Teaching & Learning
- AI use in coursework is allowed only within stated limits
- Nongenerative writing-check tools are allowed without citation
- Submitting AI-generated coursework as one’s own is prohibited as plagiarism, instructors may ban generative AI in a course, and when AI is allowed for developing writing or other coursework, its use must be acknowledged and cited
Submitting and representing course work generated by AI (ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.) as one’s own original work is a form of plagiarism and is a violation of academic integrity at AMBS.
1. There can be appropriate uses of generative AI, and these must be properly acknowledged and cited, as described below. Instructors may sometimes embed such uses into a given assignment. However, instructors may also explicitly ban the use of any generative AI tools in a given course, and students are expected to respect such boundaries.
2. If not explicitly banned by an instructor and unless otherwise noted, generative AI may be appropriately used for the development of writing or other course work. Examples include the development of outlines and the creation of diagrams.
3. All use of generative AI, including in the development process, must be acknowledged and cited.
4. Non-generative AI tools that check one’s writing are okay to use and do not require citation.
- AI use during assessments is addressed through the broader rules on unauthorized technology
- Using technological devices in testing settings when they are prohibited is not permitted, and using devices to gain unfair advantage is treated as cheating or inappropriate use of technology
● Cheating. Cheating happens when there is a deliberate effort to create an unfair academic advantage for the individual or a group. Cheating includes offenses such as:
● Using unauthorized sources or devices to obtain information required for tests, presentations, or reports
● Inappropriate uses of technology. These violate legal standards and/or the ethical norms of the AMBS community. This includes offenses such:
● Using information obtained through technological devices that gives the user unfair advantage and misrepresents the actual level of one’s knowledge or skills;
● Consulting technological devices in a setting in which they have been prohibited, e.g., in a testing or classroom environment.
- It also permits nongenerative tools that check writing without citation, and warns students that they remain responsible for submitted content
- The university permits some AI use to support learning-related development of coursework when the instructor has not banned it, but requires acknowledgment and citation of generative AI use
2. If not explicitly banned by an instructor and unless otherwise noted, generative AI may be appropriately used for the development of writing or other course work. Examples include the development of outlines and the creation of diagrams.
3. All use of generative AI, including in the development process, must be acknowledged and cited.
4. Non-generative AI tools that check one’s writing are okay to use and do not require citation.
6. Students should be aware of the potential for inaccuracies and biases in AI generated content; students are responsible for the content of assignments submitted.
Research
- The only explicit AI writing rule provided is the general plagiarism rule against presenting AI-generated work as one’s own without proper attribution
- The policy applies academic integrity expectations to research and scholarship broadly, but it does not provide a specific AI rule for drafting or editing research papers, theses, dissertations, or manuscripts
As a learning community, we count academic integrity as a specific expression of our Christian values, which guide the ways in which we complete our assignments or tasks, fulfill our responsibilities, teach, acquire knowledge, assess our work, carry out our research, present our scholarship and reports, and represent ourselves to those inside and beyond our community.
Plagiarism, the most common form of academic misconduct, results when writers, artists, or content developers present the ideas, language, or original work of another person or from generative AI as if they were their own without properly indicating the name of the original author and the original source of work.
- The university does not set an AI-specific rule for research data collection, analysis, or synthetic data
- It does state that research misconduct includes falsifying outcomes, making unsupported claims, harmful methods, and failures around consent
● Research misconduct. Failure to conduct research according to best practices of academic ethics leads to research misconduct. Research misconduct includes offenses such as:
● Fabricating or falsifying research outcomes;
● Asserting claims that are not substantiated in the evidence or documentation;
● Using research methods that do harm to people, animals, the community, and/or the environment; and
● Conducting research that fails to solicit and document appropriate consent from research subjects and/or exploits vulnerable population groups.
- Research integrity is governed through the general academic integrity policy for all members of the community
- The policy lists research misconduct categories, but it does not provide explicit AI-specific rules for grant proposals, IRB applications, or ethics declarations
The following definitions and procedures in the Academic Integrity Policy apply to all AMBS faculty, administrators, staff, and students.
● Research misconduct. Failure to conduct research according to best practices of academic ethics leads to research misconduct. Research misconduct includes offenses such as:
● Fabricating or falsifying research outcomes;
● Asserting claims that are not substantiated in the evidence or documentation;
● Claiming the work of another as your own (e.g. a faculty member must not claim the work of a student as their own);
● Using research methods that do harm to people, animals, the community, and/or the environment; and
● Conducting research that fails to solicit and document appropriate consent from research subjects and/or exploits vulnerable population groups.
Academic Integrity
- Disclosure of generative AI use is mandatory
- The university points users to Chicago Manual of Style guidance for citation examples
- All generative AI use, including use during development, must be acknowledged and cited, AI translation must also be acknowledged and cited, and both language versions must be submitted for translated work
1. There can be appropriate uses of generative AI, and these must be properly acknowledged and cited, as described below.
3. All use of generative AI, including in the development process, must be acknowledged and cited. Information on citation, including examples, can be found on the Chicago Manual of Style website.
b. Instructors may allow AI translation from a preferred language to English or other instances of limited use of an AI-translation tool for some assignments; any use of direct translation from an AI-tool must be acknowledged and cited.
c. In all cases of translated work, both versions of the assignment should be submitted.
Plagiarism, the most common form of academic misconduct, results when writers, artists, or content developers present the ideas, language, or original work of another person or from generative AI as if they were their own without properly indicating the name of the original author and the original source of work.
- The university uses automated originality checking in Moodle and states that professors are trained to recognize AI-related plagiarism
- Undisclosed or improper AI use can be treated as plagiarism or other misconduct, and plagiarism cases carry consequences under the Academic Integrity Policy
AMBS course papers are submitted through Moodle, which may automatically check for originality and plagiarism, including inappropriate uses of generative AI. Professors are also trained to recognize plagiarism, including use of AI.
Submitting and representing course work generated by AI (ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.) as one’s own original work is a form of plagiarism and is a violation of academic integrity at AMBS.
Because students frequently submit academic work, AMBS gives special attention to introducing this policy and training students to avoid academic misconduct during new student orientation.
Occurrences of plagiarism will result in a range of consequences as outlined in the Academic Integrity Policy.
Institutional & Administrative
- It does state that a faculty member must not claim a student’s work as their own
- The academic integrity policy applies to faculty, administrators, and staff as well as students, but it does not set specific AI rules for grading, feedback, lesson planning, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
The following definitions and procedures in the Academic Integrity Policy apply to all AMBS faculty, administrators, staff, and students.
● Research misconduct. Failure to conduct research according to best practices of academic ethics leads to research misconduct. Research misconduct includes offenses such as:
● Claiming the work of another as your own (e.g. a faculty member must not claim the work of a student as their own);
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 Ambassador University's AI Policies
Ambassador University has defined AI policies in 9 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 75%.
Disclosure of generative AI use is mandatory. All generative AI use, including use during development, must be acknowledged and cited, AI translation must also be acknowledged and cited, and both language versions must be submitted for translated work. The university points users to Chicago Manual of Style guidance for citation examples.
The university uses automated originality checking in Moodle and states that professors are trained to recognize AI-related plagiarism. Undisclosed or improper AI use can be treated as plagiarism or other misconduct, and plagiarism cases carry consequences under the Academic Integrity Policy.
No explicit data protection or approved AI platform policy is currently defined in the available policy sources.