Exploring Lecturers' Written Corrective Feedback in Academic English Writing Course: A Qualitative Study

Abstract

This study aims to identify the written corrective feedback (WCF) strategies employed by lecturers in an Academic English Writing course and to describe how these strategies are implemented in students’ written work. The research problem arises from the limited understanding of how lecturers select and apply corrective feedback strategies in authentic Indonesian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) academic writing contexts. Although WCF is an important pedagogical practice, its implementation varies according to instructional objectives, students’ abilities, and classroom conditions. This study employed a descriptive qualitative design involving two lecturers and 12 students in the English Language Education Study Program during the second semester of the 2025/2026 academic year. Data were collected through classroom observations, document analysis of students’ corrected writing, and semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed using the interactive model of Miles et al., with feedback strategies categorized according to Ellis’s typology. The findings revealed three WCF strategies: direct, indirect, and metalinguistic feedback. Direct feedback involved rewriting incorrect forms and adding missing linguistic elements, particularly in grammar, word choice, capitalization, and punctuation. Indirect feedback used underlining and highlighting to help students identify errors independently, while metalinguistic feedback provided comments guiding students to revise paragraph-level problems. The lecturers’ choices were influenced by instructional stages, delivery modes, and perceptions of students’ readiness. These findings highlight the importance of applying varied and context-sensitive feedback strategies to support students’ academic writing development.