Teaching & Learning
- CMU does not set one uniform rule for all coursework; faculty are directed to state assignment-level expectations about whether AI is permitted, limited, required, or prohibited
- University sample syllabus language says submitting AI-generated work as one's own is prohibited, while some program-specific rules are stricter, including a Counseling Program ban on using AI to complete required assignments
Students may encounter very different expectations across their courses. Clearly communicate whether AI is permitted, limited, required, or prohibited for each major assignment.
A general syllabus statement provides an important foundation, but expectations may differ from one assignment to another. For each major assignment, clearly identify:
* Whether AI use is permitted
* Which types of AI use are acceptable
* Which uses are not permitted
* Which parts must be completed independently
* How students should acknowledge AI use
* What students remain responsible for verifying
* What students should do when they are unsure
An example of a statement might say:
AI use for this assignment: You may use generative AI to brainstorm possible topics and receive feedback on the organization of your draft. You may not use AI to write the final response, generate sources, or complete the analysis. You are responsible for verifying all information and briefly describing how you used AI when you submit your work.
Generating Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and platforms (e.g., ChatGPT, Google AI, Boost.ai, Jasper, etc.) are new technological additions to the higher education landscape and are rapidly evolving. Submitting text and other products generated by AI tools and platforms as your own original work is prohibited and a violation of CMU’s Academic Integrity policy.
If the use of AI tools and platforms is appropriate within the context of a course, guidance on properly utilizing them, and appropriate methods of citation for direct quotations, ideas, diagrams, code, or paraphrased text generated through AI will be provided by your instructor.
The CMU Counseling Program prohibits the use of artificial intelligence to complete required assignments. The CMU Counseling Program considers the use of artificial intelligence to complete required assignments to be plagiarism and a violation of the Central Michigan University Code of Conduct for Academic Integrity, the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics (G.5.b), the American School Counseling Association Code of Ethics and the National Association for Drug and Alcohol Counselors Code of Ethics.
- University-wide teaching guidance tells faculty to set assignment-level AI expectations, but the only explicit exam rule in the provided sources is program-specific
- The CEH graduate student statement says using AI during exams, quizzes, take-home quizzes, timed tests, proctored exams, or closed-book assessments is inappropriate when not allowed
Students may encounter very different expectations across their courses. Clearly communicate whether AI is permitted, limited, required, or prohibited for each major assignment.
• Using AI during exams/quizzes when not allowed
• Asking AI to answer take-home quizzes, timed tests, proctored exams, or “closed-book” assessments.
- CMU allows AI to support learning when used as an aid rather than a substitute for student thinking, and this varies by course or program context
- The CEH graduate statement expressly permits uses such as exploring ideas, organizing thoughts, improving clarity, simplifying complex text for comprehension, and translating one's own notes, while requiring students to verify information
Artificial intelligence (AI) tools (such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, or Copilot) are increasingly common in academic and professional settings. In our graduate programs, AI may be used to support learning, but it does not replace your thinking, reflection, writing, or professional judgment.
3. Use AI to learn, not to shortcut. AI may help you explore ideas, organize thoughts, or improve clarity, but it may not replace genuine effort.
4. Check accuracy and bias. AI can be wrong, misleading, or biased. You are responsible for verifying all information.
• Translate your own notes or simplify complex text for comprehension.
AI can also be intentionally integrated into assignments. Students might be asked to:
* Critique an AI-generated response
* Correct inaccurate information
* Identify bias or missing perspectives
* Compare AI output with scholarly sources
* Revise generated content using disciplinary criteria
* Test how different prompts affect the response
* Reflect on when AI was helpful or unhelpful
In these activities, the learning comes from the student’s evaluation, judgment, and revision, not from the generated response alone.
- CMU does not provide a university-wide standalone programming rule in the provided sources
- Instead, sample syllabus guidance says AI-generated code may be used only when an instructor authorizes it and provides guidance on proper citation, so expectations are at instructor discretion
If the use of AI tools and platforms is appropriate within the context of a course, guidance on properly utilizing them, and appropriate methods of citation for direct quotations, ideas, diagrams, code, or paraphrased text generated through AI will be provided by your instructor.
Research
- For theses and dissertations, CMU permits some AI use such as editing, but not as a replacement for original thought
- Students must obtain committee chair permission before using GenAI, must cite all sections where it was used, and must include an appendix acknowledgment describing when and how specific tools were used or explicitly state that no GenAI tools were used
• The work in a thesis or dissertation is understood to be original, independent, and ethically conducted. CMU considers GenAI tools to be useful in some situations (e.g. editing) but not appropriate as a replacement for original thought.
• Before using GenAI tools, students are expected to obtain permission from their committee chair. If the chair agrees any usage is appropriate, the specific GenAI tool(s) should be defined (e.g. MS Copilot).
• Citation of AI: Students are required to cite the use of GenAI tools for all sections of the thesis or dissertation where the tool was used.
• Acknowledgement of AI in the Appendix: In the Appendix of the Thesis or Dissertation, students must write an AI Acknowledgement following the guidelines at CMU Libraries Research Guides, https://libguides.cmich.edu/ai_libraries/citation. Details on when and how specific AI tools were used in the research and writing process needs to be described. If a student has not used an GenAI tools to complete their thesis/dissertation, they need to explicitly make this assertion.
- CMU does not provide detailed rules in the provided sources about using AI for research data analysis methods themselves
- The sources do, however, require protection of sensitive or confidential scholarly data and subject students to CMU data stewardship rules when using generative AI in research contexts
• An additional consideration before using generative AI is the risk of uploading sensitive or confidential scholarly data that are subject to ethical or legal requirements. Students are subject to all guidelines and policies from CMU OIT including but not limited to policy 3-30 Data Stewardship that outlines three classifications of data that require varying levels of protection.
CMU encourages all users to begin with the question “What kind of data am I working with?” and then choose tools that are approved and appropriate for that level of sensitivity.
The guidance below is designed to help you make informed, responsible choices that balance innovation with care. Please use this as a reference when deciding what types of data can be used within certain AI tools.
- CMU's research misconduct policy does not mention AI specifically, but it applies to research proposed, performed, reviewed, or reported for publication, grants, theses, dissertations, and similar work
- In the provided AI-related research guidance, fabrication, falsification, fake citations, made-up statistics, and failure to protect records or follow required protocols are treated as integrity concerns, and misuse of AI may therefore fall under existing research misconduct and academic integrity processes depending on the context
I. Research Misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
CMU also defines Research Misconduct to include: misappropriation of funds pertaining to research; improper assignment of authorship or inventorship; failure to appropriately collect, maintain or protect Research Records; or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted by members of the wider relevant research discipline for proposing, conducting or reporting research and creative endeavors, including but not limited to failure to receive approval from, or failure to adhere to protocols approved by the CMU Institutional Review Board (“IRB”), Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (“IACUC”), or Institutional Biosafety Committee (“IBC”).
2. This policy shall apply to students involved in the following research and creative endeavors:
a. Those conducted jointly with a CMU faculty or staff member or with any person from another university.
b. Those externally funded under a grant or contract to CMU or internally funded by CMU.
c. Those expected (imminently or eventually) to be published, presented, or shared with the broader academic community outside the student’s classroom.
d. Those done in conjunction with a thesis or dissertation, and
e. Those done in conjunction with a graduate Plan B paper, which also satisfy 2.a, 2.b, or 2.c above.
• Fabricating or falsifying sources/data.
• Invented citations (fake articles, fake DOIs, fake quotes).
• AI-generated “evidence” or made-up statistics.
Academic Integrity
- CMU requires transparency about AI use where AI is permitted or used in graduate research
- A CEH graduate statement also requires students to disclose how and when AI was used, identify the program used, and provide prompts and outputs as a separate appendix
- Course guidance says instructors should specify how students must acknowledge AI, and graduate thesis/dissertation rules require citation of AI use and an appendix acknowledgment
Transparency and academic integrity: Be explicit about when and how AI is used; model proper attribution.
A general syllabus statement provides an important foundation, but expectations may differ from one assignment to another. For each major assignment, clearly identify:
* Whether AI use is permitted
* Which types of AI use are acceptable
* Which uses are not permitted
* Which parts must be completed independently
* How students should acknowledge AI use
* What students remain responsible for verifying
* What students should do when they are unsure
When students are permitted or required to use AI, ask them to describe how the tool contributed to their work. A short acknowledgment might include:
* The tool used
* The purpose for using it
* The prompts or types of questions submitted
* What information or suggestions were used
* What was revised, rejected, or verified
* How the student remained responsible for the final work
• Citation of AI: Students are required to cite the use of GenAI tools for all sections of the thesis or dissertation where the tool was used.
• Acknowledgement of AI in the Appendix: In the Appendix of the Thesis or Dissertation, students must write an AI Acknowledgement following the guidelines at CMU Libraries Research Guides, https://libguides.cmich.edu/ai_libraries/citation. Details on when and how specific AI tools were used in the research and writing process needs to be described. If a student has not used an GenAI tools to complete their thesis/dissertation, they need to explicitly make this assertion.
2. Be transparent. Always disclose when and how you used AI. Do not submit AI-generated content as if you wrote it.
Citing expectations for generative AI use:
Provide a list of responses to each of the following:
• How was AI used? For example, to generate content, to brainstorm, to aid in your comprehension of the reading, to create content, to draft a response, etc.
• What AI program did you use?
• Provide the output produced by AI (including the prompt) and used in your assignment preparation. Submit as a separate appendix to the assignment.
• The point is to demonstrate how you have used generative AI in preparing the assignment. If generative AI was used to produce a draft, the instructor should be able to see how you have changed that draft.
- Program-specific CEH guidance states misuse of AI is treated as an academic integrity issue and repeated or serious misuse may lead to assignment failure or further consequences
- For theses and dissertations, committee chairs are asked to run iThenticate similarity and AI reports, discuss both reports with students, and OGS states the AI report has limitations and is not reviewed by OGS
- CMU cautions against treating AI detection tools as proof and says suspected misuse should be handled through review of assignment-specific evidence, conversation with the student, and existing academic integrity procedures
Suspected AI use can be difficult to evaluate. AI detection tools and writing patterns should not be treated as definitive evidence on their own. Begin by reviewing the assignment expectations, the student's other work, earlier drafts or related assignments, sources and citations, and, when possible, the document history.
If concerns remain after speaking with the student, focus on specific evidence connected to the assignment and follow current CMU academic integrity procedures. Avoid deciding based only on AI detection scores, a sudden change in writing style, unusually polished language, or assumptions about what a student is capable of producing. These factors may raise questions, but they do not, by themselves, establish inappropriate AI use.
AI detection tools may produce false positives and false negatives. Their results can be affected by writing style, language background, revision, and the type of content being analyzed.
Detection results should not be treated as proof. At most, they may serve as one piece of information that prompts further review and conversation.
B. Ask your committee chair to run your document through iThenticate 2.0 to generate a plagiarism report and an AI report well before your oral defense.
• OGS expects committee chairs to discuss both reports with students. Note the AI report has limitations and is available to facilitate discussions between chairs and students but is not reviewed by OGS.
Academic Integrity
Misuse of AI is treated as an academic integrity issue. Concerns will be handled thoughtfully and fairly, beginning with conversation and education. Repeated or serious misuse may result in assignment failure or further consequences according to university policy.
Institutional & Administrative
- CMU provides faculty-facing guidance rather than hard university-wide mandates for teaching uses of AI
- Faculty are encouraged to make intentional decisions about AI in courses, communicate clear syllabus and assignment expectations, provide alternatives when AI use is required, and avoid using third-party AI detection tools when privacy, copyright, or data security concerns exist
The Office of Curriculum and Instructional Support (CIS) provides resources to help faculty make intentional decisions about AI in their courses. Explore guidance for developing course and assignment-level AI expectations, designing assignments for an AI-enabled learning environment, supporting academic integrity, building student AI literacy, and using AI to support teaching, learning, and course design.
Provide clear guidance on acceptable use including syllabus statements and assignment directions.
When AI use is required, provide an appropriate alternative for students who cannot use the selected tool or prefer not to.
Faculty should avoid submitting student work to third-party detection tools when doing so could create privacy, copyright, or data security concerns.
- The AI data security chart permits consumer or enterprise AI tools for public or nonsensitive information, subject to output review
- CMU requires use of institutionally approved tools for university data and says consumer tools are generally only for public data unless covered by an enterprise agreement
- Regulated data must not be entered into generative AI tools unless explicitly approved for that classification, and users are directed to choose tools appropriate to the sensitivity of the data
Use institutionally approved tools when working with university data; consumer tools are typically for public data only unless covered by an enterprise agreement.
Do not input regulated data (e.g., HIPAA, CUI, PCI) into generative AI tools unless the tool is explicitly approved for that classification.
The following CMU policies provide the foundation for responsible, secure, and ethical use of artificial intelligence technologies. Community members are expected to follow these policies whenever using AI tools in teaching, learning, research, or administrative work.
The Data Stewardship Policy establishes responsibilities for protecting university information and classifies institutional data as Public, Protected, or Restricted. The policy emphasizes safeguarding sensitive information and prohibits entering institutional data into generative AI systems without proper prior written approval.
The Responsible Use of Computing Policy governs the use of CMU computing, networking, and telecommunications resources. It establishes expectations for appropriate and lawful use of university technology, protection of privacy, security of user credentials, and responsible management of university data. Users may not upload CMU data to generative AI systems without prior written approval.
CMU encourages all users to begin with the question “What kind of data am I working with?” and then choose tools that are approved and appropriate for that level of sensitivity.
Public/nonsensitive | Information that is intentionally made public or carries no reasonable expectation of privacy or confidentiality. Disclosure poses little to no risk to individuals or the university. | Published web content, publicly available reports, de-identified examples, general concepts. | May use consumer or enterprise tools such as Copilot, Gemini, ChatGPT or other generative AI apps. Review outputs for accuracy, bias, IP, and reputational impact.
- CMU has an institution-level AI governance and strategy framework centered on the AI Resource Hub, draft policy principles, and cross-divisional workgroups from the Embracing AI at CMU Go Grant
- Its stated principles emphasize student-centered learning, equity and accountability, privacy and data security, transparency and academic integrity, and sustainability and assessment, with future policy development still underway
Artificial intelligence is changing how we work, teach, learn, and conduct research. CMU provides resources to help students, faculty, and staff explore AI thoughtfully and responsibly. Use the resources below to find guidance for teaching and learning, research and information literacy, and safe and responsible AI use.
CMU’s use of AI is grounded in institutional policies and the recommendations of the cross-divisional workgroups of the Embracing AI at CMU Go Grant. Draft policy principles emphasize academic integrity, data privacy and security, compliance with applicable laws, role specific guidance, and university community education.
Core principles
* Student-centered learning and career readiness: AI should enhance learning and prepare graduates for an AI-rich workplace.
* Equity and accountability: Provide equitable access to AI education and tools, with clear expectations for use.
* Privacy and data security: Institutional data stewardship and regulatory compliance are nonnegotiable.
* Transparency and academic integrity: Be explicit about when and how AI is used; model proper attribution.
* Sustainability and assessment: Support with governance, staffing, and evaluation to ensure continuous improvement.
## Future policy development
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 Central Michigan University's AI Policies
Central Michigan University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
CMU requires transparency about AI use where AI is permitted or used in graduate research. Course guidance says instructors should specify how students must acknowledge AI, and graduate thesis/dissertation rules require citation of AI use and an appendix acknowledgment. A CEH graduate statement also requires students to disclose how and when AI was used, identify the program used, and provide prompts and outputs as a separate appendix.
CMU cautions against treating AI detection tools as proof and says suspected misuse should be handled through review of assignment-specific evidence, conversation with the student, and existing academic integrity procedures. For theses and dissertations, committee chairs are asked to run iThenticate similarity and AI reports, discuss both reports with students, and OGS states the AI report has limitations and is not reviewed by OGS. Program-specific CEH guidance states misuse of AI is treated as an academic integrity issue and repeated or serious misuse may lead to assignment failure or further consequences.
CMU requires use of institutionally approved tools for university data and says consumer tools are generally only for public data unless covered by an enterprise agreement. Regulated data must not be entered into generative AI tools unless explicitly approved for that classification, and users are directed to choose tools appropriate to the sensitivity of the data. The AI data security chart permits consumer or enterprise AI tools for public or nonsensitive information, subject to output review.