Guiding Principles as You Draft Your Policy
Align Policy with Pedagogy and Learning Outcomes.
Your pedagogy must drive your policy. Your stance should be a reflection of the course's specific learning objectives, so the fundamental question behind any AI rule should be: "How does this policy support or hinder what I want my students to learn?" This alignment should provide a clear and defensible rationale for your students and not an arbitrary restriction. The policy communicates what is valued in the course.
Establish Student Accountability and Responsibility
AI policies should make clear that the student is the ultimate author and is fully responsible for the entirety of their submitted work, regardless of the tools used in its creation. This is especially important given the known propensity of AI tools to "hallucinate" or create false citations. Your policy should be clear that "the AI did it" is not a valid defense for submitting inaccurate or plagiarized work. Students should be taught that AI generated content is raw material that requires verification, evaluation, and revision. This makes the student a critical evaluator, fact checker, and overseer of the information they present.
Mandate Transparency Through Acknowledgement and Citation
The foundation of academic integrity is transparency. Rather than attempting to catch or police students using AI, a more effective approach centers on openness and honesty. Even if the policy is total prohibition, there must be clear instructions on how to cite and disclose their use of GenAI tools.This transparency can be anything from "I used ChatGPT to brainstorm ideas" or "to check for grammatical errors" to more detailed poliies that detail process documentation throughout a scaffolded assignement. All of the major citation styles have developed formats for GenAI citations, and students should be directed to those resources.
Implement Ethical and Practical Guardrails
A good AI policy should include ethical and practial issues related to GenAI usage. Issues like data privacy, intellectual property, and bias and equity are all essential considerations. Students should be warned against inputting any personal, confidential, or proprietary information, and when possible, be encouraged to use institutionally vetted AI tools. Students should also be reminded that course materials should not be uploaded into public AI tools without the instructor's or publisher's explicit permission. Finally, GenAI models that have been trained on vast datasets from the internet can perpetuate and amplify harmful stereotypes related to race, gender, and other identities. Students should be encouraged to critically analyze content for such biases.
Foster a Culture of Inquiry, not Accusation
Given the limitations on AI detection tools, policies should actively discourage their use as a primary basis for academic misconduct allegations. An approach centered on policing and detection can create a climate of fear and mistrust. This discourages students from asking for clarification about policies and could potentially lead to false accusations that are difficult for students to disprove. It's better to build a policy that fosters a culture of dialogue and trust. The first step in any inquiry about inappropriate AI use should be a conversation framed with curiosity, not an accusation. Focus on inappropriate AI use as a teachable moment, especially for first time or unintentional violations.
Academic Integrity Expectations for Assessments
Tailor Integrity Statements per Assessment
Each assessment should include a specific academic integrity statement detailing whether AI tools are permissible. For example, include a note that states, "For this exam, no AI tools may be used," or "You may use AI for proofreading but not for content generation."
Emphasize Consequences and Expectations
Clearly state the consequences of violating the AI policy and explain how such actions will impact the student’s academic record. Remind students of the importance of original work and how misuse of AI affects their learning experience.
Example AI Policy and Integrity Statements
Example AI Policy
Here is my current revised syllabus statement in which I try to focus primarily on transparency and critique:
Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models Policy and Transparency Requirement
The following policy outlines the appropriate use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Large Language Model (LLM) assistance in this class. Adherence to this policy is mandatory for all students.
100% Transparency Requirement:
- Clearly state the name of the AI tool used for assistance.
- Provide a detailed account of the exact prompt you input into the AI tool and the output it generated. This is required even if just using AI for a grammar, style, or translation check.
- Demonstrate that you have critically evaluated the AI's response against course materials and verified its accuracy.
- Your final submission must be composed in your own words, reflecting your understanding and analysis. Use of AI as a reference requires that you cite it as a source. (How to properly cite AI)
Prohibited Uses:
- Plagiarism: Never, ever, ever submit text directly copied from AI tools as your own work. Such actions constitute academic misconduct and will be referred to Student Conduct.
- Misuse of Copyrighted Material: Never input or copy/paste any copyrighted material into AI tools. This violates copyright law. Copyright infringement is a serious matter and could subject you to legal liability (up to $30,000 per violation) .
This prohibition includes the 📝 homework, 📄 quiz, and 💻 exam questions in this class. Assessments are copyrighted materials and your instructor's intellectual property.
ASK if you need help with prompting to better understand concepts from this class.
Consequences for violating this policy:
Failure to adhere to this policy will be considered a violation of academic integrity and may result in disciplinary actions as outlined in the Code of Student Conduct. It is your responsibility to ensure that your use of AI tools aligns with these guidelines and to seek clarification when in doubt
- First violation: Two-letter grade reduction in work.
- Second violation: No credit on the question/post
- Third violation: No credit on the assignment and referral to Student Code of Conduct for violating CSCC's academic integrity policy.
TLDR:
Any time you use AI in this class, you must include in your assignment submission comprehensive documentation that covers
- The AI tool used,
- The prompt and output,
- Evidence of fact-checking, and
- Proper citations
Any failure to follow this requirement will negatively impact your grade, will be reported to Student Conduct, and could subject you to legal liability. By remaining in this course, you agree to allow the instructor and/or CSCC to run your work through AI detectors in the course of investigating potential academic integrity violations.
Example AI Statements for Each Assignment
I also include specific academic integrity statements for each assignment. Here is an example of how I've added AI expectations to those statements:
Syllabi Resources
Links to sample syllabi statements
- OSU's AI: Considerations for Teaching and Learning
- U of Maine's Learn with AI
- The Sentient Syllabus Project (Very useful and comprehensive guide. See also sentientsyllabus.org)
- College Unbound - AI Generative Tools Policy Development Plan (includes temporary policy statements)
- A Toolkit for Addressing AI Plagiarism in the Classroom (via Quill.org and Commonlit.org which has a AI detection tool)
- Classroom Policies for AI Generative Tools (crowdsourced)
- Update Your Syllabus for ChatGPT (Medium)
- Rules for Tools (from Padagogische Hochschule Heidelberg)