Teaching & Learning
- DePaul leaves student AI use in coursework and assignments to instructor and course-level discretion
- Faculty may allow or encourage AI in class activities and assignments, and syllabi should state how students may or may not use AI
- If a course-specific policy is absent, the general academic integrity policy applies, including the rule against submitting AI-produced work as one’s own
• Use of AI in classes: Faculty have the discretion to allow or encourage students to use AI in class activities and/or assignments. Course syllabi should make clear how students may or may not use AI in class-related work. You can view some sample syllabus statements here. In the absence of a course-specific AI policy, the general Academic Integrity and Research Misconduct policies apply.
• Submitting a work product prepared by someone else (e.g., Generative Artificial Intelligence, research papers purchased from another person, website, paper mill, etc.) as one’s own work.
- This means AI use in exams or quizzes is governed by whether the instructor or university authorizes it
- DePaul does not set an AI-specific exam rule in the provided sources, but unauthorized assistance or unauthorized materials during exams and quizzes are prohibited under the academic integrity policy
Any action that violates University norms or instructor guidelines for the preparation and submission of assignments. This includes, but is not limited to:
• Having someone take an exam or complete an assignment in one’s place.
• Unauthorized accessing of exam materials.
• Accessing, using or possessing unauthorized materials during exams or quizzes.
- DePaul advises students to check with their instructors before using AI tools for learning assistance
- University guidance for faculty provides sample syllabus statements that illustrate how an instructor might permit limited uses like brainstorming, outlining, or checking grammar, and how they could require disclosure
Students should always check with instructors before using any AI tools.
[From faculty guidance:] You can view some sample syllabus statements here. [Example syllabus statement:]
The use of generative AI tools is permitted in this course for the following activities:
* Brainstorming ideas
* Fine tuning your research questions
* Exploring what you need to learn about your topics
* Drafting outlines
* Checking grammar
If you use generative AI in any of the above ways, please describe the tools you used, and how you used them, in a paragraph at the end of your discussion post or essay. Please include the prompts you provided to the generative AI tools.
- DePaul does not provide a separate university-wide rule for AI code generation in programming assignments in the provided sources
- The institution notes that AI can generate computer code and states that faculty control whether AI is allowed in class activities and assignments, with course syllabi expected to specify permitted use
AI enables users to generate content – including text, computer code, images, music, etc. --- from a far broader base of information than ever before.
• Use of AI in classes: Faculty have the discretion to allow or encourage students to use AI in class activities and/or assignments. Course syllabi should make clear how students may or may not use AI in class-related work.
Research
- The materials do state that AI outputs used as sources should be cited appropriately and that AI should not stand in for a student's own work
- DePaul does not define a specific university-wide policy for using AI to draft or edit research papers, theses, dissertations, or manuscripts in the provided sources
In this way, content generated by AI is a “source” and should be cited appropriately; the policy is in the process of being updated to include AI as an example of a type of source that must be cited and cannot stand in for the student’s own work.
Always double-check what they give you, especially if you’re using it for research, teaching, or decision-making.
- DePaul does not set AI-specific rules for research data analysis or synthetic data generation in the provided sources
- However, university data used with AI tools must go through a security review and comply with the data policy, and research data stored by DePaul must be stewarded and protected under applicable laws, agreements, and DePaul standards
If you would like to use any university data with AI tools, it must go through a Security review. It also must comply with the Access to and Responsible Use of Data Policy.
For research conducted by DePaul employees or students, wherein DePaul stores the data, the research Principal Investigator or responsible project faculty member or staff person shall be considered the Data Steward. Protection of this data shall be performed according to all applicable laws, project contractual agreements and DePaul protection standards.
- DePaul says that, where no course-specific AI policy exists, the general Academic Integrity and Research Misconduct policies apply
- The provided sources do not define specific AI rules for grant proposals, IRB applications, or formal research ethics declarations
In the absence of a course-specific AI policy, the general Academic Integrity and Research Misconduct policies apply.
Academic Integrity
- DePaul requires transparency and citation when AI is used
- University materials state that students and faculty should disclose AI use, that AI-generated content should be cited like other sources, and that some course policies may require students to document the tool used, how it was used, and the prompts provided
When using AI tools, make sure to disclose and use citations. Students and faculty should be clear about the use of AI tools in the classroom.
• Citations: When in doubt, cite the AI source like any other.
In this way, content generated by AI is a “source” and should be cited appropriately; the policy is in the process of being updated to include AI as an example of a type of source that must be cited and cannot stand in for the student’s own work.
When permitted, students must document and credit the AI tool. For example, paraphrased text generated using ChatGPT should include a citation according to APA, MLA, or Chicago Style generative AI citation guidelines.
If you use generative AI in any of the above ways, please describe the tools you used, and how you used them, in a paragraph at the end of your discussion post or essay. Please include the prompts you provided to the generative AI tools.
- DePaul's teaching guidance tells instructors to decide whether they will use AI detection tools and to plan adjudication steps if a tool flags AI use
- Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use can be treated as an academic integrity violation, and sanctions are handled through the academic integrity process, with the initial course-level determination and sanctions at the instructor's discretion
Will you be using an AI detection tool to look for AI usage in student work? If an AI detection tool indicates that a student has used an AI tool, what are your steps for adjudication?
What are the possible penalties for students who violate this AI usage policy? What is the relationship between the AI policy and the DePaul Academic Integrity policy?
Using generative AI in a way that is not permitted is considered a violation of DePaul’s Academic Integrity Policy.
Attempting to pass off AI-generated work as your own will violate DePaul’s Academic Integrity Policy and could result in failure of the assignment or the course.
The initial determination as to whether an academic integrity violation has occurred and the sanctions that are to be imposed are at the discretion of the instructor when the violation occurs within the context of a course.
Institutional & Administrative
- The provided sources do not define specific rules for grading, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
- DePaul provides faculty-facing guidance and training on incorporating AI into teaching and on preventing its use when necessary
- Faculty are encouraged to use discretion and careful oversight with AI, and sample teaching guidance shows instructors may use AI for tasks such as brainstorming assignments and generating text for class analysis
• Educational resources: The Teaching Commons now includes a growing body of materials for faculty on best practices in incorporating AI into courses where appropriate, and preventing its use where that approach is necessary.
Faculty are encouraged to use discretion and careful oversight when interacting with these powerful tools.
I will use AI to brainstorm assignment and activity ideas and to generate writing that we can analyze and provide feedback on as a class.
* Explain how generative AI works and apply it to pedagogical scenarios.
* Analyze ethical considerations for generative AI and determine how you will address those issues in your teaching.
* Plan for responding to academic integrity concerns related to generative AI.
- DePaul also identifies Microsoft Copilot Chat as available for DePaul faculty, students, and staff
- DePaul prohibits sharing sensitive data with public AI tools and requires a security review before any university data is used with AI tools
- AI use with university data must comply with the Access to and Responsible Use of Data Policy, which classifies data into five categories and requires protection controls
Sensitive data should never be shared with public AI tools. Treat them like public forums—if you wouldn’t post it online, don’t feed it to a bot.
If you would like to use any university data with AI tools, it must go through a Security review. It also must comply with the Access to and Responsible Use of Data Policy.
Pursuant to this Policy, there are five categories of Data: Highly Sensitive, Sensitive, Internal Restricted, Internal Non-Restricted and Public.
Microsoft Copilot Chat is available for DePaul students, faculty, and staff.
- It also publishes a responsible AI framework emphasizing transparency, fairness and inclusivity, data privacy and security, and reliability and safety
- In addition, the library has an Artificial Intelligence Working Group and a values statement guiding evaluation and implementation of generative AI tools
- DePaul articulates an institutional approach centered on responsible learning about AI, educational resources, application of existing policies, faculty discretion in classes, and citation of AI sources
Faculty, staff, and students have asked what DePaul’s position is on using AI. As an institution of higher learning, DePaul has a responsibility to create conditions for members of the University community to learn about both the benefits and dangers of AI and act responsibly. To that end, Academic Affairs’ approach is three-fold:
DePaul’s framework for generative AI emphasizes thoughtful integration and institutional accountability. Key principles include:
* Transparency: Faculty and students should understand what AI tools can and cannot do. Clear communication about limitations and ethical concerns is essential.
* Fairness and Inclusivity: AI systems must be evaluated for bias and designed to support diverse learning needs.
* Data, Privacy, and Security: Protecting student data and complying with privacy regulations is non-negotiable.
* Reliability and Safety: Tools should be vetted for accuracy and predictability before being introduced into the classroom.
Written by Artificial Intelligence Working Group (AIWG)
In March 2023, the Artificial Intelligence Working Group (AIWG) at DePaul University Library took upon itself the task of creating this values statement to serve as a guide to the working group, the library, and its patrons in approaching the evaluation and/or use of generative AI tools as well as relevant issues.
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 DePaul University's AI Policies
DePaul University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
DePaul requires transparency and citation when AI is used. University materials state that students and faculty should disclose AI use, that AI-generated content should be cited like other sources, and that some course policies may require students to document the tool used, how it was used, and the prompts provided.
DePaul's teaching guidance tells instructors to decide whether they will use AI detection tools and to plan adjudication steps if a tool flags AI use. Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use can be treated as an academic integrity violation, and sanctions are handled through the academic integrity process, with the initial course-level determination and sanctions at the instructor's discretion.
DePaul prohibits sharing sensitive data with public AI tools and requires a security review before any university data is used with AI tools. AI use with university data must comply with the Access to and Responsible Use of Data Policy, which classifies data into five categories and requires protection controls. DePaul also identifies Microsoft Copilot Chat as available for DePaul faculty, students, and staff.