<![CDATA[Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) is one of the most widely used and researched pedagogical strategies in teaching English writing as a foreign/second language (EFL/ESL), yet findings on its effectiveness remain mixed and scattered across different research contexts. This study synthesizes the literature on the types of WCF that have been investigated, the practices shown to be effective, and the factors moderating their effectiveness in EFL/ESL writing classrooms. A systematic literature review (SLR) design was employed following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, with articles retrieved from several academic databases (Scopus, ERIC, Taylor & Francis Online, SpringerLink, and SAGE Journals), supplemented by Google Scholar. Following identification, screening, and eligibility assessment, a number of empirical studies published between 2015 and 2025 were synthesized to address three research questions. The review identified ten categories of WCF, with the direct–indirect dichotomy emerging as the most dominant classification framework. Direct WCF was found to be more effective in enhancing short-term grammatical accuracy, particularly among lower-proficiency learners, whereas indirect WCF was more effective in fostering long-term retention and learner autonomy, especially among higher-proficiency learners. No single type of WCF was found to be universally superior; rather, its effectiveness was shaped by several moderating factors, namely learner proficiency, error characteristics, affective and motivational factors, feedback modality, and the gap between teachers' beliefs and practices. These findings indicate that the effectiveness of WCF is context-dependent and multifaceted, suggesting that teachers should adopt a differentiated approach to WCF tailored to learners' needs and proficiency levels.]]>
