Teaching & Learning
- Use of AI on graded coursework is determined by the instructor and course expectations
- Students must follow the syllabus and assignment instructions, and submitting AI-generated work or using AI in unapproved ways can be treated as cheating or plagiarism under the Honor Code and academic standards process
Faculty can choose whether to permit students to use generative AI or prohibit students from using these tools except under specific circumstances.
If your course instructor permits the use of AI, but with limitations, and you exceed or violate those boundaries, you may be found responsible for violating Academic Standards. For example, if your instructor permits use of AI only to help you outline your paper, and you instead use it to generate your paper and then you submit that work as your own, you may be found responsible for cheating and/or plagiarism.
Use of generative AI in violation of the instructor’s syllabus and assignment or exam instructions may constitute a violation of the university honor code’s prohibition against cheating and/or plagiarism. Thus, prior to using these tools in coursework, students should ask the following questions:
At the beginning of the semester, it is important to identify your class policies on using AI writing generators. You can do this by checking your syllabus and assignment guidelines.
Chat GPT and other AI-powered text generators are just one more thing students can use to cheat. If a student submits a paper generated by AI, they are violating the Honor Code because they are claiming authorship for the paper, but they are not the original author.
- AI use in exams and assessments is also governed by instructor directions
- Using generative AI contrary to exam instructions may be an Honor Code violation, and the university advises students to verify whether they are permitted to use AI on exams, quizzes, or take-home exams
Use of generative AI in violation of the instructor’s syllabus and assignment or exam instructions may constitute a violation of the university honor code’s prohibition against cheating and/or plagiarism.
Can I use generative AI for this assignment, exam, quiz, or take-home exam?
How can I know whether or not I can use generative AI in my coursework?
Students should review the requirements of each assignment and ask their course instructors if they have questions about whether use of generative AI is prohibited or authorized in a given instance.
- The university permits and encourages AI for learning support when used responsibly
- Students may use approved tools for brainstorming, tutoring, concept explanation, and practice, but they are expected to verify information, protect privacy, and comply with course-specific restrictions
Generative AI can also be a useful study and learning tool. For example, students can use it to help brainstorm ideas, identify arguments in support and in opposition to a position, create a study guide, summarize key points from a reading, create a research strategy, generate questions or practice problems, and identify gaps in understanding or examples to explain a concept.
Never rely solely on AI-generated content without checking it for accuracy. When using AI tools to assist in your coursework, students remain responsible for the quality and accuracy of their work and should always review and critically evaluate any output generated by AI.
You can use an AI tools to support your studying and academic tasks in ways like:
• Better understanding a concept
• Practicing and receiving feedback on a concept
• Brainstorming ideas or researching
• Creating study guides and aiding with note taking
• Practicing a language
• Exploring majors or career paths
• Generating or debugging code
The key to using AI tools effectively is to treat them as assistants, not substitutes. You should:
• Verify what AI outputs tell you because it might not be right.
• Think critically about any suggestions AI tools make.
• Never put private, proprietary, or sensitive information in a public AI tool like ChatGPT.
- The university provides coding assistance as an example of AI-supported academic use, but it does not set a uniform rule for programming assignments
- For coursework, coding-related AI use remains subject to instructor and assignment-specific limits, and students must review outputs for accuracy and avoid disallowed use
You can use an AI tools to support your studying and academic tasks in ways like:
• Better understanding a concept
• Practicing and receiving feedback on a concept
• Brainstorming ideas or researching
• Creating study guides and aiding with note taking
• Practicing a language
• Exploring majors or career paths
• Generating or debugging code
If your course instructor permits the use of AI, but with limitations, and you exceed or violate those boundaries, you may be found responsible for violating Academic Standards.
Never rely solely on AI-generated content without checking it for accuracy. When using AI tools to assist in your coursework, students remain responsible for the quality and accuracy of their work and should always review and critically evaluate any output generated by AI.
Research
- Researchers may use generative AI in manuscript preparation only under human control and with clear disclosure where appropriate
- AI cannot be listed as an author, and authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, and compliance with publisher, sponsor, and disciplinary rules
Researchers should disclose the use of AI in manuscript preparation, grant writing, and other scholarly outputs as required by publishers, funders, and professional organizations.
Generative AI tools should not be listed as an author on manuscripts, grant proposals, or other scholarly work.
Researchers are responsible for all content in manuscripts and scholarly works, including any parts generated or edited using AI tools.
Researchers should carefully review and verify any AI-generated text, citations, analyses, or interpretations before including them in scholarly work.
- AI may be used in research data and analysis only with careful oversight and in compliance with data governance rules
- Researchers are told not to enter restricted, confidential, or regulated data into public AI systems unless approved protections are in place, and they must validate AI-generated analyses and interpretations
Researchers must not input confidential, proprietary, export-controlled, personally identifiable, protected health, or other sensitive data into public AI platforms unless explicitly authorized and protected by appropriate agreements and safeguards.
Researchers should comply with university policies on data stewardship, privacy, intellectual property, and information security when using AI tools.
Researchers should carefully review and verify any AI-generated text, citations, analyses, or interpretations before including them in scholarly work.
Data classified as Confidential or Restricted shall be protected against unauthorized disclosure. Access to these data shall be restricted to only those individuals who need such access to perform their work or assigned responsibilities.
Using university computing resources to create, access, store, display, distribute or transmit any confidential information or proprietary information without authority, or in violation of policy, rule, regulation, law, or contractual obligations or restrictions is prohibited.
- The university frames AI use in research as subject to research integrity, disclosure, and sponsor or publisher requirements
- Researchers must maintain accountability for all submitted content, avoid listing AI as an author, and follow misconduct and compliance rules when AI is used in proposals or other scholarly materials
Researchers should disclose the use of AI in manuscript preparation, grant writing, and other scholarly outputs as required by publishers, funders, and professional organizations.
Generative AI tools should not be listed as an author on manuscripts, grant proposals, or other scholarly work.
Researchers are responsible for all content in manuscripts and scholarly works, including any parts generated or edited using AI tools.
Misconduct in Research and Scholarship means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting research and creative activities.
This policy applies to all allegations of misconduct in research and scholarship involving all individuals engaged in research and scholarship at Mason, including faculty, staff, postdoctoral fellows, students, and any other persons engaged in research and scholarship at Mason or acting on behalf of Mason.
Academic Integrity
- Disclosure of AI use is required when instructors, publishers, funders, or style guidance call for it
- The university directs students to follow citation rules and assignment instructions, and library guidance provides a format for citing generative AI output in academic work
Students should acknowledge when and how they have used AI tools if required by their instructor, syllabus, or assignment instructions.
When using generative AI tools in your coursework, be transparent about their role and follow your instructor’s guidance regarding citation and acknowledgment.
Researchers should disclose the use of AI in manuscript preparation, grant writing, and other scholarly outputs as required by publishers, funders, and professional organizations.
If information generated by an AI tool has in some way contributed to your writing or research, you should cite it just as you would any other source.
When using the AI tool, gather all the information you need to cite and acknowledge your use of the source. This generally includes:
• Name of the AI tool
• Version of the tool, if known
• Date you used it
• The prompt you gave the AI
• A brief description of the output
- Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use may be enforced through existing academic standards and Honor Code procedures
- The university warns that students can be found responsible for cheating or plagiarism when they exceed allowed AI use, but it also states that AI detection tools alone are unreliable and should not be the sole basis for misconduct findings
If your course instructor permits the use of AI, but with limitations, and you exceed or violate those boundaries, you may be found responsible for violating Academic Standards. For example, if your instructor permits use of AI only to help you outline your paper, and you instead use it to generate your paper and then you submit that work as your own, you may be found responsible for cheating and/or plagiarism.
Use of generative AI in violation of the instructor’s syllabus and assignment or exam instructions may constitute a violation of the university honor code’s prohibition against cheating and/or plagiarism.
Please know that Turnitin and other AI detection tools may produce false positives and false negatives, and they should not be the sole basis for allegations or findings of academic misconduct.
AI detectors are not perfect and should be used with caution.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty may decide whether and how students can use AI in their courses, and the university encourages clear syllabus language
- Instructors are advised to use caution when relying on AI for teaching tasks, protect student privacy, review outputs carefully, and avoid entering sensitive information into public systems
Faculty can choose whether to permit students to use generative AI or prohibit students from using these tools except under specific circumstances.
Faculty should clearly communicate their expectations regarding AI use in the syllabus, assignment instructions, and class discussions.
Instructors should not enter student records, grades, or other sensitive student information into public AI tools.
Instructors should carefully review any AI-generated content used in teaching, feedback, grading support, or course design.
AI tools can help you draft emails, create rubrics, brainstorm lesson plans, summarize notes, and generate examples or activities. However, these tools may produce inaccurate, biased, or inappropriate content, so human review is essential before use.
- The university restricts the use of public AI tools with sensitive or regulated information and ties AI use to existing data stewardship and computing policies
- It points users toward institutionally supported tools, including Microsoft Copilot, while prohibiting unauthorized handling of confidential or proprietary information
Never put private, proprietary, or sensitive information in a public AI tool like ChatGPT.
Instructors should not enter student records, grades, or other sensitive student information into public AI tools.
Researchers must not input confidential, proprietary, export-controlled, personally identifiable, protected health, or other sensitive data into public AI platforms unless explicitly authorized and protected by appropriate agreements and safeguards.
Data classified as Confidential or Restricted shall be protected against unauthorized disclosure. Access to these data shall be restricted to only those individuals who need such access to perform their work or assigned responsibilities.
Using university computing resources to create, access, store, display, distribute or transmit any confidential information or proprietary information without authority, or in violation of policy, rule, regulation, law, or contractual obligations or restrictions is prohibited.
Get Started with Microsoft Copilot
Mason has both a web and desktop version of Copilot available to faculty and staff.
- George Mason has institution-level AI guidance organized around separate pages for students, instructors, and research, alongside central IT and library resources
- The materials present a governance approach based on responsible use, transparency, human review, and compliance with existing university policies rather than a single standalone AI code
George Mason University encourages the responsible, ethical, and informed use of artificial intelligence technologies in teaching, learning, research, and administrative work.
These guidelines are intended to support the Mason community in using AI tools thoughtfully, while maintaining academic integrity, protecting privacy, and upholding university values.
AI Guidance for Students
AI Guidance for Instructors
AI Guidance for Research
Researchers should comply with university policies on data stewardship, privacy, intellectual property, and information security when using AI tools.
The mission of the AI at Mason initiative is to support our university community in exploring, understanding, and responsibly using artificial intelligence tools in teaching, learning, research, and work.
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 George Mason University's AI Policies
George Mason University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Disclosure of AI use is required when instructors, publishers, funders, or style guidance call for it. The university directs students to follow citation rules and assignment instructions, and library guidance provides a format for citing generative AI output in academic work.
Undisclosed or unauthorized AI use may be enforced through existing academic standards and Honor Code procedures. The university warns that students can be found responsible for cheating or plagiarism when they exceed allowed AI use, but it also states that AI detection tools alone are unreliable and should not be the sole basis for misconduct findings.
The university restricts the use of public AI tools with sensitive or regulated information and ties AI use to existing data stewardship and computing policies. It points users toward institutionally supported tools, including Microsoft Copilot, while prohibiting unauthorized handling of confidential or proprietary information.