L2 written corrective feedback has been investigated from different perspectives in SLA research (e.g. Ahmadian & Tajabadi, 2015; Bitchener & Knoch, 2010; Ferris, 2006). Taking the cognitive and sociocultural paradigms into account, the aims of the current study are twofold: Firstly, it attempts to find if corrective feedback is effective in improving the linguistic accuracy of L2 learners' tense/aspect use in writing. Secondly, it tries to measure which feedback type (direct, indirect, and negotiated) has a more significant effect on the mentioned linguistic structures. Seventy-five pre-intermediate university EFL learners were selected and asked to participate in the study; they were randomly divided into direct, indirect, negotiated feedback groups, and a control group. During six-week sessions of providing feedback on tenses/aspects, the participants were required to write diary journals on their academic life. The direct and indirect groups received feedback on their diaries, having 10 minutes time in the class to observe the feedback. The negotiated feedback group received 10 minutes one-to-one contingent feedback on the errors. After comparing the four groups, the results showed that all the treatment groups did outperform the control group which indicated that feedback was effective. Moreover, the findings showed no significant difference among the feedback types. This implies that teachers can provide any of the feedback types for learners so far as tense/aspect errors are concerned in their writing.