EduLite Journal of English Education, Literature, and Culture Vol. 6, No. 2, August 2021, pp. 287-299 287 E-ISSN: 2528-4479, P-ISSN: 2477-5304 http://jurnal.unissula.ac.id/index.php/edulite DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/e.6.2.287-299 Affective damage from teachers’ written corrective feedback Gartika Pandu Bhuana*, Ula Nisa El Fauziah English Education Study Program, The Faculty of Language Education, IKIP Siliwangi, Cimahi, Indonesia *Corresponding Author Email: gartika@ikipsiliwangi.ac.id Received: Revised: Accepted: Published: 14 December 2020 2 July 2021 20 August 2021 31 August 2021 Abstract Several studies believe that providing feedback on a students’ writing task offers several benefits. However, giving excessive corrections on students’ mistakes can have a negative impact on the students’ feeling. This study aims to investigate English Foreign Language students’ emotional response to the teachers’ written corrective feedback. A qualitative method was applied. The participants were 72 third grade students at an institution in Cimahi. To collect the data, a five-point Likert scale questionnaire and a semi-structured interview were applied. The results revealed that the teachers’ written corrective feedback had negative impact to the students’ feelings, especially for the students who had mid and low proficiency level in writing. It even led to the students’ demotivation. This indicates that the teachers have to consider several things before they give some written feedback as it can affect the students’ attitude in a negative way. Keywords: teacher’s written corrective feedback; students’ emotional response INTRODUCTION How teachers correct second language students’ writing has become an interested topic to be discussed. The controversy of its usage has made its own challenge. The debate between Ferris and Truscott in 1990s is a basis for many studies to investigate deeply the use of written corrective feedback (WCF) for second language students. Written corrective feedback is basically the teachers’ method to correct the students’ errors production in writing (Ellis, 2009) in order to provide a guidance for them to rewrite their writing. Written corrective feedback can take many different forms. However, two overly discussed types are direct and indirect corrective feedback. The first type of feedback focuses on the provision of the correct form of students’ errors (Bitchener et al., 2005; Hyland & Hyland, 2006; Domakani & Roohani, 2010; Irwin, 2017; Goksoy & Nazli, 2016; Westmacott, 2017). In this type of feedback, the teachers identify the error, clarifies the ideas, and provides the correct form. This feedback has an additional form known as metalinguistic feedback, in which the teachers brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk provided by Portal Jurnal Universitas Islam Sultan Agung (UNISSULA)