Following University Guidance, use of genAI tools within university coursework is at the discretion of individual instructors. Students are expected to follow their course-specific policies.


Syllabus Guidance

Review the university’s recommendations to guide faculty through developing a course policy that aligns with the course learning goals and generative AI. These can be augmented to work across various contexts. Given the rapid advances in generative technologies, these recommendations will be regularly reviewed and updated.

Generative AI Course Policy Recommendations - Updated August 2025


Ethical Use

Instructors are encouraged to engage students in open conversations about academic integrity, the importance of authentic work and effort, and the potential benefits and drawbacks of these new tools in their specific learning contexts. This may include when use of tools requires citation and when it merely is serving a formatting, editing function. These specifics will vary by course, and specific learning goals, which further increases the need to explicitly communicate your expectations with your students throughout the semester.

Faculty should also consider the ethical use of generative AI in their own teaching practices. When instructors prohibit student use of AI but rely on it themselves, particularly without transparency, it can create confusion, erode trust, and undermine the values of academic integrity. Recent public cases have highlighted the risks of undisclosed AI use in course materials or instruction, leading to student complaints and reputational harm. If AI is used to enhance course development, assignment design, or feedback, it is advisable to be transparent with students by noting in the syllabus that “elements of this course have been optimized with GenAI” and providing any additional details as needed. Doing so models responsible and ethical use, aligns expectations, and reinforces the principles of honesty and accountability expected in the learning environment.


AI Detection

Detecting generative AI work, especially text based, is not reliably possible with technology. Therefore, prohibiting the use entirely is not practical, but restrictions and limits can be set to meet your learning goals.


Syllabus

As you update your syllabus, consider how your assessments and learning activities support your learning outcomes while preparing students for real-world application. Many instructors are moving toward more authentic and process-oriented approaches, such as case analyses, project-based tasks, data interpretation, peer feedback cycles, or staged assignments that document thinking over time.

These strategies not only deepen engagement but can also reduce reliance on high-stakes exams and increase opportunities for meaningful feedback.

With generative AI tools increasingly available to students, this is also an opportunity to clarify your expectations around their use. Faculty retain full control over how, or if, AI tools may be used in their course. Some instructors are choosing to help students build fluency with AI through structured activities. This includes using it to brainstorm, summarize complex texts, or compare AI-generated and human-written responses, while others may prohibit use entirely depending on the goals of the course. Whatever your stance, we recommend including a clear AI use statement in your syllabus to prevent confusion and uphold academic integrity. Thoughtful guidance in this area can help students navigate current technologies while still developing their own critical thinking and disciplinary expertise.

Example syllabus language on AI can be found here.