Throughout the dissertation process, the chair and committee members provide feedback regarding quality to help the doctoral candidate to produce the highest-quality document and become an independent scholar. Nevertheless, results of previous research suggest that overall dissertation quality generally is poor. Because much of the feedback about dissertation quality provided to candidates, especially those in online learning environments, is written, there is an opportunity to assess the quality of that feedback. In this study, a comparative descriptive design was employed using a random sample of 120 dissertation reviews at one online university. Common foundational errors across dissertations and strengths and growth areas in reviewer feedback were noted. Whereas reviewer feedback quality was acceptable overall, there were significant differences across reviewers. Based on the findings, increased discourse, standardization of psychometrically sound measures that assess reviewer feedback quality, and ongoing training for faculty members who review dissertations might be warranted.