Teaching & Learning
- Indiana University does not set a specific university-wide generative AI rule for coursework
- IU Kokomo additionally provides campus-specific syllabus statement guidance for faculty through its Academic Affairs office
- Students must follow academic misconduct rules, and instructors are encouraged to set course-level syllabus terms; use of AI on assignments may be allowed only in ways authorized by the instructor, and unauthorized use is treated as plagiarism
IU does not currently have any specific policies around the use of generative AI, other than policies related to data security and privacy.
Students are expected to adhere to the Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct, which addresses Academic Misconduct. However, it may be useful for instructors to address generative AI more specifically, such as in their syllabi.
"Use of AI (such as ChatGPT) in this class. Using AI (such as ChatGPT) to assist in completing assignments will be allowed in the following ways: [List of acceptable uses, e.g. 'In Assignment x, will be using and citing ChatGPT as part of the assignment.'] If you use AI in an unauthorized manner, you will be committing plagiarism* and will be subject to penalties in this class and sanctions by Indiana University."
IU Kokomo Academic Affairs provides campus-specific syllabus statements and course code guidance for faculty, available at kokomo.iu.edu/academic-affairs/academic-resources/syllabus-statements-course-code.html.
- Not defined by a specific university-wide AI exam policy in the provided sources
- The task force report references possible future guidance for grading and testing and possible exploration of detection tools, but the current materials do not set an explicit operational rule for student AI use during exams
IU does not currently have any specific policies around the use of generative AI, other than policies related to data security and privacy.
Policy guidelines should be created for appropriate use of AI Agents and LLM (Large Language Model) Fine-Tuning for classroom activities such as grading, testing, or tutoring.
IU may explore the feasibility of implementing a GenAI detection tool for student work.
- At the same time, students are told to make sure they understand course limits on assignment use and to rely on trusted sources
- Indiana University provides affirmative guidance for students to use AI as a learning aid, such as for study scheduling and practice materials
## Working with AI to Learn
Here, we want to talk about how you can actually work with these incredible tools to improve your learning by freeing you up so you can concentrate on where the real value is: What's happening inside your own head and what that means for your growth as an increasingly confident, educated, capable person (as opposed to just working through your educational tasks as quickly as possible).
Some tools can help you generate flash cards and practice quizzes so you can maximize your time by focusing on learning that content on a deeper level over time – but make sure you're directing the A.I. to use trusted sources.
"Act like my personal assistant. I am taking the following college classes. Create a weekly schedule for me that includes study time, meal times, and sleep time..."
Be very sure that you clearly understand how you can use AI to work on assignments in your courses.
- The IU-approved generative AI tool framework is also subject to the same data classification restrictions as other AI use
- Indiana University does not publish a standalone policy specific to AI-assisted code generation or programming assignments
- However, the general framework applies: AI use in coursework, including coding tasks, is governed by instructor-set syllabus policies, and unauthorized use constitutes academic misconduct
IU does not currently have any specific policies around the use of generative AI, other than policies related to data security and privacy.
Generative AI tools are capable of producing software code, images, text, and other creative works.
No generative AI tools have been approved for use with Indiana University restricted or higher data.
Research
- No broader university-wide manuscript policy is defined in the available sourced materials
- For graduate students, Indiana University treats AI-generated text in scholarly writing as a plagiarism and cheating risk, and students are directed to discuss appropriate use with faculty mentors
Several less-obvious forms of plagiarism may arise. These include:
3. Use of artificial intelligence (machine-produced text, such as ChatGPT) programs to generate text almost indistinguishable from human writing.
Faculty mentors should provide guidance on the appropriate use of AI language models as a tool for assisting with the research process. Given the emergence of artificial intelligence in education it is important to have discussions with students to help them understand the potential consequences of using AI, and under what circumstances the use of platforms such as ChatGPT are appropriate.
However, using technological tools such as artificial intelligence by graduate students may be considered cheating. Therefore, students should discuss with their faculty mentor how [AI tools may appropriately be used in their research and writing].
- Microsoft Copilot is approved only up to university-internal data
- Indiana University ties AI use with research data to its data-classification rules
- Research data are by default classified as restricted, no generative AI tools are approved for restricted or higher data, and specific tools such as Google Gemini and ChatGPT Edu explicitly exclude research data from their approved use scope
The default classification for research data at IU is restricted.
Google Gemini Chatbot interface built on Google's Gemini AI models. Available at no cost to users at IU. ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes to Most, Excludes Research data ❌ No
ChatGPT Edu Privacy-focused version of OpenAI's generative AI platform. Data entered in IU's workspace does not train AI models. ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes to Most, Excludes Research data ❌ No
No generative AI tools have been approved for use with Indiana University restricted or higher data (Microsoft Copilot, formerly called Bing Chat Enterprise, has been approved for use with university-internal data, which does not include most student data).
- The provided sources do not define explicit AI rules for grant proposals, IRB applications, or formal research ethics declarations
- Indiana University's graduate academic integrity policy warns that AI use may constitute plagiarism or cheating in research contexts and requires faculty mentor guidance on appropriate use
Several less-obvious forms of plagiarism may arise. These include:
3. Use of artificial intelligence (machine-produced text, such as ChatGPT) programs to generate text almost indistinguishable from human writing.
Faculty mentors should provide guidance on the appropriate use of AI language models as a tool for assisting with the research process. Given the emergence of artificial intelligence in education it is important to have discussions with students to help them understand the potential consequences of using AI, and under what circumstances the use of platforms such as ChatGPT are appropriate.
However, using technological tools such as artificial intelligence by graduate students may be considered cheating. Therefore, students should discuss with their faculty mentor how [AI tools may be used appropriately in research].
Academic Integrity
- Indiana University does not state a single university-wide disclosure rule for AI use in student work in the provided sources
- Instead, attribution and acknowledgment are presented through sample syllabus language and instructor-controlled course policies, including examples that require citing ChatGPT and sample wording calling for explicit instructor permission and appropriate attribution
However, it may be useful for instructors to address generative AI more specifically, such as in their syllabi.
"Include a permission and acknowledgement disclaimer. 'AI generators/programs such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, QuillBot, Spinbot, Dall-E, etc. should not be used for any work for this class without explicit permission of the instructor and appropriate attribution.' -- from IUB College of Arts & Sciences, Office of Undergraduate Academic Affairs
"Use of AI (such as ChatGPT) in this class. Using AI (such as ChatGPT) to assist in completing assignments will be allowed in the following ways: [List of acceptable uses, e.g. "In Assignment x, will be using and citing ChatGPT as part of the assignment."]If you use AI in an unauthorized manner, you will be committing plagiarism* and will be subject to penalties in this class and sanctions by Indiana University."
- Indiana University links unauthorized AI use to plagiarism and class or university sanctions
- The task force report says the university may explore enterprise AI detection, but if adopted it should meet accuracy, security, bias, training, and review standards; the overview materials also caution against relying on attempts to 'catch' students as a primary response
"Use of AI (such as ChatGPT) in this class. Using AI (such as ChatGPT) to assist in completing assignments will be allowed in the following ways: [List of acceptable uses, e.g. "In Assignment x, will be using and citing ChatGPT as part of the assignment."]If you use AI in an unauthorized manner, you will be committing plagiarism* and will be subject to penalties in this class and sanctions by Indiana University."
While many instructors are rationally concerned about generative AI’s implications regarding academic integrity, efforts to “catch” students who are using the tools inappropriately likely won’t prevent the use of those tools. They may also disproportionately harm students from populations most vulnerable to academic integrity claims.
IU may explore the feasibility of implementing a GenAI detection tool for student work. If IU chooses to adopt or develop an enterprise-level GenAI detection tool, it should ensure that any such tool meets high standards for accuracy, data security, and lack of bias; require pre-use training on responsible and ethical usage, including familiarity with guidelines around academic misconduct evidentiary standards and procedures; and include a review/approval process that incorporates a wide variety of stakeholders, voices, and perspectives.
Institutional & Administrative
- Indiana University identifies Microsoft Copilot as the preferred generative AI service for faculty and staff, approved for data up to university-internal level
- The task force recommends policy guidelines for instructional AI use such as grading, testing, and tutoring, transparency when AI note-taking tools are used in meetings, and ongoing training programs for staff and administrators
Microsoft Copilot (formerly Bing Chat Enterprise) is IU's preferred generative AI service for faculty and staff. It can handle data up to University-Internal level.
Policy guidelines should be created for appropriate use of AI Agents and LLM (Large Language Model) Fine-Tuning for classroom activities such as grading, testing, or tutoring.
When GenAI note-taking tools are used to record meeting minutes, meeting participants should be informed, and their approval sought.
Training programs should be provided for staff and administrators on GenAI tools, covering their capabilities, limitations, ethical considerations, and best practices. Continuous learning should be fostered by offering regular updates and training opportunities.
- Indiana University has explicit data-protection rules governing AI tool use
- The institutional tool matrix defines approved use by data classification level
- No generative AI tools are approved for restricted or higher data; Microsoft Copilot is approved up to university-internal data; and tools such as ChatGPT Edu and Google Gemini are approved for public and most university-internal data but explicitly exclude research data
Microsoft Copilot (formerly Bing Chat Enterprise) is IU's preferred generative AI service for faculty and staff. It can handle data up to University-Internal level. When using public tools, usage of data is more restrictive, even when the data are anonymized.
No generative AI tools have been approved for use with Indiana University restricted or higher data (Microsoft Copilot, formerly called Bing Chat Enterprise, has been approved for use with university-internal data, which does not include most student data). The university is working to make secure versions of these technologies available. When using generative AI tools, assume that anything you share may become public.
GenAI Tool Use Case Approved for Public Data? Approved for University-Internal Data? Approved for Restricted Data? Approved for Critical Data?
ChatGPT Edu: ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes to Most, Excludes Research data ❌ No
Google Gemini: ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes to Most, Excludes Research data ❌ No
- Taskforce and related recommendations
- Indiana University has an institutional AI governance and strategy structure reflected in its Spring 2024 A.I
- The university encourages exploration of generative AI while also stating a need for thoughtfully crafted policies and practices governing acceptable use, and the task force frames a responsible integration approach across university functions
**The Indiana University A.I. Taskforce began and completed its work in Spring 2024.**
While Indiana University encourages members of the university community to explore generative AI technology, experiment with it, and contemplate possible applications for it that will help to advance the institution’s teaching, research, and service missions, the University also recognizes the need to establish thoughtfully crafted policies and practices governing acceptable use of these tools.
As generative AI (GenAI) technologies rapidly advance, Indiana University recognizes the imperative to harness their transformative potential while upholding the institution's core values of academic integrity, equity, and educational excellence. This comprehensive set of recommendations outlines a holistic framework for the responsible integration of GenAI across all university functions, safeguarding IU's mission while equipping students, faculty, and staff to thrive in an AI-driven world.
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 Indiana University--Kokomo's AI Policies
Indiana University--Kokomo has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Indiana University does not state a single university-wide disclosure rule for AI use in student work in the provided sources. Instead, attribution and acknowledgment are presented through sample syllabus language and instructor-controlled course policies, including examples that require citing ChatGPT and sample wording calling for explicit instructor permission and appropriate attribution.
Indiana University links unauthorized AI use to plagiarism and class or university sanctions. The task force report says the university may explore enterprise AI detection, but if adopted it should meet accuracy, security, bias, training, and review standards; the overview materials also caution against relying on attempts to 'catch' students as a primary response.
Indiana University has explicit data-protection rules governing AI tool use. No generative AI tools are approved for restricted or higher data; Microsoft Copilot is approved up to university-internal data; and tools such as ChatGPT Edu and Google Gemini are approved for public and most university-internal data but explicitly exclude research data. The institutional tool matrix defines approved use by data classification level.