We're currently working on a proposal for introducing University-wide internal peer review. I'll talk more about it in future posts, but I'd be interested to hear from people - both at Kent and elsewhere - about their experiences of peer review. What works? What doesn't?
One difficulty with peer review is, of course, interpreting the feedback. It's particularly an issue when reading feedback that you've received from a British colleague. Here's a handy cut out and keep guide to interpreting Brit-speak. Note in particular the following: