Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback: A Literature Review of Sampling and Design Features, Target Structures and Overall Effects

Abstract

Scholars' attention on written corrective feedback especially the direct-indirect dichotomy has been increasing due to inconsistencies in its effects toward L2 learners’ linguistic accuracy. Therefore, this study was performed to provide a literature review of the increasing number of WCF studies that may provide new perspectives for future research on direct-indirect WCF strategies. This study takes a systematic literature approach to synthesize 16 empirical studies that focusing on the effect of direct-indirect WCF from SCOPUS database. The 7-step systematic review process was used as the main approach for this study. 4 research questions were formulated to guide the study. The findings have revealed the sampling features of ESL context, beginner, and advanced proficiency levels of learners are underexplored. Moreover, it is also suggested that future studies incorporate control groups to compare the effects of direct-indirect WCF strategies with non-treatment groups. Methodologically, other research approaches should also be considered by future studies for most of the studies in the review applied experimental approach. In highlighting the targeted linguistic structures, this study has found the focus of studies in the review as mostly emphasizing on grammatical aspect, thus suggesting for more WCF studies on non-grammatical aspects. Finally, the overall effect suggests that indirect WCF was effective on both grammatical and non-grammatical structures whereas direct WCF was mostly effective on non-grammatical structures.

Direct Written Corrective Feedback for Tenth Graders Recount Text: Adequate Practice to Boost Sentential Accuracy

“…With direct WCF, it could help writers to improve their ability to write something so that writers could avoid writing errors following what had been given when getting WCF (Ferris, 1995) because writers obtained information and knowledge that might not have been known before or already known but not implemented properly. In this study, it could be found that students getting direct WCF performed better than students only getting general comments on their writing through the scores at the end of learning because direct WCF reduced writing errors in grammar (Fhaeizdhyall, 2020) and improved students' ability to understand sentences based on lexical or grammatical structures (Ellis, 2009;Firwana, 2011) so that some of the above aspects became a unity that affected each other.…”