Teaching & Learning
- Use of generative AI in coursework is generally at instructor discretion rather than governed by a single university-wide permission rule
- Faculty are told to state their expectations in the syllabus, and students are told they must know and follow each course's expectations; using AI in a way that violates those expectations can be treated as academic misconduct
Student use of AI tools in a course should align with the expectations established by the course instructor and the course learning outcomes.
There is no one-size-fits-all policy on AI use in courses or assignments. Faculty should articulate clear expectations regarding AI use in their courses and syllabi. This may involve specifying when AI can and cannot be used and what should be disclosed if students use AI tools.
Students should be informed about the broad variability in instructor expectations and standards around AI use, and they should review and understand these expectations for each course.
The unauthorized use of artificial intelligence applications and services for assignments or coursework for which they have not been explicitly approved by the instructor
- AI use in exams and assessments is not uniformly permitted or prohibited across the university; instructors are expected to set the rules
- MSU guidance specifically prompts faculty to decide and communicate whether AI is allowed during tests, quizzes, and exams, including take-home work
Will students be allowed to use AI in all assignments? Only certain assignments? In tests or quizzes or exams, including take-home assessments? How should expectations be communicated?
Faculty should articulate clear expectations regarding AI use in their courses and syllabi. This may involve specifying when AI can and cannot be used and what should be disclosed if students use AI tools.
- MSU encourages educational use of AI as a learning support tool when used critically and with human judgment
- Faculty guidance describes AI as useful for tutoring-like support such as clarifying concepts, offering explanations, practice, and feedback, while warning users to verify outputs because systems can produce errors and bias
ChatGPT or other generative AI tools can support learning by:
Generating examples, applications, or analogies for concepts or topics to support your understanding.
Breaking down more complex concepts or language into simpler chunks to support your understanding.
Asking generative AI systems to tell you "what you need to know" about a topic.
Using generative AI to quiz or tutor you on a topic.
Using generative AI to test your understanding and then ask for feedback or suggestions based on your performance.
Generating summary notes for a text, then comparing those notes to your own.
Generating a set of practice problems or prompts that can support your learning.
Asking generative AI to provide context for information or ideas
Students, faculty, and staff should also be aware of AI's limitations and recognize AI may produce inaccurate information or may not address prompts thoroughly.
- MSU does not set a single university-wide rule specific to AI code generation for student programming work in the sources reviewed
- Faculty guidance instead says AI expectations should be set at the course level, including when AI may or may not be used and what must be disclosed
There is no one-size-fits-all policy on AI use in courses or assignments. Faculty should articulate clear expectations regarding AI use in their courses and syllabi. This may involve specifying when AI can and cannot be used and what should be disclosed if students use AI tools.
Research
- The research guidance says researchers should evaluate data privacy, ethics, and intellectual property risks before using generative AI tools in research workflows
- For research writing, MSU requires researchers to follow sponsor rules, publisher rules, and disciplinary norms rather than providing a single blanket permission rule
The use of AI in Research and Scholarship at Montana State University should be informed by sponsor guidance, publisher expectations and disciplinary standards. Because the use of AI in scholarly work is evolving rapidly, researchers should consider the role of generative AI technologies and understand how use can affect important dimensions of the work, including data privacy and security, ethics, and intellectual property.
Researchers should always check on any restrictions or requirements around the use of AI in the work of external entities and stakeholders related to the work (e.g., funders, partners, publishers, etc.).
- MSU allows AI use in research-related workflows only with careful attention to privacy, security, and data stewardship requirements
- Researchers are told to consider whether tools use inputs for model training and to avoid entering non-public or restricted information unless they have confirmed the platform's terms and protections
Because the use of AI in scholarly work is evolving rapidly, researchers should consider the role of generative AI technologies and understand how use can affect important dimensions of the work, including data privacy and security, ethics, and intellectual property.
Some AI tools use user-submitted content to train the system. Data submitted to AI tools may become part of publicly available outputs, be shared with other users, or be made available to system developers.
Researchers should always understand whether or how AI systems use user-submitted content as data for model training.
Research must align with all applicable university policies regarding data stewardship and governance.
Do not enter any private or sensitive information into AI tools unless and until you have carefully evaluated the terms of service, privacy policy, and data protection standards of the AI service.
- MSU research guidance requires AI use in research to align with ethics, integrity, and external requirements
- Researchers are directed to follow funder, publisher, and partner restrictions and to consider the ethical and intellectual-property implications of AI use in scholarly work
The use of AI in Research and Scholarship at Montana State University should be informed by sponsor guidance, publisher expectations and disciplinary standards.
Researchers should always check on any restrictions or requirements around the use of AI in the work of external entities and stakeholders related to the work (e.g., funders, partners, publishers, etc.).
Because the use of AI in scholarly work is evolving rapidly, researchers should consider the role of generative AI technologies and understand how use can affect important dimensions of the work, including data privacy and security, ethics, and intellectual property.
Academic Integrity
- MSU expects transparency about AI use when instructors require it and encourages faculty to specify disclosure rules in the syllabus
- The syllabus resources include model language requiring students to document what AI tool they used, how they used it, and where AI-generated text or images appear
Faculty should articulate clear expectations regarding AI use in their courses and syllabi. This may involve specifying when AI can and cannot be used and what should be disclosed if students use AI tools.
If students use generative AI tools in the process of writing a paper, assignment, report, project, or presentation, they should include a note explaining the AI tool used, how it was used, and clearly identify any text or images generated by AI.
You are allowed to use AI tools such as ChatGPT to help generate ideas, review grammar, and suggest improvements to your writing. You are required to document your AI use and include a statement at the end of your assignment that explains which AI tool you used, how you used it, and identifies any specific content generated by AI.
- MSU treats unauthorized AI use as a form of academic misconduct subject to its regular conduct process
- Faculty guidance also warns instructors not to rely solely on AI detectors because they can be inaccurate, and instead recommends using multiple forms of evidence and documenting concerns
The unauthorized use of artificial intelligence applications and services for assignments or coursework for which they have not been explicitly approved by the instructor
As with all forms of academic misconduct, document the issue and report it according to your institution's process.
At the same time, AI detectors are notoriously unreliable and often inaccurate. These tools should not be used as the sole basis of an allegation of misconduct. Instead, concerns about potential misuse of AI should be identified through a combination of indicators and addressed through a conversation with the student, along with a review of the work in question and relevant course policies.
Institutional & Administrative
- Guidance recommends verifying outputs, protecting sensitive information, and avoiding use of AI for high-stakes decisions without human judgment
- MSU permits faculty and staff to use AI tools, but requires careful human oversight and cautions against relying on AI alone for consequential academic or administrative work
Faculty and staff are encouraged to use AI tools thoughtfully and responsibly in support of their work, including brainstorming, editing, summarizing, and generating first drafts. However, all AI-generated content should be reviewed carefully by the user for accuracy, bias, appropriateness, and alignment with university values and policies.
Do not rely solely on AI-generated outputs for decisions or communications that could significantly affect students, employees, or university operations.
Faculty, instructors, and advisors should consider carefully whether and how to use AI systems in processes that impact students and the student experience, especially in high stakes matters or those where students have the potential to be impacted unequally by AI systems or the systems' limitations.
- MSU prohibits entering private, sensitive, or regulated university information into AI tools unless the tool has been properly evaluated and approved under university data stewardship expectations
- The university provides an institutionally supported platform, CatChat, and states that CatChat is appropriate for non-public MSU data while the public version of ChatGPT should not be used for non-public university data
Do not enter any private or sensitive information into AI tools unless and until you have carefully evaluated the terms of service, privacy policy, and data protection standards of the AI service.
MSU CatChat is approved for use with non-public MSU data. Public ChatGPT is not approved for non-public MSU data.
MSU CatChat is a secure AI-powered assistant designed for Montana State University students, faculty, and staff. It uses OpenAI's ChatGPT in a secure environment where your chats and data are not used to train OpenAI models.
Protect your data by avoiding the sharing of sensitive, confidential, or personal information in any AI system unless explicitly approved and secured for such use.
- MSU's AI strategy is built on guidance documents, faculty governance, and campus resources for responsible adoption and risk awareness
- This is supported by a binding Data Stewardship policy, which requires that any use of generative AI with University Data must be formally reviewed and approved by the relevant Data Steward
This guidance is intended to support the responsible, ethical, and effective use of generative AI by faculty and staff.
Faculty Senate Resolution #8 approved in Spring 2023 tasked a Working Group with developing language and guidance related to AI generated text.
[Bozeman Data Stewards] are responsible for reviewing and approving new uses for data within their stewardship.... Any use of Generative AI or Large Language Models (LLM) including, but not limited to, ChatGPT, with University Data must be approved by the data steward for that data through the Data Use Request in Daptiv, prior to use.
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 Montana State University's AI Policies
Montana State University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
MSU expects transparency about AI use when instructors require it and encourages faculty to specify disclosure rules in the syllabus. The syllabus resources include model language requiring students to document what AI tool they used, how they used it, and where AI-generated text or images appear.
MSU treats unauthorized AI use as a form of academic misconduct subject to its regular conduct process. Faculty guidance also warns instructors not to rely solely on AI detectors because they can be inaccurate, and instead recommends using multiple forms of evidence and documenting concerns.
MSU prohibits entering private, sensitive, or regulated university information into AI tools unless the tool has been properly evaluated and approved under university data stewardship expectations. The university provides an institutionally supported platform, CatChat, and states that CatChat is appropriate for non-public MSU data while the public version of ChatGPT should not be used for non-public university data.