Abstract

The present study sought to examine the relative efficacy of three different types of written corrective feedback, as well as feedback compared with no feedback, in the context of responses to student writing quality. This study involved 60 students from the Department of English Language and Translation in the College of Languages and Translation at King Saud University. The students were divided into three groups of 20 students each. There were two experimental groups (Group A and Group B) and one control group (Group C). Groups A and B received direct and indirect written corrective feedback, respectively, while Group C received minimal written corrective feedback. The subjects were evaluated through pre- and post-tests. The study also aimed to explore the attitudes of the subjects about the different forms of written corrective feedback and attempted to find whether there was any relationship between the subjects’ attitudes and the actual effects of the types of written corrective feedback on their writing. Results showed that among the three types of feedback, direct written corrective feedback was the most effective in improving students’ writing quality, and that this form of feedback was the most preferred by the subjects. The pedagogical implications were discussed, limitations of the study were presented, and suggestions for further research projects were proposed.

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