CENTER FOR POLICY STUDIES
INTERNATIONAL POLICY FELLOWSHIPS
NADOR UTCA 11, H-1051 BUDAPEST, HUNGARY (36 1) 327 3863,
FAX (36 1) 327 3809
MENTOR CRITIQUE FORM
Your thoughtful and honest appraisal will be most helpful. We appreciate
your input and will try to implement as many of your ideas as possible. Continue
comments on the back if necessary.
Each Fellow works with one mentor who is Soros foundations network-affiliated
(usually Open Society Institute and Central European University) and one
or two ‘external’ mentor(s) who are experts in the field working outside
the Soros foundations network. Mentors should: 1) Work with Fellows to devise
a brief policy paper in their field(s) of expertise based on a lengthy research
paper written over the course of the fellowship year, 2) Maintain contact
with Fellows at least once every six weeks or so by telephone, fax or e-mail
to discuss the development of projects, 3) If feasible, meet with Fellows
at least once during the fellowship year to discuss the project, 4) Facilitate
Fellows’ contact with other relevant experts and participation in appropriate
meetings (IPF has discretionary funds to support Fellow attendance at relevant
events), 5) Complete brief mid-term and final critique forms supplied by
IPF to provide the program with feedback regarding the Fellow’s progress.
Your name, position _Natalya Kravchenko, senior fellow of Institute of Economics
and Industrial Engineering SB RAS______________________________________
Name of Fellow you have assisted __Evgenia Kolomak_______________________
1. What, in your opinion, have you and your Fellow/program/project gained
from your cooperation thus far?
_____________________________________________________________________
The project is interesting and promising so the cooperation could result
in interesting research.
___________________________________________________________________
I think my experience might be useful in empirical part and in theoretical
one. I have some relevant empirical data. I also did several studies in the
close area. I suppose my experience in consulting could be useful as well.
_____________________________________________________________________
2. Do certain areas of this Fellow’s work need improvement? Which areas?
In the discussion of the literature Kolomak refers to the industrial protection
as a result of social policy. The comment is that the author should consider
alternative hypotheses motivated by literature and explain whether the empirical
findings can be driven by these alternative stories.
_____________________________________________________________________
This story may suggest a possible endogeneity of several important variables
used in empirical analysis. Thus endogeneity should be treated more seriously.
In the empirical part it is necessary to provide summary statistics and correlations.
_____________________________________________________________________
3. In your opinion, does your Fellow’s project make a significant contribution
to the field?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
4. Would the project be important to other countries in the CEE/fSU region?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
5. Could the proposed policy research make an impact on the policy environment
in specific countries or regions? (Policy makers, experts and policy research
community)
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
6. Is the timetable for the project realistic?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
7. Could the project benefit a large number of people?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
8. Does the Fellow show evidence that he/she can think strategically about
the relevant project and/or field?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
9. If the Fellow were to re-apply for continued OSI funding for follow-up
work associated with the project, would you support continued funding?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
10. Are there other appropriate funders that may support the project?
YES - NO
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Recommendations for other potential senior contacts for this Fellow:
Additional Comments (Please comment on your Fellow’s work and all aspects
of the IPF program using the back of this sheet):