Usually, when a writer has finished a story or taken a story as far as they can, they send them out to critique groups or beta readers for feedback. As the author, it's difficult disconnecting from a story's headspace, and that makes it tricky to judge if everything is working. This is where critique groups and betas are invaluable: the fresh eye, the new perspective, the telling reactions. These all help author see where a story might still need work.
But there's a big difference between a critique and an edit, and sometimes authors get back one when they really need the other. I'm going to talk about why, break down each one, and suggest things writers should do when approaching someone for feedback.
A critique is an evaluation. It's a review where you look at the bigger picture and consider things like pacing, clarity, character motivation, character arcs, plot and plot holes, weak dialogue, unnecessary exposition, theme and motif. This is where you think about whether or not every chapter, every scene, every paragraph advances the plot. You ask if all the characters are pulling their weight. You ask what the writer is trying to get across. Think: bigger picture, overall story.
An edit focuses more on grammar, style, and punctuation. It picks apart paragraphs and sentences and looks for inconsistencies, repetitions, misused words, typos and spelling errors, awkward sentence structure, etc. It can expand to include suggestions on characters, dialogue, pace and plot, but these are generally smaller observations, on a paragraph by paragraph (or line by line) level. Think: details, fine tuning.
When you send stories out for feedback, be clear about the following:
1) How 'finished' is your story. It's no good getting line edits on a first draft--it wastes everyone's time. Ideally, you don't want line edits until you've fixed the plot and characters. Plot and characters come first, and they should be analysed in a critique. Often revision is required, which can lead to whole chunks of a story being rewritten. How awkward when you have to explain to a beta reader who just spent two hours line editing your work that you've had to rewrite the entire story from scratch.
2) Be clear about what type of feedback you need. Specify the elements of a critique if your reader doesn't know the difference. Ask questions (put them at the end of the story so as not to influence the reader before they start), and get them to write down their reactions as they read. Did their attention wander at any point, and if so, when? Were the character motivations clear and believable? Did the ending satisfy and tie in, at least a little, with the start? Was anything confusing? If the reader has never critiqued before, these questions will help guide them through it.
Writers become better writers much quicker through writing, reading, and critiquing. Editing will help teach you when to use commas instead of semi-colons, but it won't teach you how to develop an engaging character with clear, compelling motivations, or sharpen your use of metaphor or motif, or just tell a damn good story. Semi-colons generally don't sell fiction. Good stories do.
(Not, I want to add, that there's anything wrong with a semi-colon! I ♥︎ them.)
If you're a fiction writer, start critiquing. Do it every week. If you can't find a fellow author to crit, then pull an anthology off a shelf and practise with that.
Here are some other excellent resources on writing critiques:
How to Critique Fiction, by Victory Crayne.
Nuts and Bolts of Critiquing, by Tina Morgan, posted at Fiction Factor.
15 Questions for Your Beta Readers, by editor and author Jodie Renner, posted at Kill Zone.