In this study, one-way ANCOVAs, one-way ANOVAs, and paired t-tests were used to analyze the data obtained from the pre- and post-tests and surveys. In addition to an examination of the effectiveness of intertextual and reflective-reading strategies with teacher feedback in improving overall writing scores, the objective and subjective writing types was also analyzed separately. Five components of writing were also compared before and after the instruction to determine which, if any, was improved the most; these five components were content, organization, grammar, vocabulary, and punctuation. Additionally, the survey results were analyzed to establish whether the students’ self-awareness of their writing process and their confidence in writing rose over the period of instruction.  

 The results revealed that the IRRF gained higher scores in the post-experimental ‘writing test than did the control and RRF groups. IRRF reading-based writing instruction was also effective in improving both objective and subjective writing, though its influence on objective writing was greater. IRRF also improved vocabulary and punctuation, while content, organization, and students’ self-awareness in writing improved with the application of reflective-reading strategies with teacher feedback on their own with on need for xiadditional intertextuality. Grammar improved in both the RRF and IRRF groups. When considering the IRRF group only, content and organization showed greater improvement than grammar, vocabulary, and punctuation. The instruction also raised students’ confidence in writing but this increase was not significant in this study.

 The findings provide pedagogical implications for EFL classrooms. The setting of the study, a single school in Korea with non-English major students as the participants, was a major limitation. It is recommended that the same instructional model be applied at different educational levels and under different conditions in future studies.