Teaching & Learning
- The university also requires disclosure when AI use is permitted
- Use of generative AI in coursework and assignments is governed by instructor and department rules, so permission varies by course
- Students must follow syllabus or assignment instructions, and submitting fully AI-generated work as original work is academic misconduct unless the instructor explicitly permits it
The department or instructor of record may also establish policies (not to supersede or conflict with this Board policy or University policy) provided, however, that these policies must be in writing and in a format accessible to students.
a. Follow Course Guidelines: Clearly review and adhere to the instructor’s specified parameters regarding AI use, as stated in the syllabus or assignment instructions. (Core Principle 1)
c. Ensure Academic Integrity: Avoid submitting fully AI-generated content as original work unless explicitly permitted by the instructor. Submitting such work without clear permission constitutes academic misconduct. (Core Principles 1, 3)
2.9. Shall disclose the use of GAI; and
- The university does not set one blanket student rule for AI use in exams and assessments; instructors are expected to state allowable use in syllabi and assignment guidance
- In task-force guidance, course templates include options that can prohibit AI use on essay, exam, or homework responses, and instructors using AI for assessment must de-identify student work and review AI-generated feedback for accuracy and fairness
a. Follow Course Guidelines: Clearly review and adhere to the instructor’s specified parameters regarding AI use, as stated in the syllabus or assignment instructions. (Core Principle 1)
d. Research Compliance: When involved in research activities, students must obtain IRB approval and explicit consent for any human-subject data processed using AI. Data must always be anonymized before system upload or analysis activities. (Core Principle 2)
2. Instructors (Instruction & Assessment Use)
c. Responsible Use in Assessments: De-identify all student work before uploading to Gen AI platforms for feedback or assessment purposes. Carefully review and correct AI-generated feedback to ensure accuracy and fairness. (Core Principles 2, 3)
* Draft outlines or responses to essay, exam, or homework questions
- ETSU guidance allows instructors to choose whether AI may be used as a learning aid, and sample syllabus language includes both limited-use and encouraged-use models
- In those examples, AI may support brainstorming, drafting, revision, or feedback, but it should support rather than replace student thinking, and students remain responsible for accuracy and for following course-specific boundaries
🟡 Yellow – Limited Use:
GenAI may be used for specific tasks (e.g., brainstorming), but not others (e.g., drafting responses). Clear boundaries and citation required. 🟢 Green – Encourage with Attribution:
GenAI is welcomed, with expectations for transparency, reflection, and attribution.
Policy: You are encouraged to use GenAI tools to brainstorm, draft, or revise your work—so long as they support (not replace) your thinking. For every assignment in which you use GenAI, include:
Rationale: I recognize that GenAI tools can support learning. However, to ensure you are developing targeted skills in critical thinking, analysis, and original communication, limits are necessary. You may use GenAI to aid your process (e.g., for brainstorming or feedback), but not to generate answers or complete assignments.
Reminder: GenAI content may be inaccurate, biased, misleading, or otherwise flawed. You are responsible for ensuring your submitted work is accurate and appropriate.
- Course-level treatment of AI-generated code is left to instructors
- ETSU sample syllabus materials explicitly include code-based content within generative AI policy templates, but the university-wide sources provided do not establish a separate institution-wide rule for programming assignments beyond instructor discretion, disclosure, and academic integrity requirements
The department or instructor of record may also establish policies (not to supersede or conflict with this Board policy or University policy) provided, however, that these policies must be in writing and in a format accessible to students.
Definition: Generative AI (GenAI) refers to tools that generate written, visual, audio, or code-based content in response to a user prompt. Examples include ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grammarly’s Premium/AI features, and others.
2.9. Shall disclose the use of GAI; and
Research
- AI cannot be credited as an author
- ETSU permits AI use in research writing and scholarly publication only with transparency and human oversight
- Users must disclose AI use in research contexts, clearly attribute substantial AI contributions, and researchers should disclose the specific tools, purposes, and methods in publications
University community members who use generative artificial intelligence in academic, administrative, or research contexts shall transparently disclose such usage in a manner that is both appropriate and clear. This includes attributing AI-generated content or substantial Gen AI contributions when it is used to support the completion of course assignments and submissions, scholarly publications, creative activities, and related decision-making processes.
Individuals must carefully review and validate Gen AI outputs against their own knowledge and skills before incorporation into educational, administrative, or research outcomes. The ultimate responsibility for verifying the accuracy, fairness, and integrity of AI-generated content or decisions remains with the human user, who is accountable for compliance with all university policies and applicable laws.
a. Transparent Disclosure: Clearly disclose the specific generative AI tools used, their purpose, and methods of application within the Methods or Acknowledgments sections of research publications. AI should never be credited as an author nor used as a sole, undisclosed generator of creative works. (Core Principle 1)
- Fabricating research data or results is prohibited
- ETSU allows AI in research data and analysis only under privacy, consent, and human-review conditions
- Human-subject data use requires IRB approval and explicit consent, identifiers must be removed before upload or analysis, and users must verify AI outputs and avoid unauthorized platforms for confidential or regulated data
The use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies, including GAI, to fabricate data or research results, or to falsify academic content is strictly prohibited.
b. Protect Participant Data: Secure IRB approval and informed consent before utilizing generative AI to analyze any human-subject data. All personal identifiers must be removed or anonymized prior to upload. (Core Principle 2)
c. Verify and Review Outputs: Carefully evaluate all AI-generated analyses, summaries, or creative outputs to ensure they are accurate, appropriate, and methodologically sound before inclusion in formal research products or decision-making. (Core Principle 3)
b. Secure Data Management: Utilize AI platforms that protect the handling of confidential or regulated data, thereby avoiding public or unsecured tools. Always remove sensitive details such as personal identifiers or protected financial information before processing. (Core Principle 2)
- Human users remain accountable for accuracy, fairness, and compliance
- ETSU explicitly frames AI use in research under ethics, integrity, and compliance rules
- Misuse such as falsifying research content or findings is prohibited, research uses must be transparently disclosed, and researchers handling human-subject data must obtain IRB approval and informed consent
All affiliates of the university community who employ generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) technologies shall do so ethically, respectfully, and responsibly, aligning Gen AI usage with the university’s core values of honesty, integrity, inclusivity, and trust. Misuse, including falsifying academic content or research data or findings, generating malicious or misleading information, or infringing on intellectual property rights, is strictly prohibited.
University community members who use generative artificial intelligence in academic, administrative, or research contexts shall transparently disclose such usage in a manner that is both appropriate and clear.
b. Protect Participant Data: Secure IRB approval and informed consent before utilizing generative AI to analyze any human-subject data. All personal identifiers must be removed or anonymized prior to upload. (Core Principle 2)
The ultimate responsibility for verifying the accuracy, fairness, and integrity of AI-generated content or decisions remains with the human user, who is accountable for compliance with all university policies and applicable laws.
Academic Integrity
- ETSU requires disclosure of AI use
- For student assignments, substantial AI contributions must be cited using instructor-specified or standard style-guide practices
- The board policy says users shall disclose generative AI use, and the written guidance says AI use in academic, administrative, or research contexts must be disclosed clearly and appropriately
2.9. Shall disclose the use of GAI; and
University community members who use generative artificial intelligence in academic, administrative, or research contexts shall transparently disclose such usage in a manner that is both appropriate and clear. This includes attributing AI-generated content or substantial Gen AI contributions when it is used to support the completion of course assignments and submissions, scholarly publications, creative activities, and related decision-making processes.
b. Cite Generative AI: Whenever generative AI contributes substantially to assignment completion, clearly cite its use according to the instructor-specified format or standard citation practices provided by style guides. (Core Principle 1)
Citation Requirement: In accordance with ETSU Generative AI guidance, specifically the principle of transparency and disclosure, you are required to disclose any and all use of GenAI in course assignments. If you use GenAI, include a “GenAI Reference Page” with the prompt(s) and the AI-generated output(s).
- Sample syllabus materials also tie violations to grade penalties, revision requirements, or the academic integrity process
- Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use can be treated as academic misconduct, but ETSU cautions strongly against relying only on AI detectors
- Instructors are advised to use multiple forms of evidence when investigating suspected misuse, because detection tools can produce false positives and should not be treated as conclusive evidence
c. Ensure Academic Integrity: Avoid submitting fully AI-generated content as original work unless explicitly permitted by the instructor. Submitting such work without clear permission constitutes academic misconduct. (Core Principles 1, 3)
d. Investigate Misconduct Fairly: Use multiple evidence sources, including AI detection software, style analysis, and prompt logs, when investigating potential academic misconduct related to AI. Do not rely solely on Gen AI-detection scores, which have questionable validity. (Core Principle 3)
Don’t rely solely on AI detection scores.
AI detection tools are imperfect and should be used with caution. Studies have found that these systems can produce false positives and may disproportionately flag multilingual or non-native English writing. Detection scores should therefore not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct, but rather as one possible indicator that may warrant further review, conversation, or examination of the student’s learning process.
Responses to Misuse: Using GenAI in ways that go against this policy may regrettably result in [a reduced grade, the need to revise and resubmit your work,] or other steps in line with ETSU’s academic integrity process.
Institutional & Administrative
- Staff assisting with course design, preparation, or course student support must follow the same requirements as faculty
- Faculty and certain staff may use AI for instruction-related work, but they are subject to the same policy requirements and must exercise human oversight
- Instructors are expected to state course AI expectations, cite AI contributions in materials or feedback, review outputs for accuracy and appropriateness, and de-identify student work before using AI for grading or assessment-related purposes
Staff assisting faculty with their course design, preparation, or with student support of a course will follow the same requirements as faculty.
2. Instructors (Instruction & Assessment Use)
a. Communicate Expectations Clearly: Include explicit statements about acceptable Gen AI usage in course syllabi and provide detailed guidelines for individual assignments to prevent ambiguity. (Core Principle 1)
b. Cite and Review AI Contributions: Follow best practices when using generative AI to develop course materials, instructional content, or student feedback. Clearly cite any AI involvement and review all AI-generated material to ensure accuracy, appropriateness, and alignment with instructional goals. (Core Principles 1, 3)
c. Responsible Use in Assessments: De-identify all student work before uploading to Gen AI platforms for feedback or assessment purposes. Carefully review and correct AI-generated feedback to ensure accuracy and fairness. (Core Principles 2, 3)
- ETSU has explicit data-protection rules for AI use and distinguishes between non-sensitive and sensitive data
- ETSU also maintains an approved-AI-apps list for non-sensitive data and directs users working with sensitive data to ITS Security
- Users may not input confidential or regulated data into AI systems in ways that expose them to unauthorized parties, and identifiable data about students, patients, or others is prohibited from AI systems for grading or similar uses unless de-identified
2.2. Shall not input Confidential Data or Regulated Data into or use GAI in a manner that would inappropriately disclose Confidential Data or Regulated Data to an unauthorized party;
When using AIT, including GAI, compliance with data protection regulations, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in the U.S. and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, is mandatory. Users shall not disclose or expose Regulated Data in ways that violate University policies or applicable laws. For instance, when using AIT, including GAI for grading purposes, personal student data must be de-identified. Users are prohibited from inputting identifiable data concerning individuals (students, patients, or others) into AIT, including GAI.
Applications/services listed on this page have undergone security review (risk assessment) and may be purchased through Procurement without additional security review prior to the posted expiration date for use with non-sensitive data. If you are working with sensitive data please contact ITS Security for additional guidance or assistance with additional questions.
Risk level is increased when working with sensitive data (e.g. PHI, PII, FERPA, Private, Confidential, Proprietary, IP, Schedules, Restricted, Business Critical, Financial, etc). Do not upload sensitive data into publicly available AI realms where uploaded data are used to train publicly accessible AI models.
- The task force includes representatives from multiple university constituencies and seeks stakeholder input
- ETSU has an institutional AI governance structure through its Generative Artificial Intelligence Task Force under the Office of the Provost
- The task force was created to develop ethical policies and procedures for AI use in teaching, learning, research, and administrative functions, and it is responsible for implementing, reviewing, and revising the guidance
The Generative Artificial Intelligence Task Force was created to develop clear, ethical policies and procedures to guide the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in teaching, learning, and research. This task force has developed guidance to support responsible AI use while maintaining academic integrity and innovation in accordance with the university mission.
The Generative AI Policy and Procedures Task Force will:
* Continue to Assess Current AI Use: Conduct a thorough review of how faculty and students are using generative AI in academic and research settings.
* Evaluate Best Practices: Identify AI policies at peer institutions and within relevant professional organizations to inform policy development.
* Develop Clear Guidelines: Create policies that address AI use in coursework, assessments, research, and administrative functions, ensuring alignment with academic integrity standards and ETSU’s mission.
* Address Ethical and Legal Considerations: Evaluate potential ethical, privacy, and copyright concerns associated with AI use and ensure compliance with applicable laws and accreditation standards.
* Engage Key Stakeholders: Collaborate with faculty, students, administrators, and external experts to ensure broad input and acceptance of the policies.
The Generative AI Task Force, under the direction of the Office of the Provost, is responsible for implementing, reviewing, and revising this set of guidelines.
The Task Force will be chaired by a senior faculty member with expertise in academic policy and emerging technologies and include representatives from Faculty Senate, SGA, Department Chairs, Academic Technology Services, General Counsel’s Office, Library, and the Center for Teaching Excellence.
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 East Tennessee State University's AI Policies
East Tennessee State University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
ETSU requires disclosure of AI use. The board policy says users shall disclose generative AI use, and the written guidance says AI use in academic, administrative, or research contexts must be disclosed clearly and appropriately. For student assignments, substantial AI contributions must be cited using instructor-specified or standard style-guide practices.
Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use can be treated as academic misconduct, but ETSU cautions strongly against relying only on AI detectors. Instructors are advised to use multiple forms of evidence when investigating suspected misuse, because detection tools can produce false positives and should not be treated as conclusive evidence. Sample syllabus materials also tie violations to grade penalties, revision requirements, or the academic integrity process.
ETSU has explicit data-protection rules for AI use and distinguishes between non-sensitive and sensitive data. Users may not input confidential or regulated data into AI systems in ways that expose them to unauthorized parties, and identifiable data about students, patients, or others is prohibited from AI systems for grading or similar uses unless de-identified. ETSU also maintains an approved-AI-apps list for non-sensitive data and directs users working with sensitive data to ITS Security.