Teaching & Learning
- AI use in coursework is primarily at instructor discretion under the university-wide academic policy
- In the Elisabeth Haub School of Law, students must follow the professor's instructions; if no permission is given, work submitted for credit must be the student's own
The AI academic policy, approved by both faculty councils as of Spring 2025, allows faculty the freedom to decide to what extent, if any, they allow AI usage in their courses, and includes sample syllabus statements they can use or amend for their syllabi.
When preparing written work or oral presentations of any kind in doing academic assignments or satisfying academic requirements, you should not consult or utilize the help of artificial intelligence in any situation or for any purpose in which it would be inappropriate to consult or utilize the help of another person. What is “inappropriate” will, of course, depend upon and be subject to specific instructions and permissions provided by the instructor as part of the assignment. How artificial intelligence can be used is always subject to the instructions of the professor. In the absence of such instructions or permissions the presumption will be, as always, that the work you turn in for credit must be your own.
- Use of AI in examinations and assessments is not defined in a distinct university-wide AI rule in the provided sources
- The general academic integrity code prohibits use of unauthorized materials or information, and the university-wide AI policy states that course, program, or departmental rules may require disclosure and compliance
A. Cheating. Intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or
Where required by University, course, program, or departmental rules, users must disclose material use of AI Tools and comply with applicable academic integrity requirements, including the University’s AI Academic Policy , Academic Integrity Code and/or Honor Code for Law School Students.
- In the law school example, using an AI overview as a starting point for research was treated as not dishonest when the student independently checked authorities and used proper attribution
- Pace provides students with AI learning resources and study guidance, but no binding university-wide rule in the provided sources defines when study-assistance use is permitted or prohibited outside graded work
With how quickly generative AI has evolved, it can feel overwhelming. This handy list of resources for students should help get you started.
Using AI for Class
The student checked out the cases and statutes cited in the AI overview and then searched for other primary and secondary authorities using standard legal research materials and techniques. The student did not quote or paraphrase any portion of the AI overview (or any other outside source) without the use of proper quotations, indications and attribution. Based on these facts, no academic dishonesty occurred.
Research
- The AI committee charge indicates the university is developing best practices for faculty use of AI in research
- No operative university-wide rule on AI use for research manuscript drafting or editing is defined in the provided sources
Draft “best practices” for Pace University faculty to incorporate AI in research, curriculum development including learning outcomes assessment, teaching and related course assignments, including strategies to implement AI ethical best practices in DEI & mitigating the effects of implicit bias. Offer training/support for faculty on the use of AI in pedagogy via the Faculty Center in collaboration with the Colleges & Schools
- The AI committee charge states that ethical and inclusive AI policies are being drafted for students, faculty, and staff
- No explicit rule on AI in grant proposals, IRB applications, or research ethics submissions is defined in the provided sources
The committee is charged with researching, coordinating, and optimizing the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), include best practices for the use of AI, and draft policies that are ethical and inclusive as they pertain to students, faculty, and staff.
Academic Integrity
- Disclosure of material AI use is required when university, course, program, or departmental rules require it
- Pace also points students to AI citation resources, and the law school policy requires proper quotations, indications, and attribution when using material from an AI overview or other outside source
Where required by University, course, program, or departmental rules, users must disclose material use of AI Tools and comply with applicable academic integrity requirements, including the University’s AI Academic Policy , Academic Integrity Code and/or Honor Code for Law School Students.
Using AI for Class
Citing AI
The student did not quote or paraphrase any portion of the AI overview (or any other outside source) without the use of proper quotations, indications and attribution.
- The provided sources do not define a university stance on AI detection tools
- Enforcement for unauthorized AI-related academic misconduct is handled through existing academic integrity processes, including reporting obligations and instructor-led resolution procedures
Faculty, students and all members of the University community who in good faith have reason to believe that a violation of this Code has occurred, have a moral obligation to report this information to a course instructor, proctor, or the Chair of the Academic Conduct Committee.
If the matter is one in which: (a) the maximum sanction to be imposed consists of a reduced grade for particular work, a reduced grade for the course, and/or a requirement that the student be withdrawn from the course in question, and (b) the alleged academic misconduct relates directly to a course taught or an examination monitored by the instructor or a proctor, and (c) neither the student's official academic record or the file of the Academic Conduct Committee contains evidence of any instances of prior academic misconduct, then
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty and staff may use AI tools for university business, but they must comply with university policy and guidance
- They are required to review and verify AI outputs before use, and the AI committee is developing training and best practices for faculty pedagogy and staff administrative use
When using tools that include Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology (“AI Tools”), including, but not limited to, generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, Claude, etc.) for University business, users must comply with this Policy and applicable University guidance.
Users remain responsible for reviewing and verifying AI outputs for accuracy, appropriateness, bias, and compliance before use; AI outputs used for University purposes must be handled, stored, and shared as University Data and only in approved systems.
Assess all administrative uses of AI including ChatGPT and any other AI based adaptive systems and develop a training plan for staff.
Draft “best practices” for Pace University faculty to incorporate AI in research, curriculum development including learning outcomes assessment, teaching and related course assignments, including strategies to implement AI ethical best practices in DEI & mitigating the effects of implicit bias. Offer training/support for faculty on the use of AI in pedagogy via the Faculty Center in collaboration with the Colleges & Schools
- For university business, AI outputs must be treated as university data and may only be handled, stored, and shared in approved systems
- Pace identifies institutionally supported platforms and tools in its AI resources, including Microsoft Copilot and Pace Google Workspace access to Gemini and Notebooks
Users remain responsible for reviewing and verifying AI outputs for accuracy, appropriateness, bias, and compliance before use; AI outputs used for University purposes must be handled, stored, and shared as University Data and only in approved systems.
When using tools that include Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology (“AI Tools”), including, but not limited to, generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, Claude, etc.) for University business, users must comply with this Policy and applicable University guidance.
Copilot for Microsoft365 Video Tutorials
Accessing Pace Google Workspace (Gemini and Notebooks)
- Its stated strategy emphasizes responsible, ethical AI use and institutional leadership in AI integration
- Pace has a university-wide AI committee that oversees AI governance work, including policy development, best practices, resource coordination, and training for students, faculty, and staff
Pace's Artificial Intelligence Committee was established in April 2024 through the support of former Provost Joseph Franco, PhD, and the leadership of Beth Gordon, PhD, Vice President of Information Technology Services and Chief Information Officer.
Our charge is to research and optimize the use of AI at Pace University. This includes identifying, assessing, and promoting AI resources across the University, supporting faculty in incorporating AI into teaching, and developing ethical AI policies that ensure academic integrity. Additionally, we are working to provide training and best practices for students, faculty, and staff.
The committee is charged with researching, coordinating, and optimizing the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), include best practices for the use of AI, and draft policies that are ethical and inclusive as they pertain to students, faculty, and staff.
The AI Committee is dedicated to positioning Pace University as a leader in the responsible and ethical use of AI, empowering our community to leverage these technologies in meaningful ways. By fostering a culture of innovation and curiosity, we aim to set a new benchmark for ethical AI integration, not just within New York City and Westchester, but across the global academic and professional landscapes.
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 Pace University's AI Policies
Pace University has defined AI policies in 10 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 83%.
Disclosure of material AI use is required when university, course, program, or departmental rules require it. Pace also points students to AI citation resources, and the law school policy requires proper quotations, indications, and attribution when using material from an AI overview or other outside source.
The provided sources do not define a university stance on AI detection tools. Enforcement for unauthorized AI-related academic misconduct is handled through existing academic integrity processes, including reporting obligations and instructor-led resolution procedures.
For university business, AI outputs must be treated as university data and may only be handled, stored, and shared in approved systems. Pace identifies institutionally supported platforms and tools in its AI resources, including Microsoft Copilot and Pace Google Workspace access to Gemini and Notebooks.