University Policies on Generative AI by Tracy Mendolia, PhD

Stanford University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

In particular, using generative AI tools to substantially complete an assignment or exam (e.g. by entering exam or assignment questions) is not permitted. Students should acknowledge the use of generative AI (other than incidental use) and default to disclosing such assistance when in doubt.

Arizona State University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Further, we encourage faculty to state in syllabi, assignment instructions, etc., whether the use of AI/ChatGPT is permitted or prohibited (and to check with their unit leadership if needed).

Boston University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

We welcome AI language-generation tools (collectively, large language models, or LLMs) into the learning process, in a way that preserves fairness, optimizes student skill building, and honors relevant stakeholder perspectives.

University of Puget Sound

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Claiming the work of others as your own, whether created by another human or an artificial intelligence, is regarded as plagiarism, and as such is a violation of academic integrity.

Ohio State University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Specifically, students are not to use “unauthorized assistance in the laboratory, on field work, in scholarship or on a course assignment” unless such assistance has been authorized specifically by the course instructor. In addition, students are not to submit their work without acknowledging any word-for-word use and/or paraphrasing” of writing, ideas or other work that is not your own.

Colorado State University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Ultimately, academic integrity is about authentically engaging with the course, the learning material, and the activities that help students learn.

Duke University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

We suggest that faculty make it clear to students what their expectations are regarding the use of AI at the outset of the particular course.

University of Melbourne

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

If a student uses artificial intelligence software such as ChatGPT or QuillBot to generate material for assessment that they represent as their own ideas, research and/or analysis, they are NOT submitting their own work. Knowingly having a third party, including artificial intelligence technologies, write or produce any work (paid or unpaid) that a student submits as their own work for assessment is deliberate cheating and is academic misconduct.

Champlain College

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

“The student’s work must match the instructor’s intended purpose for an assignment.”

“AI Content generation tools (such as ChatGPT, etc…) are not permitted for any work, or phase of work, in this class. Using them may interfere with your progress as an independent thinker and your achievement of the course’s outcomes. If you use these tools, your actions would be considered academically dishonest and a violation of Champlain’s Academic Honesty Policy.”

Illinois State University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Content generated by an Artificial Intelligence third-party service or site (AI-generated content) without proper attribution or authorization is another form of plagiarism. If you are unsure about whether something may be plagiarism or another form of academic dishonesty, please reach out to me to discuss it as soon as possible.

University of Maryland

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Option 1 (no AI): In this course, my expectation is that you will not use any artificial intelligence (AI)-powered programs such as ChatGPT or DALL-E to help you with your assignments. Any use of AI-generated work to outline, write, create, or edit your assignments will be considered an academic integrity violation. My reasoning for this is that these programs may provide inaccurate or biased information, but more importantly, they do not serve your development as a student. In this course you will learn valuable skills from outlining, generating, and editing your own work. If you have any questions about this policy or are not sure if a resource you have found will violate this policy, please ask.

Option 2 (some AI): In this course, I encourage you to use artificial intelligence (AI)-powered programs such as ChatGPT or DALL-E to help you with some assignments. When you use these tools, it is your responsibility as a scholar to make sure you are clearly communicating the AI involvement in your work. Please make sure to use phrases such as “[your name] via DALL-E 2” (for images) or “This paper was generated with the help of GPT-3” (for essays). Please review the instructions in each assignment for more details on specifically how to show your work.

Princeton University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

We encourage faculty to be explicit about their AI/ChatGPT policy in their syllabus, on Canvas, and during class. We offer two sample syllabus statements below:

Intellectual honesty is vital to an academic community and for my fair evaluation of your work. All work submitted in this course must be your own, completed in accordance with the University’s academic regulations. You may not engage in unauthorized collaboration or make use of ChatGPT or other AI composition software.
Students must obtain permission from me before using AI composition software (like ChatGPT) for any assignments in this course. Using these tools without my permission puts your academic integrity at risk.

University of North Texas

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

“Cheating,” in this policy, means the use of unauthorized assistance in an academic exercise, including but not limited to:

1. use of any unauthorized assistance to take exams, tests, quizzes, or other assessments;

2. use of sources beyond those authorized by the instructor in writing papers, preparing reports, solving problems, or carrying out other assignments;

University of Waterloo

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

At present, it is important for instructors to be explicit about whether artificial intelligence or tools like ChatGPT are allowed to be used to complete assignments, tests or exams, and if so, the extent to which it is allowed, and if it should be cited and how to cite it.

University of Missouri

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

May Students Use ChatGPT and Similar Tools for their Academic Work?

The answer is, “It depends.” If your professor allows you to use ChatGPT, and you use it as permitted, then you are not committing academic dishonesty. This is similar to use of a graphing calculator, which is acceptable as long as the instructor permits it.

Montclair State University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Since the University’s policies on academic integrity currently do not include a separate clause on generative AI, add a clarifying statement to your syllabus
ie) “Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to produce or help content without proper attribution or authorization, when an assignment does not explicitly call or allow for it, is plagiarism.”

University of Washington

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Set expectations – Establish a policy for your course around the use of text generated by AI (e.g., ChatGPT) and communicate this with students through the syllabus and/or assignment prompts. Discuss how you will proceed if you discover that a student has turned in AI-generated work.

Harvard University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Protect confidential data: You should not enter data classified as confidential (Level 2 and above), including non-public research data, into publicly-available generative AI tools, in accordance with the University’s Information Security Policy. Information shared with generative AI tools using default settings is not private and could expose proprietary or sensitive information to unauthorized parties.
Adhere to current policies on academic integrity: Review your School’s student and faculty handbooks and policies. We expect that Schools will be developing and updating their policies as we better understand the implications of using generative AI tools. In the meantime, faculty should be clear with students they’re teaching and advising about their policies on permitted uses, if any, of generative AI in classes and on academic work. Students are also encouraged to ask their instructors for clarification about these policies as needed.

Georgetown University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

“The question of how to acknowledge [AI-generated intellectual work], and whether it is to be allowed at all, is answered by individual course policies. It is, as always, the students’ responsibility to be sure that they are following the rules laid out by their professors. Note that, as with all source material, this applies both to work taken directly from the AI generator and to work that has been paraphrased before being used in coursework. If you didn’t generate the words yourself, say so by quoting and citing the source; if you generated the words but not the content and ideas, say so by citing the source.”

University of Massachusetts Amherst

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Examine Privacy and Data Collection Practices. Before encouraging or asking students to use AI tools in their work, investigate how these tools collect personal information and data, including reading any privacy policy linked with a particular AI tool. Some tools may use log-in data, tracking, and other analytics (Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship, 2023). This same advice applies to you, as a faculty member. Should you want to input your existing writing prompts into an AI tool to see the output, consider your own data privacy. Instructors who may want to make use of ChatGPT or other technology tools in their classes should note that, as with any online service that is not contracted by the university, in view of FERPA regulations, students must not be required to identify themselves to third parties.

UC Berkley

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

At present, any use of ChatGPT should be with the assumption that no personal, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise sensitive information may be used with it. In general, student records subject to FERPA
(link is external), and any other information classified as Protection Level P2, P3, or P4
(link is external) should not be used.

Similarly, ChatGPT should not be used to generate output that would be considered non-public. Examples include, but are not limited to, proprietary or unpublished research; legal analysis or advice; recruitment, personnel or disciplinary decision making; completion of academic work in a manner not allowed by the instructor; creation of non-public instructional materials; and grading.

Seattle University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Plagiarism - The use of the work or intellectual property of other persons or the outputs of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) programs (e.g., ChatGPT, DALL-E, Github Copilot) presented as one’s own work without appropriate citation or acknowledgment.

Clemson University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Clemson is committed to protecting the privacy of its students, alumni, faculty, and staff, as well as protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information.

Any sensitive data disclosed to the public could be considered a breach under FERPA, HIPAA, PCI, GLBA or other Federal or State Statute. Examples include, but are not limited to:

Social Security Numbers
Credit Card Numbers
Personally identifiable medical information
Financial Aid information
Student education records

Additionally, great caution is suggested with the following information:

Research data
Intellectual Property
Source code
Proprietary data
Internal meeting notes
Hardware related information
Presentation notes
Emails

Classroom Policies for AI Generative Tools

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This is a Community Resource of a collection Course AI Policies. Presently, there are over 50 different submissions from HigherEd faculty.

Temple University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Acceptable and Unacceptable Use of AI

University of Minnesota

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The following syllabus statements were developed by the Senate Committee on Educational Policy as a resource for faculty and instructors, with options ranging from “no restrictions” to “ChatGPT and other AI tools may not be used under any circumstances.” These statements may be adopted or adapted to reflect a given instructor's course learning objectives and instructional / assessment style.

Texas A&M

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Generative AI Syllabus Statement Considerations

Northern Illinois University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

SAMPLE STATEMENT PROHIBITING USE OF AI-GENERATED TEXT

All written work submitted for this course must be completed by you, personally. Use of artificial intelligence (AI) to generate text is strictly prohibited. Submission of text generated by AI will be considered a violation of academic integrity, including AI-generated text that you have summarized or edited.

SAMPLE STATEMENT PROVIDING PARAMETERS FOR USE OF AI-GENERATED TEXT

You are responsible for the content of any work submitted for this course. Use of artifical intelligence (AI) to generate a first draft of text is permitted, but you must review and revise any AI-generated text before submission. AI text generators can be useful tools but they are often prone to factual errors, incorrect or fabricated citations, and misinterpretations of abstract concepts. Utilize them with caution.

Bryant University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Sample Syllabus Statements Regarding ChatGPT

University of Mississippi

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Syllabus Statement Examples & Considerations

University of Tennessee Knoxville

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Suggested Course Syllabus Statements

Policies related to ChatGPT and other AI Tools

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Course Policies related to ChatGPT and other AI Tools by Joel Gladd, Ph.D. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Based on a work at Course Policies related to ChatGPT and other AI Tools

University of Vermont

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

As you read these syllabi statements and begin writing yours, consider:

What kind of relationship do you want to have with your students?
What do you want your students to know about you and your philosophy?
How can you foster trust?
How much support from AI is too much?
Where and how should students disclose their use of AI?

University of Oregon

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Guiding principles

Learning-Centered: Like any tool students might use to engage in the work of a course—from library books to research databases to internet search engines—AI systems present opportunities for students to learn important skills, including creativity, critical thinking, ethical decision-making, and the skillful use of resources, among others. We encourage instructors to talk explicitly with students about the pluses and minuses of AI systems as they help or hinder learning in a course.

Transparent: Faculty and GE instructors have flexibility in how they approach newly available AI tools, making it essential to prioritize transparency with students about your choices. Students will shift among a variety of expectations and need to clearly know the policy in each individual class. We encourage faculty and GE instructors to talk explicitly with students about what policies they’ve set and why, emphasizing the relationship between their policies and their goals for students’ learning.

Data Classification - Clemson University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The Example Data Elements table contains a list of commonly used data types. This list is not all inclusive but does provide guidance on how to classify data.

Example Data Elements

Data Classification Standard - Berkley

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Data Classification - Administrative Examples - Harvard University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Classification Levels

L1 - Information intended and released for public use.

The University intentionally provides this information to the public.L1 Examples

Published research
Course catalogs
Published faculty and staff information
Student directory information*
Basic emergency response plans (life safety)
University-wide policies
Harvard publications
Press releases
Published marketing materials
Regulatory and legal ﬁlings
Published annual reports
Code contributed to Open Source
Released patents
Plans of public spaces

* Directory information about students who have requested FERPA blocks must be classified and handled as L3,
at minimum.

L2 - Low Risk Confidential Information that may be shared only within the Harvard community.

The University chooses to keep this information private, but its disclosure would not cause material harm.L2 Examples

Department policies and procedures
Employee web/intranet portals
Harvard training materials
Pre-release articles
Drafts of research papers
Work papers
Patent applications
Grant applications
Non-public building plans or layouts (excluding L3 or L4 items)
Information about physical plant (excluding L3 or L4 items)

L3 - Medium Risk Confidential Information intended only for those with a “business need to know.”

Disclosure of this information beyond intended recipients might cause material harm to individuals or the University.L3 Examples

Non-directory student information
Non-published faculty and staff information
Information protected under FERPA, in general
HUID tied to an individual
Personnel records**
Donor information (excluding L4 data points or special handling)
Non-public legal work and litigation information
Budget /financial transactions information
Non-public financial statements
Information specified as confidential by vendor contracts and NDAs
Information specified as confidential by Data Use Agreements
Security findings or reports (e.g. SSAE16, vulnerability assessment and penetration test results)
Most Harvard source code
Non-security technical specifications/architecture schema
Library/museum object valuations
IRB records

**Employees have the right to discuss terms and conditions of their own employment, including salary and benefits, with each other or with third parties.

L4 - High Risk Confidential Information that requires strict controls.

Disclosure of this information beyond specified recipients would likely cause serious harm to individuals or the University.L4 Examples

Passwords and PINs
System credentials
Private encryption keys
Government issued identifiers (e.g. Social Security Number, Passport number, driver’s license)
Individually identifiable financial account information (e.g. bank account, credit or debit card numbers)
Individually identifiable health or medical information***
Security system procedures and architectures
Trade secrets
Systems managing critical Operational Technology

*** Harvard units or programs that qualify as "covered entities" under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) must comply with HIPAA’s data security rules.

L5 - Reserved for Research Data only, as determined by IRB or Data Use Agreement.

Northern Illinois University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Any student work submitted using AI tools should clearly indicate what work is the student's work and what part is generated by the AI. In such cases, no more than 25% of the student work should be generated by AI.

A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This framework is organized into three dimensions: Pedagogical, Governance, and Operational.

Harvard Business School - Using ChatGPT and AI tools

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Official policy from Harvard Business School. Faculty "may allow the use of ChatGPT and similar technologies in some circumstances". Citation is required and guidance will evolve as these technologies evolve.

Rice University - Honor Council limits use of ChatGPT

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The Honor Council sent an email to all undergraduates on April 11th, 2023, announcing an Honor Code amendment explicitly prohibiting the use of artificial intelligence software such as ChatGPT without proper citation. Additionally, the email clarified professors’ right to ban the use of AI software for their classes. “Utilizing AI software to generate ideas and pass them off as one’s own will also be considered plagiarism and will be adjudicated as such by the Honor Council,” the email said. The email also clarifies that use of AI software “for your own study purposes is allowable.”

Stanford University - Generative AI policy guidance

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Absent a clear statement from an instructor, use of or consultation with generative AI shall be treated analogously to assistance from another person. In particular, using generative AI tools to substantially complete an assignment or exam (e.g. by entering exam or assignment questions) is not permitted. Students should acknowledge the use of generative AI (other than incidental use) and default to disclosing such assistance when in doubt.

UCLA - Guidance for the use of generative AI

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The UCLA Student Conduct Code states, “Unless otherwise specified by the faculty member, all submissions, whether in draft or final form, to meet course requirements (including a paper, project, exam, computer program, oral presentation, or other work) must either be the student’s own work, or must clearly acknowledge the source.” Unless an instructor indicates otherwise, the use of ChatGPT or other AI tools for course assignments is akin to receiving assistance from another person and raises the same concern that work is not the student’s own. ... The ultimate decision and responsibility for how to teach about AI and the establishment of or revision of course policies related to its use lies with the instructor.

University of Texas (Austin) - Acceptable use of ChatGPT and similar AI tools

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This advisory provides guidance on how to acceptably use AI Tools safely, without putting institutional, personal, or proprietary information at risk. Additional guidance may be forthcoming as circumstances evolve.

ChatGPT and Other AI Tools: A Guide for Faculty

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The WSU Office for Teaching and Learning (OTL) has gathered suggestions for using ChatGPT from POD listserv discussions and chats. Here are some ideas to consider: Embrace the tools used in the real world. Try to think about how or if this task would be done in the real world or workplace. Would they use AI to help them do some task? Then let students use it, too. Have students generate something with AI and then discuss how to improve on it. Or how it could be used to in the professional world to speed up tedious or repetitive tasks.

Yale University's Teaching and Learning Center - AI Guidance

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Individual instructors decide on whether AI tools may be used in their courses. Instructors should be clear and transparent about which tools are allowed and which ones are not, and the reasons for any restrictions.

Arizona State University - Generative AI FAQs

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

ASU faculty and administrators are focused on the positive potential of generative AI while also thinking through concerns about ethics, academic integrity, and privacy. The Provost’s Office is currently reviewing ASU’s academic integrity policy through the lens of what kind of content can be produced through generative AI and what kind of learning behaviors and outcomes are expected of students. Students are advised to confer with instructors about their course policies regarding AI use before using AI tools in their coursework.

Wesleyan University - ChatGPT

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

All content generated through the use of ChatGPT is to be understood and identified as “co-authored” by the user and the AI. To mitigate the possible risks of AI-generated content, OpenAI (the creators of ChatGPT) have developed their own Sharing & Publication Policy.

Classroom policies for AI generative tools

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This resource was created by Lance Eaton, for the purpose of sharing and helping other instructors see various policies made by other educators, to help in the development of their own policy development.

Boston College Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE) - Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Learning

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This resource from the CTE provides instructors with background on ChatGPT and guidance on how to best design coursework in response to emerging AI tools.

Scribbr- University Policies on AI Writing Tools | Overview & List

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This spreadsheet details the AI policies of 100 American universities. It is current through June 2023 and updated as circumstances change.

University of Minnesota - Sample ChatGPT syllabus statements

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This resource from the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost provides instructors with sample ChatGPT policies. Sample statements cover allowing ChatGPT usage, allowing limited ChatGPT usage, and prohibiting ChatGPT usage completely.

Despite concerns, only 3% of colleges have developed student policy on AI

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The rate of administrators who believe AI generative writing tools would positively affect student learning shot up by 24% among those who used it compared to those who haven't.

U.S. Department of Education Shares Insights and Recommendations for Artificial Intelligence

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Artificial Intelligence Policies: Guidelines and Considerations

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Should You Add an AI Policy to Your Syllabus?

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

UNESCO survey: Less than 10% of schools and universities have formal guidance on AI

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

McMaster University

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

These overarching provisional principles have guided the work of the Task Force on Generative AI in Teaching and Learning.

Students want to learn, and instructors want to support their learning.
Participatory learning – learning which happens in relationships and community – continues to be a valuable and vital way for students to learn.
Assessments that require students to document the process of learning continue to be meaningful for student learning.
Generative AI poses risks, as well as opportunities. Individuals will have different reactions and different expectations for the technology.

AI Operations Policy (Univ Tech Sydney)

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This policy governs all AI applications deployed by UTS, excluding research. It subscribes to the state government’s AI Ethics principles, and is accompanied by an AI Operations Procedures document specifying in more detail how it is to be implemented within UTS.

https://www.uts.edu.au/about/uts-governance/policies/uts-policy/artificial-intelligence-operations-policy

UTS: Five principles for the effective ethical use of generative AI

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

This guide introduces five principles, plus supporting resources, to assist academics in transitioning their assessments in response to the new opportunities that GenAI opens up, as well as academic integrity challenges.

Responsibility for issuing guidance to students on how GenAI may be used, for each assignment, rests with the lead academic.

https://lx.uts.edu.au/collections/artificial-intelligence-in-learning-and-teaching/resources/five-principles-for-effective-ethical-use-generative-ai/

German HE: Leitfäden und Studien zu Künstlicher Intelligenz (KI) in Lehre & Unterricht

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Overview of publications around the handling of ChatGPT in higher education and in the classroom. What are the possible applications and what should educators keep in mind when dealing with artificial intelligence? (as of June 2023)

Nanyang Technological University

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Position on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Research

AI Hub at Chapman University

yadegari — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Chapman University's AI Hub was created to promote a deep understanding of the importance of AI principles. These principles serve as ethical frameworks, aiding Chapman University's community, which includes researchers, educators, and staff, in the responsible use of AI.

Walden University

DrCoryStephens — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

UNC-Chapel Hill

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

ChatGPT and other generative AI tools are changing Higher Education, organizations, and society. To help faculty and staff use these tools appropriately and ethically, the UNC AI Committee has developed a set of resources, including guidance, training, and tools.

University of Wisconsin, Madison

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of Wisconsin, Madison

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Pace University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

...supports responsible experimentation with generative AI tools, but there are important considerations to keep in mind when using these tools, including information security and data privacy, compliance, copyright, and academic integrity.

Tufts University

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Tufts University (Resources for Faculty & Staff)

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of Toronto

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of Arizona

mjhtaylor — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Artificial Intelligence at the University of Arizona

mjhtaylor — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Elon's Generative AI Statement

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Chapman University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Links to other university's AI policies sites. Hosted by University Library

Vanderbilt University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University Policy with Principles/Goals

Notre Dame University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

student letter

Boise State University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Multiple policies related to GenAI

Carnegie Mellon University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Syllabus Statements

UNIVERSITY of NEBRASKA–LINCOLN

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Acceptable use-case examples

University of Chicago

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of Kentucky

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Course policy examples

Western Michigan University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

So, absent any articulated standard for the use of AI in a specific discipline and recognizing that usage expectations will vary across the university, it will be essential for instructors to develop clear policies on the use of AI tools in their classroom.

University of Pittsburgh

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

encourages instructors to exercise their own judgment about student use of these technologies within their courses

University Information Technology Services

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Acceptable uses

University of Michigan

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Course Policies & Syllabi Statements

Cornell University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Academic Integrity

Crediting Generative AI in an Assignment

Detecting AI-Generated Content

St. Mary's University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of Buffalo

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

The University of Alabama

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

From Academic Affairs: Guidelines on Using Generative AI Tools

University of Hawaii

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Assignment and Assessment Redesign

University of Illinois - College of Law

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Discussions of AI and ChatGPT in the Legal Academy

University of Kansas

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Building AI policies into your syllabus

Swansea University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Usage Philosophy

Brown University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Potential impact of AI on our academic mission

Brandeis University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Syllabus Statements

University of Miami

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Using AI for Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship

Northwestern University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Western University

cetl6 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Guidance by Role:

Michigan State University

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of Buffalo

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Syllabus Policies for gAI

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

success

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Always push and keep trying and never give up

Artificial Intelegiance

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

AI is become useful is so many ways. It can help us with home work, how to do thing, or even moms secret enchiladas recipe, but we also have to know how to use it because there is some people that use it for cheating which can get you into a lot of problems. If you get caught cheating in a test after college they can also take away your college degree. There is also a lot of websites from AI such as ChatGPT, DeepAI, AIChatting, some websites are outdated too, such as ChatGPT. But in my opinion AI is good for us since it can help.

University Policies on Generative AI

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Braeden Ramirez

AI is acceptable to use as a helpful tool as long as it is not used to actually do the work for you. Moral integrity must be used and credit must be given to not cross the line of plagiarism.

NYU Abu Dhabi

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

NYU Abu Dhabi teaching and learning guidelines for generative AI.

New York University

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Teaching with Generative AI

New York University

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Colorado School of Mines

facdev2 — 2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

University of British Columbia

2024-10-09 16:15:39 UTC

Principles and guidelines about generative AI use for multiple use cases and audiences, including but not limited to teaching and learning.

AI Tools and Writing: Information for Students

tmendolia — 2024-12-11 21:58:36 UTC

Guidelines for the Use of AI Tools in Writing Assignments

If your instructor allows you to use AI tools for writing assignments, below are some suggestions to guide your use.