Teaching & Learning
- The policy applies university-wide through the honor code and academic policies
- The university treats unauthorized use of AI to produce or revise graded academic work as academic dishonesty
- Students are prohibited from submitting work created by another person or generated by AI as their own, and may not use AI tools to paraphrase or modify text to evade detection
Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, fabrication, deception, cheating and sabotage.
Plagiarism is any attempt to represent the words or ideas of another as one’s own in any academic exercise.
As examples, students are expected to not use another person or generated AI to do all or part of another student’s work and should not submit written assignments as one’s own work where generated from another source, including but not limited to generated AI.
Examples include but are not limited to another person generated AI, another student, laboratory generated by another student, and copied work from any source, whether copyrighted or not.
Paraphrasing content from another source, including but not limited to generated AI, in an attempt to evade plagiarism software is considered plagiarism and a violation of this Code.
3.4.9 Copying, using, or submitting, in whole or in part, the work of another, whether copyrighted or not, in an academic exercise, or using generated AI and claiming the work is one’s own, are examples of plagiarism.
- The policy specifically bars obtaining or using answers or other information in ways not authorized during exams or other evaluated work
- The university prohibits unauthorized assistance during examinations and other academic exercises, which would cover AI use when not expressly allowed
Cheating is intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any academic exercise.
Examples include but are not limited to obtaining, providing, or using answers or information in a manner not authorized by the instructor or institution during an exam or examination of any type, quiz, assignment, project, educational exercise, or other work submitted for evaluation and uses generated AI in any form to claim one’s own work.
Research
- The policy states that AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author and that all submitted work must be created solely by humans
- This is an explicit prohibition, but it is stated in the CME context rather than as a general university-wide research manuscript policy
- For continuing medical education content, the university prohibits use of generative AI to create or revise scientific or educational material
The use of generative AI for the purpose of creating educational/scientific content, the use of AI technologies in collecting or analyzing data, and the submission of any CME/CPD accredited activity or educational material generated or revised with the assistance of AI are prohibited.
Additionally, AI systems cannot be listed as an author or co-author on scientific abstracts, papers, or educational material. All content submitted for accreditation must be solely created by humans.
- No broader university-wide research data or analysis rule was identified in the provided sources
- For continuing medical education content, the university prohibits use of AI technologies in collecting or analyzing data
The use of generative AI for the purpose of creating educational/scientific content, the use of AI technologies in collecting or analyzing data, and the submission of any CME/CPD accredited activity or educational material generated or revised with the assistance of AI are prohibited.
- No explicit IRB-, grant-, or research-ethics filing policy for AI was identified in the provided sources
- Separately, the university's general academic integrity rules define plagiarism and cheating to include claiming AI-generated work as one's own
- In the CME accreditation context, the university bars AI-generated or AI-revised submissions and requires human authorship of accredited content
The use of generative AI for the purpose of creating educational/scientific content, the use of AI technologies in collecting or analyzing data, and the submission of any CME/CPD accredited activity or educational material generated or revised with the assistance of AI are prohibited.
Additionally, AI systems cannot be listed as an author or co-author on scientific abstracts, papers, or educational material. All content submitted for accreditation must be solely created by humans.
3.4.9 Copying, using, or submitting, in whole or in part, the work of another, whether copyrighted or not, in an academic exercise, or using generated AI and claiming the work is one’s own, are examples of plagiarism.
Academic Integrity
- The provided sources do not set out a disclosure or citation method for permitted AI use
- Instead, they state that AI systems cannot be credited as authors on CME scientific abstracts, papers, or educational material, and that claiming AI-generated work as one's own is plagiarism
Additionally, AI systems cannot be listed as an author or co-author on scientific abstracts, papers, or educational material.
3.4.9 Copying, using, or submitting, in whole or in part, the work of another, whether copyrighted or not, in an academic exercise, or using generated AI and claiming the work is one’s own, are examples of plagiarism.
- The policy explicitly prohibits using AI to paraphrase content in an attempt to evade plagiarism detection software
- AI-related misconduct is enforced through the university's academic integrity process, with penalties including course failure, suspension, or expulsion
Paraphrasing content from another source, including but not limited to generated AI, in an attempt to evade plagiarism software is considered plagiarism and a violation of this Code.
An alleged violation of the Academic Honor Code by a student may be adjudicated by the Academic Honor Council and/or by the faculty member involved and/or by the dean of the college involved. Consequences for such misconduct may range from receiving a reprimand... to failing the course or facing suspension or expulsion from the university.
Institutional & Administrative
- No broader policy in the provided sources addresses faculty or staff use of AI for grading, feedback, lesson planning, recommendation letters, or administration
- For CME/CPD accredited content, the university prohibits use of generative AI to create educational or scientific content, which applies to submitted accredited materials regardless of creator
The use of generative AI for the purpose of creating educational/scientific content, the use of AI technologies in collecting or analyzing data, and the submission of any CME/CPD accredited activity or educational material generated or revised with the assistance of AI are prohibited.
All content submitted for accreditation must be solely created by humans.
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 Des Moines University's AI Policies
Des Moines University has defined AI policies in 8 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 67%.
The provided sources do not set out a disclosure or citation method for permitted AI use. Instead, they state that AI systems cannot be credited as authors on CME scientific abstracts, papers, or educational material, and that claiming AI-generated work as one's own is plagiarism.
AI-related misconduct is enforced through the university's academic integrity process, with penalties including course failure, suspension, or expulsion. The policy explicitly prohibits using AI to paraphrase content in an attempt to evade plagiarism detection software.
No explicit data protection or approved AI platform policy is currently defined in the available policy sources.