical studies were inconclusive because of variation in how the effectiveness of WCF was measured. Additionally, there is a lack of investigation pertaining to the students’ perceptions toward the feedback they received, which may reveal important factors that influence the students’ reception of the feedback that resulted in performance changes. Hence, the purpose of this study is to explore factors that contributed to the accurate use of the past tenses resulting from direct WCF and indirect WCF.  Interviews were conducted with 12 students and the qualitative findings revealed the following factors: 1) learner attitudes towards feedback provided, 2) learner beliefs towards what corrections entailed, and 3) types of scaffolding. Additionally, the findings revealed the importance of teacher-student conference, the need for students to be trained over a longer period of time in relation to the use of error codes and the need for instructor to understand and implement direct and indirect feedback accordingly in their teaching.

Keywords: written corrective feedback; second language acquisition; direct-indirect feedback; past tenses; mixed methods

Abdollahifam, S. (2014). Investigating the effects of interactional feedback on EFL students' writings. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 98, 16-21.

Ahangaria, S., Hejazib, M. & Razmjouc, L. (2014). The impact of scaffolding on content retention of Iranian post-elementary EFL learners’ summary writing. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 98, 83–89.

Aljaafreh, A. & Lantolf, J.P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The Modern Language Journal. 78(4), 465-483.

Amrhein, H.R. & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers prefer and why? The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 13(2), 95-127.

Azar, B. S. (1992). Fundamentals of English Grammar. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

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

Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback

for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research. 12(3), 409-421.

Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics. 31(2), 193–214.

Bitchener, J. & Ferris, D. (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. 191-205.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3 (2), 77-101.

Cathcart, R. & Olsen, J. (1976). Teachers’ and students’ preferences for correction of classroom errors. In J. Fanselow & R. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL ’76 (pp. 41–43). Washington DC: TESOL.

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.

Darmi, R. & Albion, P. (2013, July 4 - 5). English language in the Malaysian education system: Its existence and implications. Paper presented at the 3rd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC).

Diab, R.L. (2005). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada Journal. 23(1), 28-43.

Edwards, R. & Holland, J. (2013). What is qualitative interviewing? London: Bloomsbury.

Ellis, E.S. & Larkin, M.J. (1998). Strategic instruction for adolescents with learning disabilities. In B.Y.L. Wong (Ed), Learning about disabilities (2nd ed., pp.585-656). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Ellis, R. (1998). Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2013). Corrective feedback in teacher guides and SLA. Iranian

Journal of Language Teaching Research. 1(3), 1-18.

Ferris, D. R., Chaney, S. J., Komura, K., Roberts, B. J. & McKee, S. (2000, March 14–18). Perspectives, problems, and practices in treating written error. Colloquium presented at International TESOL Convention.

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.

Ghandi, M. & Maghsoudi, M. (2014). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ spelling errors. English Language Teaching. 7(8), 53-61.

Han, Z.H. (2002) Rethinking the role of corrective feedback in communicative language teaching. RELC Journal. 33(1), 1-34.

Hiew, W. (2012). English language teaching and learning issues in Malaysia: Learners’ perception via Facebook dialogue journal. Researchers World. 3(1), 11-19.

Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System. 31, 217-230.

Hyland, K. (2006). English for Specific Purposes: An Advance Resource Book. New York: Routledge.

James, C. (1998). Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis. London: Longman.

Kassim, A. & Ng, L. L. (2014). Investigating the efficacy of focused and unfocused corrective feedback on the accurate use of prepositions in written work. English Language Teaching. 7(2), 119-130.

Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon Press.

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

Larkin, M.J. (2002). Using scaffolded instruction to optimize learning. ERIC Digest, 1-6.

Mansourizadeh, K. & Abdullah, K. I. (2014). The effects of oral and written meta-linguistic feedback on ESL students writing. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 20(2), 117-126.

Rahimi, M. & Asadi, E. (2014). Effect of different types of written corrective feedback on accuracy and overall quality of L2 learners’ writing. European Journal of Academic Essays. 1(6), 1-7.

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

Saito, H. (1994). Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46-70.

Salimi, A. & Ahmadpour, M. (2015). The effect of direct vs. indirect written corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy in EFL context. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies. 4 (1), 10-19.

Schwartz, B. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behaviour. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 15, 147–163.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly. 41(2), 255-283.

Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian Modern Language Review. 50(1), 158-64.

Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research. 37, 285-304.

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 and Learning Language and Literature. 7(3), 30-46.

Truscott, J. (1996). Review article: The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning. 46(2), 327-369.

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing. 16, 255-272.

van Beuningen, C.V., De Jong, N.H. & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners' written accuracy. ITL-Review of Applied Linguistics. 156, 279-296.

van Beuningen, C.V. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies. 10(2), 1-27.

van Beuningen, C.V., De Jong N.H. & Kuiken F. (2012) Evidence of the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning. 62(1), 1-49.