![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
The term “peer review” has two distinct meanings in current usage among Australian social workers. It is the thesis of this paper that these definitional differences are more than a matter of semantics. Rather, they represent concepts in conflict. While they spring from a common concern for accountability, each definition is posited on different basic assumptions, answers different questions and leads to a different course of action. In short, they have different meanings. Further, by using the same term to describe essentially different activities, the forward thrust and positive impact of the more rigorous, specific and practical one may be blunted or deflected by the softer, more general and more idealistic definition. The two models of peer review will be discussed in detail further on in this paper. However, it is helpful at this stage to present introductory definitions.