This article contends that there is a plausible claim that peer-reviewing and editorship, two significantly impactful activities in our field--as in other disciplinary areas--function under black box approaches whereby the opacity of the process is overlaid by lacunae in learning, onboarding, and mentorship. In other words, current professional practice offers at best ad hoc and haphazard pathways to 'coming to know the process' of peer-reviewing and editorship, with little to no systematic discourse regarding adapting, disrupting, improving these processes in the many and varied sites of practice, journals and edited books. The article invites readers to consider the nature of and challenges presented by the lack of legibility and professionalization of peer-reviewing--especially within graduate education and early-career professionals--and how the field of higher music education may consider continua within which this dialogue can take place.