Teaching & Learning
- Use of AI on graded coursework is governed primarily by instructor discretion and syllabus rules
- The college states that unauthorized use of AI on exams, assignments, projects, or papers can be treated as academic dishonesty, while faculty are encouraged to specify whether and how generative AI may be used in their courses
The unauthorized use of Artificial Intelligence, such as ChatGPT, on exams, tests, assignments, projects, or papers is considered a violation of academic integrity when a faculty member expressly prohibits its use in the syllabus or the assignment.
Baruch faculty members should make a clear statement in the course syllabus and/or in the assignment itself about whether students are allowed to use ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) tools.
Faculty can decide whether to permit students to use AI tools in classes or on assignments and should let students know in the syllabus and assignment instructions if and how they can use them.
- If an instructor prohibits AI use, using it on exams or tests is an academic integrity violation
- AI use during exams and other formal assessments is not uniformly allowed; it depends on whether the instructor authorizes it
The unauthorized use of Artificial Intelligence, such as ChatGPT, on exams, tests, assignments, projects, or papers is considered a violation of academic integrity when a faculty member expressly prohibits its use in the syllabus or the assignment.
Faculty can decide whether to permit students to use AI tools in classes or on assignments and should let students know in the syllabus and assignment instructions if and how they can use them.
- At the same time, students are told to follow class-specific rules and to verify AI output rather than rely on it uncritically
- The college provides student-facing resources that frame AI as a tool students may use to support learning, such as understanding concepts, brainstorming, organizing ideas, and study support
Use AI as a starting point, not a final answer.
If your instructor allows it, AI can help you brainstorm, explain difficult concepts, create study guides, or practice skills.
Always review and revise AI output carefully.
Ask your professor if you’re unsure what’s allowed.
AI can be a useful tool for study and exploration, but it works best when paired with your own judgment, curiosity, and critical thinking.
Research
- The research materials provided focus on data security and review obligations rather than explicit AI rules for data analysis
- Researchers handling protected data must follow data security controls and institutional review requirements before using external tools or systems with sensitive research information
All Baruch College researchers are responsible for ensuring the security and confidentiality of the data they collect, generate, transmit, manipulate, store, retrieve, archive, and destroy.
The use of Cloud services (Box, Dropbox, Google Drive, Office365) to store, transmit, or process confidential or sensitive information, including PII, requires a review by Baruch’s Chief Information Officer.
Any changes to protocol procedures after IRB approval, including changes in study design, study personnel, recruitment procedures, informed consent process, etc., must be submitted to the IRB for review and approval before implementing the changes.
- The supplied research governance sources do not set an explicit AI-specific rule for grant proposals, IRB applications, or ethics declarations
- They do require IRB review for human-subjects research and prior approval for protocol changes, which would govern research procedures generally
The Baruch College Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviews all human subjects research projects conducted by Baruch faculty, staff, students, and researchers unaffiliated with Baruch.
Any changes to protocol procedures after IRB approval, including changes in study design, study personnel, recruitment procedures, informed consent process, etc., must be submitted to the IRB for review and approval before implementing the changes.
Academic Integrity
- Baruch does not impose a single universal disclosure rule for all student AI use; instead, disclosure expectations are tied to instructor direction
- Faculty are advised to tell students whether AI use is allowed and, in some cases, require students to submit the prompts they used or explain how they used AI
Baruch faculty members should make a clear statement in the course syllabus and/or in the assignment itself about whether students are allowed to use ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) tools.
You can permit students to use AI writing tools under certain conditions, such as asking them to submit the prompts they used and/or a subsequent paragraph reflecting on how they used the AI and critically evaluating what it suggested.
Faculty can decide whether to permit students to use AI tools in classes or on assignments and should let students know in the syllabus and assignment instructions if and how they can use them.
- Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use may be enforced through Baruch's academic integrity process when an instructor has prohibited such use
- The university materials provided do not establish a formal institutional policy endorsing AI-detection tools; instead, they emphasize faculty-set rules and standard misconduct procedures
The unauthorized use of Artificial Intelligence, such as ChatGPT, on exams, tests, assignments, projects, or papers is considered a violation of academic integrity when a faculty member expressly prohibits its use in the syllabus or the assignment.
As with any other form of academic dishonesty, cases in which students violate the rules that faculty establish around AI use should be considered under Baruch’s existing academic integrity policy and procedures.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty are given guidance to set course-level AI rules and to use care when adopting AI in teaching
- They are encouraged to be transparent with students, and they are cautioned against using AI for grading student work because of accuracy, fairness, and privacy concerns
Baruch faculty members should make a clear statement in the course syllabus and/or in the assignment itself about whether students are allowed to use ChatGPT or similar artificial intelligence (AI) tools.
Teachers should not use ChatGPT to grade student work, because of concerns about reliability and bias, not to mention FERPA concerns over entering student work into ChatGPT.
If an instructor is using AI, it should be explained to the students and a rationale given as to why its use would be an enhancement over previous methods.
- The provided sources do not name an officially approved AI platform, but they do impose data-protection conditions before sensitive information may be processed through third-party systems
- Baruch warns against entering student work into public AI systems because of FERPA concerns, and its research data guidance restricts use of external cloud services for confidential or sensitive information without institutional review
Teachers should not use ChatGPT to grade student work, because of concerns about reliability and bias, not to mention FERPA concerns over entering student work into ChatGPT.
The use of Cloud services (Box, Dropbox, Google Drive, Office365) to store, transmit, or process confidential or sensitive information, including PII, requires a review by Baruch’s Chief Information Officer.
Confidential or sensitive information should not be stored on personally owned devices or media unless advance written permission has been obtained from the Baruch College Chief Information Officer.
- Baruch has established an institutional AI governance and strategy structure through its Artificial Intelligence Think Tank
- The group is tasked with developing recommendations, resources, and guidance for the responsible use of AI in teaching, learning, scholarship, and administration
The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Think Tank is a university-wide initiative convened by the Office of the Provost to help the Baruch community navigate the opportunities and challenges posed by generative artificial intelligence.
The AI Think Tank’s mission is to develop recommendations, resources, and guidance to support the responsible and effective use of artificial intelligence in teaching, learning, scholarship, and administration.
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 CUNY Baruch College's AI Policies
CUNY Baruch College has defined AI policies in 10 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 83%.
Baruch does not impose a single universal disclosure rule for all student AI use; instead, disclosure expectations are tied to instructor direction. Faculty are advised to tell students whether AI use is allowed and, in some cases, require students to submit the prompts they used or explain how they used AI.
Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use may be enforced through Baruch's academic integrity process when an instructor has prohibited such use. The university materials provided do not establish a formal institutional policy endorsing AI-detection tools; instead, they emphasize faculty-set rules and standard misconduct procedures.
Baruch warns against entering student work into public AI systems because of FERPA concerns, and its research data guidance restricts use of external cloud services for confidential or sensitive information without institutional review. The provided sources do not name an officially approved AI platform, but they do impose data-protection conditions before sensitive information may be processed through third-party systems.