Students’ Problems of Dealing with Lecturer’s Indirect Corrective Feedback on Argumentative Writing

  • Hasanul Misbah Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta
  • Fitri Kurniawan Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta


This study was aimed at describing the problems the students encountered while dealing with the lecturer’s indirect corrective feedback on their argumentative writing. This study adapted qualitative approach. The participants involved were 20 fifth semester students of Writing III subject in Jakarta Muhammadiyah University. The study conducted in the period of September-October, 2017. The data were collected using interview and documentation. The data were analyzed through Miles and Huberman Model. The results of study showed that students faced problems with: 1) the writing components such as writing content, writing organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics; 2) Writing plan namely, lack of writing preparation and of learning management; 3. Writing process such as ineffective teamwork, big-size class, no background knowledge of the teacher-assigned topics, incomprehensible teaching materials, unreadable and hard to respond feedback, and lack of motivation. The study concluded that students still faced many problems generally with learning writing and specifically of dealing with the feedback and there should be changes of strategy from the feedback to perform better writing progress.


Aghaei, P. (2013). Learners’ Perception toward the Effect of Recast on the Quality of Their Oral Output. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3, pp. 233—237

Ahmadi-Azad, S. (2014). The Effect of Coded and Uncoded Written Corrective Feedback Types on Iranian Learners Writing Accuracy. Journal of Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4, pp. 1001—1008. doi:10.4304/tpls.4.5.1001-1008

Ahmadi, D., Maftoon, P., & Mehrdad, A.G. (2012). Investigating the Effect of Two Types of Feedback on EFL Students’ Writing. Journal of Social & Behavioral Sciences, 46, pp. 2590-2595. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.529

Bitchener, J. & Ferris, D.R. (2012). Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. New York: Routledge Ltd.

Bonyadi, A. &Zeinalpur, S. (2014). Perceptions of Students Towards Self-selected and Teacher-assigned Topics in EFL Writing. Journal of Social &Behavioral Sciences, 98, pp. 385—391.doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.430

Brown, H.D. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5thed.). New York: Pearson Education

Broughton, G., Brumfit, C., Flavell, R., Hill, P., &Pincas, A. (2003). Teaching English as a Foreign Language (2nd ed.). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Creswell, J.W. (2012). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Deane, P. & Song, Y. (2014). A Case Study in Principled Assessment Design: Designing Assessment to Measure and Support the Development of Argumentative Reading and Writing Skills. Journal of PsicologiaEducativa, 20, pp. 99—108. doi: 10.1016/j.pse.2014.10.001

Eslami, E. (2014). The Effects of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback Techniques on EFL Students’ Writing. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, pp. 445—452. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.438

Fahim, M. & Hashtroodi, P. (2012). The Effect of Critical Thinking on Developing Argumentative Essays by Iranian EFL University Students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3, pp. 632—638. doi:10.4304/jltr.3.4.632-638

Hosseiny, M. (2014). The Role of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback in Improving Iranian EFL students’ Writing Skill. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, pp. 668—674. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.466

Indreica, E-S, Cazan A-M, & Truta, C. (2011). Effects on Learning Styles and time management on Academic Achievement. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, pp. 1096—1102

Ka-kan-dee, M. & Kaur, S. (2015). Teaching Strategies Used by Thai EFL Lecturers to Teach Argumentative Writing. Journal of Social & Behavioral Sciences,208, pp. 143—156

Ketsman, O. (2012). Expectations in the Foreign Language Classrooms: A Case Study. Journal of The Qualitative Report, 12, pp. 1—21.

Leng, K.T.P. (2014). An Analysis of Written Feedback on ESL Students’ Writing. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, pp. 389—397. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1437

Miles, M., B. & Huberman, A., M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: A sourcebook for new methods (2nded.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Oshima, A. & Hogue, A. (2006). Writing Academic English. London: Pearson Longman Ltd, pp. 142—147

Qin, J., &Karabacak, E. (2013) Turkish EFL University Instructor’ Practices in Providing Written Feedback. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, pp. 95—100. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.044

Sun, Z. (2010). Language Teaching Materials and Learner Motivation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(6), pp. 889—892. doi:10.4304/jltr.1.6.889-892

Van Eemeren&Grootendorst. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vyatkina, N. (2011). Writing Instruction and Policies for Written Corrective Feedback in the Basic Language Sequence. L2 Journal, 3, pp. 63—92

Wigglesworth, G. & Storch, N. 2012. What Role for Collaboration in Writing and Writing Feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, pp. 364—374.
How to Cite
MISBAH, Hasanul; KURNIAWAN, Fitri. Students’ Problems of Dealing with Lecturer’s Indirect Corrective Feedback on Argumentative Writing. Pedagogy : Journal of English Language Teaching, [S.l.], v. 6, n. 2, p. 107-120, jan. 2019. ISSN 2580-1473. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 06 oct. 2022. doi:

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.