Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Print publication year: 2021
  • Online publication date: February 2021

10 - Written Corrective Feedback

from Part III - Different Delivery Modes of Corrective Feedback


Feedback delivery in the form of written corrective feedback on linguistic errors in L2 learners’ written texts has been central to much of the L2 writing and second language acquisition literature since the 1970s. This chapter surveys the various feedback options together with explanations of their typical pedagogical purposes and what we know from the research literature and recent theoretical proposals about the ways in which the feedback options may facilitate or impede the L2 learning process. The chapter closes with a range of recommended pedagogical options based on the available literature.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of second language writing, 17(2), 102118.
Bitchener, J. (2019). The intersection between SLA and feedback research. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed., pp. 85105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bitchener, J. & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. London: Routledge.
Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409431.
Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2010a). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193214.
Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2010b). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207217.
Bitchener, J. & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
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), 191205.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97107.
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M. & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353371.
Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Frear, D. & Chiu, Y. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 2434.
Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Guenette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 4053.
Hendrickson, J. (1980). The treatment of error in written work. Modern Language Journal, 64(2), 216221.
Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 305313.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66(2), 140149.
Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 6985.
Lee, I. (2017). Working hard or working smart: Comprehensive or focused written corrective feedback in L2 academic contexts. In J. Bitchener, N. Storch, R. Wette, (eds.), Teaching writing for academic purposes to multilingual students (pp. 168180). New York: Routledge.
Li, S. (2017). The efficacy of written corrective feedback on second language development: The impact of feedback type, revision type, learning motivation and strtaegies. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48(2), 183218.
Qi, G. (2015). The impact of explicitness of written CF, targeted linguistic form and proficiency level on the effectiveness of written CF: A mixed-methods study. Unpublished doctoral thesis, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Robb, T., Ross, S. & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. Tesol Quarterly, 20(1), 8395.
Rummel, S. (2014). Student and teacher beliefs about written CF and the effect these beliefs have on uptake: A multiple case study of Laos and Kuwait. Unpublished doctoral thesis, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Rummel, S. & Bitchener, J. (2015). The effectiveness of written corrective feedback and the impact Lao learners’ beliefs have on uptake. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 38(1), 6482.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 332). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Semke, H. D. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), 195202.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. Tesol Quarterly, 41(2), 255283.
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. London: Springer.
Sheen, Y., Wright, D. & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37(4), 556569.
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23(1), 103110.
Shintani, N. & Ellis, R. (2013). The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 286306. DOI:
Shintani, N., Ellis, R. & Suzuki, W. (2014). Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103131. DOI:10.1111/lang.12029.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stefanou, C. & Revesz, A. (2015). Direct written corrective feedback, learners differences and the acquisition of second language article use for generic and specific plural reference. Modern Language Journal, 99(2), 263282.
Tomlin, R. S. & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183203.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327369.
Truscott, J. & Hsu, A. Y. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292305.
Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H. & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy. ITL-Review of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279296.
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), 141.