Teaching & Learning
- If AI use is not allowed, students who use it are to be treated under existing plagiarism or cheating standards
- Faculty guidance states that any use of AI in student work should be explicitly permitted and documented by the instructor
- The guidance also says students should not submit AI-generated writing as their own and should be taught how to use AI ethically when it is permitted
Whatever your policy, students should know your expectations: whether they can use AI, and if so, to what extent (for example, to brainstorm ideas, revise a draft, or generate an image). Clarify also whether and how they should document their use of AI.
In general, unless the use of AI is part of the assignment and I’ve given permission, I don’t want students to use AI for their writing. If they do, I will handle this as a violation of our plagiarism policy.
If the assignment or aspects of the assignment are written by AI, then this should be clear and transparent to everyone involved. If students are allowed to use AI, they need to know how to cite the AI (ChatGPT, Gemini, etc.) and indicate what they used it for in a note at the end.
Approach the use of AI in your classroom by discussing ethical principles and encouraging students to use AI effectively and responsibly.
Like any other source, students should not represent AI-generated content as their own. If you determine that a student has plagiarized or cheated using AI, follow your usual process for handling plagiarism or cheating in your class.
- The provided sources do not define a university-level rule specifically addressing AI use during exams, quizzes, tests, or other formal assessments
not defined
- Tutors are told not to encourage AI dependence and must instead focus on helping students develop their own understanding and skills
- The tutoring handbook allows tutors to explain AI concepts, but it prohibits tutors from using or promoting AI tools to complete student work
• Explain ideas, concepts, and assignment expectations in a way students understand
• Refer students to professors, advisors, writing support, or AI literacy resources
Never use AI tools to complete a student’s work for them
Rather than immediately providing answers or suggestions, support the writer’s own thinking process.
Do not encourage dependency on tools (including AI) over skill-building.
Research
- The catalog also notes that doctoral students should expect dissertation-related AI rules to become stricter over time
- It prohibits submitting AI-generated research or writing as original work, and any permitted AI use must be acknowledged by naming the tool and explaining how it was used
- The seminary catalog permits students to use AI only in limited ways that support their own work, such as brainstorming, outlining, language feedback, note-taking, formatting, or checking citations
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) should be transparent, ethical, and support—not replace—your own original thought and work. AI-generated content may not be submitted as your own original writing or research. If AI tools are used in any substantial way, students should acknowledge that use in a note, footnote, or appendix, specifying the tool used (e.g., ChatGPT) and how it contributed.
It is considered plagiarism and misrepresentation of authorship to submit text, arguments, or ideas generated wholly or in large part by AI systems as your own.
Possible acceptable AI uses include:
- brainstorming or refining a research question or thesis statement
- generating sample outlines to compare against your own
- asking for feedback on sentence clarity, tone, or grammar
- summarizing your own notes or a text you have already read, as a study aid
- helping format citations or identify citation errors (but not fabricate sources)
- generating discussion questions based on assigned readings for review purposes
You should always remain the primary author and thinker behind your work.
As AI tools continue to develop, expectations and boundaries may evolve. Students in graduate programs—especially doctoral students engaged in advanced research or dissertation work—should be aware that policies around the use of AI in research and writing may become more strict over time.
Doctoral students in particular should expect growing limitations on the use of AI in any stage of dissertation writing or research support, unless explicitly permitted by a faculty advisor or program director.
- The seminary catalog does not authorize AI for research data or analysis functions
- Instead, it warns against fabricated sources and says doctoral students should expect increasing limits on AI use in research support unless a faculty advisor or program director explicitly permits it
Possible acceptable AI uses include:
- helping format citations or identify citation errors (but not fabricate sources)
As AI tools continue to develop, expectations and boundaries may evolve. Students in graduate programs—especially doctoral students engaged in advanced research or dissertation work—should be aware that policies around the use of AI in research and writing may become more strict over time.
Doctoral students in particular should expect growing limitations on the use of AI in any stage of dissertation writing or research support, unless explicitly permitted by a faculty advisor or program director.
- It requires transparency when AI is used in a substantial way and emphasizes that students must remain the primary author and thinker
- The seminary catalog treats undisclosed or substitute AI authorship in research and writing as a plagiarism and authorship-integrity issue
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) should be transparent, ethical, and support—not replace—your own original thought and work. AI-generated content may not be submitted as your own original writing or research. If AI tools are used in any substantial way, students should acknowledge that use in a note, footnote, or appendix, specifying the tool used (e.g., ChatGPT) and how it contributed.
It is considered plagiarism and misrepresentation of authorship to submit text, arguments, or ideas generated wholly or in large part by AI systems as your own.
You should always remain the primary author and thinker behind your work.
Academic Integrity
- The sources require disclosure when AI use is permitted or substantial
- Faculty guidance says instructors should tell students whether and how to document AI use, and seminary policy requires students to identify the AI tool and describe how it contributed in a note, footnote, or appendix
Whatever your policy, students should know your expectations: whether they can use AI, and if so, to what extent (for example, to brainstorm ideas, revise a draft, or generate an image). Clarify also whether and how they should document their use of AI.
If the assignment or aspects of the assignment are written by AI, then this should be clear and transparent to everyone involved. If students are allowed to use AI, they need to know how to cite the AI (ChatGPT, Gemini, etc.) and indicate what they used it for in a note at the end.
If AI tools are used in any substantial way, students should acknowledge that use in a note, footnote, or appendix, specifying the tool used (e.g., ChatGPT) and how it contributed.
- The provided sources do not state a university position on AI detection tools
- Faculty guidance directs instructors to handle unauthorized AI use through existing plagiarism or cheating processes rather than through a separate AI enforcement regime
In general, unless the use of AI is part of the assignment and I’ve given permission, I don’t want students to use AI for their writing. If they do, I will handle this as a violation of our plagiarism policy.
Like any other source, students should not represent AI-generated content as their own. If you determine that a student has plagiarized or cheated using AI, follow your usual process for handling plagiarism or cheating in your class.
Institutional & Administrative
- The provided sources do not set a broader rule for faculty or staff use of AI in grading, recommendation letters, or administrative work
- Faculty-facing resources encourage instructors to set course-level AI expectations, discuss ethical use, and teach students how to document AI use where allowed
Whatever your policy, students should know your expectations: whether they can use AI, and if so, to what extent (for example, to brainstorm ideas, revise a draft, or generate an image). Clarify also whether and how they should document their use of AI.
Approach the use of AI in your classroom by discussing ethical principles and encouraging students to use AI effectively and responsibly.
Do your own exploration and reflect on your values and concerns. The key is to be clear and explicit.
- The provided sources show localized faculty guidance and a seminary catalog policy, but they do not define an institution-wide AI governance structure, strategy, committee, or roadmap
not defined
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 Eastern Mennonite University's AI Policies
Eastern Mennonite University has defined AI policies in 10 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 83%.
The sources require disclosure when AI use is permitted or substantial. Faculty guidance says instructors should tell students whether and how to document AI use, and seminary policy requires students to identify the AI tool and describe how it contributed in a note, footnote, or appendix.
Faculty guidance directs instructors to handle unauthorized AI use through existing plagiarism or cheating processes rather than through a separate AI enforcement regime. The provided sources do not state a university position on AI detection tools.
No explicit data protection or approved AI platform policy is currently defined in the available policy sources.