Teaching & Learning
- Use of generative AI in coursework and assignments is at instructor discretion
- Instructors must decide the level of permitted generative AI use in their course and communicate that decision to students, with sample syllabus statements covering acceptable, limited, and prohibited use
Generative AI Policy.
The instructor must decide and communicate the level of generative AI to students in their course. See Generative AI Guide for sample generative AI statements for three scenarios: Acceptable Use, Some Use, and Prohibited Use. If an instructor decides not to use one of those three samples, they may write their own.
Evaluation of Learning:
(Assignments, assessments, activities)
- There is no separate NWU policy specific to AI use in examinations
- Instructor-level generative AI rules set via the syllabus policy apply to all course activities including assessments
- Where prohibited AI use constitutes academic misconduct, faculty have full authority to determine sanctions under the general academic dishonesty policy, including assigning failing grades, requiring reassessment, or reporting to the Student Conduct Board
Generative AI Policy.
The instructor must decide and communicate the level of generative AI to students in their course. See Generative AI Guide for sample generative AI statements for three scenarios: Acceptable Use, Some Use, and Prohibited Use. If an instructor decides not to use one of those three samples, they may write their own.
Evaluation of Learning:
(Assignments, assessments, activities)
2. Academic Dishonesty. Faculty members have full authority in determining the action to be taken in cases of academic misconduct. Faculty members may choose to take one or a combination of these actions: assign a failing grade in the course; lower or assign a failing grade to an examination or assignment; require the student to take another examination or redo the assignment; report the action to the Student Life Office; file a complaint with the Student Conduct Board.
- Use of generative AI for learning or study assistance is at instructor discretion when it relates to a course
- The syllabus policy says instructors must communicate the level of generative AI allowed in their course, but the provided university sources do not set a separate university-wide rule specifically for personal study use outside coursework
Generative AI Policy.
The instructor must decide and communicate the level of generative AI to students in their course. See Generative AI Guide for sample generative AI statements for three scenarios: Acceptable Use, Some Use, and Prohibited Use. If an instructor decides not to use one of those three samples, they may write their own.
Research
- If AI or machine learning is used to interact with participants or to analyze or gather participant data, NWU requires IRB review
- Researchers must explain the extent of AI/ML use in informed consent and describe associated risks, risk minimization efforts, and confidentiality protections
D. Documentation of informed consent involving Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) or
Third-Party software:
a. Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) or Machine Learning (M.L.): As noted by the
Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections
(SACHRP), A.I. research may be compliant but not necessarily adequate
in protecting the rights and welfare of participants. If A.I. or a M.L. tool is
used to interact with, analyze, or gather data from participants, then an
NWU-IRB review is required. The extent of A.I. or M.L. shall be explained
in the informed consent and any risks associated with such use. The
informed consent will reflect efforts to minimize risks and maintain
confidentiality.
- NWU requires IRB review for research involving AI or machine learning tools that interact with, analyze, or gather data from participants; the informed consent must disclose the extent of AI/ML use, associated risks, and confidentiality protections
- Separately, any research using third-party software (e.g., Qualtrics, SurveyMonkey, Otter) must also undergo IRB review, with the application explaining intended use, confidentiality understanding, data security and privacy policies, and risks such as identifiable data collection or future third-party storage — these third-party provisions are not AI-specific but apply broadly to any external software used in research
D. Documentation of informed consent involving Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) or Third-Party software:
a. Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) or Machine Learning (M.L.): As noted by the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP), A.I. research may be compliant but not necessarily adequate in protecting the rights and welfare of participants. If A.I. or a M.L. tool is used to interact with, analyze, or gather data from participants, then an NWU-IRB review is required. The extent of A.I. or M.L. shall be explained in the informed consent and any risks associated with such use. The informed consent will reflect efforts to minimize risks and maintain confidentiality.
b. Third-party software: Any research involving third-party companies (Qualtrics, SurveyMonkey, Otter, etc.) must be reviewed by the NWU‐IRB. The application will clearly explain the intended use of the software and reflect the investigator's understanding of confidentiality when using the software and the data security/protection and privacy policies for the company relevant to the software. The extent of use, to include data collection and maintenance, will be described in the informed consent and reflect any risks associated with using the software. Risks include default collection of identifiable data or storage of data for future third-party use. The informed consent will include efforts to minimize the risks and maintain confidentiality.
Academic Integrity
- NWU has no university-wide citation or attribution format requiring students to disclose AI use in submitted academic work; any such requirements are set at the instructor level through the course syllabus generative AI policy
- In the research context, disclosure is required in a different form: researchers must explain to human research participants the extent of AI or machine learning use, associated risks, and confidentiality protections in the IRB-reviewed informed consent — this is a participant protection mechanism, not a scholarly attribution requirement
Generative AI Policy.
The instructor must decide and communicate the level of generative AI to students in their course. See Generative AI Guide for sample generative AI statements for three scenarios: Acceptable Use, Some Use, and Prohibited Use. If an instructor decides not to use one of those three samples, they may write their own.
If A.I. or a M.L. tool is used to interact with, analyze, or gather data from participants, then an NWU-IRB review is required. The extent of A.I. or M.L. shall be explained in the informed consent and any risks associated with such use. The informed consent will reflect efforts to minimize risks and maintain confidentiality.
- The provided sources do not mention AI detection tools
- Enforcement for undisclosed or prohibited AI use would fall under the university's academic dishonesty process, where faculty have full authority to determine sanctions, including failing grades, reassessment, reporting to Student Life, or a complaint to the Student Conduct Board
2. Academic Dishonesty. Faculty members have full authority in determining the action to be taken in cases of academic misconduct. Faculty members may choose to take one or a combination of these actions: assign a failing grade in the course; lower or assign a failing grade to an examination or assignment; require the student to take another examination or redo the assignment; report the action to the Student Life Office; file a complaint with the Student Conduct Board.
3. Plagiarism: copying assignments from a text, either printed or electronic, to hand in for a grade; quoting text or other works on an examination, paper, or homework without citations; handing in a paper purchased from a research service; reproducing someone’s paper and handing it in as one’s own; citing resources deceptively for written assignments.
4. Unauthorized collaboration: planning with one or more students to commit any form of academic misconduct; working with one or more students on any assignments unless specifically allowed by the faculty member.
5. Misrepresentation: having another student do one’s work; lying to improve one’s grade; having another student take one’s exam; submitting the same work for a grade in two different courses without permission from the course instructors; misrepresenting the amount or type of work done; altering a graded work after it has been returned and then submitting it for a re-grading without the instructor’s knowledge.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty are required to decide and communicate the level of generative AI allowed in each course
- The provided sources do not establish additional institution-wide rules for faculty or staff use of AI in grading, feedback, lesson planning, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
Generative AI Policy.
The instructor must decide and communicate the level of generative AI to students in their course. See Generative AI Guide for sample generative AI statements for three scenarios: Acceptable Use, Some Use, and Prohibited Use. If an instructor decides not to use one of those three samples, they may write their own.
- NWU does not identify approved AI platforms
- The IRB data security recommendations document provides additional guidance but its specific content is not quoted in the extracted sources
- For research, IRB policies require that AI and third-party software use address confidentiality, data security, privacy policies, and risks including identifiable data collection or future third-party storage
Responsible Use Policy (general IT rules applicable to AI tool use):
m. Storing, processing, analyzing, transmitting, or receiving University records and data on information systems that do not meet minimum security standards for the data classification as defined in the ITS-02: Risk Classification Standard.
v. Using electronic communications to disclose proprietary information without the explicit permission of the owner except as required by law, example law enforcement subpoena or search warrant.
IRB Policies and Procedures:
If A.I. or a M.L. tool is used to interact with, analyze, or gather data from participants, then an NWU-IRB review is required. The informed consent will reflect efforts to minimize risks and maintain confidentiality.
Third-party software: Any research involving third-party companies (Qualtrics, SurveyMonkey, Otter, etc.) must be reviewed by the NWU‐IRB. Risks include default collection of identifiable data or storage of data for future third-party use. The informed consent will include efforts to minimize the risks and maintain confidentiality.
NWU-IRB policies and procedures stipulate that: When appropriate, there are adequate provisions to protect the privacy of subjects and to maintain the confidentiality of data.
- The sources do not define a broader university-wide AI strategy, AI committee, ethics framework, or adoption roadmap
- The university has a limited governance statement in the provided sources: its syllabus policy requires each instructor to set a course-level generative AI policy
Generative AI Policy.
The instructor must decide and communicate the level of generative AI to students in their course. See Generative AI Guide for sample generative AI statements for three scenarios: Acceptable Use, Some Use, and Prohibited Use. If an instructor decides not to use one of those three samples, they may write their own.
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 Nebraska Wesleyan University's AI Policies
Nebraska Wesleyan University has defined AI policies in 10 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 83%.
NWU has no university-wide citation or attribution format requiring students to disclose AI use in submitted academic work; any such requirements are set at the instructor level through the course syllabus generative AI policy. In the research context, disclosure is required in a different form: researchers must explain to human research participants the extent of AI or machine learning use, associated risks, and confidentiality protections in the IRB-reviewed informed consent — this is a participant protection mechanism, not a scholarly attribution requirement.
The provided sources do not mention AI detection tools. Enforcement for undisclosed or prohibited AI use would fall under the university's academic dishonesty process, where faculty have full authority to determine sanctions, including failing grades, reassessment, reporting to Student Life, or a complaint to the Student Conduct Board.
NWU does not identify approved AI platforms. Data protection obligations relevant to AI use derive from general university IT and IRB policies: the Responsible Use of University Computers and Information Systems policy prohibits storing, processing, analyzing, transmitting, or receiving university records on systems that do not meet minimum security standards, and prohibits disclosing proprietary information via electronic communications without owner permission. For research, IRB policies require that AI and third-party software use address confidentiality, data security, privacy policies, and risks including identifiable data collection or future third-party storage. The IRB data security recommendations document provides additional guidance but its specific content is not quoted in the extracted sources.