The Effectiveness of Critical Writing Feedback as Pedagogical Responses in English Writing Classrooms: Evidence from Bangladesh Secondary Schools Education

Abstract

Writing feedback is essential because it helps learners recognize weaknesses, refine ideas, and revise texts purposefully. Yet secondary-school feedback often remains focused on surface errors rather than argument, organization, evidence, and critical engagement. This study investigated how critical writing feedback was implemented and perceived in Ethiopian secondary-school English classrooms and examined its contribution to students’ writing quality, critical engagement, and revision practices. A qualitative descriptive design involved 12 purposively selected English teachers. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and 24 non-participant classroom observations using validated interview and observation guides. The data were analyzed through iterative processes of data reduction, data display, conclusion drawing, and verification. The findings showed that feedback was predominantly teacher-led and concentrated on grammar, spelling, vocabulary, punctuation, and sentence construction. Higher-order feedback on ideas, coherence, argument, evidence, audience, and organization occurred less consistently, although teachers with process-writing experience used more dialogic questions and explanations. Students responded more positively to specific, respectful, and example-based comments than to vague symbols or corrective markings. Peer feedback, self-assessment, conferencing, and multiple-draft revision were limited by large classes, examination pressure, restricted time, uneven proficiency, and teacher workload. Teachers perceived moderate improvement in language accuracy, organization, critical engagement, and revision when feedback was prioritized, explained, and followed by redrafting. However, many revisions remained superficial. The study concludes that critical writing feedback is most productive when it is dialogic, criteria-based, emotionally supportive, and integrated with opportunities for revision. Teacher development and assessment policies should recognize feedback as a learning process rather than final correction.