Improving Thai High School Learners’ Writing Ability: A Comparative Study of Anonymous and Non-Anonymous Peer Review

This research investigated the effects of anonymous and non-anonymous peer review on writing performance among Thai high school students, and their attitudes towards anonymity when providing and receiving feedback in a blended learning environment. One hundred and thirty Thai EFL learners in a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design were assigned to one of two groups, receiving either anonymous or non-anonymous peer review. The students wrote their opinion paragraphs and peer feedback in two closed FB groups created to support blended instruction. Data were obtained via a writing pretest and posttest, a questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data revealed a significant increase in all aspects of writing (content, organisation, grammar, vocabulary, and mechanics) for both groups after they performed peer review tasks. The difference between the two groups, however, was not statistically significant, suggesting that both types of feedback contributed to improving writing. Attitudinal findings indicated that, in general, students felt positively toward the utility and engagement inherent to peer reviewing, as reflected in perception-based factor items on motivation and attitudinal measures. The non-anonymised group yielded significantly higher scores in trustworthiness, responsibility for learning, and confidence. Qualitative findings also indicated that anonymous feedback encouraged objectivity and critical introspection, whereas non-anonymous feedback generated social bonding and emotional investment. Overall, empirical confirmation of this essential pedagogical implication of peer review not only sheds light on how linguistic ability, learner autonomy, and motivation can be enhanced in blended EFL writing courses but also supports the predominant use of the non-anonymous peer-review format.