The effectiveness of direct and indirect written corrective feedback on the written production of Saudi female EFL preparatory students and their emotional, cognitive, behavioral engagements and satisfaction.

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of four corrective feedback kinds: holistic comments, direct, indirect, and “indirect-direct combined” corrective feedback on the writing production of Saudi EFL female undergraduate students. Specifically, the study seeks to examine whether the various types of CF affect the performance of Saudi students in composing a descriptive essay and measure the improvement in using content, organization, language use, vocabulary, and mechanics Also, it intends to specify the best type of written feedback that supplies them with affective support, fosters motivation, encourages them to continue learning, and improves their descriptive writing skills. It also investigates students' engagement levels behaviorally, cognitively, and emotionally with the WCF. One hundred thirty-six Saudi students were randomly assigned into four groups: one control group and three experimental groups. Each of these groups was exposed to only one type of corrective feedback (Holistic, DF, IF, and DIF) and undertook two tests, pre-test, and post-test, and produced two descriptive essays.

To assess the effectiveness of corrective feedback, a quantitative approach was employed, with a quasi- experimental design to measure descriptive writing proficiency. Data were collected using two different instruments: a pre and post-test and a student's engagement and satisfaction questionnaire. The student performance within each group was compared using the paired-sample T-test, while the performance across the four groups using the one-way ANOVA test.

The results of the data analysis showed that providing EFL students with indirect CF followed by direct CF (combined) through the process-genre approach was the most effective strategy in improving their proficiency in descriptive essay writing—including content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. The results also revealed that students in the IDCF group showed the highest behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement with teaching approaches and feedback. ID group students closely followed, although their emotional engagement was narrower. However, IF group students displayed positive behavioral engagement, but their cognitive and emotional involvement was less comprehensive. Some students had limited interaction, resulting in neutral or negative engagement. The findings are discussed in the context of the related literature and provide pedagogical implications and recommendations for future research