Georgia Institute of Technology

Graduate Curriculum Committee


October 7, 2010



Present: Pikowsky (REG), Storici (BIO), Clarke (CoM), Flowers (ARCH),  Mazalek (LCC), Silva (ECON), Corso (PSYC), Ferri (ECE), Mark (CoC), Rosen (ME), Neitzel (ME), Bennett (MGT), Goldsman (ISyE)


Visitors:  Laros (Registrar), Howson (Registrar), Simon (Registrar), Paraska (Provost), McLaughlin (Provost), White (CoC)


Note: All action items in these minutes require approval by the Academic Senate.  In some instances, items may require further approval by the Board of Regents or the University System of Georgia.  If the Regents' approval is required, the change is not official until notification is received from the Board to that effect.  Academic units should take no action on these items until USG and/or BOR approval is secured.  In addition, units should take no action on any of the items below until these minutes have been approved by the Academic Senate or the Executive Board.


  1. The Committee discussed a draft document prepared by the joint/dual degree subcommittee intended to provide some guidelines for preparation of proposals. Along with the narrative, the document includes a chart that outlines important steps and considerations in the process of requesting approval for an internal, national, or international joint or dual degree.


It has become apparent to many that some guidelines regarding joint and dual degrees would go far in ensuring consistency, better understanding of the differences between these degree types, and guiding the schools and colleges to a more efficient means of developing the proposals and of getting them approved in a timely fashion.


Committee members offered very good suggestions regarding the narrative part of the document, including the need to separate out those things that the Graduate Committee would require and consider in its decision and those things that would be good for the schools and colleges to bear in mind as they prepare the proposal and then the agreement.


There was concern that the document perhaps tried to do too many different things, but at the conclusion of the discussion there was agreement that the material in the document could be better organized and labeled to clarify what was directly related to the needs of the Graduate Committee and what was simply useful material to the academic units.


Some time was spent on the issue of transfer credit and then on the relative value of a dual degree. Unless an exception to the transfer credit policy for graduate students were requested and approved, there would be little efficiency (motivation) for students to pursue a dual degree. They could simply complete two separate degrees. It was noted that some of our international partners have been very specific about their support for and interest in dual degree programs.  Whether there is efficiency achieved or not, dual degree programs are in demand.  Joint programs are clear in terms of their efficiency and attraction for students.


There was also discussion in regard to the use of Georgia Techís name and brand. Clearly, for joint degrees, we would wish to be associated only with top quality institutions. The determination of the value of the institution in that academic area would be that of the School and/or College. Dual degrees again were the focus of the discussion.  If there are two separate degrees, why should we care if a school enters into a dual degree program agreement? Committee members noted that Georgia Techís brand must be protected and if there are not guidelines for dual degree proposals and a formal process to have them approved, there will be no proper monitoring of such agreements; and that could evolve into programs that are in conflict with other Tech academic policies or that do not serve the Institute well in other regards.


At the close of the discussion, there was general agreement that such guidelines would be helpful and that the subcommittee should bring back a revised document for approval.  Dr. McLaughlin noted that the proposal will be vetted by others on campus and will come back to the Committee having been widely discussed and edited as necessary.


  1. A motion was made to approve a request from the College of Management for a new course. The motion was seconded and approved.


New Course:  MGT 6043 Advanced Financial Reporting  3-0-3


MGT 4043 will be submitted to IUCC for approval and if approved will be jointly listed.


  1. The Registrarís Office brought forth an item for discussion regarding the MBA Dual Degree Program that allows graduates of Tech (those completing an MS at Tech) to complete an MBA program of 39 hours (the normal MBA curriculum is 54). The conflicting language between the College of Managementís description of the program and the Instituteís guidelines on dual degrees is related to whether the dual degrees must be completed concurrently.  The College of Management does not require the degrees to be completed concurrently, while the Institute does.   There was general agreement that this is a situation that needs to be addressed at the November IGC meeting. The Registrarís Office will make contact with the graduate advisor and the Associate Dean of the MBA Program in the College of Management to discuss Fall 2010 graduates and to determine what kind of proposal needs to come back to the Graduate Committee regarding a permanent solution to the conflicting language.





Reta Pikowsky