Teaching & Learning
- The academic misconduct policy also treats unauthorized use of aids on academic work as misconduct
- AI use for coursework is generally permitted under the university-wide AI policy, but student use is governed by individual course policies and instructor guidance
- The teaching guidance says faculty should set expectations in syllabi and assignment instructions, and indicates that a single syllabus policy may not be sufficient for every assignment
The use of AI and AI generative solutions is generally permitted within the GVSU community, subject to the provisions of this policy and all other applicable University policies governing AI, including but not limited to individual course policies regarding the use of AI by students or other GVSU policies regarding the use of AI by faculty or staff.
Talk to your students. Rather than wondering about each other's expectations and experiences, invite a conversation. In advance of such a conversation, consider the extent to which you already have clarity. How do you expect students to use or not use generative AI? What are your policies and guidance? How can you help students navigate choices in your class and beyond?
Take an "education first" approach. Helping students learn means providing clear guidance instead of relying on policies and policing. Lean into trust as we are all learners in this space. Such guidance can appear in your syllabus but should accompany assignment instructions, as well. It may very well be that a single syllabus-based policy isn't nuanced enough to address the use (or non-use) of AI as it relates to particular assignment.
Attempting to use materials, information, or aids that have not been authorized by the instructor for academic work.
- Unauthorized AI use on assessed work would fall under academic misconduct if the instructor has not authorized it
- The university does not set a single AI rule specifically for exams and assessments; expectations are left to instructor or assignment-level guidance
Take an "education first" approach. Helping students learn means providing clear guidance instead of relying on policies and policing. Lean into trust as we are all learners in this space. Such guidance can appear in your syllabus but should accompany assignment instructions, as well. It may very well be that a single syllabus-based policy isn't nuanced enough to address the use (or non-use) of AI as it relates to particular assignment.
Reflective annotations - on either writing assignments or exams, ask students to go deeper and respond to prompts such as: Why did you make this choice? How did you approach finding a solution? Was it challenging/useful/satisfying and why?
Attempting to use materials, information, or aids that have not been authorized by the instructor for academic work.
- Teaching guidance encourages conversations about when students should or should not use AI and how to evaluate AI output
- The university generally permits AI use and frames it as something students and faculty should discuss openly, but it does not establish a specific university-wide rule for non-graded study assistance
The use of AI and AI generative solutions is generally permitted within the GVSU community, subject to the provisions of this policy and all other applicable University policies governing AI, including but not limited to individual course policies regarding the use of AI by students or other GVSU policies regarding the use of AI by faculty or staff.
Talk to your students. Rather than wondering about each other's expectations and experiences, invite a conversation. In advance of such a conversation, consider the extent to which you already have clarity. How do you expect students to use or not use generative AI? What are your policies and guidance? How can you help students navigate choices in your class and beyond?
Critical thinking is more important than ever: When should one use AI? When should one not use AI? How should AI output be evaluated? What are the right questions to ask about rapidly evolving new technologies? What assumptions are being made? Who benefits and who is harmed?
Research
- Undergraduate research policies similarly allow assistive use, require disclosure, and in some OURS-supported work require documented prior faculty advisor approval
- For research manuscripts, theses, and dissertations, AI may be used as an assistive tool but not as a substitute for original thought, analysis, and critical thinking
- Graduate students need prior approval from their advisor or committee chair for thesis/dissertation use, and substantial AI use must be disclosed with clear identification of the affected parts
AI-generated content may be used as a tool to assist research and scholarship but not as a replacement for original thought, analysis, and critical thinking.
Students using AI for research project, thesis, or dissertation work must have prior approval from their faculty research project advisor or thesis or dissertation committee chairperson.
If AI tools are used, it must be disclosed in the reference section of the research project, thesis, or dissertation and students must clearly identify which part of their work is generated or significantly influenced by AI, making sure to provide proper citation and attribution where appropriate.
Use of AI must be disclosed in manuscripts and academic submissions where it has made a substantial contribution to the work. Disclosure should:
* Be included in an appropriate section of the document or presentation (e.g., acknowledgments, methods, or a dedicated disclosure statement)
* Clearly describe how AI was used in the development of the work
* Reflect any additional requirements set by publishers or the institution
AI-generated content may be used as a tool to assist research and scholarship but not as a replacement for original thought, analysis, and critical thinking.
Students using AI for a research project, a research manuscript, or creative work must have documented prior approval from their faculty advisor for the project.
- AI use in research data processing and analysis is allowed only within compliance boundaries
- The research guidance prohibits entering sensitive or restricted data into unapproved AI tools and prohibits fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data or results using AI
- For human-subjects research, IRB review and approval is typically required, and researchers are generally expected to disclose AI data processing or analysis to participants during informed consent
The following uses of AI are not permitted in research conducted under the university’s auspices:
* Inputting sensitive, proprietary, export-controlled, or otherwise restricted data into AI tools that are not explicitly approved for such use
* Fabricating, falsifying, or manipulating data, images, citations, or results using AI
The use of AI tools in research involving human subjects is often permissible after review and approval by the GVSU Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB typically requires researchers to disclose the use of any AI tools for data processing or analysis to research participants during the informed consent process.
Support Compliance with Data and Regulatory Requirements: Ensure that the use of AI in research involving sensitive data, proprietary information, or human subjects complies with applicable policies, agreements, and oversight requirements (e.g., IRB protocols).
- The university sets explicit research-integrity limits on AI use in university research
- Grant proposal AI use must follow sponsor-specific requirements, and undisclosed use may be treated as academic integrity or research misconduct
- Researchers may not present AI-generated content as original work without attribution or disclosure, may not generate substantial portions of research outputs without critical human review and intellectual contribution, and may not use AI to fabricate or manipulate research materials
The following uses of AI are not permitted in research conducted under the university’s auspices:
* Presenting AI-generated content as original work without appropriate attribution or disclosure
* Generating substantial portions of research outputs without critical review, revision, and intellectual contribution by the researcher
* Fabricating, falsifying, or manipulating data, images, citations, or results using AI
* Using AI in ways that violate confidentiality obligations, including peer review or unpublished work
* Circumventing sponsor, publisher, or institutional policies governing research conduct
Failure to appropriately disclose AI use may constitute a violation of academic integrity or research misconduct policies.
AI use in grant proposal preparation must comply with sponsor-specific requirements and restrictions. Given evolving sponsor policies, researchers are responsible for verifying requirements at the time of submission.
Academic Integrity
- The university requires disclosure of AI use in multiple contexts
- Under the general AI policy, users should disclose AI-generated information to recipients; in research outputs, disclosures must explain the tool, purpose, and extent of contribution; graduate thesis/dissertation policy requires disclosure in the reference section with clear identification of AI-influenced parts; and OURS proposals and essays also require disclosure, citation, and attribution
Any users of AI or AI generative solutions should ensure such use does not introduce or amplify unjust bias, should disclose such use to recipients of any information generated, must uphold all privacy laws and safeguard data, and comply with all GVSU policies and procedures.
Researchers are expected to disclose the use of AI in research and scholarly outputs when such use influences the content, analysis, interpretation, or presentation of a research output. Disclosure should be sufficient to ensure transparency, support reproducibility where applicable, and align with disciplinary, sponsor, and publisher expectations, in addition to GVSU department- and college-specific guidelines.
At a minimum, disclosure should describe:
* The AI tool(s) used and when they were accessed
* The nature and purpose of the use
* The extent to which AI contributed to the final output
If AI tools are used, it must be disclosed in the reference section of the research project, thesis, or dissertation and students must clearly identify which part of their work is generated or significantly influenced by AI, making sure to provide proper citation and attribution where appropriate.
If AI tools are used during the development of the program proposal, research proposal, or application essay, their use must be disclosed in the proposal/essay and students must clearly identify which part(s) of their work was generated or significantly influenced by AI, making sure to provide proper citation and attribution where appropriate. (See APA guidelines)
- The teaching guidance tells faculty not to rely on AI detectors, describing them as unreliable and problematic
- For enforcement, academic AI misuse is routed through existing academic misconduct processes, undisclosed research AI use may be treated as academic integrity or research misconduct, and violations of the public AI policy may result in sanctions up to dismissal, termination, or legal action
DO NOT rely on products billed as AI detectors. Such software is unreliable at best and problematic on multiple levels.
If you suspect that a student has used of ChatGPT, for example, to complete an assignment, what can you do? We strongly advise against detection tools which have been shown to be ineffective. Assuming that you have provided students with clear guidance on use of AI tools, the best first step is to have a conversation with the student.
Academic misconduct and misuse, including cheating and plagiarism, are reported using the following GVSU forms:
* Academic Misconduct Reporting Form:
* https://cm.maxient.com/reportingform.php?GrandValley&layout_id=1
* Office of Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution website:
* https://www.gvsu.edu/osccr/academic-misconduct-policies-and-procedures-14.htm
Failure to appropriately disclose AI use may constitute a violation of academic integrity or research misconduct policies.
Non-compliance of AI-prohibited uses will be addressed in accordance with university disciplinary procedures and may include sanctions up to and/or including dismissal, termination, or legal action.
Institutional & Administrative
- Teaching guidance leaves classroom AI decisions to faculty judgment and recommends course-specific guidance rather than a single universal rule
- For communicators, the university has best-practice guidance for faculty and staff to use generative AI purposefully, efficiently, and ethically
- Faculty and staff are covered by the university-wide AI policy, which generally permits AI use subject to other university policies and privacy obligations
This policy applies to all members of the GVSU community, including students, faculty, staff, and any external partners engaged in activities involving AI in relation to university projects.
The use of AI and AI generative solutions is generally permitted within the GVSU community, subject to the provisions of this policy and all other applicable University policies governing AI, including but not limited to individual course policies regarding the use of AI by students or other GVSU policies regarding the use of AI by faculty or staff.
There is no one right answer to addressing AI in your teaching, scholarship and work, but reflecting on your own values will inform your next steps in learning.
In addition to clarity of expectations in a syllabus, we highly recommend including "point of use" guidance around AI as part of a specific assignment's guidelines.
Members of GVSU’s University Communications, Information Technology and the University Communicators Network have compiled a series of guidelines and tools for faculty and staff to implement generative artificial intelligence purposefully, efficiently and ethically.
- The university prohibits entering protected personal information and confidential or proprietary information into public AI tools
- GVSU-managed services such as Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace remain approved under university policy and data-classification rules
- Software and cloud services used for university business must be reviewed or approved by IT when sensitive data is involved, and non-approved cloud services should not be used to store, process, or transmit university data without appropriate review
The entering into any AI or AI generative solution of any personal protected information, such as information governed by privacy laws including FERPA, which may include but are not limited to name, address, phone numbers, emails, social security numbers, or credit card numbers is strictly prohibited.
The entering into any AI or AI generative solution of any confidential, privileged, or proprietary business information is strictly prohibited.
Please note: The software on the list is only approved for use if the usage does not involve sensitive data, which includes FERPA, HIPAA, GDPR, PII, and PCI. This list is reviewed yearly and is subject to change.
If software is not listed or will involve sensitive data, complete a Software Purchase Approval ticket prior to purchase.
This guidance applies to all faculty, staff, student employees, contractors, and third parties acting on behalf of GVSU who are considering the use of cloud services that are not provided, managed, or approved by GVSU Information Technology. Official GVSU-managed cloud services, such as Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace for Education, remain approved for university use in accordance with applicable university policies and data classification requirements.
Cloud services that have not been reviewed and approved by Information Technology should not be used to store, process, or transmit university data unless an appropriate security and legal review has been completed.
Users must not store the following information in non-approved cloud services:
* FERPA-protected data
* HIPAA-protected data
* PCI data
* Personally Identifiable Information (PII)
* Confidential university information
* Institutional business records
- GVSU has an institution-wide AI governance stance centered on responsible, ethical, legal, and transparent use
- The university also presents a broader AI initiative describing campus-wide exploration of AI across classrooms and administrative offices
- The public AI policy establishes a university-wide framework and states that departmental policies may add clarification as long as they align with it
At Grand Valley State University (GVSU), we recognize the value of artificial intelligence (AI) in contributing to human creativity, accessibility of information, and intellectual growth and are, therefore, committed to the responsible use of AI. This policy provides a framework for the ethical, legal, and responsible use of these technologies, ensuring such use aligns with our institutional mission, vision, and values.
Purpose
* To govern the use of AI and AI generative solutions at GVSU.
* To ensure these technologies are used in a way that upholds legal and ethical standards, respects privacy, and promotes transparency.
* To provide clear guidelines for all stakeholders within the GVSU community regarding the use of AI technologies.
This policy supersedes any other AI policies, further clarification is available by department. Policies must align with this policy but may expand on it for divisions that need further clarification.
At Grand Valley State University (GVSU), we are actively exploring the nearly endless possibilities of Artificial Intelligence (AI). From the classroom to our administrative offices, we integrate AI with a liberal arts foundation, ensuring our students are not just skilled technicians, but also critical thinkers, ethical leaders, and creative problem solvers. We are committed to ensuring all Lakers are equipped to thrive in this evolving landscape.
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 Grand Valley State University's AI Policies
Grand Valley State University has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
The university requires disclosure of AI use in multiple contexts. Under the general AI policy, users should disclose AI-generated information to recipients; in research outputs, disclosures must explain the tool, purpose, and extent of contribution; graduate thesis/dissertation policy requires disclosure in the reference section with clear identification of AI-influenced parts; and OURS proposals and essays also require disclosure, citation, and attribution.
The teaching guidance tells faculty not to rely on AI detectors, describing them as unreliable and problematic. For enforcement, academic AI misuse is routed through existing academic misconduct processes, undisclosed research AI use may be treated as academic integrity or research misconduct, and violations of the public AI policy may result in sanctions up to dismissal, termination, or legal action.
The university prohibits entering protected personal information and confidential or proprietary information into public AI tools. Software and cloud services used for university business must be reviewed or approved by IT when sensitive data is involved, and non-approved cloud services should not be used to store, process, or transmit university data without appropriate review. GVSU-managed services such as Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace remain approved under university policy and data-classification rules.