Main Article Content


This study is intended to find out any difference in effectiveness between direct and indirect feedback on students’ writing ability. The design was Quasi-Experiment. The population consisted of the students of the X class of Senior
High School 4, Rejang Lebong, Curup, Indonesia. The samples comprised 32 students in group 1 and 32 Students in group 2. The instrument was a writing test. In the data analysis, the researcher used the normality, homogeneity,
and t-test.These were calculated and analyzed by using SPSS 20. The tests consisted of pre-test and post-test. In post-test, there was no significant difference between groups on all aspect. There were two results of this study.
Firstly, in the post test there was a difference of mean score between experiment group 1 and experiment group 2. In general ability, in group 1 increased by 15.59. Meanwhile, the group 2 increased by 2.60. This indicated that there was an effect of indirect feedback on students’ writing ability. From t-test calculation, t-count was 3.274 which t-table was 1.670. It showed that t obtained was bigger than t-table (3.274 > 1.670). H0 was rejected and H1 was accepted. In other words, the indirect feedback technique was effective on students’ wri ting ability. Based on the data analysis, the indirect feedback technique was positively effective in increasing on students’ writing ability, on general writing ability. There were also significant differences between both groups in the writing ability aspects such as organization, language use and vocabulary.


Article Details

How to Cite
Latifah, Y., Suwarno, B., & Diani, I. (2019). THE EFFECT OF TEACHERS’ DIRECT AND INDIRECT FEEDBACK ON STUDENT’ S WRITING ABILITY. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 3(2), 47–58.


  1. Adas, D & Ayda, B.(2013). Writing
  2. difficulties and new solution:blended learning as an approach to
  3. improve writing abilities. International Journal of Humanities and
  4. Social Science, 3(9), 255.
  5. Astuti, Puji A. (2013).The effectiveness of peer feedback to improve the writing ability of the tenth grade students of SMA
  6. Kanisius Harapan Tirtomoyo in the academic year of 2012/2013 (Skripsi).
  7. Pend. Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Yogyakarta. Indonesia.
  8. Ellis, R.(2008). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT
  9. Journal, 28(2), 97-107.
  10. Eslami, E.(2014). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback
  11. techniques on EFL students’ writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98.445-452.
  12. Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes. How
  13. explicit does it need to be?. Journal of Second Language Writing. 10(3), 161184.
  14. Jamalinesari, A & friends.(2015). The effects teacher-written direct vs indirect feedback on students’ writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192.116-123.
  15. Gay, L.R & Peter A. (2000). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application. (6thed).
  16. Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers
  17. ’written feedback practices in Hong
  18. Kong secondary classrooms. Journal
  19. of Second Language Writing, 17, 69-85.
  20. Sokolik, M. (2003). Writing. In D. Nunan
  21. (ed.), Practical English language
  22. teaching. New York, NY: McGraw
  23. Hill.
  24. Utami, U (2012).Improving students’ writing
  25. skill through teacher’s direct feedback in
  26. SMA n 1 Jogonalan.skripsi. Pend.
  27. Bahasa Inggris, Universitas
  28. Yogyakarta, Indonesia.