whether you [generic you; why do we always need this caveat?] learn better by a story to story evaluation, or by breaking storytelling into its elements and examining each in turn.
It would make sense ot me that the former type learns better through workshops and the latter via how to write books.

of course, it’s also true that in sports the best and most knowledgeable coaches aren’t always ex-players. And fans as a general rule are the sorriest excuses for expertise.
But non-player coaches do come from the ranks of the fans not the players, and many players make awful coaches.
nnnot sure where I’m going with that thought except that maybe the ability to teach has nothing to do with the accomplishment, like in your experience non-writers don’t make good teachers, whereas in mine writers aren’t necessarily any better either.
(honestly, the worst evaluations on stories of mine have been by the most accomplished authors — the one has very definite ideas of what fiction has to be and I learned from him in that regard but nothing about the story itself and I don’t think the other one was really interested, just mouthed some generalities to get it behind her.)

I get better feedback from writers, too, when I ask them to read just as readers, just a general gut reaction. That tells me everything I need to know.
in-depth critiques are a crapshoot I don’t, personally, care for anymore.
mileage will vary, I do acknowledge that

This might be personality inclinations though, since I much prefer to learn in theory first and many other people find a practical hands-on learning curve better (like a workshop or critique group).

ut I rely on my workshop mates to recognize what I’m trying to do — something readers can’t do

just had a thought here, and maybe these 2 ideas aren’t so much in conflict as they would appear:
who to ask when you’re trying for something — 1) with writers, I’d mull the varieties of pov with, why and what in this story, 2) with readers, I’d just ask about the plot points and believability of the character motivations.

That’s not to say I don’t also appreciate strictly reader-type comments. But I rely on my workshop mates to recognize what I’m trying to do — something readers can’t do — and give me some guidance out of the swamp when I fall into it.

it is kinda fun, though tearing someone’s baby apart..

Oh god yes. LOL.

I’ve apologised to people for not ripping their manu more, even though I enjoyed it.

*headdesk*

This is why lately I’ve begun to question just how much value I’ve ever been as a critter. It’s also something that I do and is very hard to distance yourself from how you would do something, or would prefer it to be done and the merits of the individual work in front of you.

The more different a writer is from yourself the harder it becomes. As well, there could be the added pressure to find fault. As in, we kind of feel unconsciously that we’ll be letting the author down if we don’t rip it apart and in the process we might rip what doesn’t need ripping.
if that makes sense?

Published books and stories I can read as a reader and, like you said, I also think I need to engage that part of my brain more when reading beta nowadays.

Both crits are helpful in their own ways but I often find that some of the writer-beta stuff is more an indication of how they would tackle a story.

Uh…does any of that make sense?

These days I try to let my reader-mind take over when I beta for people.

that’s so very true, isn’t it? I mean, how many times do we come across a super selling book and what people say about it is that it breaks every rule of how to write?
what does that tell us about the use and place of rules then?

the difference might come down to when writers give advice it’s along the lines of “Don’t do this” variety which imposes limitations while readers would rather say, “please do this.”
Don’t vs Do.
well, is what I think anyways.