Numerous previous studies have explored the effectiveness of written and automated corrective feedback. While some have highlighted the benefits of written feedback in enhancing students' writing skills, others have demonstrated the efficacy of automated feedback in providing valuable writing assistance. Despite these findings, there remains a gap in the research regarding students' responses to using both feedback types simultaneously. This study aims to address the gap by examining how students respond to and process the combination of written and automated corrective feedback. It particularly emphasized examining the lecturer's written corrective feedback (WCF) and automated corrective feedback (ACF) on students' argumentative essays.

The study utilized qualitative method to delve into the students' affective and cognitive responses to written corrective feedback (WCF) and automated corrective feedback (ACF). This involved thoroughly exploring the various types of written corrective feedback (WCF) and automated corrective feedback (ACF) imparted by the lecturer and Grammarly. The participants were eight students who enrolled in an argumentative writing class, majoring in English education. Additionally, document analysis and interview served as the primary means of data collection, enabling a comprehensive examination of students' responses to written and automated corrective feedback and its type. 

The findings show that direct feedback was the most frequently type of feedback used by the lecturer followed by indirect, unfocused, and appreciation feedback. Furthermore, students responded positively both affectively and cognitively to the feedback, recognizing its potential to improve their writing. The use of written and automated corrective feedback each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Written feedback provides personalized, detailed guidance, while automated feedback offers instant, consistent corrections. Therefore, utilizing both types of feedback is highly recommended to maximize the quality of writing outcomes. By maximizing the use of both types of feedback, students can significantly enhance the quality of their writing.

In essence, combining written and automated corrective feedback, each with unique advantages, significantly enhances students writing quality. This study provides valuable insights into how students respond to feedback in an argumentative writing class, emphasizing the importance of clear feedback for improving writing skills. Using both types of feedback benefits both lecturers and students, increasing writing proficiency in academic settings.