The study investigated the efficacy of process writing and error correction as scaï¬€olds in improving writing competence among 32 college students who were enrolled in an English writing class. As a narrative-descriptive action research, the study used error analysis to account the errors committed by the learners in grammar, lexis, mechanics, and syntax, described how writing process and error correction become relevant in scaï¬€olding writing competence, and evaluated the writing competence of the learners on their final draft. Error Analysis, the Writing Competency Rubic by Archibald, et al. (2013), and Focused Group Discussion were employed as instruments. Error analysis revealed that there was a total of 363 errors in the 176 composition drafts produced by the respondents. Grammatical errors accounted the highest frequency of errors at 47.45%. Verb, pronoun, and preposition errors occurred frequently. In terms of mechanics errors, spelling and misuse of the comma recorded the most number of errors. Meanwhile, lexis errors were particularly concentrated in the first draft. Last, syntax errors were mainly developmental and ambiguous statement errors, both being attributes of local errors. In a comparison between error frequencies across drafts, it was found out that process writing and sustained error correction were eï¬€ective in reducing the incidence of errors in the succeeding drafts. Based on the FGD, the respondents divulged that the scaï¬€olds were eï¬€ective in improving their writing competence, however the routine activities were exhausting and time consuming. Finally, based on the Writing Competency Rubric it was found out that the overall competence level of the respondents was proficient. Furthermore, they were also found to be consistently proficient in all rubric outcomes: Central/Controlling Ideas, Development, Organization, Style, Mechanics, and Audience Awareness. As a conclusion, scaï¬€olding writing competence through process writing and error correction was proven eï¬€ective.