• Items posted on MERLOT/Physics are triaged (quick, preliminary review) by at least one Editorial Board Member to select high quality items for review. The goal is to review the highest quality items on MERLOT/Physics.
  
• When selected for review, items are assigned to two reviewers. The reviews cover three dimensions, the Quality of Content, the Effectiveness as a Teaching and Learning Tool, and the Ease of Use for Teachers and Students. (See Eval Criteria.) A standard review form is used to create the reviews. (See Form.)
  
• Reviews should be written in a constructive manner, but should highlight both the positive aspects of materials and potential problems in their use.
  
• Reviews are entered on the MERLOT site by each individual reviewer. Reviewers log into MERLOT and have items assigned to them listed in their personal "Workspace". The review page for an item includes a form to input the review. For more information, there is an online tutorial and FAQ about the MERLOT Review Workflow Tool.
  
• When individual reviews are completed, the two reviewers create a single composite review of the item. Any significant differences between the individual reviews are discussed and resolved by the reviewers or, when necessary, by the Editorial Board. The composite review is also entered online using the MERLOT workflow tool.
  
• Composite reviews are sent to authors by the MERLOT/Physics editors for their comments and approval to post on the MERLOT site. If authors do not respond within one month, reviews are posted. (Approval to post is requested because the opinions of the authors can better inform the reviews, authors value the feedback on their work, and in most cases they did not submit their material to MERLOT and may not know of the review process.) The editors post the items for public view on MERLOT.
  
• Once a review is posted on MERLOT, authors are sent a letter recognizing their work.