Teaching & Learning
- Student use of generative AI for academic work is governed at the instructor level
- Separately, the academic honesty code prohibits receiving or supplying unauthorized assistance on assignments
- Instructors may impose additional restrictions on AI use for student academic work, and students are to receive clear expectations and notice of disciplinary consequences for misuse
Instructors reserve the right to further restrict use of AI tools by students to complete academic work, in order to meet educational objectives. Students should be given clear and unambiguous expectations for use of AI tools, as well as awareness of disciplinary consequences of misuse.
The Student Academic Honesty Code applies to all students taking classes at Auburn University at Montgomery. It is designed to support the interests of the students and faculty, in maintaining honesty and integrity essential to an academic institution. Actions that violate this code include, but are not limited to, plagiarism and receiving or supplying unauthorized assistance on a class exam or assignment.
- The university does not publish an AI-specific examination rule in the provided sources
- However, the academic honesty code states that receiving or supplying unauthorized assistance on a class exam is a violation, so any AI use not authorized for an exam would fall under that general rule
The Student Academic Honesty Code applies to all students taking classes at Auburn University at Montgomery. It is designed to support the interests of the students and faculty, in maintaining honesty and integrity essential to an academic institution. Actions that violate this code include, but are not limited to, plagiarism and receiving or supplying unauthorized assistance on a class exam or assignment.
- The only student-use rule stated is that instructors may further restrict AI use for academic work
- The university's guidance discusses AI tools generally and advises caution about relying on their output, but it does not define a specific policy on student use for personal studying or non-graded learning support
Accuracy: Output of a public generative AI tool can be based on an almost endless array of tools, datasets, learning algorithms, and user inputs. Therefore, these tools may not in all cases produce accurate (or fully accurate) results within the context of your particular task. Caution should be exercised when relying on generative AI output, and a good practice is to treat AI tools as sources of ideas, rather than facts.
Instructors reserve the right to further restrict use of AI tools by students to complete academic work, in order to meet educational objectives.
- Student use for academic work remains subject to instructor discretion and to the academic honesty rule against unauthorized assistance
- The guidance identifies GitHub Copilot and AlphaCode as examples of public generative AI tools, but it does not set a separate university-wide rule for programming assignments
With the emergence and widespread availability of public generative AI tools (GPT-4, ChatGPT, AlphaCode, GitHub Copilot, Bard, DALL-E 2, to name a few), many members of our community are eager to explore their use in the university context
Instructors reserve the right to further restrict use of AI tools by students to complete academic work, in order to meet educational objectives. Students should be given clear and unambiguous expectations for use of AI tools, as well as awareness of disciplinary consequences of misuse.
The Student Academic Honesty Code applies to all students taking classes at Auburn University at Montgomery. It is designed to support the interests of the students and faculty, in maintaining honesty and integrity essential to an academic institution. Actions that violate this code include, but are not limited to, plagiarism and receiving or supplying unauthorized assistance on a class exam or assignment.
Research
- The provided guidance instead focuses on general data protection, privacy, accuracy, intellectual property, and review risks when using public generative AI
- The university notes that faculty research is among the contexts in which community members may wish to use AI tools, but it does not define a specific rule for drafting or editing research manuscripts
With the emergence and widespread availability of public generative AI tools (GPT-4, ChatGPT, AlphaCode, GitHub Copilot, Bard, DALL-E 2, to name a few), many members of our community are eager to explore their use in the university context (example uses could include student academic work, faculty research, admissions, employee recruitment, etc.).
Accuracy: Output of a public generative AI tool can be based on an almost endless array of tools, datasets, learning algorithms, and user inputs. Therefore, these tools may not in all cases produce accurate (or fully accurate) results within the context of your particular task. Caution should be exercised when relying on generative AI output, and a good practice is to treat AI tools as sources of ideas, rather than facts.
Intellectual Property: You may not own intellectual property rights to the output of a public generative AI tool, and it would be risky to use these tools to produce non-public or proprietary results.
- Public data may be used freely in public generative AI tools, subject to privacy and non-public-use restrictions
- The university prohibits using public generative AI tools with operational or confidential data unless specific legally binding data security protections and procedures are in place
Prohibited: Data defined as “operational data” or “confidential data” in the Data Classification Policy should never be shared with, submitted to, or used with a public generative AI tool in the absence of specific, legally binding data security protection agreements and procedures.
Allowable: “Public data” as defined in the Data Classification Policy may be used freely in public generative AI tools, subject to the following restrictions:
Users should have no expectation of privacy in data they input into public generative AI tools, or in output produced by the tool. In most cases, the tool retains the right to use any data you input or any output the tool produces. Accordingly, these tools should not be used to generate output intended for non-public use.
- The only applicable university guidance is general risk guidance on privacy, accuracy, intellectual property, and review of AI-generated output
- The provided sources do not define AI-specific rules for grant proposals, IRB applications, ethics declarations, or other research-integrity filings
Accuracy: Output of a public generative AI tool can be based on an almost endless array of tools, datasets, learning algorithms, and user inputs. Therefore, these tools may not in all cases produce accurate (or fully accurate) results within the context of your particular task. Caution should be exercised when relying on generative AI output, and a good practice is to treat AI tools as sources of ideas, rather than facts.
Bias: Public generative AI tool output may unintentionally produce biased, discriminatory, offensive, or otherwise undesirable results, especially if used in the context of admissions, recruitment, or disciplinary decision making. Again, use of these tools should be carefully reviewed before relying on results.
Academic Integrity
- It does require instructors to give students clear and unambiguous expectations for use of AI tools in academic work
- The university does not define a disclosure statement, citation format, or attribution requirement for AI use in the provided sources
Instructors reserve the right to further restrict use of AI tools by students to complete academic work, in order to meet educational objectives. Students should be given clear and unambiguous expectations for use of AI tools, as well as awareness of disciplinary consequences of misuse.
- The provided sources do not mention AI detection tools
- For enforcement, the university states that misuse of AI tools can have disciplinary consequences, and violations of the academic honesty code may be charged by any university community member with sanctions ranging from a zero on the assignment to expulsion
Students should be given clear and unambiguous expectations for use of AI tools, as well as awareness of disciplinary consequences of misuse.
A charge of violation of the academic honesty code can be made by any member of the university community. Sanctions can range from a zero on the assignment up to and including expulsion from the University.
Institutional & Administrative
- It does warn that AI outputs should be carefully reviewed before being relied upon, especially in admissions, recruitment, or disciplinary decision-making
- The guidance applies to multiple university contexts including faculty research, admissions, and employee recruitment, but it does not define detailed rules for grading, feedback, lesson planning, or recommendation letters
With the emergence and widespread availability of public generative AI tools (GPT-4, ChatGPT, AlphaCode, GitHub Copilot, Bard, DALL-E 2, to name a few), many members of our community are eager to explore their use in the university context (example uses could include student academic work, faculty research, admissions, employee recruitment, etc.).
Bias: Public generative AI tool output may unintentionally produce biased, discriminatory, offensive, or otherwise undesirable results, especially if used in the context of admissions, recruitment, or disciplinary decision making. Again, use of these tools should be carefully reviewed before relying on results.
- Any purchase or acquisition of an AI tool must comply with the Software Acquisition Policy
- AUM states that it does not currently deploy a private generative AI tool for institutional use
- Operational and confidential data must not be shared with public generative AI tools without specific legally binding protections; public data may be used subject to privacy and non-public-use restrictions
Current Auburn University at Montgomery Environment: AUM currently does not deploy a private generative AI tool for institutional use.
Prohibited: Data defined as “operational data” or “confidential data” in the Data Classification Policy should never be shared with, submitted to, or used with a public generative AI tool in the absence of specific, legally binding data security protection agreements and procedures.
Allowable: “Public data” as defined in the Data Classification Policy may be used freely in public generative AI tools, subject to the following restrictions:
Users should have no expectation of privacy in data they input into public generative AI tools, or in output produced by the tool. In most cases, the tool retains the right to use any data you input or any output the tool produces. Accordingly, these tools should not be used to generate output intended for non-public use.
Any purchase or acquisition of an AI tool must comply with the Software Acquisition Policy
- The university has issued joint advisory guidance on generative AI rather than a broader strategy document in the provided sources
- The guidance was established jointly by university IT, counsel, and compliance/privacy offices to help users identify and mitigate risks associated with AI tools
The following guidelines have been established jointly by the Auburn Office of Information Technology, Auburn University at Montgomery Information Technology Services, the Office of the General Counsel, and the Office of Audit, Compliance & Privacy to help you identify and mitigate risks associated with the use of AI tools:
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 Auburn University--Montgomery's AI Policies
Auburn University--Montgomery has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
The university does not define a disclosure statement, citation format, or attribution requirement for AI use in the provided sources. It does require instructors to give students clear and unambiguous expectations for use of AI tools in academic work.
The provided sources do not mention AI detection tools. For enforcement, the university states that misuse of AI tools can have disciplinary consequences, and violations of the academic honesty code may be charged by any university community member with sanctions ranging from a zero on the assignment to expulsion.
AUM states that it does not currently deploy a private generative AI tool for institutional use. Operational and confidential data must not be shared with public generative AI tools without specific legally binding protections; public data may be used subject to privacy and non-public-use restrictions. Any purchase or acquisition of an AI tool must comply with the Software Acquisition Policy.