November 10, 2011

 

Georgia Tech Student Regulations Committee

MINUTES

November 10, 2011

 

Attending:

Voting Members:  Richard Barke, Jung Choi, Cathy Carpenter, Charles Parsons, Young-Hui Chang

Nonvoting Members: John Stein (for Bill Schafer), Andrew Lyon, Austen Edwards, Reta Pikowsky

 

 

The committee convened at 8:35am.  The minutes of the October 6, 2011 meeting were approved.

 

The committee considered four items provided by the Registrar.

 

1. ACADEMIC STANDING    There has been a discrepancy in the definition of “good academic standing” between the GT Catalog and the Registrar’s website.  According to the Catalog, “good academic standing” means that a student is not on academic probation, which would include students on warning as in good standing, while the website showed that “good academic standing” meant that a student “is not on academic warning or probation.”  After discussion of the function of “warning” on a transcript in advising, and for credit-hour limitations, the Committee voted unanimously to affirm the catalog description and adjust the Registrar’s website accordingly.

 

2.   REMOVAL OF DEFICIENCIES    Under current policy, a student whose final grade is F or U in a course may be permitted to take an advanced standing examination to receive credit for the course.  A proposal to stipulate that such students would not be permitted to request that an instructor offer an advanced standing exam was discussed.  The Committee voted to not change current policy, thereby leaving a decision about an advanced standing exam with the instructor.

 

3.   CHANGE OF MAJOR    Section VI. F. was amended unanimously with new text which reads "3.  Students who change their majors must complete the degree requirements in the Catalog that was effective for the term in which the change of major became official, or any subsequent Catalog."

 

4.   DEFINITION OF “UNSATISFACTORY”    The committee discussed section 46.4 of the Faculty Handbook and Section V of the Catalog (Rules and Regulations) where there are discrepancies about whether a “D” is to be designated as “Unsatisfactory” on midterm grades and “Pass” / “Fail” final grades. The matter was tabled.

 

 

The meeting adjourned at 9:30am.