Academic Affairs

Academic Programs

Academic Assessment (OATS)

For information on Academic Assessment (OATS) please follow the link below.
http://www.oats.gatech.edu

Academic Program Review

For information on Academic Program Review please follow the link below.
www.apr.gatech.edu

Curriculum Committee Procedures

For information on Curriculum Committee Procedures please follow the link below.
www.icc.gatech.edu/

International Academic Programs

For more information on International Academic Programs please follow the link below.
http://www.oie.gatech.edu/

Admissions

Graduate

For information on Graduate Policies please follow the link below.
www.grad.gatech.edu

Lawful Presence

For information on Lawful Presence please follow the link below.
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/lawful-presence

Undergraduate

For information on Undergraduate Policies please follow the link below.

http://www.admission.gatech.edu/

Faculty Handbook

For more information on the Faculty Handbook please follow the link below.

http://www.policylibrary.gatech.edu/faculty_handbook

1. Introduction
2. Faculty Governance
3. Faculty Status
4. Support of Education
5. Faculty Affairs
6. Campus Use Procedures
7. Transitional Sections of the Faculty Handbook

Georgia Tech Catalog

The Georgia Tech Catalog at http://www.catalog.gatech.edu contains information on the following topics:

Graduate Student Policies

Allocation of Tuition Waivers for Non-sponsored Assistantships

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
January 2015
Last Revised: 
May 2015
Review Date: 
May 2018
Policy Owner: 
Graduate Studies
Contact Name: 
Susan Cozzens
Contact Title: 
Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Affairs
Contact Email: 
susan.cozzens@provost.gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 
To establish how non-sponsored tuition waivers are allocated in the Georgia Tech budget and budget process.
Policy Statement: 

The Institute maintains a budget to account for tuition revenue foregone when tuition waivers are used for non-sponsored GTA (graduate teaching assistant) and GRA (graduate research assistant) positions. These are positions in which state funds are used to pay the stipends. As with GRA or GTA work on sponsored projects, the Institute covers all tuition for these students beyond the $25 required by the Board of Regents.

In the tuition waiver budget, each college is permitted to use an established number of non-sponsored waivers. The permitted number is affirmed or expanded each year in the Institute budget process, through a request from each Dean and decision by the Executive Leadership Team.

Scope: 
All colleges and non-college units.

 

Definitions:

Non-sponsored assistantship An assistantship in which the stipend is paid from state funds.
Tuition waiver Part of tuition not charged to the student.
Academic faculty member As defined in the Faculty Handbook. A faculty member who supervises a GRA or GTA assignment must be appointed in an instructional unit and cleared as instructor of record by the Office of Faculty Affairs.
Procedures: 
Using the Waivers
In the collegesUnder this system, non-sponsored tuition waivers are approved and controlled by the academic units. The home department or school and the hiring unit (if different from the home unit) must certify that the assignment contributes to the student’s graduate education, and an academic faculty member must provide supervision for the educational aspect of the work, through registration for GRA or GTA credit with that faculty member.
Outside the collegesNon-academic units, while they are not allocated non-sponsored tuition waivers, are permitted to employ graduate research or teaching assistants, if the work is directly related to the student’s graduate program. If non-academic units want to employ a GRA or GTA, they must request the waiver to accompany the position from the home unit (department or school) of the student who will be hired. A faculty member from the home unit should oversee the academic aspects of the work of the GRA or GTA student in the non-academic unit to ensure the quality and relevance of the work to the student’s academic work. All graduate research or teaching assistant hires in non-academic departments must be approved by the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development (VPGEFD).

Forms:

TitleLink
Request for GRA or GTA outside an academic unitSend email to vpgefd@gateh.edu, giving the name and GTID of the student, the nature of the assignment, and the faculty member supervisor.

 

Responsibilities: 

Deans request tuition waivers in the budget process and monitor their use.

Executive Leadership Team determines the allocation of waivers in the Institute budget process.

Home schools enter the waivers for students with GRA or GTA positions that meet the Institute requirements (see Graduate Assistantship Enrollment and Employment policy).

Non-academic units request tuition waivers from the home schools of students they want to hire there and locate academic faculty members willing to supervise the academic aspects of the work.

Enforcement: 

Use of waivers beyond the established number will create a budget deficit in the College and thus trigger a discussion with the Provost’s office. Students given GRA or GTA positions that do not meet the policy are subject to cancellation of tuition waiver.

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

Policy History: 
Revision DateAuthorDescription
May 2015Graduate StudiesLanguage Clarification
April 2006Lisa Godfrey, Budget OfficeLast revision of the procedure

Financial Assistance

For information on Financial Assistance please follow the link below.
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/paying-for-grad-school

General Policies

For information on General Policies please follow the links below.
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/policies
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/theses-dissertations-policies
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/checklist

Graduate Admissions

Policies on Graduate Admissions can be found in the Student Catalog, Graduate Admissions.

Graduate Assistantship Schedule and Flexibility Policy

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
March 2014
Last Revised: 
March 2014
Review Date: 
March 2017
Policy Owner: 
Graduate Studies
Contact Name: 
Susan Cozzens
Contact Title: 
Office of the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development
Contact Email: 
scozzens@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

To clarify when graduate student work assignments stop and start and the level of acceptable flexibility in hours.

Policy Statement: 

The work duties of Graduate Research Assistants (GRAs) and Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs, encompass 4.5 calendar months for fall and spring terms and three calendar months for summer term. The fall term work period consists of half of August and all of September through December. The spring term work period consists of January through April and half of May. Summer term consists of half of May, all of June and July, and half of August. Supervisors are generally expected to employ a GRA or GTA for the full work period, providing continuous employment and pay throughout the year.

GRAs and GTAs are not required to work on official Institute holidays, which appear on the Human Resources web site. In addition, at the discretion of the student’s supervisor, a GRA or GTA may be permitted to average effort over several weeks or cluster research or teaching activities in order to spend one or more weeks away from campus during the semester or, more frequently, during periods when classes are not in session. Any time away requires the approval of the supervisor. This flexibility may be used to allow later start dates for students new to campus. Some work assignments may not permit this flexibility.

GRAs or GTAs appointed to sponsored research projects should monitor their appointments monthly in the Electronic Workload Assignment Form (EWAF), because they will be required to sign an Annual Statement of Reasonableness indicating that the effort they put into projects was correctly recorded. For more information on this Plan Confirmation System, see

/personal-services-reporting-using-plan-confirmation-system.

Scope: 

The policy applies to all graduate students and all hiring units.

Policy Terms: 

Graduate Research Assistantship (GRA)
Part time research job held by a graduate student.

Graduate Teaching Assistantship (GTA)
Part time teaching job held by a graduate student.

Graduate Assistant (GA)
Part time research or administrative job held by a graduate student.

Supervisor
The person to whom a graduate assistant reports in his or her work responsibilities.

Procedures: 

Graduate programs should communicate these terms of employment to students when they are hired. Graduate student assistants must communicate their needs for schedule flexibility to their supervisors. Supervisors of graduate student assistants must review and approve any flexibility in hours used under this policy.

Responsibilities: 

8.1. Hiring Unit
The hiring unit (school, department, or laboratory) is responsible for communicating the dates of work assignments, the number of hours of work expected per week, the extent of flexibility allowed, and the procedure for requesting flexibility.

8.2. Supervisor
The supervisor is responsible for keeping the student’s actual workload within the number of hours paid and allowing reasonable flexibility in fulfilling work responsibilities.

8.3. Graduate Student Employee
The graduate assistant is responsible for working the number of hours designated for the assignment, requesting flexibility when needed, and abiding by the determination of the supervisor with regard to flexibility requests.

Enforcement: 

Students who believe this policy has been violated should first approach the individual responsible for the violation to resolve the issue. If the violation persists, the situation should be reported to thehead of the next level up from the violation (e.g., school chair or laboratory head in the case of violations by supervisors; deans or institute directors for laboratories) or to the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Affairs vpgefa@gatech.edu. In case of doubt about where to report, use ethicspoint http://ohr.gatech.edu/ethics/ethicspoint. The Georgia Tech faculty and graduate student ombuds are available to help resolve conflicts.

Policy History: 
Revision DateAuthorDescription
March 2014Clarification of when graduate assistantships start and stop and whether any time away from campus is permitted.Graduate schedule guidelines

  

 

 

Graduate Student Enrollment and Employment

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
April 2015
Last Revised: 
April 2015
Review Date: 
April 2018
Policy Owner: 
Graduate Studies
Contact Name: 
Susan Cozzens
Contact Title: 
Office of the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development
Contact Email: 
scozzens@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

To ensure compliance with Board of Regents policies and our agreements with federal sponsors, the Institute needs policies on when and how graduate students may be employed.

Policy Statement: 

Research and teaching assistantships provide work experiences for graduate students that contribute to their education. Research assistantships involve tasks such as setting up equipment, gathering and analyzing data, participating in research team interaction and training, and writing up and presenting results. Teaching assistantships involve activities such as planning and delivering classes, laboratories, or online educational experiences, grading, and evaluating the teaching and learning experience.

The work done under a graduate research or teaching assistantship should enhance the student’s educational experience. Research grants should not be used for teaching assistantships unless the grant terms specifically allow it. It is expected that students working on grants or contracts are acquiring skills and knowledge relevant to their educational programs and should therefore be registered.

Graduate students employed as Graduate Research Assistants, Graduate Teaching Assistants, and Graduate Assistants must be registered.

Any graduate student hired to do research or teaching at 33% to 50% effort must be hired as a Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) or Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA); all GRA and GTA assignments must fall within this range of effort. To be eligible as a GRA or GTA, the student must be registered full time. Pay must meet the Institute minimums and be consistent with standards set and published within the School or College.

In accordance with Office of Management and Budget requirements, and as outlined in rate agreements with the Federal Government, expenses for similar purposes must be treated the same way under like circumstances. This principle requires us to hire graduate students doing similar kinds of work through the same mechanism at similar rates (including pay scales and tuition charges). If a student is hired on a federal project as a Graduate Research Assistant, the employment of the student shall remain as a GRA throughout their involvement with the project. Students in GRA or GTA positions will be required to pay $25 regular tuition, plus any applicable differential tuition and student fees; the institution covers the remainder of their tuition. (See the policy on tuition waivers for payment rules regarding partial semesters.)

For administrative work or small research or teaching jobs (less than 25% effort), the Graduate Assistant (GA) hiring mechanism may be used. GA assignments carry no tuition waiver, but the student must be registered. A student hired as a GA is responsible for paying tuition and fees. GA salary may be charged to sponsored projects if the work is appropriate and should be set at the unit’s prevailing pay rate for graduate students.

Exceptions to these policies may be requested from the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Affairs.

Scope: 
The policy applies to all graduate students and all hiring units.

 

Definitions:

Graduate Research Assistantship (GRA) Part time research job held by a graduate student.
Graduate Teaching Assistantship (GTA) Part time teaching job held by a graduate student.
Graduate Assistant (GA) Part time research, teaching, or administrative job held by a graduate student.
Full tuition waiver Administrative action that reduces the tuition a graduate research or teaching assistant pays to $25.
Procedures: 
The Hiring Unit submits the Student Hiring Packet and the Student’s Home School enters the tuition waiver in Banner if appropriate.
Responsibilities: 

Hiring Unit
The Hiring Unit must coordinate with the student’s home school to ensure that the student’s enrollment status allows him or her to work under an assistantship. If using state funds to pay the student, the hiring unit should provide the non-sponsored tuition waiver or have a commitment from the student’s home school to provide it.

Student’s Home School
The student’s home school is responsible for ensuring that the student’s enrollment status allows the student to work under an assistantship and that no tuition waivers are entered for students who are hired without GRA or GTA assignments. The student’s home school is responsible for posting standard pay rates for assistantships in a place that is accessible to students.

Faculty Supervisor
The faculty supervisor is responsible for assigning a work load to the student assistant that falls within the number of hours of the position while not interfering with the student’s academic progress; for mentoring the student in his or her work role; for assuring that the student has received appropriate training in the responsible conduct of research, including safety; and for evaluating the student’s performance in writing at least once every semester. The faculty supervisor is responsible for communicating how long the assistantship position is likely to last and giving as much advance notice as possible if the student’s assistantship position is going to be discontinued.

Student
The student is responsible for working the expected number of hours with the expected level of productivity, asking for help from the supervisor as needed. The student is responsible for knowing and following all relevant safety regulations and ethical standards. The student is responsible for keeping careful records of data collection procedures and leaving all data and records with the supervisor at the appropriate time. GTAs are responsible for completing grading assignments in a timely manner, including turning in grades by any deadlines set by their supervisors at the end of the semester.

Enforcement: 

Students who are not employed properly are subject to cancelation of registration for lack of payment of tuition or cancelation of employment if registration requirements are not met.

Policy 4.7 of the Georgia Tech Faculty Handbook, Student Complaints and Grievances against a Faculty Member http://policylibrary.gatech.edu/faculty-handbook/4.7-student-complaints-and-grievances-against-faculty-member, outlines procedures for when a student has a complaint and/or grievance.

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508.

Policy History: 
Revision Date Author Description
March 2014This policy replaces http://www.policylibrary.gatech.edu/student-life/graduate-assistantship

 

Graduate Student Handbook

For information on Graduate Student Handbook please follow the link below.
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/student-handbook

Policy on Advisement and Appointment of Thesis Advisory Committees

Review Date: 
February 2015

Policy & Procedure No. 7

POLICY ON THE ADVISEMENT OF GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH AND THE APPOINTMENT OF
THESIS ADVISORY COMMITTEES

Doctoral Theses

There are two committees which function to advise, approve and conduct the final doctoral oral examination of the thesis and the student's knowledge of the field in which it lies.

The first committee is called the Thesis Advisory Committee or the Thesis Reading Committee and consists of at least three persons, one of whom is the Thesis Advisor. This committee approves the research topic, provides advice and guidance during the research and is charged with approving the thesis when the research is completed and presented as the doctoral thesis. When the Thesis Advisory Committee considers the thesis to be satisfactory, a recommendation is made to the Dean of the Graduate Division for the appointment of the second committee, which is called the Final Doctoral Examination Committee, and it consists of at least five individuals.

The Thesis Advisory Committee consists of at least three members satisfying the following: (1) the thesis advisor shall be a member of the Academic Faculty (with approval of the school or college Graduate Committee, an adjunct * faculty member appointed for the specific purpose of advising graduate students may serve as the thesis advisor); (2) the majority of committee members shall be members of the Academic Faculty. The Committee is approved by the Graduate Committee in the School of College, recommended by the School Director through the College Dean, and appointed by the Dean of the Graduate Division.

The Final Doctoral Examination Committee, which consists of at least five persons, always contains the Thesis Advisory Committee members and others as appropriate, who are recommended by the school or college to the Dean of the Graduate Division for approval. At least one member of the Final Doctoral Examination Committee must be from the academic faculty of a School (or College) which is distinct from the unit in which the student is enrolled.

It is recognized that some Schools and Colleges may wish to appoint a Thesis Advisory Committee which consists of five or more persons and to recommend this committee to serve as the Final Doctoral Examination Committee. Where the constraints outlined above are met for both committees, this is permissible.

Master's Theses

For Master's Thesis advisement, the Thesis Advisory Committee consists of at least three members, the majority of whom must be members of the Academic Faculty. The thesis advisor who serves as the Chairman of the Thesis Advisory Committee must be a member of the Academic Faculty (with approval of the school or college Graduate Committee, an adjunct * faculty member appointed by the specific purpose of advising graduate students may serve as the thesis advisor.) The committee is recommended by the School Director through the College Dean and appointed by the Dean of the Graduate Division.

* "adjunct" does not indicate formal appointment, but rather appointment as indicated in this policy statement.

Note On Joint Degrees And Departments

For joint (inter-institutional) departments or degree programs, committees should have at least one faculty member from each institution, and a majority should be joint program faculty. Joint program faculty will have undergone a nomination and appointment process in the joint program in order to qualify for the right to advise students in the joint program.

POLICY ON PUBLICATION OF THESES

A policy of the Georgia Institute of Technology is that Doctoral and Master's Theses are openly published. Extraordinary delays are not to be allowed to protect proprietary interests of sponsors.

It is anticipated that all Ph.D. theses and a significant fraction of master's theses be published in the open, refereed literature.

In all cases, doctoral research should meet the "Guidelines for Ph.D. Dissertation Research", and in no situation should these be compromised to allow for concealing important research results because of security classification or a sponsor's proprietary interest.

A student may routinely elect to have publication of his or her thesis withheld for a period of one year, if recommended by the student's thesis advisor. Requests for extensions beyond one year must be justified and approved by the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research.

A Georgia Tech doctoral dissertation in its final form may not be used or have been used to meet the requirements for a separate degree at another institution.

GUIDELINES FOR PH.D. DISSERTATION RESEARCH

  1. The research should provide a useful educational experience for the student emphasizing creativity, independent action and learning, research methodology, and scholarly approach.
  2. The research must be relevant to the field in which the student is pursuing a degree.
  3. The contributions to knowledge must be original and as such, should represent a substantial addition to the fundamental knowledge of the field or a new and better interpretation of facts already known. The research must demonstrate creativity. Dissertations based on well known principles, techniques, and models applied to situations only somewhat different from previous applications are not acceptable.
  4. The dissertation should contain clear statements about (a) the relevance and importance of the problem and (b) the significance, originality, and generality of the research results. The relationship of the research to the literature of the field should be described.
  5. The research should possess the major characteristics of the scientific method, namely objectivity and reproducibility. Assumptions should be clearly stated in both experimental and theoretical research.
  6. The dissertation should reflect a level of competence indicative of significant achievement beyond the master's level. Thus, the research is expected to draw directly upon advanced learning in the student's major field and demonstrate mastery of that knowledge.
  7. The dissertation must demonstrate understanding of the theory and methodology related to its main thrust. Further the dissertation should reflect knowledge of the application area.
  8. The research should result in at least one paper publishable in a suitable refereed journal of engineering, science, management or architecture, as appropriate.
  9. The dissertation should demonstrate a high degree of proficiency in written communication of research results. It should conform to the Institute's requirements as outlined in the Office of Graduate Studies and Research "Manual for the Preparation of Graduate Dissertations and Thesis".
  10. The scope of the research should be such that it requires at least the time and effort equivalent to one year of full time graduate study.

Policy on Hour Loads for Graduate Students

Course Load Requirements
Course Selection
Guidelines for Registration of Doctoral Dissertation Hours
Responsibility

The following general policies are provided to serve as guidelines for determining the hourly work loads of students who are pursuing graduate degrees.

  1. Full-time graduate students are expected to give primary attention to the pursuit of their degrees.
  2. Graduate students are expected to take semester work loads which will contribute to substantial progress toward a degree.
  3. Graduate students shall register for a number of hours of research which is consistent with a realistic appraisal of the amount of work to be done on a project, thesis, or dissertation, and the amount of faculty involvement and use of Institute facilities required.
  4. Realistic accounting for graduate student credit hours helps support a quality graduate program.

Transcript Recognition of Teaching and Research Activity

Students holding Graduate Teaching or Graduate Research Assistantships may register for courses in recognition of teaching (8997) and research (8998) activities if these courses are available for their school. The 8997 and 8998 courses are audit-base courses. A student may not register for more than a total of 9 hours of 8997 and 8998 during any semester.

Course Load Requirements

The following regulations shall govern the semester registration requirements for students who are pursuing graduate degrees:

  1. Full-time students must be enrolled for at least 12 credit hours on a letter grade or pass-fail basis. As an exception, the advisor and school chair may allow up to 3 hours out of the 12 minimum to be taken on an audit basis in Fall and Spring semesters; in Summer semesters the advisor and school chair may allow up to 6 hours out of the 12 minimum to be taken on an audit basis. Hours in excess of the required 12 may be taken on any basis. Full-time students working exclusively on thesis research should be registered for 18 or more hours of 7000 or 9000 (Master’s or Doctoral Thesis) in Fall and Spring semesters, and for up to 16 hours during Summer semesters.
  2. The following students must register on a full-time basis as defined above:
    1. graduate research and teaching assistants;
    2. students supported by fellowships, traineeships or individual grants;
    3. students with out-of-state tuition waivers;
    4. students assigned to the institute by the Armed Forces for the purpose of pursuing a degree;
    5. students on student visas;
    6. graduate co-op students on non-work semesters.
  3. Students involved in thesis research must register for an appropriate number of 7000 or 9000 hours.
  4. The minimum load for part-time students is 3 credit hours.
  5. A student may register for only one hour of Master’s or Doctoral Thesis (7000 or 9000) during the semester of graduation. This exception may be used once for each degree.
  6. The maximum allowable semester load for employed students other than graduate assistants is reduced as a function of the number of hours employed per week as follows:
    Work load per weekMaximum semester hour load
    Full time (40 hours)6
    3/4 of full time (30 hours)9
    2/3 of full time (27 hours)10
    1/2 of full time (20 hours) 12
    1/3 of full time (13 hours) 15
    1/4 of full time (10 hours)18  (16 for Summer semesters)

    The minimum course load for these students is three hours, except as described in Course Load Requirement #5 above, but such students should be encouraged to take the maximum load they can handle in order to progress toward completion of the degree.

Course Selection

Full-time students are expected to enroll for a letter grade in regular courses and thesis hours whenever possible. Registration loads should reflect, as much as possible, the student and faculty efforts involved in the program of study. Registration loads each semester should be comprised of various hours from the areas listed below:

  1. Regular courses; letter-grade, pass-fail and in special cases, audit;
  2. 7000 or 9000 courses for thesis students;
  3. Special problem or research project courses;
  4. Specific courses for teaching or research education;
  5. GTA/GRA courses 8997/8998 (up to a maximum of 9) if available in the student’s major school and the student has an assistantship.

Guidelines for Registration of Doctoral Dissertation Hours

  1. Beginning full-time doctoral students, especially those who are research assistants, are encouraged to register for at least 3 hours of 9000. This would allow, and encourage, such students to maintain a lighter academic load to begin laying the groundwork for Ph.D. research.
  2. Advanced full-time doctoral students who are working primarily on their dissertation research should register for 18 or more hours of 9000 in Fall and Spring semesters, and for up to 16 hours of 9000 for summer semesters. If they are taking other coursework, the number of 9000 hours would be reduced by the number of formal coursework hours. Students who are required by their schools to register for 8997 or 8998 would further reduce the number of 9000 hours, so that the total number of hours is at least 18 (no more than 16 in Summer). The advisor and/or school determines whether the total is above 18 for Fall and Spring semesters.
  3. Part-time doctoral students engaged in research for the Ph.D. should register for the number of 9000 hours consistent with their and their faculty advisor’s activity on the dissertation research.
  4. All full-time students coded as Master’s students but involved in preparation for the Ph.D. are encouraged to register for 9000 hours consistent with the amount of work involved.

Academic units are encouraged to remove any in-school restrictions on registering for 9000. For example, some schools will not allow a graduate student to register for 9000 until after the student has become a candidate for the Ph.D. degree. The reasoning behind this restriction is not clear unless one takes a very restrictive interpretation of what registering for 9000 means. Academic units are encouraged to adopt a broader interpretation, so that dissertation hours reflect all stages of the doctoral dissertation--literature research, topic selection, experimental/theoretical preparation, research performance, writing and presentation. All of these stages require institute facilities and faculty involvement.

Responsibility

The responsibility for advising graduate students properly, not only in regard to programs of study, but also in regard to minimum and maximum semester course loads, rests solely within the chain from advisor/graduate coordinator to school chair to college dean. Although each graduate student is responsible for knowing the requirements for his or her degree and for insuring the appropriate, steady progress is being made toward that degree, each graduate student must have access to fair and equitable advisement. Responsibility for scheduling the proper requirements for a particular program of study and an appropriate course load per semester rests with the student and advisor alike.

Policy on Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) - Academic Policy for Doctoral Students

Last Revised: 
April 2017
Review Date: 
April 2020
Contact Name: 
Jason Borenstein
Contact Title: 
Director of Graduate Research Ethics Programs
Contact Email: 
borenstein@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

The responsible conduct of research (RCR) is an increasingly significant component of the education and training of researchers. Policies from federal agencies have contributed to this change. In 2009, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) updated its RCR policy, adding emphasis to the importance of in-person training. That same year, the National Science Foundation (NSF) released a new RCR training policy.

As a premier technological university at the cutting edge of education, research, and innovation, the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) is committed to providing leadership in the realm of ethics and RCR. RCR training is central to Georgia Tech’s mission to ensure that students are prepared with the knowledge and skills necessary to conduct themselves professionally and with integrity. Consequently, Georgia Tech enacted the RCR Academic Policy for Doctoral Students described here.

Policy Statement: 

The RCR Academic Policy for Doctoral Students applies to all doctoral students who have an admit date of Fall 2011 or later. It includes students who enrolled in a master’s program in Fall 2011 or later but who have since transitioned to a doctoral program.

Doctoral students who are not covered by this Policy should refer to the applicability criteria listed in the Georgia Tech RCR Compliance Policy to determine if their source of funding requires RCR training: http://www.policylibrary.gatech.edu/research-support/responsible-conduct-research-compliance-policy.

This Academic Policy does not affect undergraduate students or postdoctoral researchers. However, they are still subject to grant and fellowship compliance requirements. 

The Requirements of the RCR Academic Policy for Doctoral Students
As part of their degree requirements, doctoral students admitted Fall 2011 or later must complete:

(1) an online CITI RCR course and (2) in-person RCR training.

(1) The Online Requirement
The online portion of the requirement, a CITI RCR course, must be successfully completed within 90 days of when applicable students begin the first full semester of their doctoral program. Information about the CITI RCR courses can be found here: rcr.gatech.edu/online-training/.

If a student goes past the 90 day time frame, a hold will be placed on course registration until the student completes the online training.

(2) The In-Person Requirement
Students covered by this Policy are required to successfully complete PHIL 6000 OR an academic program’s in-house RCR training approach. The in-house approach must be formally approved by the GT RCR Advisory Subcommittee of the Institute Graduate Curriculum Committee.

Students are strongly encouraged to complete in-person training within the first 12 months of their doctoral program. In general, applicable students who need to take PHIL 6000 will be expected to do so during the first summer session after they begin their doctoral program at Georgia Tech. Additional sections will be available during the fall and spring semesters for those students who would not be enrolled full time during the summer session.

RCR Core Topics Areas and the Criteria for In-House Training Approaches
A proposed in-house approach must include no less than eight instruction hours on the RCR core topic areas in a credit course. The RCR core topic areas are as follows:

(1) Authorship and publication;
(2) Collaborative research;
(3) Conflict of interest;
(4) Data acquisition, management, ownership, and sharing;
(5) Laboratory safety;
(6) Peer review;
(7) Policies regarding the use of human subjects in research;
(8) Policies regarding the use of vertebrate animals in research;
(9) The responsibilities of mentors and mentees;
(10) Research misconduct and policies for handling research misconduct; and
(11) Science and engineering in society.

An in-house approach to RCR training must include all of the above topic areas unless permission has been granted by the GT RCR Advisory Subcommittee to exclude one or more of the topics.

A graduate program must submit a proposal to the GT RCR Advisory Subcommittee by the first working day in November of the current academic year in order for the in-house proposal to be considered for the academic year that follows.  More information about the process can be found here: http://www.rcr.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/RCR_MSPhDInHouseGuide.pdf

Approved In-House RCR Training Approaches
Students covered by this Policy are required to successfully complete PHIL 6000 OR an academic program’s in-house RCR training approach. Many of the in-house approaches are specific to a particular graduate program. Some utilize a single course; others utilize a combination of courses. The list of in-house RCR approaches is maintained at: http://www.rcr.gatech.edu/doctoral-courses.

Joint Graduate Programs
Doctoral students covered by this Policy who are part of a joint program must complete an online CITI RCR course within the initial 90 days of their first full semester as a doctoral student. If a student goes past the 90 day time frame, a hold will be placed on course registration until the student completes the training. These students are also subject to the in-person training requirement if they are enrolled and present at Georgia Tech’s Atlanta campus. Joint programs may submit a proposal to the GT RCR Advisory Subcommittee for approval of the in-person coursework at the partner institution. The GT RCR Advisory Subcommittee will apply the same evaluation criteria to such proposals as it does to a proposal for in-house training conducted at Georgia Tech.

Georgia Tech Graduate Students on International Campuses
Doctoral students covered by this Policy who are on Georgia Tech’s international campuses must complete a CITI RCR online course within the initial 90 days of their first full semester as a doctoral student. If a student goes past the 90 day time frame, a hold may be placed on course registration until the student completes the training. If these students enroll at Georgia Tech’s Atlanta campus for at least one semester, they should complete the in-person RCR training component the first semester that they are present on the Atlanta campus.

Tracking and Monitoring
The Administrator of Graduate Research Ethics Programs monitors student adherence to this Policy. However, doctoral programs must inform their students about this Policy.  Applicable doctoral students can check their RCR training status in DegreeWorks.

The Office of Sponsored Programs in conjunction with the Administrator of Graduate Research Ethics Programs is responsible for tracking compliance for students who require RCR training due to their source of funding.

Frequently Asked Questions:
Doctoral RCR Policy Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document

Related Information: 
RCR Academic Policy for Doctoral Students website 
Responsible Conduct of Research website 
RCR Online Training
RCR Doctoral Courses 
RCR Compliance Policy
RCR Topics

Policy History: 
Revision DateAuthorDescription
06-2013Policy LibraryUpdate to policy
02-2012Policy LibraryPosted new policy

Publication of Theses

Last Revised: 
August 2013
Review Date: 
August 2016
Policy Statement: 

Electronic submission of theses and dissertations has been mandatory since spring 2004. All degree candidates must submit their final work electronically. Georgia Institute of Technology policy states that Doctoral and Master's Theses must be openly published and Georgia Tech is granted a non-exclusive license to distribute and preserve the materials for educational purposes. Students must submit the SMARTech Repository Agreement from when submitting all theses and dissertations. Upon the request of the student and with the consent of the student's advisor, an ETD can routinely be withheld from circulation for one year. Research arrangements that would preclude publication for an extended time or permanently for reasons of national security or a sponsor's proprietary interest, however, are not appropriate for dissertations or theses. It is anticipated that all doctoral work and a significant amount of master's research will be published in the open, refereed literature.

Electronic Thesis/Dissertation Submission

All theses and dissertations must be submitted electronically via the GT Library-Graduate Studies joint ETD web site at http://thesis.gatech.edu/.

For more information about how you submit your thesis electronically, visit http://www.grad.gatech.edu/theses-dissertations-electronic-submission.

For general information about Theses and Dissertations, visit http://www.gradadmiss.gatech.edu/theses-dissertations

Policy History: 
Revision DateAuthorDescription
08-2013Policy LibraryRevised ETD external link

Responsible Conduct of Research

For information on Responsible Conduct of Research please follow the link below.
www.rcr.gatech.edu

Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Academic Policy for Master’s Thesis Students

Type of Policy: 
Academic
Effective Date: 
August 2014
Last Revised: 
April 2014
Review Date: 
April 2017
Policy Owner: 
Graduate Studies
Contact Name: 
Jason Borenstein
Contact Title: 
Director of Graduate Research Ethics Programs
Contact Email: 
borenstein@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

The responsible conduct of research (RCR) is an increasingly significant component of the education and training of researchers. Policies from federal agencies have contributed to this change. In 2009, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) updated its RCR policy, adding emphasis to the importance of in-person training. That same year, the National Science Foundation (NSF) released a new RCR training policy.

As a premier technological university at the cutting edge of education, research, and innovation, the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) is committed to providing leadership in the realm of ethics and RCR. RCR training is central to Georgia Tech’s mission to ensure that students are prepared with the knowledge and skills necessary to conduct themselves professionally and with integrity. In Fall 2011, Georgia Tech implemented the RCR Academic Policy for Doctoral Students, which covers new doctoral students. The Policy described here builds on that prior initiative and expands RCR training to master’s students who are pursuing a thesis degree. 

Policy Statement: 

The RCR Academic Policy for Master’s Thesis Students applies to all master’s students who register for thesis hours (courses numbered 7000) starting Fall 2014.

As part of their degree requirements, master’s students who register for thesis hours (courses numbered 7000) starting Fall 2014 must complete at least one of the following options:

First Option - Successfully complete an online CITI RCR course (rcr.gatech.edu/online-training/).

OR

Second Option - Successfully complete an RCR course that has already been approved to satisfy the in-person RCR training requirement for doctoral students (http://rcr.gatech.edu/doctoral-courses).

OR

Third Option - Receive at least 4 contact hours of RCR education during a course that is a required part of the curriculum for the specific master’s program (http://rcr.gatech.edu/masters-courses).

Master’s students who plan to transition to a doctoral program should refer to the “Related Information” section below. 

Scope: 

This Policy applies to all Master’s Students who enroll in thesis hours (courses numbered 7000) starting Fall 2014.

Policy Terms: 

RCR
Responsible Conduct of Research

Procedures: 

5.1 RCR Training Timeline

Notification of the Requirement
Students will be informed of the RCR requirement described in this Policy when they enroll in 7000 thesis hours.

Deadline for Completion
Students are strongly encouraged to complete the requirement prior to conducting research but it must be completed no later than when submitting the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form to the Office of Graduate Studies. 

5.2 Documenting RCR Training Completion on the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form

First Option
If the First Option is selected, applicable master’s students must successfully complete an online CITI RCR course before the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form will be processed by the Office of Graduate Studies. The completion of the training must be indicated on the Thesis Topic Form.

Second and Third Options 
If the Second or Third Option is selected, applicable master’s students must successfully complete a course that has been approved to satisfy the in-person RCR training requirement before the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form will be processed by the Office of Graduate Studies. The course name and semester taken must be indicated on the Thesis Topic Form

5.3 Review of the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form by Graduate Studies

Verification of RCR Training Completion
The Office of Graduate Studies will verify RCR training completion when it examines the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form. 

Responsibilities: 

8.1 Master’s Programs
Master’s programs must inform their thesis students about this Policy. Master’s programs who wish to pursue the “Third Option” (listed above) should refer to:
http://rcr.gatech.edu/masters-policy/third-option.

8.2 Master’s Thesis Students

  • Master’s thesis students should contact their home program to learn about their degree requirements relating to RCR.
  • Master’s thesis students must complete RCR training before the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form will be processed by the Office of Graduate Studies.
  • Applicable master’s thesis students can check their RCR training status in DegreeWorks.

8.3 The Office of Graduate Studies

The Office of Graduate Studies will verify that the RCR training has been completed prior to processing the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form.

8.4 The RCR Program

The Administrator of Graduate Research Ethics Programs, in conjunction with the Office of Graduate Studies, will monitor student adherence to this Policy.

Enforcement: 

Noncompliance with this Policy will result in the denial of the Request for Approval of Master’s Thesis Topic Form until the RCR training (described above) is completed. Failing to complete the training may result in the Form being returned to the student’s home department.

Related Information

Statement of Competitive Admission

All qualified persons are equally welcome to seek admission to the Georgia Institute of Technology, and all persons may apply for and accept admission confident that the policy and regular practice of the Institute will not discriminate against them on the basis of race, religion, sex, or national origin.

Projections of the number of graduate students to be admitted and enrolled in any year will be determined (a) by the capacity of the Institute, (b) by the capacity of the admitting department, and (c) by approved enrollment levels. If the number of eligible applicants for admission exceeds the number of applicants who can be admitted and enrolled, those to be offered admission will be selected on the basis of (a) the department’s judgment of the applicant's relative qualifications for satisfactory performance in the Institute/program/research area and (b) recognition of the Institute's special responsibilities to the residents of Georgia.

Verification of credentials and certification of compliance with Institute policies shall be the responsibility of the Office of Graduate Admissions. Policies and procedures that are approved by the Office of the President, Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and the Graduate Senate of the Institute shall be applied in determining eligibility for consideration for graduate study. From those eligible candidates, final admission decisions shall be the responsibility of the admitting department. Satisfying minimal standards, however, does not guarantee admission, since the number of eligible applicants generally far exceeds the number of places available. As a result, many well-qualified applicants cannot be accommodated.

The criteria used in determining each applicant’s eligibility for consideration shall include: (1) evidence of award of a bachelor’s degree or its equivalent (prior to matriculation) from a recognized institution and graduation in the upper half of their class (Masters) or upper quarter of their class (Doctoral); students must show evidence of preparation in their chosen field sufficient to ensure profitable graduate study; (2) for international applicants, satisfactory scores on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). From eligible candidates, departments may make final admission decisions based on a combination of factors, including academic degrees and records, the statement of purpose, letters of recommendation, test scores, and relevant work experience. Also considered are the appropriateness of the applicant’s goals to the degree program in which they are interested and to the research interests of the program's faculty. In addition, consideration may be given to how the applicant’s background and life experience would contribute significantly to an educationally beneficial mix of students.

Applicants who do not satisfy basic admission criteria may, for sufficient reason, be admitted with the approval of the Graduate Committee as established in the statutes and bylaws of the Institute.

This statement is in accordance with the Institute’s Mission and Vision statement which can be viewed at www.gatech.edu/vision/.

Stipends for Graduate Assistantships

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
August 2015
Last Revised: 
May 2016
Review Date: 
May 2018
Policy Owner: 
Graduate Studies
Contact Name: 
Susan Cozzens
Contact Title: 
Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Affairs
Contact Email: 
susan.cozzens@provost.gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 
Set a minimum stipend for graduate research and teaching assistants across the Institute and describe processes and responsibilities for setting stipends at or above the minimum.
Policy Statement: 
For the 2017-18 academic year, the minimum stipend level for each doctoral graduate research or teaching assistant shall be $1,433 per month, regardless of whether the student is working one-third or one-half time. The minimum stipend level for each master’s student who is a graduate research or teaching assistant shall be $945 per month, regardless of whether the student is working one-third or one-half time. Any exceptions to the application of this policy must be approved by the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development.
Scope: 

The policy applies to all graduate students enrolled in all degree-seeking programs.

 

Definitions:

Stipend The salary paid to the graduate student employee for teaching or research services provided.
Graduate Research Assistantship (GRA) Part time research job held by a graduate student.
Graduate Teaching Assistantship (GTA) Part time teaching job held by a graduate student.
Procedures: 
Institute Level
Setting the Institute MinimumThe Office of the Provost will determine a new minimum stipend level by January 1st of each year to apply to the following academic year. The revised minimum will take into account: (1) Georgia Tech’s projected mandatory and elective fees for the next year; (2) projected graduate student health insurance premium level; (3) current level of stipends on NSF fellowships; (4) state employee pay increase percentage; (5) other costs factors affecting graduate students; (6) available funding. This policy will be updated annually based on the Provost’s determination.
Unit and Program Level
Setting and Reviewing Unit or Program Stipend LevelsEach academic unit or inter-school degree program shall determine the stipend levels for its students. The stipend levels shall be determined by the following factors: (1) peer institution stipend levels for individual disciplines, taking into consideration the tuition waiver policies and cost factors for peer institutions for comparability (peer reviews to be conducted by academic units); (2) the student’s progress toward his/her degree, including whether the student is a masters or doctoral student; (3) whether the student is asked to work one-third time or half-time, as determined by each department; (4) level of teaching or research work conducted by the student; (5) past experience and performance of the student in research or teaching; (6) for an international student, the estimated cost of living as determined by the Office of International Education through the I-20 form (http://www.oie.gatech.edu/); (7) available funding.
Reviewing Stipends Annually and Anticipating the Need for RaisesEach academic unit shall annually review the overall stipend levels for its students based on the factors noted in 5.2. If Georgia Tech is authorized to provide annual salary increases to permanent employees, comparable increases for graduate assistants funded through non-sponsored funds shall be considered. Raises for graduate assistants funded through sponsored funds should be anticipated through escalation factors in grant budgets.
Publishing Stipend Levels; Maintaining EquityIn order to maintain equity and transparency in stipend levels, each unit should publish its stipend levels in a location accessible to both students and faculty in that unit. Unit heads are responsible for maintaining equitable stipends in their units through regular review of the stipends being paid and supporting the rationale for any differences.
Responsibilities: 

Provost
Sets Institute-level minimum stipends.

Units and Programs
Set unit or program stipend levels; review them annually and raise them as appropriate; anticipate the need for increased stipend amounts and include them in unit and grant budgets; maintain equity in pay through regular review.

Enforcement: 

The Institute reserves the right to address violations by raising the stipends of individual students to the minimum using the budget of the hiring unit.

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

Policy History: 

 

Revision Date Author Description
March 2017 Provost Office Updated Stipend Information
May 2016 Provost Office Updated Stipend Information
May 2015 Provost Office Updated Stipend Information
June-2008 Provost The policy set the minimum stipend effective August, 2008.

Thesis and Dissertations

For information on Thesis and Dissertations please follow the link below.
http://www.grad.gatech.edu/theses-dissertations

Graduate Student Tuition Waivers

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
August 2016
Last Revised: 
August 2016
Policy Owner: 
Graduate Studies
Contact Name: 
Susan Cozzens
Contact Title: 
Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development
Contact Email: 
scozzens@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 
This policy statement consolidates a number of current practices. It clarifies the two major types of tuition waivers; sets conditions for waiver of tuition if the student’s employment status changes during the term; and sets conditions for GRA or GTA positions in non-academic units.
Policy Statement: 
Full tuition waivers accompany all research and teaching assistant positions that require one-third to one-half time work. Half tuition waivers may be offered; tuition waivers may be prorated for approved hires after the term starts; and academic units may provide tuition waivers to GRAs or GTAs working in non-academic units if the work is done under the supervision of a faculty member. Graduate students are eligible for non-resident tuition waivers only under special circumstances.
Scope: 

The policy applies to all graduate students and all programs.

Definitions

Non-resident tuition waiver (NRTW)

Administrative action that reduces tuition for an out-of-state student to in-state level.

Full tuition waiver

Administrative action that reduces tuition for a graduate research or teaching assistant to $25.

Half tuition waiver

Administrative action that reduces the tuition bill for a graduate student to half of the in-state tuition level, in conjunction with a work assignment at half the number of hours of a full assistantship in the same program. Can be used only with state funds.

Tuition remission

The tuition rate automatically charged to a GTF account or sponsored project when a GRA or GTA is paid from the account or project. When the project pays tuition remission, the student receives a full tuition waiver as described above.

Academic Unit

Any school, department, or program within one of the colleges.

Academic Faculty Member

As defined in the Faculty Handbook. To supervise GRA or GTA credits, the individual must be cleared to be an instructor by the Office of Faculty Development.

Procedures: 

5.1 Types of tuition waivers

Georgia Tech’s policies on tuition waivers for graduate students are framed by those of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia (BOR), as well as by federal grant regulations. The BOR allows Georgia Tech to provide two distinct types, both called “waivers” in its tuition policies (BOR Policy Manual Section 7.3.4.1; see Fall 2015 revisions).

1. Non-resident tuition waivers (NRTWs)

Non-Resident Tuition Waivers (NRTWs) are also called “out of state tuition waivers.” These waivers eliminate the out-of-state portion of the tuition a student would otherwise pay. They fall into several categories:

  1. Presidential Waivers, of which there are three types: academic, athletic, and international. These waivers are awarded based on specific criteria proposed by the institution. The BOR limits the number of these Georgia Tech can give to 4% of the student body, plus an additional 140 for graduate students. For graduate students, these waivers are administered by the Office of Scholarships and Financial Aid, after approval by the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development.

1.2.Mandated categories. The BOR mandates that we give NRTWs to several categories of people, including employees; military personnel and their families; border county residents; family members of residents; and students associated with economic development activities of the state. (See details in the BOR Policy Manual Section 7.3.4.1.) These waivers are administered by the Registrar’s Office.

  1. Reciprocal. Another major group of NRTWs is used in exchange programs, whether international or domestic. These reductions apply to “any student who enrolls in a USG institution as a participant in an international or domestic direct exchange program that provides reciprocal benefits to USG students.” For international exchanges, these waivers are administered by the Office of International Programs.

 

2. Full Tuition Waivers

The other major category of waivers largely releases the student from payment of tuition, except the $25 mandated by the Board of Regents. The BOR permits Georgia Tech to give graduate students full tuition waivers as long as they are research assistants (GRAs) or teaching assistants (GTAs) (see BOR Policy Manual Section 7.3.1.2). Other Georgia Tech policies govern who counts as a GRA or GTA for full tuition waiver purposes (e.g., must be full time student working 13-20 hours per week). Unlike NRTWs, full tuition waivers are not limited in number by the BOR.

  1. GRAs (sponsored). Most GRAs are supported under grants or contracts and thereby receive full tuition waivers. When this is the case, tuition “remission” is charged to the grant. Tuition remission is paid at the rate negotiated with the federal government and is reflected in our agreements with our federal audit agency, ONR (the Office of Naval Research); the current rate is posted on the Office of Sponsored Programs web site. If the agency’s policies for a particular program do not allow this full payment, the EVPR can authorize that the sponsored project not be charged tuition remission. The EVPR office must approve this at the time the proposal is submitted. In order to maintain consistent charging, Foundation accounts also pay tuition when they support GRAs. The money charged to grants and foundation accounts goes into a fund called GSTRP (the Graduate Student Tuition Remission Program), which is used for general operations.
  2. GTAs (and non-sponsored GRAs). Any graduate student on non-sponsored GRA or GTA support (that is, support paid with state operating funds) also receives a full tuition waiver and pays the mandated $25 tuition.  Georgia Tech is required under its federal contracting relationship to maintain consistency between the cost of sponsored GRAs and the cost of GTAs and non-sponsored GRAs. The waivers for non-sponsored assistantships are allocated to the colleges under a set of procedures described in another policy.
  3. Graduate Assistants. The BOR would also allow Georgia Tech to give full tuition waivers to graduate assistants (those doing small jobs or administrative work or part time students), but Georgia Tech reserves that category of employment to be used without a full tuition waiver.

 

 

5.2 Timing of waivers

Both NRTWs and full tuition waivers must be applied to a student’s account before tuition is due (the Monday of the second week of class). Full tuition waivers must be associated with a GRA or GTA appointment by that same time. If these conditions are not met, the student is responsible for full tuition for the term.

Termination mid-semester

Assistantships may be terminated mid-semester if students withdraw, complete their degree work, or leave campus permanently. In these cases, stipends will be paid only to the date of termination. Any tuition waiver applied at the beginning of the semester will continue to be in force. Sponsored projects will be charged the monthly rate for tuition remission up to the date of termination. If a student does not complete the work commitment for any reason other than withdrawing and leaving school, then the tuition waiver will be removed and student will be responsible for paying tuition for the full term at the applicable rate (resident or non-resident).

 

Late hires

In the rare case in which a student is hired for a GRA or GTA position after tuition and fees are due for the term, responsibility for tuition up to the month of hiring remains with the student, at the applicable rate (resident or non-resident). Responsibility for tuition from the month of hiring shifts to the account to which the GRA or GTA position is being charged through the use of a prorated tuition waiver amount reflecting the portion of the term remaining based on the last day of the hiring month.  Because the percentages vary from term to term, the Bursar will post the percentages for each term. Since late hiring is an exception to regular practices and may affect other aspects of financial aid, it requires review by the Registrar, Bursar, and Office of Scholarships and Financial Aid and written approval from the Vice Provost for Graduate Education.

5.3  Other provisions

Half waivers

Graduate programs may offer half research or teaching assistantships to full-time students, if state funds are being used. Like full assistantships, these automatically waive the non-resident portion of tuition. The student pays half of in-state tuition, and the other half is waived. The student is still responsible for all differential tuition in programs where this applies. The work assignment for these assistantships must be half the number of hours required for a full assistantship in the same program.

Waivers for work outside the colleges

All tuition waivers are allocated to and used by academic units alone. The student’s home school must enter the waiver, regardless of where the student is working. By entering the waiver, the academic program certifies that the work to be done is relevant to the student’s graduate education. If non-academic units want to fund GRA or GTA positions, they can request the waiver to accompany the positions from the home school of the student who will be hired. The unit must certify that the assignment contributes to the student’s graduate education and an academic faculty member must provide supervision for the educational aspect of the work, as shown by the student’s registering for GRA or GTA credit with that faculty member. All GRA or GTA assignments outside the colleges must be approved by the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development.

Student responsibility for fees

Tuition waivers do not include waivers of payment of fees. Responsibility for fees always remains with individual students when they are hired as GRAs or GTAs.

Responsibilities: 

Home school of GRA or GTA enters the tuition waiver to accompany a GRA or GTA appointment.

Office of Scholarships and Financial Aid enters all Presidential non-resident tuition waivers, either under standing instructions or with the approval of the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development in the case of graduate students.

Registrar’s Office enters NRTWs for special categories mandated by the Board of Regents.

Office of International Education approves NRTWs for international exchange students.

Executive Vice President for Research (EVPR) approves all exceptions to the policy of charging tuition remission to GTF and sponsored accounts.

Bursar’s Office applies or removes tuition waivers, including pro-rating when approved and posting the schedule and percentages for pro-rating.

Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Development approves all late GRA or GTA hires; all GRA or GTA hires outside the colleges; and all special cases of NRTWs.

Students are responsible for paying all fees and any tuition that is not waived by the Bursar’s deadlines each term. 

Enforcement: 

Principal investigators, units, or programs that violate the policies must pay any resulting tuition balances with GTF or GTRC funds. Students who violate the policies must pay any tuition due or have their registration canceled due to lack of payment.

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

International Students

J Research Scholar Activities

For information on J Research Scholar Activities please follow the link below.
http://oie.gatech.edu/content/j-scholar-or-j-student-intern-ds-2019-request-process

Medical Reduced Courseload

For information on Medical Reduced Courseload please follow the link below.
http://oie.gatech.edu/accordion-f-current-maintaining-status#accordion_f_current_maintaining_status-page-node-4100

Student Visa Type & Eligibility

For information on Student Visa Type & Eligibility please follow the links below.
http://oie.gatech.edu/content/j-immigration-document-overview
http://oie.gatech.edu/content/f-immigration-documents

Work Authorization (OPT and CPT)

For information on Work Authorization (OPT and CPT) please follow the links below.
http://oie.gatech.edu/content/curricular-practical-training
http://oie.gatech.edu/content/optional-practical-training

Commencement Regalia

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
August 2016
Last Revised: 
August 2016
Review Date: 
August 2019
Policy Owners: 
Office of the Provost
Office of the Registrar
Contact Names: 
Jennifer Herazy, Assistant Provost, herazy@gatech.edu
Reta Pikowsky, Registrar, reta.pikowsky@registrar.gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 
As an official function of the Institute, Institute Commencement ceremonies convey the scholarly tradition and formal tone befitting of an academic ceremony. This policy sets forth standards related to the academic regalia worn at Institute commencement ceremonies by students, as well as the process by which student organizations and Institute programs may seek approval to add adornment to the regalia to signify a student’s membership or association. Adornments include any addition to the issued traditional academic regalia and may include, but are not limited to: cords, stoles, torus, medallion, pins, and other decorations.
Policy Statement: 

Traditional academic regalia will be worn by all graduating students and faculty in commencement ceremonies (as described in section 4). The Institute welcomes students, academic programs, and student organizations to express their identity and values through the addition of appropriate adornment to the standard Institute regalia. Any adornments added to the regalia should not obstruct the view of others at the ceremony or interfere with another’s participation in the ceremony.

Georgia Tech Student Organizations (as registered with the Division of Student Life) and other Institute-approved programs or organizations wishing to provide student members or participants with organization or program recognition regalia adornment to be worn at commencement must seek prior approval from the Office of the Provost through the Registrar. The cost of the adornments will be borne by the organization or student members. A list of all pre-approved regalia adornments including the requesting person or organization, description, and meaning of the adornment will be maintained by the Registrar’s Office.

Students not in compliance with the requirements of this policy may be asked to remove and/or conceal any unapproved regalia adornment.

Scope: 

This policy pertains to the regalia and adornments worn by students participating in any Institute undergraduate commencement, graduate commencement, or PhD hooding ceremonies.

Definitions:

Academic Regalia – Doctoral Candidates

Doctoral candidates traditionally wear customized gold regalia with full rounded sleeves, velvet facings on the front and velvet bars on the sleeves. Hoods are lined with Georgia Tech colors. Doctoral candidates also wear a six-pointed tam.

Academic Regalia – Master’s Candidates

Master’s degree candidates traditionally wear the traditional black grown with full-length square sleeves with a crescent piece hanging from each sleeve. The gowns are adorned with the Georgia Tech seal. The master’s hoods are lined in white and gold and colors appropriate to their major. Caps are traditional mortar boards and tassels are white and gold.

Academic Regalia – Bachelor’s Candidates

Bachelor’s degree candidates traditionally wear the traditional black gown but with no hood and no additional material at the bottom of the sleeves. Caps are traditional mortar boards and tassels are white and gold.

Regalia Adornments

Any décor or embellishment added to the regalia which may include, but is not limited to cords, stoles, tassel décor, medallions, and patches.

Honor Cords

A cord worn by undergraduate students who have earned the designation of academic honors as based on their GPA at the start of the graduating semester. Cords may not be used for any other designation unless by specific permission of the Office of the Provost through the Registrar.  Exceptions may be granted for academic (GPA-based), distinguished national honor societies that may issue cords to their graduates.  Recognizing the considerable effort of the students who earn honors, the color of the cord will signify the level of honors:

  • white for honors,
  • gold for high honors, and
  • white and gold braided for highest honors. 

The determination of honors would be preliminary and based on the students' GPA at the start of the graduating semester.  The distribution of cords will be managed by the Registrar’s Office.

Medallions or pins

A piece of jewelry worn around the neck or pinned to the regalia signifying participation in a specific Institute recognized organization or program.

Stoles

A long band of cloth, usually silk, worn around the neck signifying participation in a specific Institute recognized organization or program.

Tassel Décor or Torus

Academic programs and departments may wish to signify participation in academic-based options with a torus – beads worn on the tassel of the mortar board.  This would be determined by individual programs and departments and must be limited to academic options that are included on the students' transcripts or documented in some other consistent manner, such as co-op, threads, international plan, minors, or undergraduate research option. 

Procedures: 

Student organizations or Institute-approved programs must submit stole designs for approval to the Registrar’s office. The following chart details the process:

Requests for approval of Academic Regalia Adornments

Request Form

A form to submit for approval will be available on the Registrar’s office web site. Forms submitted must include a photo of the stole.

Approval

Any regalia adornment or exceptions to this policy must be approved by the Office of the Provost through the Registrar prior to display at commencement.  A list of all approved regalia adornments will be kept by the Registrar’s office and posted on the Institute Commencement website.

Deadline

All submissions for approval must be submitted to the Registrar’s office by the dates designated on the Registrar’s web site.

Responsibilities: 
  1. Office of the Provost – Oversee the implementation of this policy and approve any exceptions to the terms of the policy.
  2. Registrar – Manage the approval and registry of regalia adornments as well as the distribution of honor cords.

  3. Student Organizations, academic departments, and Institute approved programs – Seek approval and register any regalia adornments prior to commencement.

Georgia Tech Professional Education

Review Date: 
February 2015
Policy Statement: 

Joint and Dual Academic Agreements

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
August 2014
Last Revised: 
August 2014
Review Date: 
August 2017
Policy Owner: 
Library Learning Excellence
Contact Name: 
Catherine Murray-Rust
Contact Title: 
Vice Provost Learning Excellence and Dean of Libraries, SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison
Contact Email: 
catherine.murray-rust@library.gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

This policy is designed to ensure that Georgia Tech complies with applicable accreditation principles of SACSCOC and Policy and Procedures of the Board of Regents (BOR) of the University System of Georgia (USG) for academic programs offered via collaborative agreements between Georgia Tech and other institutions.

Policy Statement: 

Georgia Tech is responsible for providing timely notification to SACSCOC and to the USG’s BOR of agreements involving dual or joint academic agreements (awards), providing signed copies of the agreements and any other documentation or information required by SACSCOC or USG BOR policies and procedures for review.

This policy outlines the procedures Georgia Tech must follow to comply with SACSCOC’s Agreement Involving Joint and Dual Academic Awards Policy and the USG’s BOR Curriculum and Off-Campus Instructional Sites policy. Adherence to the policy will ensure Georgia Tech avoids sanctions and penalties associated with non-compliance.

Scope: 

This policy applies to dual or joint academic agreements (awards) established for the purposes of awarding academic completions awards, e.g. certificates, diplomas or degrees.

Policy Terms: 

Dual Academic Award
Students study at two or more institutions and each institution grants a separate academic award bearing only its name, seal and signature.

Joint Academic Award
Students study at two or more institutions and the institutions grant a single academic award bearing the names, seals and signatures of each of the participating institutions.

Faculty Sponsor / Point of Contact
The Georgia Tech faculty employee responsible for developing and / or negotiating the terms and operational details of the dual or joint academic award on behalf of Georgia Tech and providing information and regular reports to every responsible person in his / her business unit responsible for oversight. The agreement must be signed by an authorized agent of Georgia Tech – this may or may not be the Georgia Tech Faculty Sponsor / Point of Contact.

Procedures: 

5.1 Dual Academic Awards

SACSCOC: Dual Academic Awards
Entering into an agreement with another institution involving a dual academic award is a substantive change that requires an institution to submit a letter of notification to SACSCOC six months prior to implementation of the agreement and a final signed copy of the agreement. Formal, written acceptance of that notification and agreement by SACSCOC is required before implementation of the provisions of the agreement.

The following should be submitted to SACSCOC:

  • A notification letter that includes a statement of intent, the anticipated beginning date of the agreement, a description of the agreement, the complete address/location parties involved in the agreement and information for contact persons at each participating institution regarding the agreement
  • A copy of the final signed agreement
If the joint or dual academic award involves offering 50 percent or more of a program at a previously unapproved off-campus site by a member institution or involves offering a new program which is significantly different from currently offered approved programs, notification is due six months prior to implementation date with a prospectus for approval due at least three months prior to implementation.

USG’s BOR: Dual Academic Awards
Dual Degrees in the University System of Georgia are defined according to the SACSCOC Agreements Involving Joint and Dual Academic Awards: Policy and Procedures Policy. Notification to the Office of Academic Programs is required at least two weeks prior to implementation. Only dual degrees comprised of academic programs that have been previously approved by the BOR either at a single University System institution or between University System institutions shall be forwarded as notification items. All new degree programs require Board approval.

5.2 Joint Academic Awards

SACSCOC: Joint Academic Awards –
Category One: Partner Institutions that are all SACSCOC accredited

Entering into an agreement with another institution involving a dual academic award is a substantive change that requires an institution to submit a letter of notification to SACSCOC six months prior to implementation of the agreement and a final signed copy of the agreement. Formal, written acceptance of that notification and agreement by SACSCOC is required before implementation of the provisions of the agreement.

The following should be submitted to SACSCOC:

  • A notification letter that includes a statement of intent, the anticipated beginning date of the agreement, a description of the agreement, the complete address/location parties involved in the agreement and information for contact persons at each participating institution regarding the agreement
  • A copy of the final signed agreement

If the joint or dual academic award involves offering 50 percent or more of a program at a previously unapproved off-campus site by a member institution or involves offering a new program which is significantly different from currently offered approved programs, notification is due six months prior to implementation date with a prospectus for approval due at least three months prior to implementation.

SACSCOC: Joint Academic Awards –
Category Two: At least One Partner Institution is accredited by a US Department of Education (DOE) recognized accreditor other than SACSCOC

Entering into an agreement with another institution involving a dual academic award is a substantive change that requires an institution to submit a letter of notification to SACSCOC six months prior to implementation of the agreement and a final signed copy of the agreement. Formal, written acceptance of that notification and agreement by SACSCOC is required before implementation of the provisions of the agreement.

The following should be submitted to SACSCOC:

  • A notification letter that includes a statement of intent, the anticipated beginning date of the agreement, a description of the agreement, the complete address/location parties involved in the agreement and information for contact persons at each participating institution regarding the agreement
  • A copy of the final signed agreement
  • Documentation that the non-SACSCOC partner institution is not on a public sanction with its accreditor
  • Documentation that the courses or programs of the non-SACSCOC Partner institution (s) are consistent with the educational purpose and goals of the SACSCOC-accredited institution (s)
  • Documentation that the institution meets the provisions of Comprehensive Standard 3.4.7 (consortial relationships / contractual agreements) including the analysis of credits accepted in transfer
  • A plan to monitor and ensure that the quality of contributions made by the partner institution (s) meets SACSCOC expectations
  • A plan and process produced by the SACSCOC accredited institution (s) ensuring that the agreement and awarding of a joint award does not result in the appearance of extending SACSCOC accreditation to partner institutions through promotional materials, academic publications, student transcripts, credentials verifying program completion and releases to the news media
  • Prototypes of official academic documents (e.g. student transcript, degree, diploma, certificate) involved in the agreement. If the joint or dual academic award involves offering 50 percent or more of a program at a previously unapproved off-campus site by a member institution or involves offering a new program which is significantly different from currently offered approved programs, notification is due six months prior to implementation date with a prospectus for approval due at least three months prior to implementation.

If the joint or dual academic award involves offering 50 percent or more of a program at a previously unapproved off-campus site by a member institution or involves offering a new program which is significantly different from currently offered approved programs, notification is due six months prior to implementation date with a prospectus for approval due at least three months prior to implementation.

SACSCOC: Joint Academic Awards –
Category Three: At least One Partner Institution is not accredited by a US Department of Education (DOE) recognized accreditor

Entering into an agreement with another institution involving a dual academic award is a substantive change that requires an institution to submit a letter of notification to SACSCOC six months prior to implementation of the agreement and a final signed copy of the agreement. Formal, written acceptance of that notification and agreement by SACSCOC is required before implementation of the provisions of the agreement.

The following should be submitted to SACSCOC:

  • A notification letter that includes a statement of intent, the anticipated beginning date of the agreement, a description of the agreement, the complete address/location parties involved in the agreement and information for contact persons at each participating institution regarding the agreement
  • A copy of the final signed agreement
  • A description of (1) any external governmental or accrediting agency approval for the institution (s) or programs (s) involved in the agreement, excluding the SACSCOC institutions (s), (2) the process of quality assurance used by the agency granting this approval, and (3) any required legal or licensing approvals
  • Documentation that the courses or programs of the non-SACSCOC Partner institution (s) are consistent with the educational purpose and goals of the SACSCOC-accredited institution (s)
  • Documentation that the institution meets the provisions of Comprehensive Standard 3.4.7 (consortial relationships / contractual agreements) including the analysis of credits accepted in transfer
  • Documentation that faculty involved in the collaboration are qualified to teach assigned components or courses and a description of the means by which the SACSCOC accredited institutions (s) will monitor these qualifications (Submit a completed SACSCOC Faculty Roster Form)
  • Documentation describing the physical and learning resources that will support the collaboration
  • A plan and process to monitor and ensure that the quality of contributions made by the partner institution (s) meet applicable SACSCOC requirements
  • A plan and process produced by the SACSCOC accredited institution (s) ensuring that the agreement and awarding of a joint award does not result in the appearance of extending SACSCOC accreditation to partner institutions through promotional materials, academic publications, student transcripts, credentials verifying program completion and releases to the news media
  • Prototypes of official academic documents (e.g. student transcript, degree, diploma, certificate) involved in the agreement

If the joint or dual academic award involves offering 50 percent or more of a program at a previously unapproved off-campus site by a member institution or involves offering a new program which is significantly different from currently offered approved programs, notification is due six months prior to implementation date with a prospectus for approval due at least three months prior to implementation.

USG’s BOR: Joint Academic Awards
Joint Educational Programs in the University System of Georgia are defined according to the SACSCOC Agreements Involving Joint and Dual Academic Awards: Policy and Procedures Policy. Notification to the Office of Academic Programs is required at least two weeks prior to implementation. Only joint degrees comprised of academic programs that have been previously approved by the BOR either at a single University System institution or between University System institutions shall be forwarded as notification items. All new degree programs require Board approval.

Required notification forms and documentation can be found at http://www.usg.edu/academic_programs/changes

Responsibilities: 

8.1. Responsible Party
Faculty Sponsor / Point of Contact

  • Notifies and receives approval from every responsible person/business unit noted in the Institute’s Graduate and Undergraduate Curriculum Committees Process for Approving Curricular Change – Steps 1-3 and 5 in the Approval Process. This can be found on the ICC website (information on website and location from Reta)
  • Consults with SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison to determine if SACSCOC requirements and standards apply
  • Provides final agreement to the SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison for submission to SACSCOC is applicable
  • Completes and provides to the Substantive Change Standing Committee and the SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison all required SACSCOC and USG BOR documentation necessary for approval of any substantive change (i.e. a completed prospectus)
  • Implements and submits annual assessment and periodic review report to every responsible party including the SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison

8.2. Responsible Party
Registrar

  • Ensures that the policies, procedures for internal review and approval are developed, maintained and followed for internal reviews and approvals
  • Responsible for the Institute’s Graduate and Undergraduate Curriculum Committees Process for Approving Curricular Change

8.3. Responsible Party
SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison

  • Provides feedback to the Faculty Sponsor / Point of Contact regarding elements in the dual or joint agreement that may be of concern to SACSCOC
  • Receive from the Faculty Sponsor / Point of Contact all required documentation. Review and timely submits all required documentation to SACSCOC and the USG BOR. Coordinate with the Faculty Sponsor / Point of Contact any required follow up action items / information needed
  • Ensure compliance with appropriate SACSCOC, USG’s BOR and U.S. Department of Education responsibilities and requirements
Enforcement: 

Failure to comply with SACSCOC’s substantive change procedures, could result in the Institute’s loss of Title IV funding, the Institute’s reimbursement to the U.S. Department of Education money received for programs related to unreported substantive change, sanction or removal from membership with SACSCOC.

Optional: To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

Policy History: 
Revision DateAuthorDescription
08-2014Library Learning ExcellenceNew Policy

Limit on Income Accumulation for Named Chairs and Professorships

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
April 2011
Last Revised: 
February 2017
Review Date: 
February 2020
Policy Owner: 
Academic Affairs
Contact Name: 
Jennifer Herazy
Contact Title: 
Assistant Provost for Administration
Contact Email: 
herazy@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

This policy provides limitations on the accumulation of income funds in support of named chairs and professorships. The limitations are to encourage the strategic management while preserving the resource within the spirit of the donor agreement.

Policy Statement: 

Faculty members holding named chair or professorship positions supported by an endowment receive an annual income allocation from the GT Foundation at the beginning of each fiscal year.  This annual income allocation can be carried forward up to two years.  This provides a total of three years of income allocation available for expenditure within each fiscal year (see attached table).

At the end of each fiscal year, the amount in the income allocation account exceeding the most recent two fiscal years’ income allocation amount will be returned to the corpus of the fund. To support strategic flexibility which fosters advances in research, named chairs and professors may request an exception to the two-year carry forward limit to access additional funds for viable support of their research and scholarly activities. Additionally, faculty members holding named positions and other positions of scholarly leadership may wish to borrow funds. The Office of the Provost may assist faculty members in this manner by seeking GTF and other Institute funds as appropriate and available. The terms of each such loan would be set on a case-by-case basis, but the Institute will seek repayment from discretionary funds available to the faculty member within a term of one to two years.

.

Scope: 

Employees (typically academic faculty members) holding a named chair or professorship. 

Additionally, if the income of an endowed chair or professorship fund is split into multiple expendable funds to the benefit of other faculty members, it is expected those funds will be expended in a time-frame consistent with this policy.

Definitions:

Corpus The principal of an endowed fund
Income allocation The amount generated annually from an endowed fund
Maximum carry-forward amount The amount that can be carried forward at the end of each fiscal year for expenditure in the next fiscal year. This policy sets that amount at two years of income allocation.
Expendable Fund An expendable account (or subaccount created from the income allocation account of an endowment) that does not receive an annual income allocation and is typically awarded to a faculty member for a term of years. It is expected these funds will be expended in a time-frame consistent with this policy.
Procedures: 

 

5.1 Appointment of Faculty Holder to the Named Position
Offer letter At the time of appointment, the letter of offer shall include the specific amount to be provided, consistent with this policy, to the faculty member, and indicate that a maximum of two years of the income can be carried forward to the next fiscal year.

 

5.2 Annual Notification of Income Accumulation
Annual Income Allocation

The GT Foundation advises departments of the amount generated from each endowed fund annually. These funds are made available at the beginning of each fiscal year.

Calculation of maximum carry-forward amount The maximum carry-forward amount is the value of the most recent two fiscal years’ income allocation amount. Any accumulated balance over this amount is returned to the corpus of the endowment. See example under “frequently asked questions.”
Early notification of possible return of income In the spring of each year (around the third quarter of each fiscal year), the Georgia Tech Foundation notifies the Office of the Provost of any funds predicted to be over the income accumulation limit based on the following fiscal year’s income projection. The Office of the Provost notifies the relevant Deans offices.
Notification of return of income to corpus Following the close of the past fiscal year’s accounting, the Georgia Tech Foundation notifies the Office of the Provost of any fund with an income balance over the accumulation limit as well as the amount of income that will be returned to corpus. The Office of the Provost notifies the relevant Deans offices for communication to the related faculty members.
Exceptions to the two-year carry forward limit Deans may seek, on behalf of the faculty member an exception to the income accumulation policy. The exception request should include: the account name, account number, the amount requested as exception, the reason for the exception, the utilization plan to expend the funds within the current fiscal year, and the Dean’s support. A deadline to submit exceptions shall be provided.
Approval of exceptions and return to corpus The Provost will review all requested exceptions to the income return and communicate approval decisions. Any amount not approved for exception will be reported to the GTF and returned to the corpus of the fund.
Responsibilities: 

Provost
The Provost (or designate) is responsible to seek and secure information from the GTF about which accounts may be exceeding the accumulation limit and communicating this information to the Deans for action.

Dean
Upon notification, the dean (or designate) is responsible for notifying faculty members of income allocation over the accumulation limit and reviewing and endorsing exceptions to the policy as appropriate.

Faculty Member
The faculty member is responsible for spending the fund in accordance within the terms of the donor agreement, and this and other related Institute policies.

Enforcement: 

The Dean of the College or Provost is responsible to ensure that donated funds are stewarded within the terms of the donor agreement, and this and other related Institute policies.

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

Policy History: 

 

 

 

Revision Date Author Description
April 2015 Provost Office Codify Memo/Added to Policy Library
February 2017 Provost Office Codify Memo/Added to Policy Library

 

Other Policies & Processes related to Academic Administration

Academic Administrators Salary Funding Policy

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
December 2016
Last Revised: 
February 2016
Review Date: 
February 2019
Policy Owner: 
Office of the Provost
Contact Name: 
Jennifer Herazy
Contact Title: 
Assistant Provost for Administration
Contact Email: 
herazy@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

To establish guidelines related to the appointment of current tenured faculty members to Institute-level administrative positions at Georgia Tech. Typically, these positions would be vice provost, vice president positions or similar administrative appointments reporting to either the Provost or Executive Vice President for Research.

Policy Statement: 
This policy outlines procedures, especially related to salary arrangements, when a tenured faculty member assumes an administrative role at Georgia Tech, typically within the Office of the Provost or Office of the Executive Vice President for Research.
Scope: 
These guidelines will be applicable to most, but not all, such situations. Alternate arrangements may be negotiated based on the needs of the position, department or individual with approval from the Provost or EVPR.
Procedures: 

All appointments within the Office of the Provost or the Office of the Executive Vice President for Research are subject to the approval of the related executive and the faculty member’s department chair and/or dean.

Salary Funding Guidelines
Requirements
  • While the individual serves in the administrative position, his/her department of employment will be either the Office of the Provost or the Office of the EVPR, and that department will provide the funds to pay the individual’s base salary.
  • The individual’s home academic department as a member of the faculty remains unchanged. Tenured faculty members will retain tenure.
  • While the individual serves in the administrative position, the individual may be paid an administrative supplement and will be typically paid on a fiscal (12-month) contract. The pay will be based on the salary range for the administrative appointment.
  • The home academic department will retain the individual’s faculty salary, as well as the faculty line. The salary funds may be used to support a replacement faculty member or temporary/part-time instructors to assist with teaching load.
  • Upon the individual’s return to his/her home academic department in a faculty position, the College will be responsible to cover the base salary with existing salary funds or other funds available to them.
  • New permanent workload funds will be provided to cover any merit increases to the base salary during the individual’s service in the administrative role.
  • Alternate appointment arrangements may apply if the faculty member is appointed at less than 100% time in the Executive unit while retaining a partial appointment in the academic home unit.

 

Letter of Appointment Guidelines
When appointed to an administrative role, the letter of offer/appointment should state:
  • The administrative supplement, if any, will cease when the individual no longer serves in the administrative position.
  • The individual holds the administrative appointment at the pleasure of the EVPR or Provost; and
  • How the faculty member’s base salary, contract type (fiscal or academic) and workload assignments are to be determined when she/he leaves the administrative assignment.
Policy History: 
Revision Date Author Description
February 2016 Office of the Provost Codify existing Provost policy

 

Faculty Affairs

For information on Faculty Affairs please follow the link below.
www.academic.gatech.edu/main/

Registrar's Procedures

For information on Registrar's Procedures please follow the link below.
http://www.registrar.gatech.edu/

Student Grievance Processes

For information on the Student Grievance Processes please follow the links below.
www.academicgrievance.provost.gatech.edu
Activities of the Faculty’s Student Grievance and Appeal Committee

Other Academic Student Policies

Academic Honor Code

GEORGIA TECH HONOR CHALLENGE STATEMENT

I commit to uphold the ideals of honor and integrity by refusing to betray the trust bestowed upon me as a member of the Georgia Tech community.

GEORGIA TECH HONOR CODE

Click here for the history of the Academic Honor Code.

Graduate Students, please read the Graduate Addendum.

Article I: Honor Agreement

Article II: Academic Honor Code

Article III: Honor System

Article IV: Amending the Academic Honor Code

Appendix A: Graduate Addendum to the Academic Honor Code

Article I: Honor Agreement

Having read the Georgia Institute of Technology Academic Honor code, I understand and accept my responsibility as a member of the Georgia Tech community to uphold the Honor Code at all times. In addition, I understand my options for reporting honor violations as detailed in the code.

Article II: Academic Honor Code

Section 1. Statement of Purpose
The members of the Georgia Tech community believe the fundamental objective of the Institute is to provide the students with a high-quality education while developing in them a sense of ethics and social responsibility. We believe that trust is an integral part of the learning process and that self-discipline is necessary in this pursuit. We also believe that any instance of dishonesty hurts the entire community. It is with this in mind that we have set forth a student Honor Code at Georgia Tech.

Section 2. Objectives
An Academic Honor Code at Georgia Tech aims to cultivate a community based on trust, academic integrity, and honor. It specifically aims to accomplish the following:

Ensure that students understand that academic dishonesty is a violation of the profound trust of the entire academic community;

  • Ensure that students, faculty and administrators understand that the responsibility for upholding academic honesty at Georgia Tech lies with them;
  • Prevent any students from gaining an unfair advantage over other students through academic misconduct;
  • Clarify what constitutes academic misconduct among students at Georgia Tech and what is expected of them by the Institute, the faculty, and their peers;
  • Cultivate an environment at Georgia Tech where academic dishonesty is not tolerated among the students;
  • Secure a centralized system of education and awareness of the Honor Code;

Section 3. Student Responsibilities
Students are expected to act according to the highest ethical standards. The immediate objective of an Academic Honor Code is to prevent any Students from gaining an unfair advantage over other Students through academic misconduct. The following clarification of academic misconduct is taken from Section XIX Student Code of Conduct, of the Rules and Regulations section of the Georgia Institute of Technology General Catalog: Academic misconduct is any act that does or could improperly distort Student grades or other Student academic records. Such acts include but need not be limited to the following:

  • Unauthorized Access: Possessing, using, or exchanging improperly acquired written or verbal information in the preparation of a problem set, laboratory report, essay, examination, or other academic assignment.
  • Unauthorized Collaboration: Unauthorized interaction with another Student or Students in the fulfillment of academic requirements.
  • Plagiarism: Submission of material that is wholly or substantially identical to that created or published by another person or persons, without adequate credit notations indicating the authorship.
  • False Claims of Performance: False claims for work that has been submitted by a Student.
  • Grade Alteration: Alteration of any academic grade or rating so as to obtain unearned academic credit.
  • Deliberate Falsification: Deliberate falsification of a written or verbal statement of fact to a Faculty member and/or Institute Official, so as to obtain unearned academic credit.
  • Forgery: Forgery, alteration, or misuse of any Institute document relating to the academic status of the Student.
  • Distortion: Any act that distorts or could distort grades or other academic records.

While these acts constitute assured instances of academic misconduct, other acts of academic misconduct may be defined by the professor. Students must sign the Academic Honor Agreement affirming their commitment to uphold the Honor Code before becoming a part of the Georgia Tech community. The Honor Agreement may reappear on exams and other assignments to remind Students of their responsibilities under the Georgia Institute of Technology Academic Honor Code. 

Section 4. Faculty Responsibilities

Faculty members are expected to create an environment where honesty flourishes. In creating this environment, Faculty members are expected to do the following:

  • Make known to their class as specifically as possible what constitutes appropriate academic conduct as well as what comprises academic misconduct. This includes but is not limited to the use of previously submitted work, collaborative work on homework, etc.
  • Provide copies of old exams or lists of sample questions to the Georgia Tech library for Students to review;
  • Avoid the re-use of exams;
  • Include a paragraph containing information about the Georgia Tech Academic Honor Code on the syllabus for each class they teach;
  • Report instances of academic dishonesty to the Office of the Dean of Students.

In addition to the expectations listed previously, faculty have the authority to superimpose their own interpretations on some aspects of academic conduct including, but not limited to, the following:

  • Old exams for use during open-book exams;
  • Contents of formula sheets allowed on exams;
  • Use of calculators on exams;
  • Collaboration on out-of-class assignments;
  • Use of previously submitted out-of-class assignments.

Article III: Honor System

Section 1. Governing Bodies
The Georgia Institute of Technology Academic Honor Code recognizes the present bodies given the power to enforce the academic regulations of the Institute. The Academic Honor Code recognizes the Office of the Dean of Students to be the principal administrator to enforce Institute disciplinary measures as presently specified in Article XIX Section B, of the Rules and Regulations section of the current Georgia Institute of Technology General Catalog.  The Academic Honor Code also recognizes the Student Honor Committee as the body given jurisdiction to hear all cases of alleged academic misconduct as currently specified in XIX Section B, of the Rules and Regulations section of the current Georgia Institute of Technology General Catalog.

Section 2. Reporting Honor Code Violations
In order for an Academic Honor Code to function, members of the Georgia Tech community must not tolerate violations of it by anyone. Community members are at their discretion to use any of three options to report suspected Honor Code violations:

  1. A student may simply desire to confront the fellow student with the perceived infraction. While this option is most likely to enact widespread change in attitude and behavior among students (because violators would understand that they are violating the trust of their peers and not some abstract body of people), it is still expected that an alleged violator be taken before the Student Honor Committee if he or she persists in academic misconduct.
  2. A student may choose to approach the professor of the class in which the alleged infraction occurred and seek his or her input on how to proceed. A result of a conference of this type would be the professor's awareness that the alleged violator needs closer monitoring to ascertain reasonable certainty of guilt before being brought before the Student Honor Committee.
  3. A student may choose to seek the advice of an honor advisor (see Article III., Section 3). Meetings with honor advisors shall address issues of policy and procedure only. Specifics of an individual case are not to be discussed. After a consultation with an honor advisor, a student may choose to submit a formal accusation of academic misconduct to the Office of the Dean of Students.

Section 3. Student Honor Advisory Council
Students composing the Student Honor Advisory Council are to become well versed in all aspects of the Georgia Institute of Technology Academic Honor Code and the procedures for reporting an honor violation as well as those procedures for the trying of cases of suspected academic misconduct before the Student Honor Committee. The Council is to act as an information resource to all members of the Georgia Tech community on issues related to the Academic Honor Code.

  1. Membership
    1. Members are to be selected by the Vice-President of Student Affairs or a designated person to carry out these duties.
    2. Members must be full-time students at Georgia Tech and must be in good academic standing.
    3. Once a member of the council, the student shall serve until he or she graduates, unless he or she resigns or is impeached.
    4. Impeachment procedures are to be specified in the rules and/or bylaws of the Student Honor Advisory Council.
    5. Membership shall be composed of no less than fifteen (15) students at any given time.
  2. Duties and Responsibilities
    1. To serve in an advisory capacity to any student(s) wishing to report an honor violation or any student(s) being accused of committing an honor violation.
    2. To continually educate and maintain awareness among the Georgia Tech community regarding the Academic Honor Code.
    3. To limit discussion with students to issues of policy and procedure.

    Article IV: Amending the Honor Code

    Amendments to the Georgia Tech Academic Honor Code may be proposed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of both the Undergraduate Student Council and the Graduate Student Senate, or by a petition of ten percent (10%) of the total population (undergraduate and graduate) directed to both the undergraduate student body president and the graduate student body president. Amendments become part of this Honor Code upon ratification by two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast in a special election open to the undergraduate and graduate students, provided that the proposed amendments have been published in the Technique at least one week prior to the vote by the student body and further provided that the amendments are approved by the Academic Senate. Appendices or amendments of appendices which pertain to either the undergraduate student body or to the graduate student body may be proposed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the respective legislative body or a petition of at least ten percent of the respective student body directed to the respective student body president. These shall become part of this Honor Code upon ratification by two-thirds (2/3) of the votes in a special election of the respective student body, provided that the proposed appendices or amendments of appendices have been published in the Technique at least one week prior to the election, and further provided that the appendices or amendments of appendices are approved by the Academic Senate.

    Appendix A: Graduate Addendum to the Academic Honor Code

    1. Preamble
      The Honor Code recognizes that graduate students are involved in research and scholarly activities that occur outside the classroom. Integrity and academic honesty are as fundamental to research and scholarly activity as they are to classroom activity. Therefore, this Appendix to the Academic Honor Code is adopted to pertain to the academic activities of graduate students that occur outside of the classroom.
    2. Scholarly Misconduct
      Scholarly misconduct refers to misconduct that occurs in research and scholarly activities outside the classroom. It can include plagiarism, among other things. The consequences of scholarly misconduct are governed by Institute policy. The following definitions are taken from the Institute Policy on Scholarly Misconduct:
      • "Misconduct" or "scholarly misconduct" is the fabrication of data, plagiarism, or other practice that seriously deviates from those that are commonly accepted within the academic or research community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research or scholarly activity. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretation or judgments of data.
      • "Plagiarism" is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts of passages of his or her writings, or language or ideas of the same, and passing them off as the product of one's own mind. It involves the deliberate use of any outside source without proper acknowledgment. Plagiarism is scholarly misconduct whether it occurs in any work, published or unpublished, or in any application for funding.

    Allegations involving scholarly misconduct fall under the Institute's Policy on Scholarly Misconduct. This document details the procedures involved with reporting allegations and with the handling of cases. All graduate students are encouraged to become familiar with this policy, which is available from the Office of the Provost.

    This information cannot be duplicated and/or modified without written permission from the Office of Student Integrity.
    Office of Student Integrity, Office of the Dean of Students, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2009.

Code of Conduct

 

Georgia Institute of Technology
XIX. Student Code of Conduct
Last Approved: April 22, 2014

 

 

The most current Student Code of Conduct can be found on the Office of Student Integrity Web site as listed in the References. In the event of any conflict, the Code found on the Web site will govern.

 

  1. General
  2. Prohibited Academic Conduct
  3. Prohibited Non-Academic Conduct
  4. Student Code of Conduct Procedures
  5. Sanctions
  6. Interim Suspension
  7. Appeal Procedures
  8. Record Keeping and Release of Information
  9. References
  1. GENERAL
    1. Purpose

      The Student Code of Conduct educates all members of the Georgia Tech Community about the Institute’s expectations and Students’ rights, and creates a standard by which Students are expected to conduct themselves for the purpose of establishing an environment conducive to academic excellence.

    2. Definitions

      When used in this Code:

      "Accused" means a Student, Group, or Organization who is alleged to be in violation of the Student Code of Conduct.

      “Administrative Conference” refers to the meeting between the Accused and the Student Conduct Administrator that occurs during an investigation. An Administrative Resolution may be offered during this conference.

      “Administrative Resolution” refers to a decision by a Student Conduct Administrator that will result in the Accused either being found responsible or not for the alleged violation.

      “Advisor” refers to an individual who assists a participant with the Student Conduct process. Attorneys at law are not allowed to serve as Advisors to Complainant(s) or Accused(s) unless the Student or Students are subject to criminal prosecution or the parent/legal guardian is the attorney.

      “Appellate Officer” means the person authorized by the Institute to consider an appeal of a disciplinary decision rendered by a Student Conduct Administrator, a Student Conduct Panel, or the Dean of Students.

      “Business day” means any day in which the Institute is open for its full hours of operation, in accordance with the Institute’s official calendars. All campuses will follow their respective calendars. When an authorized Institute Official closes the Institute, it will not be considered an official business day.

      “Chairperson” means a member of a Student Conduct Panel who is identified by the Institute to oversee the proceedings during a hearing.

      ”Complainant" means any person who submits a complaint to OSI alleging that a Student or Organization violated the Student Code of Conduct, or anyone who has been affected by the alleged misconduct.

      “Community” includes any Student, Faculty member, Institute Official, or any other person employed by the Institute. A person’s status in a particular situation shall be determined by the Dean of Students.

      “Faculty Member” means any person hired by the Institute to conduct classroom, teaching, or research activities or who is otherwise considered by the Institute to be a member of its Faculty, except as otherwise provided in Section D.5.c.

      "Group" means a number of persons who are associated with each other, but who have not complied with Institute requirements for registration as an Organization.

      "Group or Organization Activity" means any activity on or off Institute Premises that is directly initiated for, or supervised by a Group or Organization including any individual activity occurring in buildings, facilities, grounds, utilities, or resources (including computer resources) owned, leased, operated, controlled, or supervised by an Institute Organization.

      “Hazing” is conduct, whether on or off Institute property, which exceeds the normal expectations of the organizational purpose or mission and which a) endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student as a condition of affiliation with a group or organization and/or b) which is sufficiently severe or pervasive enough to interfere with academic responsibilities.

      “Information” means any Witness testimony, documents, statements, or tangible material presented to a Student Conduct Administrator or Student Conduct Panel.

      "Institute" and "Georgia Tech” each refer to the Georgia Institute of Technology and all of its undergraduate, graduate, and professional schools, divisions, and programs.

      "Institute Official" is defined as faculty, administration, or staff personnel including Students serving as Institute employees.

      “Institute Premises" includes all land buildings, facilities, grounds, utilities, resources, and other property (including computer resources) in the possession of, or owned, operated, leased, controlled, or supervised by the Institute (including adjacent streets and sidewalks).

      “May” is used in the permissive sense.

      ”Office of Student Integrity” or “OSI” means the office designated by the Institute to oversee the Student Code of Conduct.

      "Organization" means a number of persons who have complied with, or are in process of complying with the requirements for chartering.

      “Policy” or “Policies” means any written rule or regulation of the Institute.

      “Preponderance of the Evidence” means it is more likely than not that the Accused is responsible for a violation of the Student Code of Conduct.

      “President” means Georgia Institute of Technology or his/her designee.

      “Sanction” and “Supplementary Requirements” means the conditions imposed upon an Accused found responsible for a violation of the Student Code of Conduct.

      “Student” means any person who is taking or auditing classes of the Institute, either full-time or part-time; is participating in academic programs; or is pursuing undergraduate, graduate, or professional studies. A Student is also any person who matriculates in any Institute program, has been accepted for enrollment, or is eligible to reenroll without applying for readmission.

      “Student Conduct Administrator” means an Institute Official authorized on a case-by-case basis by the Dean of Students to impose Sanctions upon any Student(s) found to have violated the Student Code of Conduct.

      “Student Conduct Panel” means a set of persons authorized by the Institute to determine whether the Accused has violated the Student Code of Conduct. In academic cases, the Panel makes a decision to be implemented by OSI. In non-academic cases, the Panel recommends a decision and Sanctions, if applicable, to the Director of Student Integrity.

      "Weapon" means any object or substance designed, intended, or used to inflict or threaten bodily injury.

      "Will" and "shall" are used in the imperative sense.

      “Witness" is defined as a person providing Information during the Conduct process.

    3. Authority
      1. This Code is not written with the specificity of a criminal statute and should not be confused with criminal law. Institute conduct proceedings are not restricted by the rules of evidence governing criminal and civil proceedings. Students may be held accountable both to civil authorities and the Institute for acts that constitute violations of law and the Code. Proceedings under this Code may be carried out prior to, simultaneously with, or following civil or criminal proceedings. Students who reside in Institute housing will be held accountable under housing policies and procedures in addition to this Code.
      2. OSI shall develop consistent operating procedures for the administration of the Student Code of Conduct process and for the conduct of Student Conduct Panel hearings.
      3. Interpretation of the Student Code of Conduct is held by the Dean of Students.
    4. Jurisdiction
      1. The Institute reserves the right to take necessary and appropriate action to protect the safety and well-being of the community. Academic misconduct relevant to any Institute activity will be addressed regardless of where it may have occurred. Non-academic misconduct will be addressed whenever such acts:
        1. occur on Institute Premises; or
        2. occur at Institute sponsored activities; or
        3. occur at Group or Organization Activities; or
        4. occur off Institute Premises when conduct adversely affects the Institute and/or the pursuit of its objectives.
      2. Each Student shall be responsible for his/her conduct from the time of application for admission through the actual awarding of a degree. This includes conduct that may occur before classes begin or after classes end, as well as during the academic year and during periods between terms of actual enrollment. The Code shall apply to a Student’s conduct even if the Student withdraws from school while a disciplinary matter is pending. The Code applies to Institute programs in remote and overseas locations.
      3. The Institute shall retain jurisdiction over all Students irrespective of when the Student is subject to tenets of an agreement with other schools.
    5. Inappropriate Classroom Behavior

      The primary responsibility for managing the classroom environment rests with the instructor. Students who engage in any acts that result in disruption of a class may be directed by the instructor to leave the class for the remainder of the class period. Longer suspensions from a class can be administered only by the Dean of Students in accordance with this Code.

    6. Student Organizational Discipline

      Student Organizations are accountable to this Code. A Student Organization and its officers may be held collectively and individually responsible when violations of this Code by those associated with the Organization have received the consent or encouragement of the Organization, or of the Organization’s leaders or officers.

  2. PROHIBITED ACADEMIC CONDUCT

    Any Student accused of committing or attempting to commit one or more of the following acts of academic misconduct is subject to conduct procedures in accordance with Section D.

    1. Unauthorized Access: Possessing, using, or exchanging improperly acquired written or verbal information in the preparation of a problem set, laboratory report, essay, examination, or other academic assignment.
    2. Unauthorized Collaboration: Unauthorized interaction with another Student or Students in the fulfillment of academic requirements.
    3. Plagiarism: Submission of material that is wholly or substantially identical to that created or published by another person or persons, without adequate credit notations indicating the authorship.
    4. False Claims of Performance: False claims for work that has been submitted by a Student.
    5. Grade Alteration: Alteration of any academic grade or rating so as to obtain unearned academic credit.
    6. Deliberate Falsification: Deliberate falsification of a written or verbal statement of fact to a Faculty member and/or Institute Official, so as to obtain unearned academic credit.
    7. Forgery: Forgery, alteration, or misuse of any Institute document relating to the academic status of the Student.
    8. Distortion: Any act that distorts, or could distort grades or other academic records.
    9. Intellectual Property: The unauthorized use of an instructor's intellectual property, including marketing and selling, is prohibited (such properties may include power point presentations, lecture notes (any media), examination questions, study guides, etc.).
  3. PROHIBITED NON-ACADEMIC CONDUCT

    Any Student accused of committing or attempting to commit one or more of the following acts of non-academic misconduct is subject to conduct procedures in accordance with Section D. Any Student Organization accused of committing or attempting to commit one or more of the following acts of non-academic misconduct is subject to conduct procedures in accordance with the Addendum “Student Organization Code of Conduct Procedures.”

    1. Alcohol violations including, but not limited to:
      1. Underage use or possession of alcohol.
      2. Possession or consumption of alcohol in an unauthorized area.
      3. Use or possession of fake identification.
      4. Distribution of alcohol to underage person(s).
      5. Behavior, while under the influence of alcohol that endangers any person.
      6. Disorderly conduct associated with the use of alcoholic beverages.
    2. Illegal drugs and other substance violations including, but not limited to:
      1. Use or possession of illegal drugs (without valid medical or dental prescription).
      2. Behavior, while under the influence of illegal drugs, that endangers any person.
      3. Manufacturing, furnishing, selling, or distributing of any narcotic or dangerous drug controlled by law.
      4. Disorderly conduct associated with the use of illegal drugs.
    3. Unjustifiably pushing, striking, or otherwise intentionally causing reasonable apprehension of such harm to any person.
    4. Disorderly conduct including, but not limited to:
      1. Boisterousness, rowdiness, obscene, or indecent conduct or appearance.
      2. Obstruction or disruption of teaching, research, administration, or other Institute activities, including its public service functions or other authorized activities.
      3. Breach of the peace.
    5. Behavior that endangers any person(s), including self.
    6. Unauthorized use of Institute facilities or premises including:
      1. Unauthorized entry into any Institute Premises or remaining without permission in any building after normal closing hours.
      2. Possessing, using, making, or causing to be made any key or other means of access to any Institute Premises without proper authorization.
    7. Furnishing false information to any Institute Official.
    8. Forgery, alteration, replication, or misuse of any document, record, or identification upon which the Institute relies, regardless of the medium.
    9. “Hazing” is conduct, whether on or off Institute property, which exceeds the normal expectations of the organizational purpose or mission and which a) endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student as a condition of affiliation with a group or organization and/or b) which is sufficiently severe or pervasive enough to interfere with academic responsibilities.
    10. Safety violations, including, but not limited to:
      1. Intentionally initiating or causing to be initiated any false reporting, warning or threat of fire, explosion, or other emergency.
      2. Tampering with safety devices or other emergency, safety, or firefighting equipment.
      3. Setting or attempting to set an unauthorized fire.
      4. Unauthorized possession of fireworks, firearms, and/or ammunition.
      5. Unauthorized possession of weapons and/or dangerous materials or chemicals.
      6. Unauthorized sale, possession, furnishing, or use of any bomb or explosive or incendiary device.
    11. Theft and/or unauthorized possession or use of property or services belonging to the Institute, another person, or any other entity.
    12. Malicious or unauthorized damage to or destruction of Institute property or property belonging to another.
    13. Illegal gambling, including online gambling.
    14. Failure to return or submit property or records of the Institute within the time prescribed by the Institute.
    15. Acting with any other person to perform an unlawful act or to violate an Institute regulation or Policy.
    16. Failure to comply with instructions or a directive of any properly identified Institute Official while that person is acting in the performance of his/her duties.
    17. Abuse of the Student Code of Conduct Procedures including, but not limited to:
      1. Failure to cooperate with the investigation, resolution, and procedures of the Student Code of Conduct.
      2. Falsification, distortion, or misrepresentation of Information before a Student Conduct Administrator or Student Conduct Panel.
      3. Disruption or interference with the orderly conduct of an Administrative Conference and/or a Student Conduct Panel proceeding.
      4. Attempting to influence the impartiality of a Student Conduct Administrator and/or a member of a Student Conduct Panel at any point in the Student Conduct process.
      5. Failure to comply with the Sanction and/or Supplementary Requirements imposed under the Student Code of Conduct.
      6. Influencing or attempting to influence another person to commit an abuse of the Student Conduct process.
    18. Violation of the Georgia Institute of Technology Computer and Network Usage and Security Policy.
    19. Harassing another person including, but not limited to:
      1. Placing another person in reasonable fear of his/her personal safety through words or actions directed at that person, or substantially interfering with the working, learning, or living environment of the person.
      2. Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other written, verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.
    20. Sexual misconduct including, but not limited to:
      1. Non-consensual sexual contact including, but not limited, to intentional and/or forcible touching.
      2. Non-consensual sexual intercourse including, but not limited to, anal, oral or vaginal penetration, however slight.
      3. Sexually related offenses including, but not limited to, obscene, indecent behavior and/or exposure.
    21. Violation of any Georgia Institute of Technology policy, rule or regulation.
    22. Violation of any Board of Regent’s policy and/or federal, state, or local law.
  4. STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT PROCEDURES
    1. Case Referrals

      Any person may file a complaint against a Student for violations of the Student Code of Conduct. The complaint shall be prepared in writing and directed to OSI or, in academic cases, the instructor of record may hold a Faculty Conference (see Section D.5.c.). The procedures for filing a complaint can be found on the OSI Web site as listed in Section I. This complaint should be submitted as soon as possible after the event takes place or when it is reasonably discovered, no later than thirty (30) business days following the discovery of the incident. Any supporting documentation related to a submitted case should be forwarded to OSI within ten (10) business days of the original submission or OSI may process the case solely on the original complaint. Resolution to any case should be made within thirty (30) business days of OSI’s first request to meet with the Accused. If resolution cannot be reached in thirty (30) business days, OSI will communicate with the accused and complainant during the process. OSI may waive this timeline for extenuating circumstances.

    2. Communication

      All communication (requests for meetings, notifications, notice of hearings, etc.) will be provided via official Institute e-mail addresses, as defined by the Office of Information Technology. If the Accused is not currently enrolled, the notification will be sent via U.S. Postal Service to the last known address on file with the Registrar.

    3. Rights of the Accused

      Throughout the Conduct process, the Accused is granted the following rights:

      1. to seek information from a Student Conduct Administrator about the Investigation and Resolution Process;
      2. to be informed of the charge(s) and alleged misconduct upon which the charge is based;
      3. to be informed of the Information upon which a charge is based and afforded an opportunity to offer a relevant response;
      4. to be accompanied by an Advisor of his/her choice;
      5. to remain silent with no inference of responsibility drawn;
      6. to call and question relevant Witnesses;
      7. to present Information in his/her behalf;
      8. to be considered not responsible until proven responsible by a Preponderance of the Evidence;
      9. to be informed of the outcome of the disciplinary proceeding in writing;
      10. to appeal the decision;
      11. to waive any of the above rights;
      12. to have resolution of the case within a reasonable time.
    4. Investigation and Resolution Process

      The Institute's Conduct process utilizes an investigatory model, not an adversarial model, in resolving allegations of misconduct with the primary goal of uncovering the truth. The standard of proof shall be a Preponderance of the Evidence. An investigation begins when a complaint is forwarded and the case is opened by OSI. During the investigation, a Student should continue to attend class and required Institute functions unless otherwise instructed by the Dean of Students. The investigation and resolution process are as follows:

      1. After OSI receives a complaint, the conduct administrator will review the information to decide what, if any process to initiate. The Student Conduct Administrator will:
        • initiate conduct proceedings by sending the Student a notice;
        • resolve the situation through an informal resolution process including, but not limited to, mediation or a meeting between the Accused and a Student Conduct Administrator or a third party; or
        • determine that the facts of the complaint or report, even if true, would not constitute a violation of policy.

        If the Student Conduct Administrator initiates a process, the Accused is formally notified and is requested to contact a Student Conduct Administrator within five (5) business days of the notification to schedule an Administrative Conference. The Accused may submit a list of desired Witnesses to the Student Conduct Administrator no later than 48 hours prior to the Administrative Conference. Should the Accused fail to contact the Student Conduct Administrator within the required time frame, or fail to attend the Administrative Conference, the Student Conduct Administrator may determine the resolution of the case in the Student’s absence, or may refer the case to a Student Conduct Panel.

      2. At the Administrative Conference, the Accused is presented with the alleged violation of the Student Code of Conduct, supporting Information and an explanation of his/her rights. The Student will be allowed to designate a preference for a decision to be rendered by the Student Conduct Administrator or by a Student Conduct Panel. Ordinarily, the Student’s preference will be honored. However, OSI reserves the right to determine the process to be used based on the circumstances, including but not limited to:
        • imminent graduation of the Student;
        • end of the semester;
        • extraordinary circumstances.

        A decision of OSI not to honor the Accused Student’s preference will be made in consultation with the Dean of Students, who will make a final determination. The Student’s reasons for his/her original preference may be conveyed, either in written or verbal form, to the Dean of Students. If the Student preference is not honored, the rationale for such will be provided to the Student in writing.

      3. If the case is adjudicated by the Student Conduct Administrator, the Student Conduct Administrator offers the Accused the opportunity to provide his/her statement regarding the alleged misconduct, supporting Information, and Witnesses. Accused Students may bring an Advisor. However, if the Advisor disrupts the investigation and resolution process, he/she may be asked to leave. The Student Conduct Administrator continues the investigation as necessary by meeting with the Complainant(s) and Witnesses and gathering additional Information. If the Student Conduct Administrator determines that the Witness (including faculty or staff) may have relevant Information, s/he will make a good faith effort to contact such Witnesses to obtain a statement from them. The investigation will be completed in an expeditious fashion. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, the Student Conduct Administrator will render a decision, which will be communicated to the Student via the Student’s Institute e-mail address.
      4. If the case is to be adjudicated by the Student Conduct Panel, the case shall be referred to the Student Conduct Panel and follow the procedures outlined in Section D.5.b.
    5. Forms of Case Resolution
      1. Administrative Resolution

        The Student Conduct Administrator renders a decision of 1) Not Responsible, which closes the case, or 2) Responsible for one or more violations with an appropriate Sanction, and, as warranted, one or more from among the Supplementary Requirements. The Accused, after being notified of the Student Conduct Administrator’s decision, may submit an appeal to the Dean of Students according to appeal procedures described in Section G.

      2. Student Conduct Panel

        The Student Conduct Panel is convened only when either the Student Conduct Administrator or the Accused elects this form of resolution.

        1. Decisions and Sanctions for Academic Cases

          The Student Conduct Panel, after convening a hearing, renders a decision of 1) Not Responsible, which closes the case, or 2) Responsible for one or more violations of the Student Code of Conduct with an appropriate Sanction and, as warranted, one or more from among the Supplementary Requirements. The Accused, after being notified of the decision, may submit an appeal to the Dean of Students according to appeal procedures described in Section G.

        2. Decisions and Sanctions for Non-academic Cases

          The Student Conduct Panel, after convening a hearing, recommends a disciplinary decision to the Director of Student Integrity. The Director of Student Integrity, after reviewing the case, renders a decision of 1) Not Responsible, which closes the case, or 2) Responsible for one or more violations of the Student Code of Conduct with an appropriate Sanction and, as warranted, one or more from among the Supplementary Requirements. The Accused, after being notified of the decision and Sanction, may appeal to the Dean of Students, according to appeal procedures described in Section G.

        3. Scheduling of Student Conduct Panel Hearing

          After the case is forwarded to a Student Conduct Panel, the Complainant and the Accused will be notified of available dates and times for a hearing. The Accused may indicate preferences from among the available dates and times. These preferences will be considered by OSI if received within three (3) business days of the date the options were presented to the Accused.

          This official notice will be provided at least five (5) business days prior to the hearing and will include the time, date, and location of the hearing. In addition, the notice will specify the Complainant(s), Witnesses(s), and nature of the alleged misconduct. The Accused may waive the notification timeline in order to expedite the hearing process. Upon request, the Accused may meet with a Student Conduct Administrator to review Information and hearing procedures.

        4. Hearing Participants and Attendees
          • Student Conduct Panel hearings shall ordinarily be closed except for the Accused(s), the Complainant(s), Advisor(s), and Witnesses. Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the Chairperson. Witnesses are allowed at the discretion of the Chairperson. The Chairperson may exclude any person, including the Accused, who disrupts a hearing.
          • An Accused Student who fails to appear after proper notice will be deemed to have responded "Not Responsible" to the charges against him/her and to have exercised the right to remain silent without prejudice. At the discretion of the Chairperson the hearing may be conducted in the absence of the Student(s) and all the Information regarding the alleged misconduct shall be presented and considered.
          • The Complainant(s) and Accused(s) have the right to be accompanied by an Advisor. The Complainant(s) and/or Accused(s) should select an Advisor who can attend the hearing at the scheduled date and time. Delays are not usually granted due to scheduling conflicts of an Advisor.
          • Subject to the Chairperson’s control of the hearing, the Complainant(s), Accused(s), and their Advisor(s), shall be allowed to attend the Student Conduct Panel hearing, but not Panel deliberations.
            In Student Conduct Panel hearings involving more than one Accused, OSI may permit the Student Conduct Panel hearings concerning each Student to be conducted either separately or jointly.
          • A maximum of two (2) character Witnesses will be allowed in a hearing.
        5. Hearing Procedures
          • The Chairperson shall exercise control over the proceedings to achieve orderly completion of the hearing.
          • Advisors are restricted to private communications with their advisee(s). However, if the Advisor disrupts the investigation and resolution process, he/she may be asked to leave.
          • All questions by the Complainant(s) and Accused(s) must be directed to the Chairperson, rather than to the Witness directly. Questions of whether potential Information will be received shall be resolved at the discretion of the Chairperson.
          • In addition to the Information provided by OSI, the Student Conduct Panel, at the discretion of the Chairperson, may accept additional pertinent Information and testimony (including impact statements). Any letters of recommendation submitted by the Accused will be admitted for consideration at the discretion of the Chairperson and, if admitted, will be viewed only during Panel deliberations.
          • All procedural questions arising during the hearing are subject to the final decision of the Chairperson.
          • The Student Conduct Panel’s standard of proof shall be a Preponderance of the Evidence.
          • The Student Conduct Panel in consultation with OSI, may reasonably accommodate concerns for the personal safety, well-being, and/or fears of confrontation of the Complainant(s), Accused(s), and/or Witnesses during the hearing.
          • The Student Conduct Panel shall make a recording and/or summary transcription of the proceeding, which will serve as the official record of the hearing. No other recording will be permitted. The Accused or the Complainant may request a copy of the Institute's recording upon payment of the cost to reproduce the recording, or may listen to the original recording in a location designated by OSI at no charge. The record shall be the property of the Institute.
      3. Faculty Conference (optional academic case resolution)

        A faculty conference is an optional way in which an alleged act of academic misconduct can be resolved.

        1. Initiation of Complaint

          The Faculty Conference is initiated by the instructor of record, who requests the meeting with the Accused to discuss the alleged misconduct. Should the Accused not choose to participate in a Faculty Conference, the instructor should forward the case to OSI for investigation.

        2. Participants

          The Faculty Conference involves the instructor of record and the Accused. The Faculty Conference may also involve Witnesses and a representative from OSI if requested by either the instructor or the Accused.

        3. Process

          During the Faculty Conference, the instructor of record explains the alleged misconduct, supporting Information, and the Rights of the Accused. The Accused has the opportunity to provide 1) his/her response to alleged misconduct, 2) supporting Information, and 3) Witnesses.

        4. Conclusion
          • If the instructor finds the Accused not responsible, the case is closed.
          • If the instructor finds the Accused responsible, but the Accused does not admit responsibility, the instructor forwards the case to OSI for investigation.
          • If the instructor finds the Accused responsible, and the Accused acknowledges responsibility, the instructor proposes a Faculty Resolution including 1) a Sanction of Disciplinary Warning, or Disciplinary Probation, 2) a grade penalty, and 3) an educational component.
          • If the Accused agrees to the Faculty Resolution, the Faculty Member forwards the resolution to OSI for consideration. OSI will determine if the Accused has prior disciplinary history. If so, in the case will be investigated by OSI, in accordance with Section D.4.
          • If the Accused does not agree to the Faculty Resolution, the Faculty Member forwards the case to OSI.
        5. Implementation
          • The Accused is formally notified of the proposed Faculty Resolution by OSI, according to the communication guidelines in Section D.2.
          • Faculty resolution goes into effect upon delivery unless the Accused requests within five (5) business days that the case be forwarded to OSI for investigation.
      4. Alternative Dispute Resolution

        At the sole discretion of OSI, cases may be assigned for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). If the ADR is not agreed to by both parties, the remaining forums may adjudicate the case. Results of the ADR proceedings do not result in formal disciplinary records.

  5. SANCTIONS

    Sanctions are imposed only when the Accused is found responsible for one (1) or more violations of the Student Code of Conduct. Sanctions are determined by the severity of the case and the disciplinary history of the Accused(s). An Accused who is found responsible must be given one of the five (5) Sanctions, listed in Section E1 in ascending order of severity. In addition the Accused may be subject to one or more Supplementary Requirements.

    1. Sanction Descriptions
      1. Disciplinary Warning

        A Disciplinary Warning means that the Student has been found responsible for violating the Institute’s Code of Conduct. Any further disciplinary violation may result in disciplinary action up to, and including Expulsion. Disciplinary Warning is officially recorded in the Student’s disciplinary file.

      2. Disciplinary Probation

        Disciplinary Probation means that the Student has been found responsible for violating the Institute’s Code of Conduct. Disciplinary Probation is for a specified period of time. Any further disciplinary violation may result in disciplinary action up to, and including Expulsion. Disciplinary Probation is officially recorded in the Student’s disciplinary file.

      3. Suspension Held in Abeyance

        Suspension Held in Abeyance means that the Student has been found responsible for violating the Institute’s Code of Conduct. Suspension Held in Abeyance is for a specified period of time. During the time of Suspension Held in Abeyance, involvement at the Institute is restricted to 1) academic activities and 2) non-academic activities specifically approved by the Office of Student Integrity. A Student who is found responsible for violating the Student Code of Conduct while under Suspension Held in Abeyance will be given immediate Suspension or Expulsion. Suspension Held in Abeyance is officially recorded in the Student’s disciplinary file.

      4. Suspension

        Suspension means that the Student has been found responsible for violating the Institute’s Code of Conduct. Suspension is exclusion for a specified period of time from the Institute Premises, and other privileges or activities as determined by the Office of Student Integrity. A suspended Student shall immediately leave campus and cannot re-enter campus without prior approval from the Office of Student Integrity. The Dean of Students will determine when the Accused has met the requirements for readmission. Any further disciplinary violation may result in disciplinary action up to, and including Expulsion. Suspension is officially recorded in the Student’s disciplinary file.

      5. Expulsion

        Expulsion means that the Student has been found responsible for violating the Institute’s Code of Conduct. Expulsion is permanent separation and termination of the Accused’s status as a Georgia Tech Student, and exclusion from Institute Premises, privileges, and activities. Expulsion is officially recorded in the Student’s disciplinary file.

    2. Supplementary Requirements
      1. Restitution: Payment to the Institute or to an affected party for damages resulting from a violation of the Student Code of Conduct.
      2. Fine: A monetary penalty paid to the Institute.
      3. Grade Change: Change of grade for the course and/or coursework in which the academic misconduct occurred.
      4. Programmatic Requirements: Required completion of designated educational programs (e.g., alcohol, community issues, anger management, assessments, etc.).
      5. Restrictions: Exclusion from participation in specified services and activities.
      6. Revocation of Admission and/or Degree: Admission to, or a degree awarded from the Institute may be revoked for fraud, misrepresentation, or other violation of Institute standards in obtaining the degree, or for other serious violations committed by a Student prior to graduation.
      7. Withholding Degree: The Institute may withhold awarding a degree otherwise earned until the completion of the process set forth in this Student Code of Conduct, including the completion of all Sanctions and Supplementary Requirements, if any.
      8. Other Requirements: Other Requirements may be imposed.
  6. INTERIM SUSPENSION

    In certain circumstances the Dean of Students may impose an Institute suspension prior to the investigation and resolution process.

    1. The Dean of Students will determine if interim suspension is warranted. Interim suspension may be imposed only:
      • To ensure the Student's physical or emotional safety and well-being; or
      • To ensure the safety and well-being of members of the Institute Community or to preserve Institute property; or
      • If the Student poses a definite threat of disruption of, or interference with the normal operations of the Institute; or
      • If the Student is charged with a felony.
    2. During the interim suspension the Student may be denied access to classes, campus facilities, and all other Institute activities or privileges.
    3. The Student shall be notified in writing of this action and the reasons for the Suspension, in accordance with Section F.1. The notice should include the time, date, and place of a subsequent meeting with the Dean of Students in order for the student to show cause why he/she should not be interim suspended.
    4. Cases of interim suspension shall be given priority and will be expedited through the Conduct process.
  7. APPEAL PROCEDURES
    1. Reasons for Appeal

      The appeal process is not intended to grant a new hearing at a higher level. An appeal shall be limited to a review of the record of the initial hearing, supporting documents, and the Accused’s written appeal. The Accused must explicitly state why he or she believes an appeal is warranted. Appeals will only be considered for the following reasons:

      1. To determine whether the original hearing was conducted fairly and in conformity with prescribed procedures;
      2. To determine whether there was sufficient evidence to support the decision;
      3. To determine whether the Sanctions and Supplementary Requirements imposed were appropriate for the violation for which the Student was found responsible; and/or
      4. To determine whether new Information, not available at the time of the hearing, is relevant to the final decision.
    2. Process

      If a case is appealed, sanctions are not imposed unless the welfare of a person or the community is threatened.

      Sanctions will be imposed if an appeal is not filed, the deadline for an appeal passes, or when an appeal decision has been finalized.

      The appeal must be written by the Accused, addressed to the appropriate Appellate Officer, and delivered to the Office of Student Integrity within five (5) business days of the delivery of the decision. Appeal decisions will normally be rendered within ten (10) business days either in person, or accordance with the communication guidelines in Section D.2. Extension of these deadlines may be granted for extenuating circumstances. At the discretion of the Appellate Officer, a designee may be selected to determine the outcome of the appeal.

      In cases where a student has been accused of violating, or found in violation of the Georgia Tech Policy on Student Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Harassment, Stalking, and Intimate Partner Violence, both the Accused(s) and Complainant(s) have the right to submit an appeal and will follow the process as outlined in Section G.2. of the Student Code of Conduct. For further information, please see Section K of the Georgia Tech Policy on Student Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Harassment, Stalking, and Intimate Partner Violence at: http://www.osi.gatech.edu/plugins/content/index.php?id=41

      For all decisions made by the Office of Student Integrity, the Appellate Officer shall be the Dean of Students.

      For all academic cases where the sanction includes suspension or expulsion, Undergraduate Students may, after an appeal to the Dean of Students, appeal to the Institute President, via the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education. The Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education will review and make a recommendation to the Institute President. The Institute President’s decision will be the final decision of the Institute.

      For all academic cases where the sanction includes suspension or expulsion, Graduate Students may, after an appeal to the Dean of Students, appeal to the Institute President, via the Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Affairs. The Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Faculty Affairs will review and make a recommendation to the Institute President. The Institute President’s decision will be the final decision of the Institute.

      For all non-academic cases where the sanction includes suspension or expulsion, the Student may, after an appeal to the Dean of Students, appeal to the Institute President, via the Vice President for Student Affairs. The Vice President for Student Affairs will review and make a recommendation to the Institute President. The Institute President’s decision will be the final decision of the Institute.

    3. Appeal Decisions

      Decisions of the Appellate Officer go into effect immediately. The Appellate Officer is authorized to take one of the following actions:

      1. dismiss the appeal for failure to state valid reasons, in accordance with Section G.1.
      2. find no error and uphold the original decision;
      3. uphold the original decision, but modify Sanctions and Supplementary Requirements;
      4. remand the case to a Student Conduct Administrator or Student Conduct Panel; or
      5. reverse the original decision.
    4. Board of Regents

      The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia (the "Board") is the final appellate authority for all cases of suspension or expulsion that have been reviewed by the Institute President. Should the Accused be dissatisfied with the decision of the Institute President, he/she may apply to the Board for a review of the decision. The application for review shall be submitted in writing to the executive secretary of the Board within the period specified by the Board of Regents.

  8. RECORD KEEPING AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION
    1. Maintenance of Disciplinary Files

      Disciplinary records of Students found responsible of any charges against them will be retained for five (5) years after graduation or date of last attendance. Disciplinary records containing records of Suspension and Expulsion will be permanently retained. A case referral results in the creation of a disciplinary file in the name of the Accused. This file shall be voided if the student is found not responsible for the charges.

    2. Release of Information

      Student disciplinary records shall be governed by the Family Educational Rights of Privacy Act20 U.S.C. § 1232g.

      1. Academic or non-academic misconduct resulting in expulsion is released to third parties indefinitely.
      2. Academic misconduct that resulted in suspension is released to third parties for five years after sanction completion.
      3. Any non-academic misconduct that resulted in suspension where a potential threat to the campus community exists is released to third parties for five years after sanction completion. In instances of suspension where no threat to the community is identified, the suspension is reported until the sanction is complete.
      4. Any academic or non-academic misconduct that did not result in suspension or expulsion is not released to third parties.
      5. The Institute requires a specific written request from the student to release the entire disciplinary record to third parties.
    3. Parent/Legal Guardian Notification

      Parents/Legal Guardians of Students under the age of 21 may be notified when a Student is found responsible for violating the Georgia Tech Student Policy on Alcohol and other Drugs when any of the following occur:

      1. A Student endangers himself/herself or others while under the influence of alcohol or other substances. Specific instances include driving under the influence, fighting, alcohol poisoning, and hospitalization.
      2. When the Dean of Students determines that any future violation of Institute Policy will most likely result in suspension from the Institute.
      3. When a Student Conduct Administrator determines that any future violation of Institute Policy will likely result in removal from housing.
    4. Transcript Encumbrances

      In pending cases that could result in Suspension or Expulsion, the Dean of Students will normally place a temporary encumbrance (hold) on a Student's records. The Dean of Students will also place a hold on a Student's records if the Student fails to respond to an official request to meet or if the Student fails to complete assigned Sanctions.

  9. REFERENCES

    Academic Honor Code: www.honor.gatech.edu
    Board of Regents: http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/
    Computer Use and Network Policy: www.security.gatech.edu
    Department of Housing: www.housing.gatech.edu
    Faculty Senate: www.Facultysenate.gatech.edu
    Office of the Dean of Students: www.deanofstudents.gatech.edu/
    Office of Student Integrity: www.osi.gatech.edu
    Title IX Information: www.ohr.gatech.edu/ers/titleix

    The following policies can be found on the OSI Web site: Alcohol and Drugs Policy Georgia Tech Policy on Student Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Harassment, Stalking, and Intimate Partner Violence

     

    Office of Student Integrity, Office of the Dean of Students, Georgia Institute of Technology, Last Updated, April 22, 2014

     

 

Make-Up Classes Scheduled Following the Cancellation of Classes

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
May 2016
Last Revised: 
August 2016
Review Date: 
August 2019
Policy Owners: 
Office of the Provost
Registrar
Contact Names: 
Jennifer Herazy, Assistant Provost, herazy@gatech.edu;
Reta Pikowsky, Registrar, reta.pikowsky@registrar.gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

This policy sets forth plans, procedures, responsibilities, and requirements related to the scheduling of make-up classes due to the cancellation of classes, closing of campus, or the necessary closing of instructional spaces for any reason, but most commonly due to inclement weather.

This policy is intended to provide guidelines and probable approach to the scheduling of make-up of regular classes. This policy may need to be revisited frequently to ensure consistency with emergency preparedness guidelines, best practices, and new information or knowledge. Due to the inherent unpredictable nature of the cancellation of classes, not all possible scenarios can be predicted or accounted for. Actual specific plans will be determined for each such case and will work to maximize the educational experience and success of the students while allowing some flexibility for faculty members to respond in a manner consistent with their course format and teaching style. Lab courses and other specially scheduled classes may be managed differently as circumstances dictate.

Policy Statement: 

Should it become necessary for the Institute to cancel classes for three (3) or more days (or the equivalent) within a single academic term – before the 11th week of a regular term (after approximately 70% of the term has passed) – a make-up course schedule held during pre-scheduled make-up days will be established.

  • If classes are cancelled for less than three days, make-up days are not required to be made up unless so directed by the Provost. If classes are cancelled for more than five days (or the equivalent) in a single academic term, additional make-up days – beyond the pre-scheduled make-up days – may be necessary. Additional make-up days will be set at the discretion of the Provost.
Scope: 

This policy addresses scheduling make-up class sessions (both undergraduate and graduate) for regular classes missed due to a closure of the campus (or a portion of the campus) or cancelling of classes. Due to the unique nature lab sections and other specially scheduled classes may be managed differently and those arrangements will be announced as appropriate to the circumstances.

This policy pertains to courses taught as part of any Georgia Tech academic degree program on the Atlanta campus and does not govern non-credit, short courses, certificate programs, and courses taught on other GT campuses and locations.

Definitions: 

Regular classes Classes that meet in the typical 50 and 80 minute sessions on the regular block schedule. Make-up classes for missed lab classes and other specially scheduled classes will be addressed as appropriate to the circumstances.
Make-Up Classes Classes that are rescheduled at a later date and time in place of regularly scheduled class sessions that have been cancelled by the Institute.
Virtual Classes Any class meeting held via an electronic medium.
Pre-Scheduled Make-up Days Weekend days designated on the academic calendar and held late in the term to hold make-up classes, if needed and set forth in accordance with this policy.

 

Procedures: 
5.1 Institute-wide Cancellation of Classes
Institute-wide Cancellations of three (3) or more days (or the equivalent) If classes are cancelled for three (3) or more days (or the equivalent) within a single academic term before the 11th week of a regular term (or approximately 70% of the term has passed), a make-up course schedule will be established by the Institute. If Instructors wish to schedule make-up class sessions – whether physical or virtual meetings, they must follow the make-up class schedule. Students cannot be penalized for missing a virtual or physical make-up class.
Pre-Scheduled Make-up Days Each term, the Institute will establish and include in the academic calendar a pre-determined weekend – in the last ¼ of the term – that will serve as the pre-scheduled days for make-up classes. Should it become necessary for the Institute to establish a make-up class schedule, it will be held during these pre-scheduled make-up days.
Virtual Class Sessions If the Institute decides to cancel classes or close the campus (or a portion of the campus) for any amount of time, instructional faculty are welcomed to hold virtual classes using instructional technology, social media or other available electronic means. (See further procedure in 5.3 below regarding virtual classes).
Cancellations late in the term If classes are cancelled during or after the 11th week, in a regular term, ( after approximately 70% of the term has passed) make-up scheduling may not be implemented and would be determined by the administration based on circumstances.
5.2 Make-up Class schedule
Establishing and announcing the Make-Up Schedule The timing and specifics of the course make-up schedule will be determined by the Registrar’s office (in consultation with the Office of the Provost, the College Deans’ Offices and the Office of Space Planning and Capital Management) and will be announced within one week after the last day of cancelled classes triggering the make-up schedule.
Faculty Requirement to hold make-up classes The purpose of the schedule is to avoid class scheduling conflicts for the students and to assign classroom space. Typically, instructors are not required to offer make-up class sessions. If they do wish to schedule make up class sessions – whether physical or virtual meetings, they must follow the make-up class schedule. It is the responsibility of the instructor to notify the students in a timely manner of the make-up class session.
Student Participation Student attendance at make-up class sessions is strongly recommended, but students cannot be penalized for missing a virtual or rescheduled class. In planning make-up work and classes, faculty members should recognize and be sensitive to students’ work, family and other obligations.
In-class grading and new assignments In-class tests, quizzes, or other graded assignments cannot be administered and assignments cannot be due during a rescheduled class session. New assignments cannot be announced or given during a rescheduled class session.
Distance Learning Classes Make-up class sessions for courses with attached Q-sections will be scheduled in DL equipped classrooms to ensure the ability to record the make-up lecture for the online students.
Allowing for Extraordinary Circumstances

The Office of the Provost, in consultation with the President, may adjust this policy as required by unforeseen and specific circumstances.

Should the number of days of cancelled classes become extraordinary, holding make-up class sessions may be required, and students may be required to attend the make-up sessions.

5.3 Virtual Classes
Campus Protocols and Student Privacy Any virtual or electronic classroom session should comply with Institute virtual classroom protocols and FERPA policies, paying particular attention to privacy of student identity and academic information.
Suggested Online Formats Suggested formats that lend to the protection of student privacy are:
GT Online: Make-up lectures will be recorded in a DL classroom at the scheduled make-up time. The recording will be posted in GTcourses. The professor can request access for non-DL students. Students must authenticate to gain access.
Responsibilities: 

Registrar – Establish the dates of the pre-scheduled make-up days each term and establish additional details of make-up schedules as required by this policy.

Instructional Faculty – Communicate clearly and timely with students any plans for make-up classes consistent with the Institute established make-up schedule.

GTOnline - Confirm with instructional faculty the method and timing of their makeup lectures. Communicate to all online students how to access their makeup lecture if one is available.

Provost – oversee the implementation of this policy and determine when unforeseen or specific circumstances require deviation from the stated policy.

Enforcement: 

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit http://www.academicgrievance.gatech.edu/

Policy History: 
Revision Date Author Description
05/06/2016 Office of the Provost Updated Policy

 

Student Organizations Code of Conduct

STUDENT ORGANIZATION CODE OF CONDUCT PROCEDURES
  1. Case Referrals
    Any person may file a complaint against an Organization for violations of the Student Code of Conduct. The complaint shall be prepared in writing and directed to OSI. The procedures for filing a complaint can be found on the OSI website as listed in the References. This complaint should be submitted as soon as possible after the event takes place or when it is reasonably discovered, no later than thirty (30) Business days following the discovery of the incident. In extraordinary circumstances, OSI may waive this timeline.
  2. Communication
    All communication (requests for meetings, notifications, notice of hearings, etc.) will be provided via the official Institute e-mail address, as defined by the Office of Information Technology. If the Organization president is not currently enrolled, the notification will be sent via U.S. Postal Service to the Student’s last known address on file with the Office of the Dean of Students and notification will be sent to the Organization’s Advisor.
  3. Rights of the Accused Student Organization
    Throughout the Conduct process, the Accused is granted the following rights:
    1. to seek information from a Student Conduct Administrator about the Investigation and Resolution Process
    2. to be informed of the charge(s) and alleged misconduct upon which the charge is based
    3. to be informed of the Information upon which a charge is based and afforded an opportunity to offer a relevant response
    4. to be accompanied by an Advisor of the Student Organization’s choice
    5. to remain silent with no inference of responsibility drawn
    6. to call and question relevant Witnesses
    7. to present Information in the Student Organization’s behalf
    8. to be considered not responsible until proven responsible by a Preponderance of the Evidence
    9. to appeal the decision
    10. to waive any of the above rights.
  4. Investigation and Resolution Process
    The Institute's Conduct process utilizes an investigatory model, not an adversarial model, in resolving allegations of misconduct with the primary goal of uncovering the truth. The standard of proof shall be a Preponderance of the Evidence. An investigation begins when a complaint is forwarded and the case is opened by OSI. During the investigation, an Organization should continue to participate in Institute functions unless otherwise instructed by the Dean of Students. The investigation and resolution process are as follows:
    1. After OSI receives a complaint, the conduct administrator will review the Information to decide what if any process to initiate. The Student Conduct Administrator will:
      • initiate Institute conduct proceedings by sending the Organization president a notice;
      • resolve the situation through an informal resolution process including but not limited to mediation or a meeting between the Organization and a Student Conduct Administrator or a third party; or
      • determine that the facts of the complaint or report, even if true, would not constitute a violation of Institute policy;
      • determine, in consultation with the Director of Greek Life or the Director of Student Involvement that the facts of the complaint may constitute a violation of that Organization’s own governing documents or bylaws and should be adjudicated by the Organization’s governing board conduct process. If the Organization conducts its own process, that process may occur at the same time as the Institute Conduct process.
        If the Student Conduct Administrator initiates a process, the Organization president is formally notified and is requested to contact a Student Conduct Administrator within five (5) business days of the notification to schedule an Administrative Conference. The Organization may submit a list of desired Witnesses to the Student Conduct Administrator no later than 48 hours prior to the Administrative Conference. Should the Organization president fail to contact the Student Conduct Administrator within the required time frame, or fail to attend the Administrative Conference, the Student Conduct Administrator may determine the resolution of the case in the Organization’s absence, or may refer the case to a Student Conduct Panel.
    2. At the Administrative Conference, the Organization president is presented with the alleged violation of the Student Code of Conduct, supporting Information and an explanation of his/her rights. The Organization president will be allowed to designate a preference for a decision to be rendered by the Student Conduct Administrator or by a Student Conduct Panel. The Organization president can choose to, on behalf of the Organization: 1) meet and have the decision rendered by the Student Conduct Administrator; or 2) meet and have the decision rendered by a Student Conduct Panel.
      Ordinarily, the Organization president’s preference will be honored. However, OSI reserves the right to determine the process to be used based on the circumstances, including but not limited to:
      • imminent graduation of the Student(s) associated with the Organization;
      • end of the semester;
      • extraordinary circumstances.
      A decision of OSI not to honor the Organization president’s preference will be made in consultation with the Dean of Students, who will make a final determination. The Organization president’s reasons for his/her original preference may be conveyed, either in written or verbal form, to the Dean of Students. If the Organization president preference is not honored, the rationale for such will be provided to the Organization president in writing.
    3. If the case is adjudicated by the Student Conduct Administrator, the Student Conduct Administrator offers the Organization president the opportunity to provide his/her statement regarding the alleged misconduct, supporting Information, and Witnesses. Accused Students may bring an Advisor. However, if the Advisor disrupts the investigation and resolution process, he/she may be asked to leave. The Student Conduct Administrator continues the investigation as necessary by meeting with the Complainant(s), and Witnesses and gathering additional Information. If the Student Conduct Administrator determines that the Witness (including faculty or staff) may have relevant Information, s/he will make a good faith effort to contact such Witnesses to obtain a statement from them. The investigation will be completed in an expeditious fashion. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, the Student Conduct Administrator will render a decision, which will be communicated to the Organization president via the Student’s Institute email address.
    4. If the case is to be adjudicated by the Student Conduct Panel, the case shall be referred to the Student Conduct Panel and follow the procedures outlined in Section 5.b of this Addendum.
  5. Forms of Case Resolution
    1. Administrative Resolution
      If an Organization president chooses to meet with the Student Conduct Administrator, the Student Conduct Administrator follows the investigation process in Section 4. and renders a decision of 1) Not Responsible, which closes the case or 2) Responsible for one or more violations with an appropriate Sanction, and, as warranted, one or more from among the Supplementary Requirements. The Organization president, after being notified of the Student Conduct Administrator’s decision, may submit an appeal to the Dean of Students according to appeal procedures described in Section G of the Student Code of Conduct.
    2. Student Conduct Panel
      The Student Conduct Panel is convened only when either the Student Conduct Administrator or the Organization president elects this form of resolution.
      1. Decisions and Sanctions for Non-academic Cases
        The Student Conduct Panel, after convening a hearing, recommends a disciplinary decision to the Director of Student Integrity. The Director of Student Integrity, after reviewing the case, renders a decision of 1) Not Responsible, which closes the case, or 2) Responsible for one or more violations of the Student Code of Conduct with an appropriate Sanction and, as warranted, one or more from among the Supplementary Requirements. The Organization president, after being notified of the decision and Sanction, may appeal to the Dean of Students, according to appeal procedures described in Section G of the Student Code of Conduct.
      2. Scheduling of Student Conduct Panel Hearing
        After the case is forwarded to a Student Conduct Panel, the Complainant(s) and the Accused(s) will be notified of available dates and times for a hearing. The Organization president may indicate preferences from among the available dates and times, which will be considered by OSI if received within three (3) business days.
        This official notice will be provided at least five (5) Business days prior to the hearing and will include the time, date, and location of the hearing. In addition, the notice will specify the Complainant(s), Witnesses(s), and nature of the alleged misconduct. The Organization president may waive the notification timeline in order to expedite the hearing process. Upon request, the Accused may meet with a Student Conduct Administrator to review Information and hearing procedures.
      3. Hearing Participants and Attendees
        • Student Conduct Panel hearings shall ordinarily be closed except for the Accused(s), the Complainant(s), Advisor(s), and Witnesses. Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the Chairperson. Witnesses are allowed at the discretion of the Chairperson. The Chairperson may exclude any person, including the Organization, who disrupts a hearing.
        • A Organization who fails to appear after proper notice will be deemed to have responded "Not Responsible" to the charges against him/her and to have exercised the right to remain silent without prejudice. At the discretion of the Chairperson the hearing may be conducted in the absence of the Student(s) and all the Information regarding the alleged misconduct shall be presented and considered.
        • The Complainant(s) and Accused(s) have the right to be accompanied by an Advisor. The Complainant(s) and/or Accused(s) should select an Advisor who can attend the hearing at the scheduled date and time. Delays are not usually granted due to scheduling conflicts of an Advisor.
        • Subject to the Chairperson’s control of the hearing, the Complainant(s), Accused(s) and their Advisors, shall be allowed to attend the Student Conduct Panel hearing, but not Panel deliberations.
        • In Student Conduct Panel hearings involving more than one Accused, OSI may permit the Student Conduct Panel hearings concerning each Organization to be conducted either separately or jointly.
        • A maximum of two (2) character Witnesses will be allowed in a hearing.
      4. Hearing Procedures
        • The Chairperson shall exercise control over the proceedings to achieve orderly completion of the hearing.
        • Advisors are restricted to private communications with their advisee(s). However, if the Advisor disrupts the investigation and resolution process, he/she may be asked to leave.
        • All questions by the Complainant(s) and Accused(s) must be directed to the Chairperson, rather than to the Witness directly. Questions of whether potential Information will be received shall be resolved at the discretion of the Chairperson.
        • In addition to the Information provided by OSI, the Student Conduct Panel, at the discretion of the Chairperson, may accept additional pertinent Information and testimony (including impact statements). Any letters of recommendation submitted by the Accused will be admitted for consideration at the discretion of the Chairperson and, if admitted, will be viewed only during Panel deliberations.
        • All procedural questions arising during the hearing are subject to the final decision of the Chairperson.
        • The Student Conduct Panel’s standard of proof shall be a Preponderance of the Evidence.
        • The Student Conduct Panel in consultation with OSI, may reasonably accommodate concerns for the personal safety, well-being, and/or fears of confrontation of the Complainant(s), Accused(s), and/or Witnesses during the hearing.
        • The Student Conduct Panel shall make a recording and/or summary transcription of the proceeding, which will serve as the official record of the hearing. No other recording will be permitted. The Accused or the Complainant may request a copy of the Institute's recording upon payment of the cost to reproduce the recording, or may listen to the original recording in a location designated by OSI at no charge. The record shall be the property of the Institute.

Student/Student Organization Alcohol Policy

Last Revised: 
August 2015
Review Date: 
August 2018
Policy Owner: 
Student Life
Contact Name: 
Peter Paquette
Contact Title: 
Director of the Office of Student Integrity
Contact Email: 
peter.paquette@vpss.gatech.edu

The purpose of this policy is to promote and educate about the lawful and responsible use of alcohol by students, and to educate about illegal drugs in order to maintain an environment that is consistent with the educational focus of Georgia Tech.
Georgia Tech will comply with all federal, state, and local laws and policies, including the policies of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, on the abuse of alcohol and other drugs by its students. The legal drinking age in the State of Georgia is 21.

Each member of the Georgia Tech community should be involved in the implementation of, and compliance with this policy. Unless otherwise stated by law, each individual retains responsibility for his or her actions at all times regardless of his or her mental state, even if altered by alcohol or other drugs.
Campus organizations may develop and enforce additional group/individual standards which are more restrictive than those established in this policy.

STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND SANCTIONS
In accordance with federal and state laws and because of the potential detriment to the health and well-being of its students, all students are prohibited from engaging in the unlawful use, possession, manufacture, distribution, dispensation, and sale of alcoholic beverages, controlled substances (including marijuana), and other drugs. The term “dangerous drug” is defined in the Official Code of Georgia Section 16-13-71.

A. Alcohol
The sale, distribution, and consumption of alcoholic beverages in or on all Georgia Tech owned or leased (by) property, or on sidewalks/streets are specifically prohibited, with the exception of those approved by the Office of the President or designee. This policy does not prohibit the lawful use of alcohol in Institute-owned residences.

Individual possession and/or consumption of alcohol is acceptable, provided individuals DO NOT:

a. Possess or consume alcohol if under 21 years of age.
b. Furnish, or cause to be furnished, any alcohol to persons under 21 years of age.
c. Conspicuously display open containers of alcohol in any public location, including, but not limited to, grounds, sidewalks, and streets within campus boundaries (but not the public sidewalks and streets, or privately owned or leased property).
d. Sell alcoholic beverages.
e. Misrepresent one's age or identity in any manner for the purpose of obtaining or possessing alcohol.
f. Serve or make available alcohol to intoxicated persons.

Alcoholic beverages may be served and/or consumed by individuals 21 and older at advertised events and activities that are promoted, sponsored, or supervised by a chartered Georgia Tech organization, providing the organization shall:

a. Be responsible for enforcing the entire Student Policy on Alcohol and Illegal Drugs.
b. Completed and confirmed review of the “Acknowledgement of Alcohol and Illegal Drugs Policy.” This form will remain on file in the Office of Leadership and Civic Engagement, 2211 Student Center Commons. Acknowledgment of Alcohol and Illegal Drugs Policy Forms are available in the Office of Leadership and Civic Engagement. This must be signed with every officer transition.
c. Ensure that alcohol is not the focal point, the reason for, or the drawing card for an event.
d. Submit, and have approved, a completed Alcohol Event Planning Form. Alcohol Event Planning Forms are available in the Office of Leadership and Civic Engagement.
e. Not advertise the service or availability of alcoholic beverages at functions.
f. Ensure that alcoholic beverages are not consumed by any individual under the legal drinking age of 21.
g. Provide non-alcoholic beverages and food in reasonable quantity, in the same general area, and for the same time period, as the alcoholic beverages are accessible.
h. Control access to the alcoholic beverages through a central point of distribution by a designated server within a designated area at the event (e.g. beer garden) and through the use of sober monitors. Only students who have shown proper proof of age may enter the designated area where alcohol is being served. All alcohol must be distributed and consumed within the designated area. Control is for the purpose of restricting use by those under 21 and/or who are obviously intoxicated.
i. Not use organizational funds to purchase alcohol. Any funds used to pay for alcohol must be taken from personal/private sources and paid to a properly licensed third party vendor. Alcohol may not be paid for by the student organization via a sale at the activity or by charging an admission fee either in advance or at the door (as stated in the Georgia Code of Law, 1981 Section 3-3-21).
j. Not use kegs, champagne/punch fountains, or other common usage containers (such as punch bowls or frozen drink machines) for alcoholic beverages.
k. In the absence of a third-party vendor, designate or hire a TIPS (Training Intervention Procedures for Servers) trained server to monitor the service and consumption of alcohol. It is unlawful to serve or make available alcohol to intoxicated persons (as stated in the Georgia Code of Law, Section 3-3-22).
l. Require a full-time Institute employee, who must not be a minor, to be present for the duration of functions hosted by student organizations where alcohol is served or made available. Advisers are encouraged to attend such functions.

Promotional activities regarding alcohol are as follows:

a. The posted advertisement of alcoholic beverages on campus is not permitted. This includes, but is not limited to: chalking, electronic communications, bulletins, flyers, and social media sites.
b. Campus publications are encouraged to minimize/eliminate all advertisement of alcoholic beverages.
c. No promotion or advertising on campus of incentive drinking (“happy hours”, “2-for-1 specials”, unlimited quantities of alcohol available at reduced prices or free, events focusing on the consumption of alcohol, etc.) is permitted.
d. Chartered student organizations and student groups may not seek or accept sponsorship or support from companies/vendors whose main focus of business is the manufacture, distribution, or sale of alcohol, other drugs or related paraphernalia.

Participants in Study Abroad programs are bound by the legal drinking age of the respective countries in which they are traveling and in all other respects this policy applies.

Sanctions for Violation of Standards:
Students who violate this policy will be subject to disciplinary action and penalties in accordance with the Georgia Tech Student Code of Conduct.

Attempts to circumvent the provisions in this policy in any way are an infraction of this policy.

B. Possession and/or Use of Illegal Drugs
Georgia Tech does not permit or condone the illegal possession and/or use of controlled substances. Controlled substances means any drug, substance, or immediate precursor included in the definition of controlled substance in the Official Code of Georgia Section 16-13-21 (4) or Schedule I through V of Section 202 of the Federal Controlled Substance Act [21 United States Code 812]. The term “dangerous drug” is defined in the Official Code of Georgia Section 16-13-71.

Sanctions for Violation of Standards:
Any student who violates this policy or any federal or state law or policy regarding the manufacture, distribution, sale, possession, or use of controlled substances or other dangerous drugs shall be subject to disciplinary actions and penalties in accordance with the Georgia Tech Student Code of Conduct.

Additionally, in accordance with Georgia law, any student convicted of a felony that involves the manufacture, distribution, sale, possession, or use of controlled substances or other illegal drug, or chartered student organizations and student groups involved in these activities may be subject to specific penalties required by state law.

Further information regarding the effects of drug abuse and penalties for manufacture, distribution, sale, possession, or use of controlled substances or other illegal drugs is available in the Counseling Center, Stamps Health Services and the Office of the Dean of Students.

Participants in Study Abroad programs are bound by the policies of the Georgia Institute of Technology regarding the possession and/or use of controlled substances or other illegal drugs.

DRUG AND ALCOHOL COUNSELING, TREATMENT, AND REHABILIATION PROGRAMS
Students with alcohol- or drug-related concerns may be referred to, or seek assistance from the Division of Student Affairs. The Division of Student Affairs provides trained professional and paraprofessional counselors in the Counseling Center for drug and alcohol abuse prevention, education, and counseling.

POLICY REVIEW
This policy shall be reviewed by a Task Force which includes student representation and is appointed by the Dean of Students or their designee, to determine its effectiveness, to ensure that policies are enforced and the disciplinary sanctions are consistently applied, to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of the educational component of the policy, and to recommend and implement changes as appropriate.

POLICY DISTRIBUTION
The Dean of Students, or their designee, shall oversee the annual distribution of this Policy to every Georgia Tech student. Additional copies of the Policy on Student Alcohol and Illegal Drugs may be obtained from the Office of the Dean of Students.

Scholarly Allowance for Endowed Chairs and Professorships

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
November 2011
Last Revised: 
April 2015
Review Date: 
April 2018
Policy Owner: 
Academic Affairs
Contact Name: 
Jennifer Herazy
Contact Title: 
Assistant Provost for Administration
Contact Email: 
herazy@gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

This policy provides consistency of annual scholarly allowance payments to faculty members holding endowed chairs or professorships for planning of research and scholarly activities.

Policy Statement: 

For any named faculty position established after the date of this policy, the annual scholarly allowances will be set as following to provide consistent but impactful support:

  • Endowed chair appointments – $50,000/year
  • Endowed professorship appointments – $25,000/year
  • Termed professorship appointments -- Termed appointments would follow these values as well, but due to the variation in the terms for those positions, the allowance may be reduced based on available funding

This allowance would apply to all faculty appointments to chairs or professorships established in the recent past and going forward with donor agreements that contain the following language: Distributions from the fund shall be determined and overseen by the Provost, the Dean of the College, and the Chair of the School in accordance with Georgia Institute of Technology policies and procedures related to the administration of endowed chairs and professorships.

Scope: 

Employees (typically academic faculty members) holding named positions supported by an endowment or expendable fund

 

Definitions:

Scholarly allowance An amount of funding provided to a faculty member to support his/her research and scholarly activities.
Income allocation The amount generated annually from an endowed fund
Termed professorship A named faculty position supported by a restricted expendable (non-endowed) fund administered in accordance with GTF policies and a legal agreement with the donor of the funds. The value of the expendable fund can vary and the named appointment is for the duration of the fund life.

 

Procedures: 
5.1 Appointment of Faculty Holder to the Named Position
Offer letterAt the time of appointment, the letter of offer shall include the specific amount to be provided, consistent with this policy, to the faculty member, and indicate that a maximum of three years of the income can be carried forward to the next fiscal year. For termed professorships, the offer letters should also note the term of the appointment to the professorship.
High value endowmentsEndowments of higher values may provide for increased allowances, but should be negotiated separately and based upon the needs of the department and faculty member.
5.2 Distribution of Funds
Annual income allocationAs is the practice now, the entire income allocation will be distributed to the home unit, where a sub-account for the scholarly allowance will be created.
Fluctuations in annual allocationsAny annual income over this amount would be available to support expenses consistent with the donor agreement. Should the annual income be less than the set scholarly allowance, the Provost’s Office and the related home unit will do everything possible to cover the remainder from other sources
Responsibilities: 

School Chair/Department Head
The school chair, dean or department head offering the named faculty position shall notify the faculty member in writing of the scholarly allowance associated with the appointment. He/she is responsible to steward any funds available in excess of the scholarly allowance within the terms outlined in the donor agreement. Should the amount of the restricted endowment or restricted expendable account be inadequate to support the committed scholarly allowance, it is the responsibility of the school chair, dean or department head to work with the senior administration to identify additional funding sources.

Faculty Member
The faculty member is responsible for spending the fund in accordance within the terms of the donor agreement, and this and other related Institute policies.

Enforcement: 

The Dean of the College or Provost is responsible to ensure that donated funds are stewarded within the terms of the donor agreement, and this and other related Institute policies.

To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

Policy History: 

Revision DateAuthorDescription
April 2015Provost OfficeCodify Memo/add to Policy Library

 

Student Employment in Support of Education

For more information on Student Employment see the Employment book.

Cooperative Education (Undergraduate)

For information on Cooperative Education (Undergraduate) please follow the link below
http://catalog.gatech.edu/specialacademic/divpro.php

Grad Co-op

For information on Grad Co-op please follow the link below
http://catalog.gatech.edu/specialacademic/coop.php

Federal Work Study

For information on Federal Work Study please follow the link below.
http://www.finaid.gatech.edu/fws

Student Employment Regulations

For information on Student Employment Regulations please follow the link below.
http://www.policylibrary.gatech.edu/employment/student-employment

Substantive Change Policy

Type of Policy: 
Administrative
Effective Date: 
August 2014
Last Revised: 
August 2014
Review Date: 
August 2017
Policy Owner: 
Library Learning Excellence
Contact Name: 
Catherine Murray-Rust
Contact Title: 
Vice Provost Learning Excellence and Dean of Libraries, SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison
Contact Email: 
catherine.murray-rust@library.gatech.edu
Reason for Policy: 

Georgia Tech is required to have policies and procedures to ensure that all substantive changes are reported to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) in a timely fashion.

This policy outlines the procedures Georgia Tech must follow to comply with the SACSCOC Substantive Change Policy, in adherence with U.S. Department of Education regulations. Adherence to the policy will ensure Georgia Tech avoids sanctions and penalties associated with non-compliance.

Policy Statement: 

As a member of the SACSCOC, Georgia Tech is required to notify SACSCOC of changes in accordance with the substantive change policy and when required seek approval prior to the initiation of changes.

Substantive change is a significant modification or expansion of the nature and scope of an accredited institution. The reporting and review of substantive change ensures that the scope of programs offered by Georgia Tech have undergone appropriate review by SACSCOC.

Required substantive change materials will be submitted by Georgia Tech’s SACSCOC Liaison to SACSCOC for approval only after required Institute and University System of Georgia approvals have been obtained.

Scope: 

Substantive change is defined by SACSCOC as a significant modification or expansion of the nature and scope of an accredited institution. Under federal regulations, substantive change includes:

  • Any change in the established mission or objectives of the institution
  • Any change in legal status, form of control, or ownership of the institution
  • The addition of courses or programs that represent a significant departure, either in content or method of delivery, from those that were offered when the institution was last evaluated
  • The addition of courses or programs of study at a degree or credential level different from that which is included in the institution’s current accreditation or reaffirmation
  • A change from clock hours to credit hours
  • A substantial increase in the number of clock or credit hours awarded for successful completion of a program
  • The establishment of an additional location geographically apart from the main campus at which the institution offers at least 50% of an educational program
  • The establishment of a branch campus
  • Closing a program, off-campus site, branch campus or institution
  • Entering into a collaborative academic arrangement that includes only the initiation of a dual or joint academic program with another institution
  • Acquiring another institution or a program or location of another institution
  • Adding a permanent location at a site where the institution is conducting a teach-out program for a closed institution
  • Entering into a contract by which an entity not eligible for Title IV funding offers 25% or more of one or more of the accredited institution’s programs

Policy Terms: 

Substantive Change
A significant modification or expansion of the nature and scope of an accredited institution.

Branch Campus
A location of an institution that is geographically apart and independent of the main campus of the institution. A location is independent of the main campus if the location is: permanent in nature; offers courses in educational programs leading to a degree, certificate or other recognized educational credential; has its own faculty and administrative or supervisory organization and has its own budgetary and hiring authority.

Contractual Agreement
Typically is one in which an institution enters an agreement for receipt of courses / programs or portions of courses or programs (i.e. clinical training internships, etc.) delivered by another institution or service provider.

Consortial Relationship
A consortial relationship typically is one in which two or more institutions share in the responsibility of developing and delivering courses and programs that meet mutually agreed upon standards of academic quality.

Correspondence Education
A formal educational process under which the institution provides instructional materials, by mail or electronic transmission, including examinations on the materials, to students who are separated from the instructor. Interaction between the instructor and the student is limited, is not regular and substantive, and is primarily initiated by the student; courses are typically self-paced.

Degree completion program
A program typically designed for a non-traditional undergraduate population such as working adults who have completed some college-level course work but have not achieved a baccalaureate degree. Students in such programs may transfer in credit from courses taken previously and may receive credit for experiential learning. Courses in degree completion programs are often offered in an accelerated format or meet during evening and weekend hours, or may be offered via distance learning technologies.

Distance Education
A formal education process in which the majority of the instruction (interaction between students and instructors and among students) in a course occurs when students and instructors are not in the same place. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous. A distance education course may use the internet; one-way and two-way transmissions through open broadcast, closed circuit, cable, microwave, broadband lines, fiber optics, satellite, or wireless communications devices; audio conferencing; or video cassettes, DVD’s and CD-ROMS if used as part of the distance learning course or program.

Dual Degree
Separate program completion credentials each of which bears only the name, seal, and signature of the institution awarding the degree to the student.

Educational program
A coherent course of study leading to the awarding of a credential (i.e. a degree, diploma or certificate).

Geographically separate
An instructional site or branch campus that is located physically apart from the main campus of the institution.

Joint degree
A single program completion credential bearing the names, seals, and signatures of each of the two or more institutions awarding the degree to the student.

Modified prospectus
A prospectus submitted in lieu of a full prospectus for certain designated substantive changes. When a modified prospectus is acceptable, SACSCOC specifies requested information from the institution.

Notification
A letter from an institution’s chief executive officer, or his/her designated representative, to SACSCOC President summarizing a proposed change, providing the intended implementation date, and listing the complete physical address if the change involves the initiation of an off-campus site or branch campus. The policy and procedures for reporting and review of institutional substantive change are outlined in the document “Substantive Change for SACSCOC Accredited Institutions.”

Significant departure
A program that is not closely related to previously approved programs at the institution or site or for the mode of delivery in question. To determine whether a new program is a “significant departure,” it is helpful to consider the following questions: What previously approved programs does the institution offers that are closely related to the new program and how are they related? Will significant additional equipment or facilities be needed? Will significant additional financial resources be needed? Will a significant number of new courses be required? Will a significant number of new faculty members be required? Will significant additional library/learning resources be needed?

Teach-out agreement
A written agreement between institutions that provides for the equitable treatment of students and a reasonable opportunity for students to complete their program of study if an institution, or an institutional location that provides 50% or more of at least one program offered, ceases to operate before all enrolled students have completed their program of study. This applies to the closure of an institution, a site, or a program. Such a teach-out agreement requires SACSCOC approval in advance of implementation.

Teach-out plan
A written plan developed by an institution that provides for the equitable treatment of students if an institution, or an institutional location that provides 50% or more of at least one program, ceases to operate before all students have completed their program of study and may include, if required by the institution’s accrediting agency, a tech-out agreement between institutions. This applies to the closure of an institution, a site, or a program. Teach-out plans must be approved by SACSCOC in advance of implementation.

Procedures: 

5.1 Internal Reporting to SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison

Notification to SACSCOC Liaison of Proposed Changes
If a change is substantive, SACSCOC must be notified as long as 12 months in advance of implementing the change. Upon becoming aware of a proposed change that may be substantive, Vice Provosts, Vice Presidents, Deans and Directors of the unit proposing the change should notify the SACSCOC Liaison as early as possible so that the information required by SACSCOC is prepared appropriately by the College and submitted by the SACSCOC Liaison to SACSCOC according to the SACSCOC specified timeline with the appropriate internal review and approvals.

Late Notification – After Program Implementation – to SACSCOC Liaison of Proposed Changes
If it is discovered that a program that may be considered a substantive change has been implemented without notification to the SACSCOC Liaison, the appropriate Vice Provost, Vice President, Dean or Director has the responsibility to notify the SACSCOC Liaison immediately. It is then the responsibility of the SACSCOC Liaison to notify SACSCOC as provided in the SACSCOC Policy. To minimize the possibility that proposals that may be considered substantive changes do not go unreported, it is expected that Vice Provosts, Vice Presidents, Deans and Directors participate or send a designee to the quarterly Substantive Change Standing Committee meetings.

5.2 External Reporting to SACSCOC

Procedure 1 -Requiring Approval Prior to Implementation
Required for: Initiating coursework, certificates, or programs of study at a different level than those previously approved by SACSCOC; Initiating certificate programs for workforce development; Initiating other certificate programs; Initiating an off-campus site at which students can earn at least 50% of the credits toward an educational program; Initiating degree completion programs; Initiating a branch campus; Initiating distance learning or correspondence courses and programs by which students can earn at least 50% of a program’s credits through delivery in a format other than face-to-face; Expanding at the institution’s current degree level; Initiating a significant change in the established mission of the institution; Changing from clock hours to credit hours; Changing significantly the length of a program, substantially increasing the number of clock or credit hours awarded for successful completion of a program; Relocating a main or branch campus; Initiating a collaborative academic program with another institution not accredited by SACSCOC; Entering into a contract with an entity not certified to participate in USDOE Title IV Programs.

See Substantive Change Policy - http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/SubstantiveChange.pdf pages 14-18 for specific approval procedures.

Procedure 2 – Requiring Only Notification Prior to Implementation
Required for: Site-based/classroom group instruction – a: Initiating an off-campus site at which a student may earn at least 25% but less than 50% or credits toward a program or b: Moving an approved off-campus instructional site within the same geographic area to serve essentially the same pool of students; offering for the first time credit courses via distance learning/technology-based instruction by which students can obtain at least 25% but less than 50% of their credits toward an educational program; Initiating program/courses delivered through contractual agreement or a consortium; Entering into a contract with an entity not certified to participate in USDOE Title IV programs if the entity provides less than 25% of an education program offered by the accredited institution; Repackaging of an existing approved curriculum

See Substantive Change Policy - http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/SubstantiveChange.pdf pages 19-20 for specific approval procedures.

Procedure 3 – Closing a Program, Instructional Site, Branch Campus or an Institution
Teach-out Plans and Teach-out Agreements

See Substantive Change Policy -http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/SubstantiveChange.pdf pages 21-22 for specific approval procedures.

Responsibilities: 

8.1. Responsible Party

Responsibilities of Vice Provosts, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors, Curricular Committee Chairs, Registrar and the Substantive Change Standing Committee

Vice Provosts, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors, Curricular Committee Chairs, Registrar and the Substantive Change Standing Committee have the responsibility to be aware of the substantive change policy, inform the Institute’s SACSCOC Liaison at the earliest point possible of proposals that may be considered a substantive change for the Institute and provide the SACSCOC Liaison with any data or information necessary to comply with SACSCOC policy when requested.

Additionally, the Substantive Change Standing Committee shall meet quarterly to discuss proposed or upcoming academic changes consulting with the SACSCOC Liaison on what, if any, communication is required to SACSCOC and when. This standing committee shall consist of the Registrar; Undergraduate and Graduate Curriculum Committee Chairs; Vice President of Legal Affairs & Risk Management; Vice Provosts of Undergraduate and Graduate Education; All College Deans or their designee; Associate Vice Provost of Learning Excellence; Director Office of Assessment; the SACSCOC Liaison and a Secretary appointed by the SACSCOC Liaison. Members of this committee shall ensure that academic changes are presented and discussed to provide sufficient advance time for internal approval and notification and / or approval by SACSCOC in advance of program changes in accordance with SACSCOC policy and procedures.

Colleges are responsible for completing and providing to the Substantive Change Standing Committee and the SACSCOC Liaison all required SACSCOC documentation necessary for approval of any substantive change (i.e. a completed prospectus)

The SACSCOC Liaison is the chair of the Substantive Change Standing Committee.

8.2 Responsible Party

Responsibilities of the SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison

Every SACSCOC member institution has an Accreditation Liaison whose charge is to ensure compliance with SACSCOC accreditation requirements. The current SACSCOC Accreditation Liaison for Georgia Tech is:

Catherine Murray-Rust
Vice Provost Learning Excellence and Dean of Libraries
catherine.murray-rust@library.gatech.edu / 404-894-8914

The Accreditation Liaison will:

  • Provide the Vice Provosts, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors, Curricular Committee Chairs, Registrar and members of the Substantive Change Standing Committee with information about the SACSCOC substantive change policy.
  • Chair the Substantive Change Committee and work with its members to determine whether proposed academic changes are substantive requiring approval and / or notification by SACSCOC.
  • Review the Institute Curriculum Committees agendas prior to each meeting to determine if any items could be considered a substantive change. Attend the Curriculum Committees meetings as appropriate.
  • Obtain and review all Curriculum Committee minutes for any items that could be considered a substantive change. Follow up with the Dean and Registrar as appropriate.
  • Make the final determination on what action with respect to SACSCOC is needed and when a change is substantive.
  • Receive from the Colleges the appropriate notice and / or prospectus. Review and timely file such notice and / or prospectus with SACSCOC. Coordinate with SACSCOC and the Vice Provosts, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors and members of the Substantive Change Committee any required follow up action items / information needed.

Enforcement: 

Failure to comply with SACSCOC’s substantive change procedures, could result in the Institute’s loss of Title IV funding, the Institute’s reimbursement to the U.S. Department of Education money received for programs related to unreported substantive change, sanction or removal from membership with SACSCOC.

Optional: To report suspected instances of noncompliance with this policy, please visit Georgia Tech’s EthicsPoint, a secure and confidential reporting system, at: https://secure.ethicspoint.com/domain/en/report_custom.asp?clientid=7508

Policy History: 
Revision DateAuthorDescription
08-2014Library Learning ExcellenceNew Policy

Teaching Handbook

For information on the Teaching Handbook please follow the link below.
http://ctl.gatech.edu/resources/teaching-guidebook

I. A Framework for Effective Teaching at Georgia Tech
II. Overview of the Teaching Environment
III. Policies, Guidelines, and Procedures Pertaining to Teaching
IV. Resources for Teachers
V. The Teaching Assistant as a Teacher and Student
VI. Supervising and Mentoring Teaching Assistants
VII. Temporary/Part-Time Faculty and Graduate Student Instructors

Transfer Credit Policy

Review Date: 
February 2015
Policy Statement: 

Non-Resident Credit Policy, Explanations and Information

1. Only official transcripts from other schools may be used to evaluate and/or award credit.

  • New students must request that an official transcript from ALL previously attended colleges be mailed to the Admissions Office.

    Georgia Institute of Technology
    Undergraduate Admissions Office
    Atlanta GA, 30332-0320
  • Current or previously enrolled Georgia Tech students should have the official transcript mailed to:

    Georgia Institute of Technology
    Office of the Registrar
    Transfer Credit
    Atlanta GA, 30332-0315

2. The basic policy regarding the acceptance of the courses by transfer is to allow credit for courses completed with satisfactory grades (C or better) in other accredited colleges provided the courses correspond in time and content to courses offered at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Georgia Tech assumes responsibility for the academic quality of any work or credit recorded on the institution's transcript. Transfer credits will be accepted from newly-formed institutions of the University System of Georgia prior to accreditation.

3. Georgia Tech will NOT award credit for courses successfully completed at another institution which were previously taken at Georgia Tech.

4. A petition to the faculty must be approved to use course work more than ten years old.

5. Georgia Tech reserves the right to test the proficiency of any student in course work transferred from other institutions and to disallow credit in courses in which the student cannot demonstrate acceptable proficiency.

Procedures: 

How To Request Transfer Credit for Courses Not Previously Evaluated:

1. Check the online equivalency database for updates. New evaluations are posted daily:
https://oscar.gatech.edu/pls/bprod/wwsktrna.P_find_location

2. Notify the Registrar’s Office Transfer Credit Department of any un-awarded credit by sending an email to comments@registrar.gatech.edu

3. Submit courses for evaluation

Information - Transfer Credit:

1. Georgia Tech does not offer correspondence courses and does not grant credit for correspondence courses taken at other institutions. Academic units reserve the right to take such things as delivery method into consideration. For example, on-line courses and computer-instructed courses may not be accepted by some academic units for credit.

2. Georgia Tech does not grant credit for the College Level General Educational Development Tests, USAFI courses, or courses completed at any United States armed services, with the exception of the military academies and schools with full accreditation by a regional accrediting body.

3. Georgia Tech does not grant credit for professional certificate programs.

4. The following items are among other circumstances in which non-resident credit is NOT granted:

  • Courses previously completed at Georgia Tech.
  • College courses taken to meet freshman admissions requirements.
  • Remedial courses.
  • Courses basically secondary school or pre-college level.
  • Courses with essentially non-academic content.
  • Vocational courses.
  • Learning support courses.
  • Experiential learning.

5. Non-resident credit is not computed as a part of the student's grade point average at Georgia Tech.

Advanced Placement & International Baccalaureate:

1. See directions below to view AP and IB equivalencies.

  1. Go to https://oscar.gatech.edu
  2. Select the "Transfer Equivalencies" icon
  3. Select the asterisk (*) from the pull down menu
  4. Click "Continue" button
  5. Select your option from the pull down menu
  6. Click "Get Courses" button

2. Once enrolled at Georgia Tech, students are not allowed to take College Board (Advanced Placement and SAT II), International Baccalaureate or A-Level Examinations for credit. All examinations must be completed prior the student's enrollment date. Students who offer satisfactory evidence that they are qualified to do so may receive credit for a course by examination at Georgia Tech. Such an examination is called an examination for advanced standing.