I sent a survey out to the postgraduate students at City University London about their thoughts on the peer review process. One of my questions asked:
Would you be happy to peer-review your supervisor’s work?
The results that came in showed a variety of responses. As shown in the graph below, 87% of respondents answered ‘Yes’, while the remaining 13% of respondents said they would not be happy reviewing their supervisor’s work.
Seven of the survey participants also left comments on the reasoning behind their answer:
To find out about their background
It’s anonymous and I’m more experienced in some areas
I consider myself to be an academic, making me capable of reviewing academic studies
Only if it is anonymous. I do not want my supervisor to know I critisise him
I have reviewed both supervisors work. It’s useful to see different writing styles – it helps me realise she isn’t perfect. It’s useful to see the process from draft to submission.
Good experience as an opportunity to analyse something critically
These responses suggest that as long as the peer-reviewing process is anonymous, they would feel comfortable reviewing a supervisor’s work.