Thai EFL Learners’ Preferences and Justifications on Teacher Written Corrective Feedback: A Mixed-Methods Investigation
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study explores Thai EFL learners’ preferences and justifications regarding various types of teacher written corrective feedback (WCF) and investigates their relationship with English proficiency. A bilingual questionnaire incorporating Likert-scale items and open-ended questions was administered to 57 third-year English majors at a northern Thai university. The results indicate the strongest preference for no feedback and content only, followed by direct feedback supplemented by metalinguistic comment, suggesting that students value not only explicit correction but also conceptual understanding. Vocabulary and grammar were identified as the most significant areas requiring attention, whereas punctuation was assigned to be the lowest priority. Statistical analysis revealed no significant correlation between CEPT scores and feedback preferences, implying that learner beliefs and prior educational experiences exert a stronger influence than proficiency level. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses highlighted clarity, usefulness for revision, and emotional reassurance as central considerations shaping students’ preferences. In contrast, vague or absent feedback was frequently associated with confusion, frustration, and diminished motivation. These findings underscore the necessity of aligning feedback practices with learner expectations while promoting feedback literacy to enhance students’ capacity to interpret and apply corrections effectively. Overall, the study contributes to ongoing discussions on WCF and offers pedagogical implications for improving EFL writing instruction within teacher-centered educational contexts.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Abu-Rasheed, H., Ruseti, S., Drăgan, M., & Mitrovic, A. (2023, July 27). Context based learning: A survey of contextual indicators for personalized learning recommendation systems. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1210968. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1210968
Agbonifo, O. C. (2022, June 8). Design of a personalised adaptive ubiquitous learning system. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–21. DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2022.2084114
Amrhein, H. R., & Nassaji, H. (2010, November 3). Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers think is right and why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 95–127. Retrieved October 8, 2025, from https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/ article/view/19886
Bitchener, J. (2008, June). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102–118. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.
Black, D. A., & Nanni, A. (2016, October). Written corrective feedback: Preferences and justifications of teachers and students in a Thai context. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 16(3), 99–114. DOI: 10.17576/gema-2016-1603-07
Chingchit, O. (2024, July 29). Written corrective feedback under SLA lens: From research to practice. DOI: 10.70730/dssb5633
DeKeyser, R. (2007, May 20). Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009, April). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97–107. DOI: 10.1093/elt/ccn023
Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 33–53. DOI: 10.2307/3587804
Ferris, D. R. (2010, April 23). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181–201. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263109990490
Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001, August). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161-184. DOI: 10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X
Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2015, December.). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31–44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002
Hartshorn, K. J., & Evans, N. W. (2012). The differential effects of comprehensive and dynamic written corrective feedback on ESL writers. In Rosa Manchón (Ed.), L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives (pp. 31–60). Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hyland, K. (1998, September). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255–286. DOI: 10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90017-0
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (Eds.). (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Indrakusuma, A. H., Setyosari, P, Sulton, & Waras. (2024, July 19). The influence of personalized web-based learning on the mastery and application of concepts in students with different learning styles. Jurnal teknologi Pendidikan, 26(1), 291-305. DOI: 10.21009/ jtp.v26i1.45877
Kang, E. Y., & Han, Z. (2015, April 28). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–18. DOI: 10.1111/modl.12189
Kantamara, P., Hallinger, P., & Jatiket, M. (2006). Scaling-up educational reform in Thailand: Context, collaboration, networks and change. Planning and Changing, 37(1-2), 5-23. Retrieved May 1, 2026 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ756213.pdf
Khattak, A. I., & Saad, M. (2024, July 26). The comparative effectiveness of focused and comprehensive written corrective feedback on writing accuracy: A mixed-methods perspective. IIUM Journal of Educational Studies, 12(2), 33–52. DOI: 10.31436/ijes.v12i2.519
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
Norouzian, R., & Farahani, A. A. (2012, June). Written corrective feedback and the impact of learner expectations in EFL contexts. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(11), 2274–2282. DOI: 10.4304/tpls.2.11.2274-2282
Razmjoo, S. A., & Hoomanfard, M. H. (2012). On the effect of cooperative writing on students' writing ability, WTC, self-efficacy, and apprehension. World Journal of English Language, 2(2), 19-28. d DOI: 10.5430/wjel.v2n2p19
Rasool, U., Mahmood, R., Aslam, M. Z., Barzani, S. H. H., & Qian, J. (2023, July 22). Perceptions and preferences of senior high school students about written corrective feedback in Pakistan. SAGE Open, 13(3), Article 21582440231187612. DOI: 10.1177/21582440231187612
Rastgou, A. (2024, March.). Cyclical interplay between L2 writing, WCF processing and rewriting: Explaining modification and consolidation in L2 development. Journal of Second Language Writing. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101078
Schmidt, R. W. (1990, June). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. DOI: 10.1093/applin/11.2.129
Schulz, R. A. (2001, December 17). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerningthe role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA–Colombia. Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244–258. DOI: 10.1111/0026-7902.00107
Shao, X. (2015). On written corrective feedback in L2 writing. English Language Teaching, 8(3), 155–168. DOI: 10.5539/elt.v8n3p155
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 DOI: 10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.
Srichanyachon, N. (2011, December 30). Written feedback in English writing: Students’ preferences. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 5(2), 103–110. Retrieved September 3, 2025, from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/hasss/article/view/7149
Torrance, H. (2007, October 23). Assessment in post-secondary education and training: Editorial introduction. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 277–279. DOI: 10.1080/09695940701591859
Truscott, J. (1996, June.). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wondim, B. M., Bishaw, K. S., & Zeleke, Y. T. (2023, February 16). Effects of teachers’ written corrective feedback on the writing achievement of first‐year Ethiopian University Students. Education Research International, 2023(1), 7129978. DOI: 10.1155/2023/7129978
Zhang, Z., & Hyland, K. (2018, April). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2018.08.001
Zulkepli, N. S., & Hussin, S. (2021). Facilitating L2 WTC: A review of past studies. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(Special Issue 1), 160–172. Retrieved May 1, 2026, from https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/2006
