Teaching & Learning
- Florida Polytechnic University does not state an AI-specific university-wide rule for coursework and assignments in the provided sources
- Instead, instructors are expected to tell students what is and is not acceptable in each course, and unauthorized use of materials or information in academic work is treated as academic dishonesty
(a) Cheating. Intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any type of academic exercise.
(1) Responsibilities. Faculty, staff, and administration hold the responsibility to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity in order to maintain the rights and trust of honest students and scholars and foster appropriate behavior; therefore, it is expected that course instructors should communicate to students at the beginning of each course the standards, expectations, and clear behaviors for what is and is not acceptable.
- Florida Polytechnic University does not provide an AI-specific exam rule in the provided sources
- Exam-related misuse is governed by existing academic integrity rules: violating rules set for an exam is sanctionable, and using unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in an academic exercise is prohibited
(i) Violating Examination Rules. Rules explicitly set up for an exam, especially as they pertain to distance modalities, when violated are subject to sanction under this policy.
(a) Cheating. Intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any type of academic exercise.
- Florida Polytechnic University does not set out an AI-specific university-wide rule for code generation in the provided sources
- The provided teaching resources show faculty support for artificial intelligence in education and an AI-focused faculty learning community, but course-level acceptability is left to instructors under the academic integrity framework
CITE also provides support for emerging topics such as artificial intelligence in education, active learning strategies, and inclusive teaching practices.
This FLC empowers educators to integrate aspects of AI into their teaching. The program builds an engaged faculty network, teaches practical AI skills, and promotes ethical educational practices. Participants will develop hands-on projects that advance the future of AI-driven education at Florida Polytechnic University.
(1) Responsibilities. Faculty, staff, and administration hold the responsibility to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity in order to maintain the rights and trust of honest students and scholars and foster appropriate behavior; therefore, it is expected that course instructors should communicate to students at the beginning of each course the standards, expectations, and clear behaviors for what is and is not acceptable.
Research
- Florida Polytechnic University does not provide an AI-specific rule for using AI to draft or edit theses, dissertations, or manuscripts in the provided sources
- For research work generally, the university treats serious deviation from accepted professional practices or university policies in carrying out or reporting research as misconduct, and thesis students are directed to use the university's thesis preparation resources
(f) Misconduct in Research and Creative Endeavors. Serious deviation from the accepted professional practices within a discipline or from the policies of the University in carrying out, reporting, or exhibiting the results of research or in publishing, exhibiting, or performing creative endeavors. It does not include honest error or honest disagreement about the interpretation of data. (Faculty and Staff will refer to FPU-12.0013AP Research Misconduct, which covers this type of violation. In general, student infractions in research will be processed under this policy.)
Students currently in the thesis pathway should utilize these resources as they progress through the program, and when preparing their thesis. Please note these resources are updated annually.
- Florida Polytechnic University does not state an AI-specific rule for AI use in research data or analysis in the provided sources
- The academic integrity policy prohibits making up data or results, and research misconduct includes serious deviation from accepted professional practices or university policies in carrying out or reporting research
(c) Fabrication. Making up data or results and recording or reporting them in an academic exercise.
(f) Misconduct in Research and Creative Endeavors. Serious deviation from the accepted professional practices within a discipline or from the policies of the University in carrying out, reporting, or exhibiting the results of research or in publishing, exhibiting, or performing creative endeavors. It does not include honest error or honest disagreement about the interpretation of data. (Faculty and Staff will refer to FPU-12.0013AP Research Misconduct, which covers this type of violation. In general, student infractions in research will be processed under this policy.)
- The provided sources do not contain AI-specific research ethics rules for grant proposals, IRB applications, or ethics declarations
- They do show that Florida Polytechnic University has formal research compliance policies, including responsible conduct of research, research misconduct, and financial conflict of interest and disclosure, and that student research infractions are processed under the academic integrity regulation
(f) Misconduct in Research and Creative Endeavors. Serious deviation from the accepted professional practices within a discipline or from the policies of the University in carrying out, reporting, or exhibiting the results of research or in publishing, exhibiting, or performing creative endeavors. It does not include honest error or honest disagreement about the interpretation of data. (Faculty and Staff will refer to FPU-12.0013AP Research Misconduct, which covers this type of violation. In general, student infractions in research will be processed under this policy.)
Policies overseeing research conduct, compliance, and funding.
FPU-12.0012AP Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) 1.12.18
FPU-12.0013AP Research Misconduct 10.09.20
FPU-12.0014AP Financial Conflict of Interest and Disclosure 2.10.17
Academic Integrity
- Florida Polytechnic University does not provide AI-specific disclosure or citation instructions in the provided sources
- Its academic integrity rules require appropriate credit for others' ideas, processes, results, or words, and instructors are expected to communicate course-specific standards for what is acceptable
(b) Plagiarism. Appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit in any academic exercise.
(1) Responsibilities. Faculty, staff, and administration hold the responsibility to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity in order to maintain the rights and trust of honest students and scholars and foster appropriate behavior; therefore, it is expected that course instructors should communicate to students at the beginning of each course the standards, expectations, and clear behaviors for what is and is not acceptable.
- Florida Polytechnic University does not state a position on AI detection tools in the provided sources
- It does define academic dishonesty as sanctionable, requires reporting and investigation of apparent violations, and routes student cases through a documented enforcement process with possible sanctions, including additional action for repeat violations
Any University community member (faculty, staff, students) who has witnessed an apparent act of academic dishonesty or has information that reasonably leads to the conclusion that such an act has occurred or has been attempted has the responsibility to report the matter to the appropriate authority (instructor or supervisor). The authority must pursue any reasonable allegation and take action where appropriate.
When a course instructor suspects that a student has committed an academic integrity violation, the course instructor must follow these steps:
(a) Gather the evidence, taking care to maintain the confidential nature of the situation and in a manner that supports teaching and learning.
(b) Consult with their department chair to assess the evidence and determine whether the sanction identified is appropriate given the likely infraction.
(c) Meet with the student to discuss the allegation of misconduct.
(d) Document the meeting by having the student complete the Academic Integrity Student Acknowledgement (AISA) Form.
(e) Upon receipt of the AISA Form, submit all documentation through the Campus Student Conduct Record System.
(a) When the student accepts responsibility for the violation, either through the signed form or failure to return the form in the allotted timeframe, the course instructor imposes the sanction and submits the documentation through the Campus Student Conduct Record System.
(ii) If it is a repeat violation, the Academic Integrity Manager notifies the VPSA that the student has multiple violations.
(iii)The VPSA notifies the student that additional sanctions may be applied and that the matter will go before the AIHP.
Institutional & Administrative
- The university does, however, provide faculty support for AI in education, offers an AI-focused faculty learning community, and lists an AI-assisted grading tool for instructors
- Florida Polytechnic University's provided sources do not establish a binding university-wide AI operations policy for faculty or staff use in grading, feedback, lesson planning, or administrative communication
CITE also provides support for emerging topics such as artificial intelligence in education, active learning strategies, and inclusive teaching practices.
This FLC empowers educators to integrate aspects of AI into their teaching. The program builds an engaged faculty network, teaches practical AI skills, and promotes ethical educational practices. Participants will develop hands-on projects that advance the future of AI-driven education at Florida Polytechnic University.
An AI-assisted assessment and grading tool designed to streamline the evaluation of paper-based, digital, and coding assignments. Instructors can use dynamic rubrics that update in real-time, allowing for highly consistent grading and detailed analytics on student performance across various subjects.
- The university's policy index lists relevant IT policies rather than giving AI-specific operational requirements in the text provided
- The provided sources show that Florida Polytechnic University has institution-level IT governance around data security, information privacy, data classification, and appropriate use of IT resources, but they do not provide AI-specific rules on what data may be entered into AI tools or identify approved AI platforms
## IT Policies
Technology use, data security, and information privacy regulations.
FPU-11.00122P Data Classification and Protection 4.9.20
FPU-11.0018P Appropriate Use of IT Resources 4.21.15
- Florida Polytechnic University does not present a formal university-wide AI strategy or governance framework in the provided sources
- The sources do show institutional activity around AI through faculty support, an AI-focused faculty learning community, and a public policy event on ChatGPT, ethics, and use
CITE also provides support for emerging topics such as artificial intelligence in education, active learning strategies, and inclusive teaching practices.
This FLC empowers educators to integrate aspects of AI into their teaching. The program builds an engaged faculty network, teaches practical AI skills, and promotes ethical educational practices. Participants will develop hands-on projects that advance the future of AI-driven education at Florida Polytechnic University.
10/03/23 – Artificial Intelligence: ChatGPT, Its Ethics & Use
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 Florida Polytechnic University's AI Policies
Florida Polytechnic University has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
Florida Polytechnic University does not provide AI-specific disclosure or citation instructions in the provided sources. Its academic integrity rules require appropriate credit for others' ideas, processes, results, or words, and instructors are expected to communicate course-specific standards for what is acceptable.
Florida Polytechnic University does not state a position on AI detection tools in the provided sources. It does define academic dishonesty as sanctionable, requires reporting and investigation of apparent violations, and routes student cases through a documented enforcement process with possible sanctions, including additional action for repeat violations.
The provided sources show that Florida Polytechnic University has institution-level IT governance around data security, information privacy, data classification, and appropriate use of IT resources, but they do not provide AI-specific rules on what data may be entered into AI tools or identify approved AI platforms. The university's policy index lists relevant IT policies rather than giving AI-specific operational requirements in the text provided.