Teaching & Learning
- Course-level rules govern AI use in graded coursework
- The academic catalog states that submitting AI-generated work is prohibited unless the instructor has explicitly permitted it, and the recommendations say faculty should specify AI permissions for each assignment and require independent work when assignments are meant to assess core skills
Faculty must explicitly state whether AI use is permitted or prohibited (or to what degree) for each assignment.
Assignments designed to assess skills that AI can replicate should be clearly identified as requiring independent work.
Artificial Intelligence. Submitting work generated by artificial intelligence when you are being assessed on that work and the instructor has not explicitly permitted the use of artificial intelligence.
- AI use in exams and other assessments is prohibited unless a faculty member authorizes it
- The recommendations also list writing exams with AI as a prohibited student use and suggest changing assignment and exam formats to reduce student AI use
2. Writing term papers, exams, or reports (including group work)
ProhibitedUses*
• use of any unauthorized assistance in taking quizzes, tests, or examinations;
• use of unauthorized assistance from an artificial intelligence;
• Professors may consider changing the format or administration of assignments and exams that decrease the ability for the students to use AI-models (i.e., more in-class, hand-written work)
- This guidance is framed as recommended examples rather than binding university-wide rules
- The recommendations permit students to use AI for study support activities such as brainstorming, vocabulary help, expanding notes, generating practice questions, using AI as a study tutor with existing notes, and getting started with research
Student AI Use Guidelines – examples of permitted and prohibited uses.
1. Brainstorming ideas and concepts
2. Assisting with vocabulary and word choice (like a thesaurus)
3. Expanding class notes with additional examples or explanations
4. Creating practice questions for exam preparation
5. Using as a study tutor with existing notes (e.g. anticipating exam questions while reviewing)
PermittedUses
6. Getting started with research
- This means programming-related AI use is not uniformly allowed and is restricted by assignment-level permission
- AI use for coding assignments is prohibited in the recommendations, and the broader academic policy treats AI-generated assessed work as impermissible unless an instructor explicitly allows it
3. Completing coding or math assignments
ProhibitedUses*
Assignments designed to assess skills that AI can replicate should be clearly identified as requiring independent work.
Artificial Intelligence. Submitting work generated by artificial intelligence when you are being assessed on that work and the instructor has not explicitly permitted the use of artificial intelligence.
Research
- Not defined for research papers, theses, dissertations, or scholarly manuscripts
- The available sources discuss student coursework and general academic integrity, but they do not set a specific AI policy for research manuscript drafting or editing
not defined
- Not defined for AI use in research data collection, analysis, statistical processing, synthetic data, or interpretation of results
- The catalog includes a general rule that data must be reported accurately, but it does not establish an AI-specific research data policy
not defined
- None of the provided sources contain explicit AI rules for those research governance contexts
- Not defined for AI use in grant proposals, IRB applications, research ethics declarations, or research integrity processes
not defined
Academic Integrity
- The catalog also treats unacknowledged AI use as plagiarism by requiring full and explicit acknowledgment of AI-derived material
- Students are required by the recommendations to disclose any AI assistance used in academic work at submission, including the extent and nature of that assistance, and to follow citation guidance such as APA or MLA
• Students must clearly disclose any AI assistance used in completing their academic work at the time of submission, including the extent and nature of that assistance. Style guides (APA, MLA, etc.) provide specific citation guidelines for disclosure of AI-use.
Plagiarism. The term “plagiarism” includes, but is not limited to, the use—by summary, paraphrase, or direct quotation—of the published or unpublished work of another person or artificial intelligence without full and explicit acknowledgment. It also includes the unacknowledged use of materials prepared by another agency or generated by artificial intelligence.
- Undisclosed AI use that violates course policy is treated as a breach of academic integrity
- The recommendations forbid relying solely on AI detection software for penalties and require discussion before any grade penalty, while the handbook and catalog describe sanctions, appeal rights, and university procedures for academic integrity violations, including those involving AI-generated content presented as original work
• Undisclosed use of AI in violation of course policies constitute a breach of academic integrity.
• No academic penalty may be imposed based solely on AI detection software results. If a student is suspected of prohibited AI-use, a discussion with the student should precede any grade penalty.
• Grade appeals related to AI use allegations follow the standard university grade appeal process.
Academic honesty is also expected of every student. Students who commit acts of academic dishonesty violate the University's academic integrity policies and will be sanctioned according to university procedures. Violations of academic integrity include, but are not limited to: giving or receiving unauthorized aid or unfair advantage for any form of academic work (“cheating”); copying the language, structure, ideas, and/or thoughts of another and presenting them as one's own or presenting AI-generated content as one's own original work (“plagiarism”);
A student who commits a second violation of academic honesty standards can ordinarily expect to be subject to an academic suspension for one or more semesters. A student who commits a third violation is ordinarily dismissed.
Institutional & Administrative
- The recommendations permit faculty to use AI for teaching support such as teaching editing and writing skills, demonstrating AI capabilities, creating cited case studies, and preparing lecture outlines or teaching materials
- They prohibit faculty from using AI for grading or automated feedback without human review, and they require faculty to disclose AI use in course materials, feedback, or grading when students would reasonably expect solely human work
Faculty AI Use Guidelines – examples of permitted and prohibited uses.
1. Using AI as an educational tool to teach editing, writing, and correction skills
2. Demonstrating AI capabilities and limitations as part of course content
3. Creating case studies or other content with a clear purpose (AI-generated work should be cited as such)
PermittedUses
4. Creating lecture outlines and other teaching materials
1. Using AI for grading student work or providing automated feedback without human review
2. Failing a student based solely on automated AI-detection programs.
• Faculty must disclose AI use in developing course materials, providing feedback, or assisting with grading whenever students would reasonably expect such work to be solely the product of the instructor's expertise and effort.
- The provided sources include general privacy and data protection references, but they do not set AI-specific platform approval or data-entry rules
- Not defined for approved AI platforms, data classification rules, or specific restrictions on what institutional information may be entered into AI tools
not defined
- AUBG has a stakeholder-developed set of AI policy recommendations, but the university explicitly states these are not official policy
- The materials describe an initiative in which students, faculty, and staff collaboratively developed recommendations and presented them to AUBG leadership for consideration and review
AI Aware Universities was an initiative that explored how artificial intelligence (AI) should be used in university settings. Its mission was to give students, faculty, and staff an equal voice in shaping policies on AI in education.
AUBG students, faculty, and staff worked together to develop a set of guidelines for the ethical use of AI in the university. Following the project completion, the final set of recommendations was presented to AUBG leadership for consideration and review. While these recommendations are not part of official AUBG policy, they offer deep insight, spark ideas and highlight the value of a deep democratic process involving all stakeholders in the university community.
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 American University in Bulgaria's AI Policies
American University in Bulgaria has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Students are required by the recommendations to disclose any AI assistance used in academic work at submission, including the extent and nature of that assistance, and to follow citation guidance such as APA or MLA. The catalog also treats unacknowledged AI use as plagiarism by requiring full and explicit acknowledgment of AI-derived material.
Undisclosed AI use that violates course policy is treated as a breach of academic integrity. The recommendations forbid relying solely on AI detection software for penalties and require discussion before any grade penalty, while the handbook and catalog describe sanctions, appeal rights, and university procedures for academic integrity violations, including those involving AI-generated content presented as original work.
Not defined for approved AI platforms, data classification rules, or specific restrictions on what institutional information may be entered into AI tools. The provided sources include general privacy and data protection references, but they do not set AI-specific platform approval or data-entry rules.