Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0

Main Article Content

Abstract

Previous research has explored politeness strategies in contexts such as classroom interactions and online communication; however, further investigation across diverse dimensions of educational discourse is necessary. This study examines the politeness strategies utilized by lecturers when delivering Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) to undergraduate EFL students in Indonesia. This research adopted a descriptive qualitative research design comprising data from twelve files of WCF collected from the Contrastive Error Analysis course at a public university in Indonesia. Discourse-based coding was employed to analyze the data, identifying the four maxims of politeness theory: positive politeness, negative politeness, off-record strategies, and bald-on-record expressions. The findings showed that the lecturer applied all four politeness strategies; furthermore, positive and negative politeness were the most frequently used. Positive politeness was expressed through praise, encouragement, and inclusive language to enhance students' confidence, whereas negative politeness was demonstrated through hedging, indirect suggestions, and question forms that maintained student autonomy. Off-record strategies primarily addressed higher-order issues, including coherence and argumentation, while bald-on-record strategies were limited to surface-level corrections. The findings enhance the understanding of feedback discourse and provide implications for improving feedback practices in EFL contexts, especially within Indonesian higher education.

Keywords

Politeness Strategy Written Corrective Feedback Discourse Analysis

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

In submitting the manuscript to the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • The publication has been approved by the author(s) and by responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.

License and Copyright Agreement

Authors who publish with FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Author Biographies

Asmida Yanti Siregar, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Asmida is a postgraduate student at Department of English Language Education, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Nida Husna, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Nida is a senior lecturer at Department of English Language Education, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

How to Cite
Siregar, A. Y., Hidayat, D. N., & Husna, N. (2026). Politeness Strategies in Lecturers’ Written Corrective Feedback: A Discourse Analysis in Indonesian EFL Higher Education. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(1), 189-207. https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v7i1.334
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Afidawati, Arrasyid, & I. (2024). (2024). (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies) P-ISSN: 2407-2575 E-ISSN: 2503-2194 https://jurnalfaktarbiyah.iainkediri.ac.id/index.php/jeels. Listening To Students’ and Teachers’ Voices: Online Teaching Practices Leading To Efl Learners ’ Demotivation, 10(January 2024), 119–148. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v10i2.Submission
  2. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
  3. Canggung Darong, H., Kadarisman, A. E., & Basthomi, Y. (2020). Teachers’ Politeness Markers in Request in Classroom Interactions. NOBEL: Journal of Literature and Language Teaching, 11(2), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.15642/nobel.2020.11.2.217-233
  4. Fitriyani, S., & Andriyanti, E. (2020). Teacher and Students’ Politeness Strategies in EFL Classroom Interactions. Politeness Strategies in EFL Classroom Interactions Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 2020. www.ijeltal.org
  5. Hafidhoh, H., Agus, C., Sunan, U., & Yogyakarta, K. (n.d.). Teacher Feedback and Student Writing Improvement in EFL Classrooms: A Longitudinal Study.
  6. Huisman, B., Saab, N., van Driel, J., & van den Broek, P. (2018). Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(6), 955–968. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1424318
  7. Hyland, K. (2019). Feedback in Second Language Writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  8. Hyland, K. (2021). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts, issues, and practices. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1843125
  9. Irfani, B., & O’boyle, A. (2024). Teacher practices and student preferences of oral corrective feedback in Indonesian EFL classrooms: A Vygotskian perspective. Training, Language and Culture, 8(1), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-1-101-114
  10. Kazemi, M., Abadikhah, S., & Dehqan, M. (2018). EFL Students’ Perceptions of Teacher Feedback and Intra-Feedback in Writing Essays. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 21(2), 26–49. https://doi.org/10.5782/2223-2621.2018.21.2.26
  11. Khan, M. A., Khan, M. R., & Chughtai, I. A. (2020). ESL Learners’ Sense of Alienation: An Exploratory Mixed Method Research on the Role of ESL Teachers’ Remarking Practices. English Language Teaching, 13(11), 59. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n11p59
  12. Khodadust, M. R. (2024). Politeness and Corrective Feedback: Immediate and Delayed Performance. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 37–155. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2024.54354.2395
  13. Kim, Y. J., Choi, B., Kang, S., Kim, B., & Yun, H. (2020). Comparing the effects of direct and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback: Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 53(1), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12443
  14. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educational research from theory to practice. Jossey-Bass.
  15. Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. In Language Teaching (Vol. 46, Issue 1, pp. 1–40). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365
  16. Mahvelati, E. H. (2021). Learners’ perceptions and performance under peer versus teacher corrective feedback conditions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.100995
  17. Mao, Z., Lee, I., & Li, S. (2024). Written corrective feedback in second language writing: A synthesis of naturalistic classroom studies. In Language Teaching (Vol. 57, Issue 4, pp. 449–477). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000393
  18. Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. In Language Teaching Research (Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 129–132). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815572747
  19. Pathanasin, S., & Eschstruth, I. (2022). The Politeness Strategies of Thai Undergraduates in an Instant Messaging Application. REFLections, 29(1), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v29i1.258888
  20. Peng, Y. (2020). A Pragmatic Study of Junior High School Teachers’ Speech Act of Criticism from the Perspective of Politeness Principle. English Language Teaching, 13(4), 11. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n4p11
  21. Rashad, W., & Bin-Hady, A. (n.d.). Correcting Students’ Essays Interactively in Face-to-face Mode: A Study of Yemeni EFL Undergraduates’ Attitudes 1. In MEXTESOL Journal (Vol. 49, Issue 2).
  22. Rivai, M., Yusri, Y., Rivai, A. T. O., & Anwar, M. (2021). Teachers’ language politeness, students’ academic motivation and self-efficacy during school from home. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 16(5), 2161–2172. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v16i5.6236
  23. Santiago Sanchez, H. (2024). Teacher-written feedback in L2 writing education: Insights into student tensions and responses. Feedback Research in Second Language, 2, 58–80. https://doi.org/10.32038/frsl.2024.02.04
  24. Sarré, C., Grosbois, M., & Brudermann, C. (2021). Fostering accuracy in L2 writing: Impact of different types of corrective feedback in an experimental blended learning EFL course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 54(5–6), 707–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1635164
  25. Shen, R., & Chong, S. W. (2023). Learner engagement with written corrective feedback in ESL and EFL contexts: a qualitative research synthesis using a perception-based framework. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(3), 276–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2072468
  26. Sudar, Sukarni, S., Setiyono, J., Widoyoko, S. E. P., & Irianto, S. (2025). Language politeness in EFL student-lecturer interactions through technology-assisted communication. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(1), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v15i1.69949
  27. Supiani, Yansyah, & Basthomi, Y. (2023). Indonesian University Students’ Engagement with Teacher’s Written Corrective Feedback in English as an Additional Language Writing Classroom. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2023.121334
  28. Widiastuti, T., Mafulah, O. S., Puspitasari, S., & Holland, Y. (2023). Online Feedback in Integrative Blogging: Cultivating Students’ Writing Performance and Learning Engagement. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v10i2
  29. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.