Michigan State University AI Policy

Instructors are expected to establish a course-specific guidance that defines the appropriate and inappropriate use of generative AI tools.

Students may only use generative AI tools to support their coursework or research activities when explicitly permitted by the instructor/research advisor.

Students – Students are expected to follow the course-specific guidance outlined in the syllabus or assignment instructions regarding the use of generative AI tools. In the absence of explicit guidance, students should always consult with their instructor before using generative AI for any assignment or assessment.

Generative AI tools should not be used to deliberately fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent information; impersonate others or oneself; or create deceptive content, except when explicitly authorized for instructional or research purposes within a controlled and approved environment.

Instructors are expected to establish a course-specific guidance that defines the appropriate and inappropriate use of generative AI tools.

Students – Students are expected to follow the course-specific guidance outlined in the syllabus or assignment instructions regarding the use of generative AI tools. In the absence of explicit guidance, students should always consult with their instructor before using generative AI for any assignment or assessment.

Educators – The university expects instructors to include generative AI course guidance with a clear statement in every syllabus. This statement should specify whether generative AI use is permitted, the contexts in which it may be used (e.g., assignments, exams, collaborative projects), and how students are expected to appropriately acknowledge and cite their use of generative AI applications.

The use of generative AI detection tools is generally discouraged. However, if an instructor chooses to use such tools, they must clearly inform students about their intended use, including the rationale, how results will be interpreted, and what actions may follow. Detection tool outputs should be considered potential indicators—not conclusive evidence—of generative AI misuse and should never serve as the sole basis for academic or grading decisions.

While the use of generative AI to support learning—such as practicing problems, exploring concepts, or reviewing definitions—is increasingly common, students must seek clarification from their instructors or teaching assistants to ensure their use aligns with academic integrity policies specific to each course and assignment.

When participating in university-sponsored co-curricular and experiential learning activities, students should obtain clear guidance from their instructor, supervisor, or program sponsor regarding whether and how generative AI tools may be used. This includes student employment, internships, leadership roles, research, service-learning, and other applied learning experiences.

When in doubt, students are expected to always seek clarification before using generative AI tools in academic or co-curricular contexts.

AI tools are not yet reliable sources for accurately interpreting or summarizing evidence. Therefore, critical and transparent use of these technologies is essential to maintaining trust, integrity, and fairness in all aspects of your learning and development at MSU.

Instructors are expected to establish a course-specific guidance that defines the appropriate and inappropriate use of generative AI tools. Students may only use generative AI tools to support their coursework when explicitly permitted by the instructor.

Students – Students are expected to follow the course-specific guidance outlined in the syllabus or assignment instructions regarding the use of generative AI tools. In the absence of explicit guidance, students should always consult with their instructor before using generative AI for any assignment or assessment.

Regardless of the tool, researchers must approach AI-generated content with a critical lens—validating accuracy, ensuring appropriate attribution, and acknowledging the limitations and potential biases inherent in these systems. AI output should never be relied upon as a substitute for scholarly judgment or original analysis.

Disclosure of AI Involvement: Transparently disclose the extent of AI involvement in the research and manuscript preparation.

Review for Biases or Inaccuracies: Carefully review any AI-generated content for potential biases or inaccuracies before submission.

Researchers at MSU are expected to use generative AI tools in ways that uphold the highest standards of research integrity, intellectual rigor, and ethical responsibility. This includes thoughtful engagement with generative AI tools in the design, conduct, analysis, and dissemination of research, scholarship, and creative work. Use of these tools must align with applicable data security requirements, disciplinary norms, and university policies governing research conduct and compliance.

Researchers and administrative staff should never enter confidential or sensitive information into third-party, non-MSU enterprise generative AI tools, unless explicitly approved by MSU IT Information Security.

Researchers are encouraged to document how generative AI is being used and ensure that it supports, rather than substitutes, scholarly expertise. Researchers should assess potential risks related to data security, intellectual property, and research integrity, and avoid entering sensitive, proprietary, or export-controlled information into generative AI platforms.

Researchers planning to conduct studies involving the use of generative AI tools must engage with the Institutional Review Board (IRB) early in the research design process to ensure ethical compliance and alignment with federal regulations and university policies.

Investigators should be prepared to clearly explain the role of AI in their study, how data (especially sensitive or identifiable data) will be collected, stored, and protected, and whether participants are interacting directly with AI systems.

Early consultation with the IRB office and MSU IT Security is expected to determine risk level, necessary disclosures, and appropriate safeguards. All AI-related elements of the study must be fully documented in the IRB application and participant consent materials to ensure transparency and protect participant rights.

Generative AI tools should not be used to deliberately fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent information; impersonate others or oneself; or create deceptive content, except when explicitly authorized for instructional or research purposes within a controlled and approved environment.

Investigator Responsibility: The investigator must take full ownership of the entire proposal, even when assisted by generative AI.

Educators – The university expects instructors to include generative AI course guidance with a clear statement in every syllabus. This statement should specify whether generative AI use is permitted, the contexts in which it may be used (e.g., assignments, exams, collaborative projects), and how students are expected to appropriately acknowledge and cite their use of generative AI applications.

Educators and students alike must recognize the limitations of generative AI tools: outputs may be biased, inaccurate, or lack transparency and require careful attention to citation and proper attribution.

Ideally, a course-guidance on the use of generative AI tools includes three key components: (a) how students are allowed to use generative AI in the course, with examples of tools that are permitted or not allowed; (b) the reasoning behind the guidance, including any rules about citation or attribution; and (c) how students can ask questions or request exceptions, so expectations are clear and transparent.

Use in these settings must be narrowly scoped, clearly disclosed, and subject to careful human oversight, in full alignment with MSU policies, academic governance procedures, and applicable collective bargaining agreements.

The use of generative AI detection tools is generally discouraged. However, if an instructor chooses to use such tools, they must clearly inform students about their intended use, including the rationale, how results will be interpreted, and what actions may follow. Detection tool outputs should be considered potential indicators—not conclusive evidence—of generative AI misuse and should never serve as the sole basis for academic or grading decisions.

If educators believe a student is committing academic misconduct, they should report it to the Office of Student Support & Accountability.

Data and Prompt Management – MSU treats generative AI tools like any other technology procured through MSU IT. Like any other IT system and service approved and supported, MSU IT reserves the right to access and review prompts, data uploads, and outputs, monitor misuse, flag inappropriate content, and investigate actual or suspected misconduct or incidents that may pose risks to the university. Any investigation related to the misuse of any generative AI tools on campus will be conducted in accordance with institutional policies.

Evaluative or Supervisory Contexts – generative AI tools may be used in limited ways for evaluative or supervisory contexts, such as faculty or staff reviews. This includes drafting assistance, checking for mechanical errors, or refining language. However, they must not substitute for disciplinary judgment, institutional knowledge, or the nuanced understanding essential for fair and transparent evaluation. Use in these settings must be narrowly scoped, clearly disclosed, and subject to careful human oversight, in full alignment with MSU policies, academic governance procedures, and applicable collective bargaining agreements.

When using generative AI to develop course materials, interpret/translate text, or support grading processes, instructors should apply the same standards of oversight, transparency, and accountability that they expect from students in their academic use of these tools.

Graduate Teaching Assistants – Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs) are expected to adhere to the instructor’s decisions regarding the use of generative AI tools in each course. The use of generative AI to assist students, develop course materials, or support grading is not permitted unless explicitly authorized by the course instructor.

MSU expects all members of its community to follow these guidelines when using generative AI tools in teaching, research, administrative, and professional contexts. To safeguard institutional data, the university also expects all members of its community to use generative AI tools that are institutionally approved and supported when conducting work on behalf of MSU.

Researchers and administrative staff should never enter confidential or sensitive information into third-party, non-MSU enterprise generative AI tools, unless explicitly approved by MSU IT Information Security.

When conducting work on behalf of MSU, individuals should only use MSU-approved generative AI tools and consult with their supervisors to determine appropriate use based on their specific roles, clarify expectations, and establish the scope of permissible applications.

Third-party generative AI tools, particularly those operated outside the United States, pose significant risks to data security and intellectual property. These tools may only be used with non-sensitive, public information unless prior approval is obtained from MSU IT Information Security.

Entering confidential or sensitive information into third-party, non-MSU enterprise generative AI tools is strictly prohibited unless explicitly approved by MSU IT Information Security.

Only AI platforms that have been formally evaluated and recommended by MSU IT Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC) may be used with institutional data.

No AI tools should be assumed safe for confidential or regulated data unless explicitly approved.

Currently, Microsoft Copilot with enterprise data protection (available to all MSU faculty, staff, and students when logged in with your MSU credentials) is the only MSU IT approved generative AI tool for use with the following data types:

* Institutional data

* Research data (with appropriate ownership or permissions)

* FERPA data

Microsoft Copilot is not currently approved for HIPAA, PCI, CUI, NIST 800-171, or other controlled or confidential data types.

Microsoft Copilot is an AI-powered web chat assistant that provides answers, research insights, and content creation capabilities while maintaining enterprise data protection when logged in with MSU credentials. Allowed data includes Public, Internal, Confidential Research, and FERPA data (learn more about data security).

In addition to launching the AI website in the fall of 2025, MSU has released updated Guidelines for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence, which supersede all previously issued AI guidance.

This document establishes institutional guidelines for the responsible and ethical integration of generative AI tools across Michigan State University, reflecting MSU’s commitment to upholding its core values of collaboration, equity, excellence, integrity, and respect.

These guidelines supersede all previously issued guidance related to the use of generative AI tools at MSU. They supplement existing university policies, standards, and procedures, and serve as the university’s official framework for the ethical, responsible, and equitable use of generative AI.

MSU encourages all members of the university community to engage with generative AI tools responsibly, ethically, and creatively, always keeping in mind that academic and administrative decisions must be grounded and centered around human judgment and input.

These guidelines apply to all members of the MSU community who use generative AI tools in teaching, learning, research, scholarship, or administrative activities.

The following MSU AI ethical values developed by the MSU Ethics Institute provide a framework for the responsible use of generative AI in alignment with the university’s mission and values.