Teaching & Learning
- Course-level AI use for assignments is at instructor discretion under the university policy
- Faculty must decide and communicate whether AI is allowed, and units may adopt more restrictive rules
- Mercer’s teaching guidance provides examples ranging from no AI use to limited or integrated AI use, with students responsible for following the stated course expectations
Faculty are responsible for deciding whether, when, and how generative AI is used in courses, programs, and/or research.
Faculty must clearly communicate generative AI use to students in course syllabi, assignment instructions, and research guidelines.
Students are responsible for understanding and adhering to faculty communications for using generative AI in each of their courses and research activities.
Individual units may have separate generative AI policies that are more restrictive, not less restrictive, than this University policy.
Students complete the identified work without generative or agentic AI assistance because independent performance is part of what the assignment measures.
Students may use AI for specifically named purposes, such as brainstorming, practice, feedback, or debugging, but not for other parts of the task.
AI use is [permitted/required] for this assignment because learning to direct and evaluate AI is part of the assignment goal. You may use AI to [identify the permitted or required functions]. Your submission must demonstrate how you evaluated, corrected, refined, or built upon the AI-assisted work and must reflect your own disciplinary understanding and judgment.
- Mercer does not set a single university-wide AI rule specifically for exams and assessments in the provided sources; use is governed by faculty direction
- The teaching guidance states that instructors should determine whether AI would perform the thinking an assignment is designed to assess, and sample language includes assignments where independent performance is required
Faculty are responsible for deciding whether, when, and how generative AI is used in courses, programs, and/or research.
Faculty must clearly communicate generative AI use to students in course syllabi, assignment instructions, and research guidelines.
Students are responsible for understanding and adhering to faculty communications for using generative AI in each of their courses and research activities.
Evaluate the role of AI. Would AI support practice and feedback, or would it perform the thinking the assignment is designed to assess?
Students complete the identified work without generative or agentic AI assistance because independent performance is part of what the assignment measures.
- Mercer permits AI to be used for learning support, but the specific boundaries depend on faculty or unit rules
- The university and medical library resources describe AI as supporting learning, and the sample syllabus guidance lists brainstorming, practice, and feedback as example permitted uses when an instructor authorizes them
Students may use AI for specifically named purposes, such as brainstorming, practice, feedback, or debugging, but not for other parts of the task.
For this assignment, you may use AI only to [list permitted purposes, such as generate practice questions, brainstorm alternatives, receive feedback on a student-written draft, or debug student-written code]. You may not use AI to [list prohibited purposes or the thinking students must perform themselves].
Artificial intelligence can support learning, teaching, research, literature searching, and clinical information seeking. However, AI generated information may be incomplete, inaccurate, biased, or based on fabricated sources. MUSM users remain responsible for verifying AI generated content, protecting confidential information, following course and University policies, and applying appropriate professional judgment.
- The university's pilot AI platform can also be used for lightweight coding help
- Mercer does not publish a separate university-wide coding rule; code-related AI use is handled through instructor discretion
- The sample syllabus guidance expressly lists debugging student-written code as a possible permitted use when authorized by the instructor
Faculty are responsible for deciding whether, when, and how generative AI is used in courses, programs, and/or research.
Students may use AI for specifically named purposes, such as brainstorming, practice, feedback, or debugging, but not for other parts of the task.
AmplifyAI is being piloted as Mercer’s secure generative AI platform for faculty, staff, and students.
Research
- Research writing with AI is governed by faculty discretion and responsible-use expectations in the provided sources
- Mercer’s policy says faculty decide how AI may be used in research and must communicate expectations, while Mercer School of Medicine guidance warns that users remain responsible for verifying AI-generated content and applying professional judgment
This policy applies to members of the Mercer community who are engaged in academic work and scholarship.
Faculty are responsible for deciding whether, when, and how generative AI is used in courses, programs, and/or research.
Faculty must clearly communicate generative AI use to students in course syllabi, assignment instructions, and research guidelines.
Artificial intelligence can support learning, teaching, research, literature searching, and clinical information seeking. However, AI generated information may be incomplete, inaccurate, biased, or based on fabricated sources. MUSM users remain responsible for verifying AI generated content, protecting confidential information, following course and University policies, and applying appropriate professional judgment.
- The provided sources do not define a specific university rule for AI use in research data collection, analysis, or synthetic data generation
- Mercer does state that faculty determine AI use in research, and the medical guidance requires users to verify AI-generated content and protect confidential information
Faculty are responsible for deciding whether, when, and how generative AI is used in courses, programs, and/or research.
Artificial intelligence can support learning, teaching, research, literature searching, and clinical information seeking. However, AI generated information may be incomplete, inaccurate, biased, or based on fabricated sources. MUSM users remain responsible for verifying AI generated content, protecting confidential information, following course and University policies, and applying appropriate professional judgment.
- The provided sources do not specifically address grant proposals or IRB applications
- Mercer requires AI use in academic work and scholarship to align with academic and professional ethics, citation standards, academic integrity rules, and conduct policies
- Authors are responsible for AI-generated content, and medical school guidance adds that users must verify outputs, protect confidential information, and apply professional judgment
This policy applies to members of the Mercer community who are engaged in academic work and scholarship.
Generative AI must be used responsibly and consistently with academic and professional codes of ethics, standards of citations, the University policy on academic integrity, and the University Student Code of Conduct.
Authors of content generated by AI are responsible for that content.
Artificial intelligence can support learning, teaching, research, literature searching, and clinical information seeking. However, AI generated information may be incomplete, inaccurate, biased, or based on fabricated sources. MUSM users remain responsible for verifying AI generated content, protecting confidential information, following course and University policies, and applying appropriate professional judgment.
Academic Integrity
- Mercer requires compliance with citation standards and makes disclosure a course-level requirement when instructors choose to require it
- The sample syllabus guidance tells faculty to specify what must be disclosed and what process evidence students must retain, and example language requires disclosure plus retention of prompts, outputs, drafts, revision history, source notes, or other records
Generative AI must be used responsibly and consistently with academic and professional codes of ethics, standards of citations, the University policy on academic integrity, and the University Student Code of Conduct.
State what must be disclosed and what process evidence students should retain.
If you use AI, include the required disclosure and retain [identify prompts, outputs, drafts, revision history, source notes, or other process evidence]. You are responsible for evaluating and verifying all AI-assisted content. Do not submit AI output unchanged or represent AI-generated work as your own thinking.
Verify all facts, sources, citations, quotations, calculations, and other outputs. Include the required disclosure and retain [identify required process evidence]. You remain responsible for everything you submit.
- The provided sources do not mention AI detection tools
- Enforcement is tied to Mercer’s existing academic integrity and conduct procedures, and the sample syllabus guidance tells faculty to address how noncompliance will be handled under applicable Mercer procedures
Generative AI must be used responsibly and consistently with academic and professional codes of ethics, standards of citations, the University policy on academic integrity, and the University Student Code of Conduct.
Noncompliance: How will possible violations be addressed under the applicable Mercer procedures?
Mercer University strives to be a Community of Respect, which includes respect for academic integrity. Students operate under an honor system and will exhibit the values of honesty, trustworthiness, and fairness regarding all academic matters. Students, faculty, and staff are expected to report any violations, including but not limited to, cheating, plagiarism, and academic dishonesty, to the honor council appropriate for their campus and program.
Procedures related to Honor Systems and Academic Integrity are outlined in the specific handbooks for each campus and can be found on the Provost website at https://provost.mercer.edu/office-of-the-provost/honor-system/.
Institutional & Administrative
- Mercer also provides AmplifyAI as a pilot platform for faculty and staff use across teaching, research, productivity, and custom assistants
- Mercer gives faculty responsibility for deciding whether, when, and how AI is used in courses, programs, and research, and requires them to communicate those expectations
- The provided sources do not set explicit rules about grading, recommendation letters, or administrative communications beyond these general permissions and responsibilities
Faculty are responsible for deciding whether, when, and how generative AI is used in courses, programs, and/or research.
Faculty must clearly communicate generative AI use to students in course syllabi, assignment instructions, and research guidelines.
AmplifyAI is being piloted as Mercer’s secure generative AI platform for faculty, staff, and students. Use it for teaching and learning support, research workflows, office productivity, and custom assistants designed for repeatable tasks.
- The provided sources do not define a detailed university-wide data classification scheme
- Mercer identifies AmplifyAI as its secure pilot generative AI platform for faculty, staff, and students
- The sample syllabus guidance tells faculty to specify what information may not be entered and what supported tool or alternative will be available, while the medical guidance requires users to protect confidential information
AmplifyAI is Mercer’s multimodel generative AI access platform.
AmplifyAI is being piloted as Mercer’s secure generative AI platform for faculty, staff, and students. Use it for teaching and learning support, research workflows, office productivity, and custom assistants designed for repeatable tasks.
Privacy and access: What information may not be entered, and what supported tool or alternative will be available?
Artificial intelligence can support learning, teaching, research, literature searching, and clinical information seeking. However, AI generated information may be incomplete, inaccurate, biased, or based on fabricated sources. MUSM users remain responsible for verifying AI generated content, protecting confidential information, following course and University policies, and applying appropriate professional judgment.
- The policy is issued by the Provost, applies to academic work and scholarship across the Mercer community, and permits units to adopt more restrictive policies
- Mercer has an overarching institutional AI policy and presents AI as an area for university-wide exploration guided by mission, values, ethical leadership, and collective insight
Effective Date: August 1, 2024
Issuing Authority: Provost
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidance on the responsible use of generative AI.
This policy applies to members of the Mercer community who are engaged in academic work and scholarship. Individual units may implement separate generative AI policies that address their unique needs and govern their specific requirements. Individual units may have separate generative AI policies that are more restrictive, not less restrictive, than this University policy.
Mercer University considers artificial intelligence to be an important area of exploration for learning, discovery, and service. Guided by our mission, values, and commitment to ethical leadership, we seek to investigate AI and related emerging technologies with wisdom, discernment, and collective insight.
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 Mercer University's AI Policies
Mercer University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Mercer requires compliance with citation standards and makes disclosure a course-level requirement when instructors choose to require it. The sample syllabus guidance tells faculty to specify what must be disclosed and what process evidence students must retain, and example language requires disclosure plus retention of prompts, outputs, drafts, revision history, source notes, or other records.
The provided sources do not mention AI detection tools. Enforcement is tied to Mercer’s existing academic integrity and conduct procedures, and the sample syllabus guidance tells faculty to address how noncompliance will be handled under applicable Mercer procedures.
Mercer identifies AmplifyAI as its secure pilot generative AI platform for faculty, staff, and students. The sample syllabus guidance tells faculty to specify what information may not be entered and what supported tool or alternative will be available, while the medical guidance requires users to protect confidential information. The provided sources do not define a detailed university-wide data classification scheme.