The Relationship between Iranian Teachers' Experience and Education, and their Written Feedback on their Students' Papers

Document Type : Original Article


1 Faculty of Humanities, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran

2 Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran


This cross-sectional study was designed to explore the written corrective feedback (WCF) strategies employed by Iranian university teachers and the focus of their feedback; we also aimed to determine the relationship between the use of the identified strategies and the teachers' teaching experience and educational level. To this end, 100 MA and PhD volunteer teachers with various years of experience in teaching English from different universities in Iran participated in this investigation. Each male or female participant was requested to provide the researchers with a batch of rated writing essays which contained at least 15 papers. Afterwards, the collected essays were analyzed in terms of feedback strategy types and focus of feedback. To analyze the relationship between feedback strategies and teacher characteristic variables, we used the chi-square test. The findings indicated that the teachers used all the feedback strategies under study including direct, indirect, comprehensive, and selective strategies with the predominance of direct and selective ones. Besides, form followed by organization received the teachers’ attention in the current research more than other aspects of writing. The results of the chi-square test showed that education, rather than experience, had a significant relationship with the teachers’ feedback strategies and was a better predictor of the feedback strategies given by the teachers. At the end, pedagogical implications are provided for researchers and teachers interested in this area of study.


Al Kharusi, F.M.N. (2018). The practice of teachers’ written corrective feedback as perceived by EFL teachers and supervisors. Unpublished master’s thesis, Sultan Qaboos University, Al Khoudh, Sultanate of Oman.
Alkhawajah, F.I. (2016). The effect of direct and indirect written corrective feedback on the acquisition of rule-based and item-based linguistic features. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, York University, Canada.
Alshahrani, A., & Storch, N. (2014). Investigating teachers’ written corrective feedback practices in a Saudi EFL context: How do they align with their beliefs, institutional guidelines, and students’ preferences? ARAL, 37(2), 101-122.
Ashoori Tootkaboni, A., & Khatib, M. (2014). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback on improving writing accuracy of EFL learners. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 7(3), 30-46.
Barkaoui, K. (2010). Do ESL essay raters’ evaluation criteria change with experience? A mixed-methods, cross-sectional study. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 31-57.
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 102-118.
Budianto, S., Sulistyo, T., Widiastuti, O., F. Heriyawati, D., & Mahaban, S. (2021). Written corrective feedback across different levels of EFL students’ academic writing proficiency: Outcomes and implications. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 472-485.
Cao, P. (2017). ESL teachers’ knowledge of and experience with written corrective feedback. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Minnesota Duluth, the U.S.A.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107.
Erdosy, M.U. (2004). Exploring variability in judging writing ability in a second language: A study of four experienced raters of ESL compositions. (No. RR-03-17). Princeton, New Jersey: ETS.
Ferris, D.R. (2007). Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 165–193.
Kaivanpanah, S., Nemati, M., & Sharifi, A. (2014). Iranian TOEFL/IELTS teachers’ perception and practice of feedback in L2 writing classrooms. English Language Teaching, 1(1), 19-35.
Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 285-312.
Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 69-85.
Mao, S.S., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Investigating written corrective feedback: (mis)alignment of teachers’ beliefs and practice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 46-60.
Modirkhamene, S., Soleimani, M., & Sadeghi, K. (2017). Selective vs. comprehensive grammar correction in writing pedagogy: counter evidence to Truscott’s view. Applied Research on English Language, 6(2), 193-212.
Moradian, M. R. & Hossein-Nasab, M. (2019). Revisiting the role of indirect written corrective feedback in the light of written languaging. Teaching English Language, 13(2), 79-94.
Mostofee, S., Ghanbari, N., Nemati, F. (2016). Examining five behaviors conducted by two groups of novice and experienced raters in two rating processes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 5(4), 199-211.
Negahi, M., G. Shooshtari, Z., & Vahdat, S. (2022). Exploring the impact of unfocused indirect and direct written feedback on Iranian EFL students’ implicit and explicit knowledge of grammar. Teaching English Language, 16(1), 89-117.
Nagode, G. P., Pižorn, K., & Juriševič, M. (2014). The role of written corrective feedback in developing writing in L2. English language and literature teaching, 11(2), 89-98.
Nemati, M., Alavi, S.M., & Mohebbi, H. (2019). Assessing the effect of focused direct and focused indirect written corrective feedback on explicit and implicit knowledge of language learners. Language Testing in Asia, 9(7), 1-18.
Norouzian, R. (2015). Does teaching experience affect type, amount, and precision of the written corrective feedback? Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching, 3(5), 93-105. 
Norouzian, R., & Khomeijani Farahani, A.A. (2012). Written error feedback from perception to practice: A feedback on feedback. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(1), 11-22.
Rezaei, S., Mozaffari, F., & Hatef, A. (2011). Corrective feedback in SLA: Classroom practice and future directions. International Journal of English Linguistics,1(1), 21-29.
Salami, F.A. & Khadawardi, H. A. (2022). Written corrective feedback in online writing classrooms: EFL students’ perceptions and preferences. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 10(2), 12-35.
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.
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. Springer. 
Tatawy, M.E. (2015). Corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Retrieved from http://tesol-dev. Journals. cdrs. Columbia. Edu/up-content/ uploads/ sites/ 12/ 2015/ 05/ 4-Tatawy-2002. Pdf.
Teo, T., Khazaie, S., & Derakhshan, A. (2022). Exploring teacher immediacy-(non) dependency in the tutored augmented reality game-assisted flipped classrooms of English for medical purposes comprehension among the Asian students. Computers & Education179, 104406.
Truscott, J. (2007). The Effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255-272.
Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 18(2), 1-27.