Teaching & Learning
- For graded academic work, CMU’s Academic Integrity policy requires students to produce their own original work and prohibits collaboration or assistance unless explicitly authorized by the course instructor(s)
- The Provost’s guidance clarifies that “unauthorized assistance” would include generative AI tools unless explicitly permitted by the instructor, and students are directed to rely on course syllabi and instructor expectations for what is acceptable
Academic credit awarded to an individual should represent the work of that individual. Therefore, students at Carnegie Mellon are expected to produce their own original academic work. Collaboration or assistance on academic work to be graded is not permitted unless explicitly authorized by the course instructor(s).
In any manner of presentation, it is the responsibility of each student to produce her/his own original academic work. Collaboration or assistance on academic work to be graded is not permitted unless explicitly authorized by the course instructor(s).
Unauthorized assistance refers to the use of sources of support that have not been specifically authorized in this policy statement or by the course instructor(s) in the completion of academic work to be graded.
Review CMU’s existing Academic Integrity Policy, which prohibits "unauthorized assistance," which would include generative AI tools unless explicitly permitted by the instructor.
Carefully review your course syllabi to understand what is and is not acceptable in each of your courses in terms of using generative AI tools in your coursework.
- The provided sources do not explicitly address generative AI use during exams; instead, the policy emphasizes that any assistance during graded work must be explicitly authorized by the instructor
- CMU’s Academic Integrity policy identifies specific exam-related misconduct (e.g., use of a proxy, copying) as examples of cheating, and applies academic integrity standards to academic work to be graded
Collaboration or assistance on academic work to be graded is not permitted unless explicitly authorized by the course instructor(s).
Examples of unauthorized assistance include but are not limited to:
Use of an alternate, stand-in or proxy during an examination.
Copying from the examination or work of another person or source.
- Beyond those services, any other sources of collaboration or assistance require specific instructor authorization when applied to graded work
- CMU’s Academic Integrity policy explicitly permits students to use assistance from named academic support centers unless a course instructor specifically prohibits it
Students may utilize the assistance provided by the Student Academic Success Center and the Academic Resource Center (CMU-Q) unless specifically prohibited by the course instructor(s).
Any other sources of collaboration or assistance must be specifically authorized by the course instructor(s).
- CMU’s Academic Integrity policy treats “electronic sources” as potential sources of unauthorized assistance for graded work unless authorized by the course instructor(s)
- The Provost’s guidance states that generative AI tools would fall under “unauthorized assistance” unless explicitly permitted by the instructor, which would apply to coding work when it is academic work to be graded
Unauthorized assistance refers to the use of sources of support that have not been specifically authorized in this policy statement or by the course instructor(s) in the completion of academic work to be graded. Such sources of support may include but are not limited to advice or help provided by another individual, published or unpublished written sources, and electronic sources.
Review CMU’s existing Academic Integrity Policy, which prohibits "unauthorized assistance," which would include generative AI tools unless explicitly permitted by the instructor.
Research
- This is framed as a safety and responsible-use expectation rather than a detailed research-method policy
- CMU’s AI safety guidance warns against using public AI tools with confidential research, and emphasizes using CMU-licensed and approved tools for data protection
Remember, these tools should only be used for general exploration. Never use public AI tools with student data, confidential research, or sensitive administrative tasks.
Remember, you should only use CMU-licensed and approved tools that require logging in with your Andrew userID and password. This ensures your data is protected under the university’s Computing and Information Security policies.
Academic Integrity
- CMU requires citation of all sources in graded academic work
- When collaboration or assistance is permitted by the instructor (or when using certain academic support services), students must acknowledge the collaboration or assistance within the submitted work (not separately or later)
In all academic work to be graded, the citation of all sources is required.
When collaboration or assistance is permitted by the course instructor(s) or when a student utilizes the services provided by the Student Academic Success Center and the Academic Resource Center (CMU-Q), the acknowledgement of any collaboration or assistance is likewise required. This citation and acknowledgement must be incorporated into the work submitted and not separately or at a later point in time.
The citation of all sources is required.
- CMU states that failing to acknowledge permitted collaboration or assistance can be the basis for charges (cheating, plagiarism, or unauthorized assistance) and that such charges are subject to disciplinary action, with procedures detailed in the Academic Integrity Actions Procedures
- CMU’s generative AI teaching FAQ cautions that AI detection tools can produce false positives/negatives or inconclusive results, and indicates instructors need more than a detection score to determine a policy violation; it also notes that evidence of AI use may be irrelevant unless a clear course policy defines AI use as unauthorized assistance
When collaboration or assistance is permitted by the course instructor(s), the acknowledgement of any collaboration or source of assistance is likewise required. Failure to do so is dishonest and is the basis for a charge of cheating, plagiarism, or unauthorized assistance. Such charges are subject to disciplinary action.
Procedures for dealing with allegations of these policy violations are detailed in the university’s Academic Integrity Actions Procedures, which are published in The WORD student handbook.
Academic integrity actions are outcomes imposed when any student violates the University Policy on Academic Integrity including cheating, plagiarism and unauthorized assistance.
In addition to false positives and false negatives, detection tools may often produce inconclusive results. A detection tool can provide an estimate of how much of a submission has the characteristics of AI-generated content, but the instructor will need to use more than just that number to decide whether the student violated the academic integrity policy.
Even very strong evidence that a student used AI may be irrelevant unless you have a clear academic integrity policy establishing that the student’s use of the AI tool constitutes “unauthorized assistance” in your course. Furthermore, research suggests that the use of detection tools may disproportionately impact English language learners.
Institutional & Administrative
- CMU also states instructors may prohibit student use of AI tools in their course and encourages transparency about such decisions
- CMU advises that when using generative AI tools for teaching and learning (including grading), faculty should ensure proper data management and FERPA compliance and consider whether the tool is CMU-licensed and FERPA compliant
When using tools for teaching and learning (and grading), proper data management and FERPA compliance are a must. First and foremost, consider whether or not the tool or system you are using has been licensed by CMU and is FERPA compliant.
As the instructor, you are allowed to prohibit the use of AI tools in your course.
If you choose to do so, make sure to be transparent about why you are not allowing their use
- CMU’s AI safety guidance directs users to use CMU-licensed and approved tools that require Andrew userID login to protect data under university policies
- CMU cautions that public/commercial genAI tools may use entered content for training and that CMU data privacy requirements may not be met; it also instructs users never to use public AI tools with student data, confidential research, or sensitive administrative tasks
Remember, you should only use CMU-licensed and approved tools that require logging in with your Andrew userID and password. This ensures your data is protected under the university’s Computing and Information Security policies.
Remember, these tools should only be used for general exploration. Never use public AI tools with student data, confidential research, or sensitive administrative tasks.
In public/commercial genAI tool environments, the content you enter will be used for training their models and CMU data privacy requirements will not be met.
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 Carnegie Mellon University's AI Policies
Carnegie Mellon University has defined AI policies in 9 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 75%.
CMU requires citation of all sources in graded academic work. When collaboration or assistance is permitted by the instructor (or when using certain academic support services), students must acknowledge the collaboration or assistance within the submitted work (not separately or later).
CMU states that failing to acknowledge permitted collaboration or assistance can be the basis for charges (cheating, plagiarism, or unauthorized assistance) and that such charges are subject to disciplinary action, with procedures detailed in the Academic Integrity Actions Procedures. CMU’s generative AI teaching FAQ cautions that AI detection tools can produce false positives/negatives or inconclusive results, and indicates instructors need more than a detection score to determine a policy violation; it also notes that evidence of AI use may be irrelevant unless a clear course policy defines AI use as unauthorized assistance.
CMU’s AI safety guidance directs users to use CMU-licensed and approved tools that require Andrew userID login to protect data under university policies. CMU cautions that public/commercial genAI tools may use entered content for training and that CMU data privacy requirements may not be met; it also instructs users never to use public AI tools with student data, confidential research, or sensitive administrative tasks.