Teaching & Learning
- For graded coursework and assignments, use of AI is prohibited unless the instructor or syllabus gives permission
- Indiana University does not have a single AI-specific policy for courses, and instructors are encouraged to address generative AI in their syllabi; departments may also have additional guidelines
Using or providing unauthorized external assistance or materials on any exam, assignment, or academic-related activities. This prohibition includes the use of tutors, editing services, commercial term-paper providers, books, notes, calculators, online and electronic resources, artificial intelligence, and wireless communication devices, subject to the following:
On exams, term papers, and graded assignments, external assistance is presumed to be unauthorized unless the instructor or syllabus gives permission.
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.
Keep in mind that your department may have additional guidelines for the use of generative AI.
- For exams and other assessments, AI use is prohibited unless the instructor or syllabus explicitly permits it
- The academic misconduct rules apply across formats and expressly cover in-class, take-home, entrance, qualifying, thesis, and dissertation assessments
Policies of academic misconduct apply to all curricular and academic-related activities, regardless of format or location. This includes, but is not limited to:
Any exams or assessments, including in-class and take-home exams, entrance and qualifying exams, auditions, theses, and dissertations.
Using or providing unauthorized external assistance or materials on any exam, assignment, or academic-related activities. This prohibition includes the use of tutors, editing services, commercial term-paper providers, books, notes, calculators, online and electronic resources, artificial intelligence, and wireless communication devices, subject to the following:
On exams, term papers, and graded assignments, external assistance is presumed to be unauthorized unless the instructor or syllabus gives permission.
- For ungraded study or learning activities, external assistance, including AI, is permitted unless the instructor or syllabus prohibits it
- University centers that support writing, research, math, computing, and similar skills are also allowed unless prohibited by the instructor or syllabus
On ungraded academic-related activities, students may use external assistance unless the instructor or syllabus prohibits their use.
Campus or unit centers that assist students with computing, writing, research, mathematics, or other academic skills are not considered external, and may be used unless the instructor or syllabus prohibits their use.
- Coding work falls under the general academic misconduct rule: AI use on graded assignments is unauthorized unless the instructor or syllabus permits it
- The university acknowledges that generative AI can create computer code, but it does not define a separate university-wide policy for AI-assisted programming assignments
Generative AI is a technology that creates new content by identifying and replicating patterns found in large quantities of data. Depending on the type of generative AI used, you or your students may create prose, images, computer code, and more in response to prompts.
Using or providing unauthorized external assistance or materials on any exam, assignment, or academic-related activities. This prohibition includes the use of tutors, editing services, commercial term-paper providers, books, notes, calculators, online and electronic resources, artificial intelligence, and wireless communication devices, subject to the following:
On exams, term papers, and graded assignments, external assistance is presumed to be unauthorized unless the instructor or syllabus gives permission.
Research
- For graduate research writing, AI-generated text may be treated as a plagiarism or cheating issue
- Faculty mentors are expected to guide graduate students on when and how AI language models such as ChatGPT are appropriate during the research process, and students should discuss AI use with their faculty mentor before using such tools
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 or may not be used appropriately within their specific research context.
- Microsoft Copilot is approved only up to university-internal data, and users are warned to assume shared information may become public
- The university does not define an AI-specific rule for using AI in research data collection or analysis, but it does prohibit entering restricted-or-higher data into generative AI tools
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.
Do not enter internal Indiana University information or student, faculty, or staff intellectual property into generative AI tools without the explicit consent of the owner of that property.
IU does not currently have any specific policies around the use of generative AI, other than policies related to data security and privacy.
- Graduate research-related AI use is addressed through academic integrity guidance rather than a separate university-wide research-ethics AI policy
- AI use by graduate students may be considered cheating, and faculty mentors are expected to guide students on when AI tools such as ChatGPT are appropriate
- Additionally, students working on research projects covered by the IU Research Misconduct policy (ACA-30) must not engage in conduct that would violate that policy
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 or may not be used appropriately.
A student working on a research project covered by ACA-30, Research Misconduct, must not engage in conduct that would violate ACA-30.
Academic Integrity
- Students must fully acknowledge sources when using others' words, ideas, paraphrases, formulas, theories, facts, statistics, or illustrative material
- The university provides sample course-level language that requires proper citation and may prohibit generative AI entirely, but it does not set a single university-wide AI disclosure rule beyond general source acknowledgment requirements
A student must not present ideas or materials taken from another source for either written or oral use without fully acknowledging the source, unless the information is common knowledge.
A student must give credit to the original source whenever:
Directly quoting another person’s actual words, whether oral or written;
Using another person’s ideas, opinions, formulas, or theories;
Paraphrasing the words, ideas, opinions, or theories of others;
Borrowing facts, statistics, or illustrative material; or
In this course, you are expected to do your own work and properly cite any sources you use. The use of generative AI (GAI) tools, such as chatbots, text generators, paraphrasers, summarizers, or solvers, is strictly prohibited for any part of your assignments. Students must complete all work independently and without GAI-generated content.
- The university materials provided do not state a position on AI detection tools
- They do define enforcement procedures for academic misconduct: instructors take grade action and report misconduct, and at IU East additional sanctions can include probation, suspension, or expulsion
If an instructor determines that academic misconduct has occurred, the instructor will take appropriate action with respect to grades, and report academic dishonesty to the student affairs officer of the campus.
At the conclusion of the informal conference, if the student is found responsible for the academic misconduct, the faculty member is required to report the matter within seven calendar days in writing to the Dean of Students, who will send the report to the student, the dean or division chair of the unit in which the offense occurred, and the student’s dean or division chair (if the student is not a major in the unit in which the offense occurred).
A statement that the additional sanction may be any of the following:
Disciplinary probation for a specified period of time;
Suspension from the university for a specified period of time;
Expulsion from the university.
Institutional & Administrative
- No additional university-wide AI-specific faculty policy currently exists beyond data protection rules
- Faculty and staff are directed toward Microsoft Copilot as IU's preferred generative AI service, approved for use with data up to the university-internal level
- Instructors are encouraged to address generative AI in their syllabi and may consider using generative AI tools to support teaching activities, subject to data security and privacy restrictions
IU does not currently have any specific policies around the use of generative AI, other than policies related to data security and privacy.
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.
However, it may be useful for instructors to address generative AI more specifically, such as in their syllabi.
Instructors may consider using generative AI to support course design, generate example content, or assist with instructional tasks, provided they remain within IU's data security guidelines.
- Users must not enter internal university information or student, faculty, or staff intellectual property into generative AI tools without explicit consent, and they should assume anything shared may become public
- IU's AI-related data protection rules are explicit: no generative AI tools are approved for restricted-or-higher data, and Microsoft Copilot is the preferred service for faculty and staff and is approved only up to university-internal data
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.
Do not enter internal Indiana University information or student, faculty, or staff intellectual property into generative AI tools without the explicit consent of the owner of that property.
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.
- Indiana University system-level materials indicate IU is working to make secure versions of generative AI technologies available and has made investments in AI infrastructure, curriculum, and research computing
- However, no formal AI governance policy, committee structure, or university-wide ethics framework specific to IU East has been identified in the available sources; the evidence reflects IU system-level strategy rather than IU East campus-specific governance
The university is working to make secure versions of these technologies available.
Big Red 200 is Indiana University's flagship research supercomputer, providing powerful computing capacity to support AI, machine learning, and data-intensive scientific discovery.
IU President Pamela Whitten explains why IU made its most popular AI skills course free and open to all.
Note: The above evidence reflects Indiana University system-level AI strategy and infrastructure. No IU East-specific AI governance policy, oversight committee, or ethics framework was identified in the reviewed sources.
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 - Northwest's AI Policies
Indiana University - Northwest has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Students must fully acknowledge sources when using others' words, ideas, paraphrases, formulas, theories, facts, statistics, or illustrative material. The university provides sample course-level language that requires proper citation and may prohibit generative AI entirely, but it does not set a single university-wide AI disclosure rule beyond general source acknowledgment requirements.
The university materials provided do not state a position on AI detection tools. They do define enforcement procedures for academic misconduct: instructors take grade action and report misconduct, and at IU East additional sanctions can include probation, suspension, or expulsion.
IU's AI-related data protection rules are explicit: no generative AI tools are approved for restricted-or-higher data, and Microsoft Copilot is the preferred service for faculty and staff and is approved only up to university-internal data. Users must not enter internal university information or student, faculty, or staff intellectual property into generative AI tools without explicit consent, and they should assume anything shared may become public.