1998-1999 Selective Investment Evaluation Committee
Bunny C. Clark, Ph.D., Committee Chair
Distinguished University Professor
Department of Physics
Jerald Greenberg, Ph.D.
Management and Human Resources
Fisher College of Business
John C. Huntington, Ph.D.
Department of History of Art
Brian D. Joseph, Ph.D.
Department of Linguistics and
Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures,
Kenneth E. Naylor Chair in South Slavic Liguistics
Daniel Levin, Ph.D.
Department of Economics
Samuel J. Traina, Ph.D.
School of Natural Resources
Department of Geological Sciences
Mark D. Wewers, Ph.D.
Professor and Director of Pulmonary & Critical Care Division
Department of Internal Medicine
Yuan F. Zheng, Ph.D.
Professor and Chair
Department of Electrical Engineering
L. Alayne Parson
Senior Vice Provost for Academic Administration
Office of Academic Affairs
1) In addition
to the proposals, evaluation committee members were provided with
several documents related to previous benchmarking efforts at Ohio
State. Each committee member reviewed all proposals and provided the
chair with a ranking of 1-4 for individual proposals. Reviewers were
asked to specify at least three proposals at each ranking level and
not to rank any proposal for which there would be a conflict of
interest. Emphasis was placed on benchmarking, evidence of commitment
to excellence, and ranking by peers. In addition, response to
specified evaluation criteriaas stipulated in the invitation for
proposals from former Provost Richard Sisson and former Vice President
for Research Edward Hayes in July 1997also was carefully
whose proposals had been selected for a more in-depth review were
invited to formally present their proposals to the Selective
Investment Evaluation Committee. Emphasis was placed not only on the
specified evaluation criteria but also on concepts of vision,
mechanisms in place to implement such vision, rationale, and specific
plans to achieve goals and alternative approaches. The evaluation
committee was keen on evaluating the likelihood of success of the
program and that the resources involved were compatible with the plans
of individual departments.
3) Site visits
were organized with two to three members of the evaluation committee
assessing all the key aspects of individual competing departments.
Specific information was requested regarding space issues, other
resources, and previous success in hiring nationally and
internationally renowned experts in the field, as well as fairness and
the inclusion of minorities in the hiring process. Accomplishments of
key recent recruits were also reviewed to ensure that new hires
resulting from the Selective Investment Program would be successful in
The Ohio State University environment. The conclusions of the site
visitors were reviewed with all evaluation committee members.
reviewers selected by the departments being reviewed were asked to
comment on the validity of the proposals selected for in-depth review.
Only the opinions of invaluable individuals in the respective fields
were considered. The spectrum of contacted referees ranged from Nobel
Prize winners to movie producers. The external audit was remarkably
helpful in the process as it generally confirmed the conclusions of
the evaluation committee.
Once these four
steps of the review process had been completed, the evaluation
committee deliberated on the results and agreed upon a ranking of the