Evaluation of error correction in writing process


  • Cuong Phu Nguyen Hanoi University of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam



How to Cite

Nguyen, C. P. (2019). Evaluation of error correction in writing process. Vietnam Journal of Education, 3(2), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.52296/vje.2019.42


It is obvious that English has become a popular language in many countries in the world. As a means of communication, English guarantees better mutual understanding and has become indispensable for most of people around the world. Thus, it is necessary to find out an appropriate and effective methods of giving feedback to help university students improve their English writing skills. The result of this study indicates that using indirect coded feedback in error correction help students make noticeable progress. The students’ positive attitude towards teacher’s feedback (indirect coded feedback) means that they enjoyed using error codes to find and correct their errors. Moreover, their confidence was boosted because error codes motivated them.


Download data is not yet available.


Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 227-258.

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191-205.

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267-296.

Chiang Kwun-Man, K. (2004). An Investigation into Students’ Preferences for and Responses to Teacher Feedback and Its Implications for Writing Teachers. Hong Kong Teachers’ Centre Journal, 3, 98-115.

Cumming, A. (1985). Responding to the Writing of ESL Students. Highway One, 8, 58-78.

Diab, R. L. (2006). Error Correction and Feedback in the EFL Writing Classroom: Comparing Instructor and Student Preferences. English Teaching Forum, 44(3), 2-13.

Erel, S. & Bulut, D. (2007). Error treatment in L2 writing: a comparative study of direct and indirect coded feedback in Turkish EFL context. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Sayı, 22, 397-415.

Hamouda, A. (2011). A Study of Students and Teachers’ Preferences and Attitudes towards Correction of Classroom Written Errors in Saudi EFL Context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128-141.

Hendrickson, J. M. (1984). Error Analysis and Error Correction in Language Teaching. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

Kepner, C. G. (1991). An Experiment in the Relationship of Types of Written Feedback to the Development of Second Language Writing Skills. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 305-313.

Lauren, S. (2005). A Step-By-Step Guide to Narrative Writing. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group.

Lee, I. (2002). Helping Students Develop Coherence in Writing. English Teaching Forum, 40(3), 32-39.

Lee, I. (2005). Error Correction in the L2 Writing Classroom: What Do Students Think?. TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1-16.

Leki, I. (1992). Understanding ESL Writers. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Natasha P. et al. (2011). Impact of Immediate and Delayed Error Feedback on Iranian EFL Learners’ Improvement of Writing Mechanics. The Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Languages, Literature and Linguistics.

Reid, J. (1993). Teaching ESL Writing. Englewood Cliffs, HJ: Prentice-Hall Regents.

Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of Feedback on Error and Its Effect on EFL Writing Quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-93.




How to Cite

Nguyen, C. P. (2019). Evaluation of error correction in writing process. Vietnam Journal of Education, 3(2), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.52296/vje.2019.42