Teaching & Learning
- AI use in coursework is primarily at instructor discretion
- In restrictive settings, use of generative AI for assignments can be forbidden and treated as academic misconduct
- Faculty are advised to state in the syllabus how AI may be used, and the university provides permissive, hybrid, and restrictive sample course policies
o Faculty should include a clear AI policy in their course syllabi, outlining how AI tools can be used in the course. Sample policy statements for permissive, hybrid, and restrictive use are provided below.
Permissive Policy: This course encourages students to explore the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT for all assignments and assessments. Any such use must be appropriately acknowledged and cited. It is each student’s responsibility to assess the validity and applicability of any GenAI output that is submitted; you bear the final responsibility. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
Hybrid Policy: Certain assignments in this course will permit or even encourage the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT. The default is that such use is disallowed unless otherwise stated. Any such use must be appropriately acknowledged and cited. It is each student’s responsibility to assess the validity and applicability of any GenAI output that is submitted; you bear the final responsibility. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
Restrictive Policy: We expect that all the work students submit for this course will be their own. In instances when collaborative work is assigned, we expect for the assignment to list all team members who participated. We specifically forbid the use of ChatGPT or any other Generative AI (GenAI) tools at all stages of the work process, including preliminary ones. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
- Faculty are advised to communicate expectations and consequences clearly, and misuse is handled under existing academic integrity processes
- The university does not impose one uniform rule for AI use in exams and assessments; course-level policy can permit, restrict, or default-disallow such use
o Faculty should include a clear AI policy in their course syllabi, outlining how AI tools can be used in the course. Sample policy statements for permissive, hybrid, and restrictive use are provided below.
o Clearly communicate expectations regarding the use of AI tools and the consequences of misuse.
o Academic integrity misconduct will follow existing honor code and student conduct standards.
Permissive Policy: This course encourages students to explore the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT for all assignments and assessments. Any such use must be appropriately acknowledged and cited. It is each student’s responsibility to assess the validity and applicability of any GenAI output that is submitted; you bear the final responsibility. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
Hybrid Policy: Certain assignments in this course will permit or even encourage the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT. The default is that such use is disallowed unless otherwise stated. Any such use must be appropriately acknowledged and cited. It is each student’s responsibility to assess the validity and applicability of any GenAI output that is submitted; you bear the final responsibility. Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
- ODU encourages AI integration for learning support and gives examples of study-oriented uses
- The guidance frames AI as a support tool rather than a replacement for human judgment, and students are to be educated about ethical use, bias, and limitations
o Faculty are encouraged to explore and integrate AI tools to enhance teaching and learning experiences.
o AI tools should be used to augment, not replace, human interaction and judgment.
o Educate students and recommend student to attend trainings that aim to educate them about the ethical use of AI and the potential biases and limitations of AI-generated content.
1. Teaching and Learning (This is not an exhaustive list):
5. Draft practice quizzes to test students' understanding of the material.
9. Provide simple explanations of complex concepts.
12. Generate practice problems with solutions, structured reflection activities.
- Programming-related AI use is addressed through course-level discretion rather than a single university-wide rule
- The faculty development guidance includes programming code within AI-generated content that may be prohibited in a course, and syllabi should clarify what students may or may not use
o Faculty should include a clear AI policy in their course syllabi, outlining how AI tools can be used in the course. Sample policy statements for permissive, hybrid, and restrictive use are provided below.
Clarify your expectations regarding academic honesty. Be clear about what your students may or may not use.
Provide clear instructions on how students should use AICGTs: why (purpose), what (assignments), how (grading criteria).
In this course, you may not use AI tools such as ChatGPT and DALL●E 2, to generate content (including text, images, digital art, sound, video, and programming code) is strictly prohibited. You must complete all course assignments on your own or with your classmates. Using AI tools to create content for your assignments is a form of academic dishonesty and a violation of the University Honor Code.
Research
- The source text does not provide a broader university-wide manuscript rule beyond this graduate requirement
- For theses and dissertations, AI may be used for research and the resulting written document, but committee approval is required and use should be disclosed in the acknowledgments section
AI may be an appropriate tool for completion of thesis/dissertation research and the written document that results. Use of AI must be approved for use by the student’s committee and, if used, it should be disclosed in the acknowledgments’ section of the thesis/dissertation. Example guidelines for how to acknowledge AI can be found in numerous sources, including journal manuscript guidelines and manuscript preparation manuals (e.g., APA Guide).
- ODU allows AI in research data-related work only with privacy and risk controls
- Sensitive or protected research data must not be entered into AI research tools without proper risk analysis, informed consent should be obtained for data collection and analysis, and human or animal research using AI must be disclosed in the IRB application
Strengthen provisions related to data privacy and security when using AI technologies, adhering to best practices for protecting sensitive information and obtaining informed consent for data collection and analysis.
mplement measures to ensure that confidential, sensitive, and other protected data are not entered into any AI research tool without proper risk analysis. Protected data may include information protected by FERPA, HIPAA, confidential personnel records, intellectual property, Human and Animal Subject data, and other sensitive or confidential institutional research data.
Any use of AI tools in the research process using humans or animals should be disclosed in the Institutional Review Board (IRB) application and address potential ethical considerations.
AI may be an appropriate tool for completion of thesis/dissertation research and the written document that results.
- ODU requires ethical safeguards when AI is used in research, including IRB disclosure for human or animal research and attention to ethical considerations
- The university also circulated NSF research misconduct language stating that fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism can occur through AI-based tools in proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting NSF-funded research
Any use of AI tools in the research process using humans or animals should be disclosed in the Institutional Review Board (IRB) application and address potential ethical considerations.
RESEARCH MISCONDUCT means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism, whether committed by an individual directly or through the use or assistance of other persons, entities, or tools, including artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools, in proposing or performing research funded by NSF, reviewing research proposals submitted to NSF, or in reporting research results funded by NSF.
Academic Integrity
- Board policy also requires disclaimers for AI products or outcomes generated in educational settings
- Disclosure and attribution requirements are explicitly stated in both teaching and graduate research contexts
- In courses that allow AI, use must be acknowledged and cited; for theses and dissertations, AI use requires committee approval and should be disclosed in the acknowledgments section
All AI products or outcomes generated in educational settings must be accompanied by clear and comprehensive disclaimers that inform users about the limitations, assumptions, and potential biases of the AI system and clarify the roles and responsibilities of human users in interpreting and acting upon AI-generated information.
Permissive Policy: This course encourages students to explore the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT for all assignments and assessments. Any such use must be appropriately acknowledged and cited.
Hybrid Policy: Certain assignments in this course will permit or even encourage the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT. The default is that such use is disallowed unless otherwise stated. Any such use must be appropriately acknowledged and cited.
AI may be an appropriate tool for completion of thesis/dissertation research and the written document that results. Use of AI must be approved for use by the student’s committee and, if used, it should be disclosed in the acknowledgments’ section of the thesis/dissertation. Example guidelines for how to acknowledge AI can be found in numerous sources, including journal manuscript guidelines and manuscript preparation manuals (e.g., APA Guide).
- Sample course policies also state that violations will be considered academic misconduct
- ODU states that AI-checker results alone are insufficient evidence and must be weighed with other evidence
- Misuse of AI is handled through existing honor code and student conduct procedures, and faculty are to receive tools and training to detect and address potential AI-related misconduct
A. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Checker Percentage as Evidence: The AI Checker percentage alone does not determine if the student used AI to complete an assignment. The AI Checker percentage will be considered with all other evidence to determine if there was a violation.
o Academic integrity misconduct will follow existing honor code and student conduct standards.
o Faculty will be provided with relevant tools and trainings to detect and address potential academic misconduct related to AI, as these become available.
Violations of this policy will be considered academic misconduct.
Institutional & Administrative
- MonarchMind is specifically provided for faculty and staff, including for course content and assessment design
- Faculty and staff are encouraged to use AI in teaching and work, but with human judgment, ethics, and privacy safeguards
- Faculty have autonomy over whether to incorporate AI in their courses, and guidance includes uses such as syllabus drafting, quiz creation, feedback, and grading automation
o Faculty are encouraged to explore and integrate AI tools to enhance teaching and learning experiences.
o Faculty have the autonomy to decide the extent to which they incorporate AI tools in their courses. Those who choose not to use AI will not be required to follow these guidelines.
o AI tools should be used to augment, not replace, human interaction and judgment.
1. Teaching and Learning (This is not an exhaustive list):
1. Draft/outline for course syllabus, lecture notes, resources, etc.
3. Draft quiz questions and answers, rubrics, assignments, project-based learning scenarios, etc.
6. Draft personalized feedback on student assignments.
8. Automate the grading of specific student assignments.
MonarchMind is a custom AI application built for Old Dominion University faculty and staff that enhances communication and student support.
Faculty and staff at ODU can take advantage of the platform:
Faculty members: Leverage the platform to design course content, create quizzes and assessments, draft syllabi or brainstorm new curriculum ideas. Prepare study guides for students to help them gain a deeper understanding of complex topics.
- ODU requires protection of sensitive, confidential, restricted, and non-public data when using AI, including approval and security review requirements before using university data with AI tools
- The university identifies institutionally provided or more secure options such as MonarchMind and ODU-account Google Gemini, while directing employees to review the regulated data storage matrix before uploading university data
Implement robust data privacy and security measures to safeguard sensitive information collected or processed by AI systems.
Ensure that AI systems comply with applicable laws and regulations governing the collection, storage, and use of student data, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and other relevant state and federal privacy laws.
Be mindful of the information you provide to AI systems.
Never share sensitive, confidential or protected data.
Get the approval of data owners before using non-public data in any AI tool.
Have ITS conduct a security review before sharing or using any University data with an AI tool.
MonarchMind is a secure, AI-driven interface that integrates multiple large language models (LLMs), including OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Meta's Llama 3.
ODU faculty, staff, and students have access to Google Gemini with data protection, a more secure alternative to the consumer version of Gemini (Google's generative AI).
When logged in with your ODU account, data shared with Gemini is not shared with Google. This helps ensure university data is not used to train generative AI models or reviewed by humans.
University employees must be careful to protect confidential or restricted data. Before uploading any University data to Google Gemini or NotebookLM, review the regulated data storage matrix.
- ODU has an institution-wide AI governance and strategy framework centered on Board policy, an AI Implementation Workgroup, responsible-office oversight, approval processes, training, and ongoing review
- The university states that its AI standards are meant to support research, teaching, and administration while protecting privacy and mitigating risk, and it describes MonarchMind as part of a broader institutional AI initiative
The purpose of this policy is to establish a culture of integrity that ensures the responsible, ethical, transparent use of artificial intelligence (AI) technology in public higher education by implementing comprehensive AI standards across the University ecosystem.
Old Dominion University is committed to the effective implementation of comprehensive artificial intelligence policy standards that support research, teaching, and administration while safeguarding state business applications, protecting individual data, and mitigating risk.
The responsible office, the Division of Digital Learning, shall establish a standardized and transparent approval process for the acquisition, development, and/or deployment of AI technologies.
Training and Capacity Building: Provide training and professional development opportunities for faculty, staff, and administrators on AI ethics, best practices, and compliance requirements. Foster a culture of responsible AI usage through awareness campaigns, workshops, and educational resources.
Monitoring and Evaluation: Establish mechanisms for ongoing monitoring, evaluation, and review of AI initiatives to ensure alignment with AI Policy Standards and educational objectives.
These guidelines have been developed in alignment with the recommendations from the ODU Artificial Intelligence (AI) Implementation Workgroup.
We are excited to announce the launch of MonarchMind, ODU’s AI-powered platform designed to enhance student support, improve faculty productivity, and create efficiencies across the university community – all while prioritizing ethical AI use and bias mitigation.
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 Old Dominion University's AI Policies
Old Dominion University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Disclosure and attribution requirements are explicitly stated in both teaching and graduate research contexts. In courses that allow AI, use must be acknowledged and cited; for theses and dissertations, AI use requires committee approval and should be disclosed in the acknowledgments section. Board policy also requires disclaimers for AI products or outcomes generated in educational settings.
ODU states that AI-checker results alone are insufficient evidence and must be weighed with other evidence. Misuse of AI is handled through existing honor code and student conduct procedures, and faculty are to receive tools and training to detect and address potential AI-related misconduct. Sample course policies also state that violations will be considered academic misconduct.
ODU requires protection of sensitive, confidential, restricted, and non-public data when using AI, including approval and security review requirements before using university data with AI tools. The university identifies institutionally provided or more secure options such as MonarchMind and ODU-account Google Gemini, while directing employees to review the regulated data storage matrix before uploading university data.