Peer Editing vs. Peer Review vs. Peer Feedback vs. Peer Critique

I’ve used the phrases “Peer Editing”, “Peer Review”, “Peer Feedback”, and “Peer Criticism” somewhat synonymously in the past, but I’ve come to learn that they are, in fact, different things. I tend to favor “Peer Review” out of the others, but it is important to look at the differences and advantages to calling your workshop days one of the phrases out of the others!

Let’s go over them:

Peer Editing

From the online English Club, “Peer Editing” is broken into two parts: “Peer”, and “Editing”: “peer (noun): a person who shares your ability, age or background; your equal” “edit (verb): to review, correct and suggest changes to another person's work”

Image from The Conversation

Key words here includes “equal” (when talking about a peer), “suggest changes” in editing, and “reviewing”. A Peer editor might suggest changes, look for grammar or syntax mistakes, and overall seems to be more surface level than a peer reviewer.      

                                                                                                     

Peer Review

Image from Elsevier

From the Oxford Language Dictionary, Peer Review is the “evaluation of scientific, academic, or professional work by others working in the same field”. Key words from this definition includes “academic” when referring to the work, and “same field”. Peer Review seems to be referred to in more college and scholar spaces - places with professionals, not what you’d typically think of when referring to a junior or high school. However, I like to use Peer Review the most because I want to insert my students into the academic conversation. I want them to see themselves as professionals, not as young and incompetent teens. 

Additionally, the meaning of the words "Review" and "Edit" is inherently different. According to Dissertation Peer Review,

"An editor ensures that the researcher’s opinions are best presented with an impact quality of the drafting whereas a peer reviewer, belonging from the same research area, can further advise him regarding the research. Like peer reviewers, an editor cannot advise the researcher of how he would have conducted his research, what research methods would have made a difference or any other suggestions which would help him in developing a good dissertation as well as a conducting a good research".

Applying this to high school, a peer reviewer would look at the student's current work, suggest ways to develop their ideas further, and ensure that their current ideas are sound. 

Peer Feedback

Image from Lucidchat

As another strong contestor for my favorite term for giving and receiving criticism in class,  “Peer feedback refers to comments and suggestions that learners receive from their classmates” (EduMaxi). However, “Peer Feedback” seems to be a bit vague - “feedback” just feels a bit ambiguous to me. It insinuates a superficial level of reviewing - you can give feedback by just glancing over someone’s paper. 

Peer Critique

Image from Common Outlook

Probably my least favorite out of the four terms as it harbors a feeling of, well, being critiqued. “Peer critique, a specialized form of critique, is the common practice of writers reviewing and providing constructive criticism of each other's work. Most fiction writers use some form of peer critique as part of their process of writing” (Definitions.com). Yes, it says “constructive criticism” in the definition, but still having “Critique” in the phrase automatically shuts down some writers. Who would willingly be critiqued? Who would want to participate in an activity where they know they are being                                                                                     judged? 

Conclusion

Personally, I prefer “Peer Review” and “Peer Editing” since they insinuate a more friendly and specific approach to critiquing days. Most classrooms I've observed or researched about online have used either "Peer Review" or "Peer Editing" since, as I mentioned before, they insinuate an situation where students aren't being judged or criticised for their work (like "Peer Critique" insinuates).