Teaching & Learning
- The policy also states that generative AI use must follow the usage policy for specific assignments as defined in the syllabus and/or communicated by the instructor
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy treats the unauthorized use of AI to generate content for assignments as cheating, and requires written authorization from the instructor for AI-generated assignment content
Cheating is the unauthorized use or attempted use of material, information, notes, study aids, devices, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, or communication during an academic exercise.
Using artificial intelligence tools to generate content for assignments or exams, including but not limited to language models or code generators, without written authorization from the instructor.
Any use of generative AI tools must be in line with the usage policy for specific assignments as defined in the course of the syllabus and/or communicated by the course instructor.
- The policy also lists generating entire exam responses using AI without authorization as an example of a substantial violation for which disciplinary sanctions may be sought
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy treats the unauthorized use of AI during exams as cheating and specifically identifies using AI tools to generate exam content without written instructor authorization as an example of cheating
Cheating is the unauthorized use or attempted use of material, information, notes, study aids, devices, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, or communication during an academic exercise.
Using artificial intelligence tools to generate content for assignments or exams, including but not limited to language models or code generators, without written authorization from the instructor.
generating entire assignments or exam responses using AI without authorization
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy does not define whether or how students may use AI for non-graded study support (e.g., tutoring or concept explanation) outside an academic exercise
- A campus guidance page (City Tech) includes general AI literacy advice and states that users should confirm accuracy and check outputs for bias, but it does not define a systemwide student study-assistance permission rule
Cheating is the unauthorized use or attempted use of material, information, notes, study aids, devices, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, or communication during an academic exercise.
Confirm the accuracy of the output provided by Generative AI tools. It is possible for content to be inaccurate, biased or entirely fabricated.
Check the output of AI tools for bias. You must consider whether the data input into, and the output of, AI tools produces decisions that may result in unequal impact to individuals based on their protected classifications under law.
- It also states generative AI use must align with the usage policy for specific assignments as defined in the syllabus and/or communicated by the course instructor
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy explicitly includes code generators in its examples of AI tools and states that using AI tools (including code generators) to generate content for assignments or exams without written instructor authorization is cheating
Using artificial intelligence tools to generate content for assignments or exams, including but not limited to language models or code generators, without written authorization from the instructor.
Any use of generative AI tools must be in line with the usage policy for specific assignments as defined in the course of the syllabus and/or communicated by the course instructor.
Research
- CUNY’s systemwide Academic Integrity Policy addresses AI in the context of academic exercises (e.g., assignments/exams) but does not define rules for using AI to draft or edit research manuscripts, theses, or dissertations
- A campus guidance document (Baruch) states that AI outputs must be confirmed by human critical thinkers before using it in research and that the key guideline is to disclose AI use, but it is presented as campus guidance rather than a CUNY-wide research-writing policy
Cheating is the unauthorized use or attempted use of material, information, notes, study aids, devices, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, or communication during an academic exercise.
The key guideline for the use of generative AI is a simple one: disclose.
Thus AI outputs must be confirmed by human critical thinkers before using it in operations, teaching, learning, or research.
- CUNY’s systemwide Academic Integrity Policy does not define rules for AI use in research data collection or analysis
- Campus guidance (Baruch) states institutional data may not be used with generative AI platforms outside of the CUNY CoPilot environment, and also states AI outputs must be confirmed by human critical thinkers before using it in research
Similarly, institutional data may not be used with Gen AI platforms outside of the CUNY CoPilot environment.
Thus AI outputs must be confirmed by human critical thinkers before using it in operations, teaching, learning, or research.
- Campus guidance (Baruch) includes an expectation of disclosure and human confirmation of AI outputs before use in research, but it is presented as guidelines for a specific campus
- CUNY’s systemwide Academic Integrity Policy addresses academic dishonesty in academic exercises and includes AI-based generation of assignment/exam content without authorization as cheating, but it does not define AI-specific research ethics rules for IRB applications, grant proposals, or research integrity declarations
Cheating is the unauthorized use or attempted use of material, information, notes, study aids, devices, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, or communication during an academic exercise.
The key guideline for the use of generative AI is a simple one: disclose.
Thus AI outputs must be confirmed by human critical thinkers before using it in operations, teaching, learning, or research.
Academic Integrity
- Separately, campus-level guidance (Baruch and City Tech) explicitly requires disclosure of AI-generated content or AI-derived work product, framing disclosure as a key guideline and requiring transparency when relying on AI output
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy requires written instructor authorization for using AI tools to generate content for assignments or exams, and states generative AI use must follow the usage policy for specific assignments in the syllabus and/or communicated by the instructor
Using artificial intelligence tools to generate content for assignments or exams, including but not limited to language models or code generators, without written authorization from the instructor.
Any use of generative AI tools must be in line with the usage policy for specific assignments as defined in the course of the syllabus and/or communicated by the course instructor.
The key guideline for the use of generative AI is a simple one: disclose.
Disclose that content was generated by AI while providing details when appropriate (for example, the prompts used to generate content).
You must disclose materials and work product that is based on or derives from the use of AI. Always be transparent if you are relying on the output of an AI tool
- A campus guidance page (Lehman) states it is not appropriate to use AI detection tools as the sole means of identifying unoriginal work
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy states academic dishonesty is prohibited and identifies penalties including academic and disciplinary sanctions
- It also requires that each college subscribe to an electronic plagiarism detection service and notify students that it is available for faculty use
Academic dishonesty is prohibited in The City University of New York. Penalties for academic dishonesty include academic sanctions, such as failing or otherwise reduced grades, and/or disciplinary sanctions, including suspension or expulsion.
Each college shall subscribe to an electronic plagiarism detection service and shall notify students of the fact that such a service is available for use by the faculty.
The Office of Online Education does not feel it is appropriate to use such tools as the sole means of identifying unoriginal work.
Institutional & Administrative
- CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy focuses on student academic dishonesty and does not define faculty/staff AI-use rules for grading, feedback, lesson planning, or administrative work
- Campus guidance (Baruch and City Tech) addresses administrative decision-making and advises disclosure when AI is used for decision-making, and also requires human confirmation/accuracy checking of AI outputs before use in operations
Disclose if AI was used to aid in decision-making, including the platform, prompt, and date.
Thus AI outputs must be confirmed by human critical thinkers before using it in operations, teaching, learning, or research.
Generative AI tools such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, Stability AI’s Stable Diffusion and others, are being embraced across disciplines for different learning goals, teaching methods and administrative decision-making.
Confirm the accuracy of the output provided by Generative AI tools. It is possible for content to be inaccurate, biased or entirely fabricated.
- City Tech guidance instructs users not to input confidential, personally identifiable, or sensitive information into AI tools, and advises checking the privacy policy of the tool before use
- Campus guidance (Baruch) states that Baruch uses CoPilot as its default generative AI tool because data input by CUNY users will not be shared beyond the CUNY environment, and it states institutional data may not be used with generative AI platforms outside of the CUNY CoPilot environment
Baruch College uses CoPilot as its default generative AI tool because, as specified in the CUNY Microsoft 365 contract, CoPilot will not share data input by CUNY users beyond the CUNY environment.
Similarly, institutional data may not be used with Gen AI platforms outside of the CUNY CoPilot environment.
Do not input confidential, personally identifiable or sensitive information
Always check the privacy policy of the tool you are using before using it.
- CUNY-wide governance and strategy for AI is not defined in the provided system policy document, but campus-level governance is described in at least one campus guidance document
- Baruch’s guidance states it was developed by a governance subcommittee and is a living document that will be updated as AI technology evolves, and City Tech’s site references an AI taskforce
Developed by the AI Think Tank Governance and Operations Subcommittee with input of the campus community
Note: Guidelines will be updated as AI technology evolves. Thus, this is a living document.
Update August 19, 2025
AI Taskforce Members
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 City University of New York's AI Policies
City University of New York has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy requires written instructor authorization for using AI tools to generate content for assignments or exams, and states generative AI use must follow the usage policy for specific assignments in the syllabus and/or communicated by the instructor. Separately, campus-level guidance (Baruch and City Tech) explicitly requires disclosure of AI-generated content or AI-derived work product, framing disclosure as a key guideline and requiring transparency when relying on AI output.
CUNY’s Academic Integrity Policy states academic dishonesty is prohibited and identifies penalties including academic and disciplinary sanctions. It also requires that each college subscribe to an electronic plagiarism detection service and notify students that it is available for faculty use. A campus guidance page (Lehman) states it is not appropriate to use AI detection tools as the sole means of identifying unoriginal work.
Campus guidance (Baruch) states that Baruch uses CoPilot as its default generative AI tool because data input by CUNY users will not be shared beyond the CUNY environment, and it states institutional data may not be used with generative AI platforms outside of the CUNY CoPilot environment. City Tech guidance instructs users not to input confidential, personally identifiable, or sensitive information into AI tools, and advises checking the privacy policy of the tool before use.