Teaching & Learning
- Faculty may choose to permit AI use in a course, but students must follow the instructor's stated expectations and complete work in accordance with those requirements
- The university treats submitting AI-generated work as academic dishonesty when the work is presented as the student's own or used without explicit instructor authorization
Academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to:
1. submitting one’s own work previously submitted in another course unless explicitly permitted by the instructor; submitting someone else’s work as one’s own, whether in whole or in part, without proper citation; or submitting text generated by an artificial intelligence tool as one’s own, with or without modifications, unless explicitly authorized by the instructor.
Each faculty member is responsible for informing students of expectations and policies for student work in the course syllabus.
- Use of AI in exams or other formal assessments is not separately defined
- However, if AI-generated text is submitted as the student's own without explicit instructor authorization, it is treated as academic dishonesty, and faculty set course expectations in the syllabus
Academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to:
1. submitting one’s own work previously submitted in another course unless explicitly permitted by the instructor; submitting someone else’s work as one’s own, whether in whole or in part, without proper citation; or submitting text generated by an artificial intelligence tool as one’s own, with or without modifications, unless explicitly authorized by the instructor.
Each faculty member is responsible for informing students of expectations and policies for student work in the course syllabus.
Research
Academic Integrity
- The policy does not provide a separate university-wide AI citation format, but it makes instructor authorization central to acceptable use
- The university requires proper citation when using someone else's work and states that AI-generated text cannot be submitted as a student's own work unless the instructor explicitly authorizes it
Academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to:
1. submitting one’s own work previously submitted in another course unless explicitly permitted by the instructor; submitting someone else’s work as one’s own, whether in whole or in part, without proper citation; or submitting text generated by an artificial intelligence tool as one’s own, with or without modifications, unless explicitly authorized by the instructor.
- Undisclosed or unauthorized submission of AI-generated text is handled through the university's academic dishonesty process
- Instructors may assign penalties ranging from a reduced or failing grade on the work to course failure, and repeated or unresolved cases may be escalated for additional institutional action
Academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to:
1. submitting one’s own work previously submitted in another course unless explicitly permitted by the instructor; submitting someone else’s work as one’s own, whether in whole or in part, without proper citation; or submitting text generated by an artificial intelligence tool as one’s own, with or without modifications, unless explicitly authorized by the instructor.
A faculty member has the authority to assign an academic consequence for an act of academic dishonesty. Such consequences may range from a reduced grade on a work product to an F in the course.
When the consequences of an act of academic dishonesty are contested, or in cases where the Dean of Academic Affairs or the Dean of Students determines there may be a need for institutional sanctions beyond a failed course or workshop, the Dean of Academic Affairs and/or the Dean of Students may choose to forward the matter to the Academic Dishonesty Committee.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty are responsible for setting and communicating course expectations about student work, including AI-related expectations
- No separate policy was found governing faculty or staff use of AI for grading, feedback, lesson planning, recommendation letters, or administrative work
Each faculty member is responsible for informing students of expectations and policies for student work in the course syllabus.
DocuMark: Responsible AI Use for Academic Integrity
Knowing your institution's AI policy is step one. DocuMark helps enforce it fairly by empowering universities to manage AI-generated content, prevent cheating, and support student writing through responsible AI use.
Common Questions About Adams State University's AI Policies
Adams State University has defined AI policies in 5 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 42%.
The university requires proper citation when using someone else's work and states that AI-generated text cannot be submitted as a student's own work unless the instructor explicitly authorizes it. The policy does not provide a separate university-wide AI citation format, but it makes instructor authorization central to acceptable use.
Undisclosed or unauthorized submission of AI-generated text is handled through the university's academic dishonesty process. Instructors may assign penalties ranging from a reduced or failing grade on the work to course failure, and repeated or unresolved cases may be escalated for additional institutional action.
No explicit data protection or approved AI platform policy is currently defined in the available policy sources.