Teaching & Learning
- Use of AI in coursework is at instructor discretion
- Unauthorized use can be treated as an academic integrity violation
- NAU says students may use AI in coursework only when approved by faculty, and course or assignment policies may range from full permission with acknowledgment, to limited preparatory use only, to complete prohibition
NAU encourages the responsible and ethical use of AI in coursework when approved by faculty.^{1} As a result, guidelines for generative AI may differ between courses, depending on instructor preferences.
Before using AI in your coursework, it’s essential to check your course syllabus for any guidelines related to generative AI tools. If AI isn’t explicitly mentioned, ask your instructor for clarification.
This course (or assignment) allows the use of generative AI for any work submitted by students working individually or in groups as directed by class assignment instructions.
This course (or assignment) allows for the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies as part of the research and preparation phase of the work, for example using these technologies to assist with research, generating ideas, creating summaries of topics, and developing drafts of text that are then used as an input to the work students do to generate a final assignment.
This course (or assignment) expects that any work submitted by students that contributes toward the course grade, including all process work, drafts, brainstorming artifacts, and final work, will be generated entirely by the students themselves, working individually or in groups as directed by class assignment instructions. Any use of generative artificial intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT, constitutes an academic integrity violation.
Unauthorized uses of GenAI, as defined by the instructor, may constitute an academic integrity violation.
- NAU does not set a single university-wide AI rule specific to exams or assessments in the provided sources
- Instead, assessment-related AI use is left to instructor-defined course and assignment policies, and unauthorized use may count as an academic integrity violation
Provide and discuss clear syllabus policy statements that define permitted and prohibited use in your courses; developed in collaboration with our instructional designers, we offer sample syllabi statements to use as a starting point in offering guidance to students, which may be modified to fit specific course or assignment needs. Unauthorized uses of GenAI, as defined by the instructor, may constitute an academic integrity violation.
NAU encourages the responsible and ethical use of AI in coursework when approved by faculty.^{1} As a result, guidelines for generative AI may differ between courses, depending on instructor preferences.
- NAU encourages students to use AI to enhance learning rather than replace their own work, but this remains contingent on instructor approval
- The student guidance gives examples such as proofreading, sorting large data sets, and formatting citations, while warning students not to use AI to produce answers or original work for them
NAU encourages the responsible and ethical use of AI in coursework when approved by faculty.^{1}
Open communication ensures you’re aware of any restrictions in place and when you’re able to use AI to enhance your learning.
When using generative AI tools in your coursework, aim to use them as a way to enhance your learning or efficiency, not as a shortcut for producing answers or original work. For example, AI can be a helpful tool for proofreading your writing, sorting large data sets, or formatting citations. Don’t use AI to write your discussion posts, essays, or answer questions on your behalf.
Suggested methods for using generative AI tools on this page are contingent upon instructor approval. If you’re unsure—always ask your instructor.
Research
- The university does not provide a binding research-writing policy in the provided sources
- However, the task force report says faculty and staff guidance is warranted for AI use in grant writing and manuscript preparation, indicating the issue was identified for future guidance rather than already governed by a formal rule
Guidance on acceptable uses for faculty and staff is also warranted: Is it ok to use AI text generation tools for Report writing? Lesson planning? Organizing? Grant writing? Manuscript preparation? Grading?
- NAU states in its task force report that AI can be used for data analysis and research, but it emphasizes caution about misuse, bias, privacy, and security
- For human-subjects research data, the university also requires confidentiality protections and allows external cloud storage only if NAU ITS security guidelines are followed, with stronger protection for highly sensitive data
AI can be leveraged by students and faculty for data analysis, research, and creative expression, but caution must be exercised to prevent misuse or bias.
Uses of AI should be ethical, transparent, and aligned with NAU’s values and mission, with careful consideration given to privacy and security concerns.
Human subjects research data is typically considered confidential and sensitive data. Associated risk depends on the method of data collection(s), the type of participant information and how it is stored.
Use of external vendors for data storage and transfer (i.e., cloud storage) is permitted subject to following NAU ITS security guidelines. For highly sensitive data such as studies determined to be more than minimal risk to participants or that involve Protected Health Information (PHI) subject to HIPAA regulation, must be protected with the highest levels of security that are reasonably attainable.
- NAU’s provided sources do not set an AI-specific rule for grant proposals, IRB applications, or ethics declarations
- The materials do emphasize that AI use should be ethical and transparent, and the research misconduct policy identifies fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism as research misconduct terms, but no explicit AI-specific research-integrity procedure is defined here
Uses of AI should be ethical, transparent, and aligned with NAU’s values and mission, with careful consideration given to privacy and security concerns.
Fabrication
Falsification
Plagiarism
Research misconduct
Academic Integrity
- When an instructor permits AI use in graded work, NAU’s sample syllabus language requires acknowledgment of AI-generated content
- The sample guidance gives examples of how to acknowledge that content, including colored font, direct quotation, or an in-text parenthetical citation
When submitting an assignment that contributes toward the course grade, there is an expectation to acknowledge what content was generated by generative AI tools (e.g., AI-generated text appears in a different colored font, is quoted directly in the text, or uses an in-text parenthetical citation).
If you have any questions about how to appropriately acknowledge the use of such technologies, please ask for clarification before submitting assignments.
- The sources do not define a university position on AI detection tools such as Turnitin or GPTZero
- The provided sources address enforcement by stating that prohibited or unauthorized AI use may constitute an academic integrity violation
Unauthorized uses of GenAI, as defined by the instructor, may constitute an academic integrity violation.
If your instructor has set guidelines against using AI in your coursework, always respect their policy. Even though AI tools may prove helpful in context, using generative AI when prohibited can lead to major consequences, including academic integrity violations.
Submitting final work created by generative AI constitutes an academic integrity violation.
Any use of generative artificial intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT, constitutes an academic integrity violation.
Institutional & Administrative
- NAU encourages faculty to set and communicate course-level AI rules to students, using sample syllabus statements that can be modified for specific courses or assignments
- The task force report also notes that faculty and staff guidance is needed for administrative and instructional uses such as report writing, lesson planning, organizing, grant writing, manuscript preparation, and grading, but those uses are not governed by a formal university-wide rule in the provided sources
Provide and discuss clear syllabus policy statements that define permitted and prohibited use in your courses; developed in collaboration with our instructional designers, we offer sample syllabi statements to use as a starting point in offering guidance to students, which may be modified to fit specific course or assignment needs.
The Transformation through Artificial Intelligence in Learning program , launching in academic year 2024–2025 with an inaugural set of grants, aims to support faculty in developing innovative approaches for applying AI technologies to various aspects of student learning and our broader educational enterprise.
Guidance on acceptable uses for faculty and staff is also warranted: Is it ok to use AI text generation tools for Report writing? Lesson planning? Organizing? Grant writing? Manuscript preparation? Grading?
It also impacts the way faculty prepare coursework, assess learning, conduct research, and complete mundane tasks.
- NAU directs users to use only approved AI tools for university use and identifies Microsoft Copilot, Claude Enterprise, and Google Gemini as enterprise-level tools
- The university prohibits DeepSeek on university-owned devices, requires users to sign in with NAU credentials to activate enterprise protections, and says sensitive university information should never be shared with generative AI tools; data above Level 2 should not be shared
NAU’s enterprise partnership with Microsoft provides NAU users access to the Microsoft Copilot service, {1} a generative AI chatbot approved for use within the university under the guidelines of allowed use.
When using generative AI tools, even under the allowance of acceptable use, never share any sensitive university information. NAU’s data classification policy outlines which types of university data are considered “sensitive.” Any data above a Level 2 classification^{2} should not be shared with generative AI tools.
### Enterprise Level AI Tools
* Microsoft Copilot
* Claude Enterprise
* Google Gemini
Before you prompt, perform this quick review to ensure your work stays secure and aligned with the NAU Acceptable Use Policy.
1. Are you using an approved tool? Only use AI tools which are approved for University use .
* Prohibited Software: Per Arizona State directive, DeepSeek is not approved and must not be used on any university-owned devices.
2. Are you logged in with NAU credentials? Some AI tools have enterprise-level data protections. To activate these protections, you must be signed in with your NAU account (e.g. NAU credentials for Microsoft products and NAU Google account (abc123@nau.edu) for Google products).
3. Am I using the right data levels? Ensure what data level is approved for your tool by checking the service catalog . Follow the NAU Data Classification and Handling Policy for all inputs.
It’s important to note that when accessing Copilot on the web, you’ll need to sign into Microsoft using your NAU credentials. Using Copilot when logged out with university data can allow for potentially sensitive information to be ingested by the LLM.
When accessing Copilot on the web, sign in with your NAU credentials to ensure your data is protected.
- NAU has an institutional AI strategy centered on responsible adoption, with multiple coordinating initiatives
- The university says it aims to stay informed and engaged on AI applications, aligns its work with higher-education principles, created a Generative AI in Education task force, established a central coordinating hub to accelerate curricular and scholarly adaptation, and launched the TRAIL program to support faculty innovation in teaching and learning
As these technologies evolve, NAU aims to stay informed and engaged in discussions about the applications of AI within the university.
Our work with these technologies is aligned with larger principles about higher education’s role in preparing for the continued expansion of artificial intelligence capabilities.
People, not technology, must be at the center of our work.
AI tools should enhance teaching and learning.
AI research and development must be done responsibly.
NAU’s central coordinating hub for academic affairs activities that seeks to substantially accelerate NAU’s pace of curricular and scholarly adaptation in the responsible application of artificial intelligence technologies.
Broad recommendations on responding to the emergence of GenAI technologies for faculty and academic leaders can be found in the Generative AI in Education task force report, published in June 2023.
The task force convened on roughly a bi-weekly basis throughout the Spring 2023 semester
Transformation through Artificial Intelligence in Learning program, launching in academic year 2024–2025 with an inaugural set of grants, aims to support faculty in developing innovative approaches for applying AI technologies to various aspects of student learning and our broader educational enterprise.
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 Northern Arizona University's AI Policies
Northern Arizona University has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
When an instructor permits AI use in graded work, NAU’s sample syllabus language requires acknowledgment of AI-generated content. The sample guidance gives examples of how to acknowledge that content, including colored font, direct quotation, or an in-text parenthetical citation.
The provided sources address enforcement by stating that prohibited or unauthorized AI use may constitute an academic integrity violation. The sources do not define a university position on AI detection tools such as Turnitin or GPTZero.
NAU directs users to use only approved AI tools for university use and identifies Microsoft Copilot, Claude Enterprise, and Google Gemini as enterprise-level tools. The university prohibits DeepSeek on university-owned devices, requires users to sign in with NAU credentials to activate enterprise protections, and says sensitive university information should never be shared with generative AI tools; data above Level 2 should not be shared.