Teaching & Learning
- For coursework, Skidmore does not set a single blanket rule permitting or banning AI across all classes
- Instead, use of AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language is prohibited unless the instructor authorizes it, and faculty are encouraged to state course-specific expectations in the syllabus because practices may vary by instructor
Thus, the use of AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language without instructor authorization constitutes plagiarism.
Instructors should be direct and transparent about what tools students are permitted to use, and about the reasons for any restrictions
If you expect students to avoid the use of AI chatbots when producing their work, add this to your policy.
Faculty might also consider explicitly addressing the limits of collaboration and their expectations regarding use of generative AI, areas where ambiguity and variation across instructors can lead to unintentional (but still egregious) violations of the Honor Code.
- Faculty are encouraged to specify AI expectations for individual assessments in their syllabi, and honor code violations must be reported
- Skidmore does not have a standalone AI policy specific to examinations, but the Academic Honor Code's prohibition on unauthorized AI use applies to assessed work, including exams
Thus, the use of AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language without instructor authorization constitutes plagiarism.
Instructors should be direct and transparent about what tools students are permitted to use, and about the reasons for any restrictions.
Faculty have final authority over each student's grade in this as in other contexts.
- The materials emphasize that allowed uses should be determined in the class context and communicated by the instructor
- Skidmore provides guidance encouraging discussion of acceptable and unacceptable AI uses in learning, but it does not establish a uniform student right to use AI for study assistance
Try involving the students in a discussion about how these new tools impact them as learners and you as an educator, while highlighting the reasons why writing is important, and learning to write well an essential skill. Getting buy in from the students about the uses of AI that will be allowed in your class, and those that would mean an honor code violation, is important.
Depending on your discipline, course topic, and teaching style, there are a collection of resources below that might be helpful as you think through how you might alter writing assignments, incorporate generative AI in creative ways, and/or utilize a detection tool.
Librarians are a valuable resource to inform conversations about information literacy and the use of various online tools for composing research-based writing. Draw upon their expertise when meeting with students to explore different ways that students can and can’t use ChatGPT effectively for research-based writing assignments.
- Faculty are expected to set course-level expectations
- Skidmore does not appear to have a specific policy addressing AI-assisted code generation for coursework
- The general academic integrity rule that unauthorized AI use constitutes plagiarism would apply to programming assignments, but no code-specific guidance has been identified in the available sources
Thus, the use of AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language without instructor authorization constitutes plagiarism.
Instructors should be direct and transparent about what tools students are permitted to use, and about the reasons for any restrictions.
Research
- Skidmore’s academic integrity rules state that using AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language without instructor authorization is plagiarism
- The provided sources do not set a separate university-wide policy specifically for faculty or researcher use of AI in manuscript drafting beyond the general plagiarism and source-acknowledgment rules
Thus, the use of AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language without instructor authorization constitutes plagiarism.
The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging his or her academic, scholarly, or creative indebtedness, and the consequences for violating the Skidmore Honor Code.
- No additional AI-specific data analysis guidance was identified in the available sources
- Skidmore does not have an AI-specific policy for research data and analysis, but the Scientific Misconduct Policy's prohibitions on fabrication and falsification of data apply broadly to all research activities, including any AI-assisted data analysis
Scientific Misconduct or misconduct in science means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.
- The IRB manual emphasizes oversight to ensure scientific, ethical, and regulatory standards are met for human-subjects research
- Skidmore’s research integrity materials address misconduct through the standard categories of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, but they do not provide AI-specific rules for grant proposals, IRB applications, or ethics declarations in the supplied sources
Scientific Misconduct or misconduct in science means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific
community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.
In connection with research conducted or proposed to be conducted on human subjects the Skidmore IRB performs critical oversight functions to ensure applicable scientific, ethical, and regulatory standards are met.
Academic Integrity
- Skidmore requires acknowledgment or citation when AI influences student work
- Passing off AI-generated text as one’s own without acknowledging or citing the influence of ChatGPT is treated as a violation of the honor code, and unacknowledged AI-generated ideas, arguments, or language are classified as plagiarism
In a portion of the course syllabus dedicated to academic integrity, it is worth mentioning that if a student uses text generated from ChatGPT and passes it off as their own writing, without acknowledging or citing the influence of ChatGPT in their process, they are in violation of the college’s academic honor code.
Thus, the use of AI to generate ideas, arguments, or language without instructor authorization constitutes plagiarism.
The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging his or her academic, scholarly, or creative indebtedness, and the consequences for violating the Skidmore Honor Code.
- All honor code violations, including AI-related plagiarism, must be reported to the dean, and sanctions range from grade penalties to suspension depending on severity
- Skidmore supports use of the Compilatio plagiarism and AI detection tool integrated into its LMS (theSpring), with standalone account access available on request via LEDS
## Automated Plagiarism & AI Detection with Compilatio
The Compilatio option in theSpring is located in your course navbar under Assessments.
For those not using theSpring who would still like to utilize Compilatio for plagiarism detection, you will first need to request a new Compilatio account be created for you by emailing LEDS at leds@skidmore.edu.
Faculty should be mindful that all violations of the Academic Honor Code must be reported and including a statement to that effect on the syllabus may prove helpful when working with students to address a violation.
Penalties for Plagiarism: All offenses observed by faculty or students must be reported to the dean.
Such serious instances of intentional plagiarism are not treated lightly at Skidmore and in the academic world; like cheating on examinations, plagiarism can be punished by suspension from the College.
Institutional & Administrative
- Additional faculty guidance on AI pedagogical integration is available through the CLTL and LEDS resources
- Skidmore grants faculty final authority over course-level AI policies, grading decisions, and syllabus expectations regarding generative AI
- Faculty are encouraged to update syllabi with AI-use statements, inform students of platform limitations and privacy risks when requiring AI account creation, and clearly communicate honor code implications
You may want to revisit your syllabus to include some mention of your own course's considerations around the use of generative AI. Here are some example statements you may adjust in service of what is best for your students and desired learning goals for your class.
If faculty choose to require students create an account with a generative AI service, such as ChatGPT, we encourage you to not only inform students of the limitations of such platforms (they are prone to hallucinating, i.e. can provide inaccurate or biased information, fabricated quotes and sources, etc.) but also potential data privacy concerns.
Faculty have final authority over each student's grade in this as in other contexts.
Faculty might also consider explicitly addressing the limits of collaboration and their expectations regarding use of generative AI, areas where ambiguity and variation across instructors can lead to unintentional (but still egregious) violations of the Honor Code.
- The IT Acceptable Use Policy governs use of college technology resources broadly
- Skidmore warns faculty, staff, and students about data privacy risks when using generative AI platforms, advising review of terms of service and privacy policies before account creation
- No formal approved AI platform list or AI-specific institutional data classification scheme has been identified in the available sources, though the ethical considerations resource addresses privacy among other AI-related concerns
If faculty choose to require students create an account with a generative AI service, such as ChatGPT, we encourage you to not only inform students of the limitations of such platforms (they are prone to hallucinating, i.e. can provide inaccurate or biased information, fabricated quotes and sources, etc.) but also potential data privacy concerns.
Everyone who chooses to create an account should review the terms and privacy policy to fully understand the provisions permitting the sharing of information, as well as reflect on what is being given up by the user for "free" access to these tools.
Data Collection: ChatGPT collects and stores information about the user's interactions, which could include sensitive information such as personal details or confidential academic information.
Data retention: ChatGPT may retain data for an indefinite period of time, which could lead to privacy issues in the future.
- Recent news coverage suggests active institutional engagement with AI topics
- However, no formal university-wide AI governance policy, adoption roadmap, or centralized AI oversight committee has been identified in the available sources
- Skidmore has developed institution-level AI coordination through its AI at Skidmore website, an AAC&U AI Team developing ethical AI guidance for faculty and students, and LEDS and CLTL resources supporting AI integration in teaching
Artificial Intelligence at Skidmore College
There are a number of opportunities to study artificial intelligence and related topics across the curriculum at Skidmore. This site contains information about AI-related courses, faculty, students and alums.
Skidmore's AAC&U AI Team has developed a resource offering an overview of key ethical issues related to AI use, including bias, hallucinations, labor practices, accessibility, environmental impact, and privacy, to help Skidmore faculty, staff, and students engage with AI technologies thoughtfully and responsibly.
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 Skidmore College's AI Policies
Skidmore College has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Skidmore requires acknowledgment or citation when AI influences student work. Passing off AI-generated text as one’s own without acknowledging or citing the influence of ChatGPT is treated as a violation of the honor code, and unacknowledged AI-generated ideas, arguments, or language are classified as plagiarism.
Skidmore supports use of the Compilatio plagiarism and AI detection tool integrated into its LMS (theSpring), with standalone account access available on request via LEDS. All honor code violations, including AI-related plagiarism, must be reported to the dean, and sanctions range from grade penalties to suspension depending on severity.
Skidmore warns faculty, staff, and students about data privacy risks when using generative AI platforms, advising review of terms of service and privacy policies before account creation. The IT Acceptable Use Policy governs use of college technology resources broadly. No formal approved AI platform list or AI-specific institutional data classification scheme has been identified in the available sources, though the ethical considerations resource addresses privacy among other AI-related concerns.