Teaching & Learning
- Stetson defers student AI use for coursework and assignments to instructor discretion
- Faculty are encouraged to state their AI rules in the syllabus, including citation expectations and how violations will be handled
- Course syllabi and assignment instructions determine whether AI is permitted, limited, or prohibited, and misuse can be treated as academic misconduct
Your faculty member has the say over what is allowed in your coursework. Make sure to read your syllabus!
To uphold academic integrity, follow the instructor's directions for GenAI use.
Syllabus statements, assignment instructions, or both, establish what is permitted or prohibited in the course and will be relevant to accusations of academic misconduct in situations involving GenAI misuse. For example, one course or assignment may prohibit copying material directly from a GenAI tool for course assignments. Another course or assignment may require that students cite AI-generated text when it is used.
In another course, an assignment’s instructions might permit using GenAI for research activities or revision.
The scope of permissible GenAI use may vary from course to course, so always follow the specific instructions provided for each class and seek clarification from the instructor if you do not fully understand the permissible scope of use on any assignment. Students should not assume that what GenAI use is permitted or encouraged in one course applies to other courses. Always look for a statement in the syllabus or assignment instructions—or ask the instructor for guidance!
The following syllabus statements were developed as a resource for faculty and instructors, with options ranging from “no restrictions” to “ChatGPT and other AI tools may not be used under any circumstances.” These statements may be adopted or adapted to reflect a given instructor's course learning objectives and instructional / assessment style. Instructors are strongly encouraged to include a syllabus statement directly addressing their policy on the use of AI/ChatGPT, including material on appropriate citation styles and some statement of how instructors will handle violations of the stated syllabus policy.
- Stetson does not set one single university-wide exam rule; exam AI use is governed by instructor policy
- However, the faculty syllabus templates include a prohibition option that explicitly bans generative AI in exams, and the student AI guide states that using AI on quizzes or exams without authorization or while prohibited is an academic violation
Using AI to complete quizzes or exams without authorization or while prohibited.
2) In accordance with the commitment to uphold academic integrity and promote original thinking and creativity, the use of Generative AI technologies is strictly prohibited in completing assignments, projects, exams, or any other coursework associated with this class. Students are expected to complete all coursework independently or in designated groups, using authorized resources only. Any use of Generative AI, in any form, to complete course assignments will be considered a violation of the academic misconduct policy and will be dealt with accordingly, which may include failure for the assignment or course, or other disciplinary actions as outlined in the institution's academic misconduct policy.
The following syllabus statements were developed as a resource for faculty and instructors, with options ranging from “no restrictions” to “ChatGPT and other AI tools may not be used under any circumstances.” These statements may be adopted or adapted to reflect a given instructor's course learning objectives and instructional / assessment style.
- Students are expected to verify AI output, use it responsibly, and avoid letting it replace their own learning or critical thinking
- Stetson encourages students to learn about AI and permits study-support uses such as brainstorming, concept explanation, organizing, and language assistance, but it warns against overreliance
While at Stetson, students should learn as much as they can about the responsible and effective use of GenAI. When using GenAI as part of the educational experience, students should adhere to the following guidelines.
Learn about GenAI while at Stetson. GenAI has both advantages and limitations; thus, you should approach this technology thoughtfully and use it responsibly. Students might learn about GenAI in coursework, and Stetson provides additional resources to help students learn about how to use GenAI sensibly, safely, and responsibly.
Avoid over-relying or depending too much on GenAI tools in your University studies. Overreliance on GenAI means using it to create content without (1) understanding GenAI’s limitations and (2) understanding the generated content yourself. Examples of overreliance include:
Using AI to summarize reading assignments instead of reading them yourself.
Relying only on AI-generated ideas without exploring other sources of inspiration and information.
Submitting AI-generated answers without critically evaluating them.
Your job is to verify the accuracy and appropriateness of the content generated by GenAI.
AI can serve as a valuable tool in your writing process, but it should never overshadow your voice or ideas. Here are a few ethical ways to use AI:
• Brainstorming: To help you come up with ideas or refine your thesis.
• Organizing: To structure your paper, improving clarity and flow.
• Understanding Concepts: To help explain complex concepts in simpler terms.
• Helping with Language Accuracy: To identify issues in language such as grammar or spelling and suggest revisions.
Be mindful not to overuse AI, or you might miss out on developing important skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and creative expression.
- Coding-related AI use falls under the same instructor-controlled course policy framework as other assignments
- Stetson mentions Copilot as an example of embedded AI and coding assistance, but it does not set a distinct university-wide rule for programming assignments
GenAI includes both stand-alone AI tools (e.g., OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Claude’s Sonnet) and artificial intelligence that is embedded in technology tools that you may be using already (e.g., Copilot within Microsoft Products and Gemini within Google products).
Copilot (by Microsoft) – AI-powered assistance in Office applications and coding.
To uphold academic integrity, follow the instructor's directions for GenAI use.
The scope of permissible GenAI use may vary from course to course, so always follow the specific instructions provided for each class and seek clarification from the instructor if you do not fully understand the permissible scope of use on any assignment.
Research
- The materials do not provide a more detailed manuscript-drafting rule beyond these requirements
- For research writing and manuscript preparation, Stetson requires responsible use, transparency about AI use where appropriate, verification of AI-generated content, and compliance with publication outlet and funding agency policies
When using GenAI for research, faculty, staff, and students should do so responsibly. Researchers should:
Be transparent in reporting GenAI use and acknowledge that use where appropriate.
Verify the accuracy of AI-generated content and exercise caution when incorporating GenAI output into research.
Follow the policies of publication outlets and funding agencies when publishing research or applying for research grants.
- Stetson permits research-related AI use only with safeguards
- Researchers must disclose relevant AI methods in IRB materials, avoid uploading information on research subjects without IRB approval, confirm that AI transcription will not endanger confidentiality or privacy, and avoid putting unpublished or confidential research into tools that do not protect it from disclosure, storage, or training use
Disclose plans for GenAI use for research in the Institutional Review Board Protocol Description form for methods that are relevant for the IRB protocol (e.g., stimulus generation, transcription, experimentation, etc.).
Avoid uploading information on research subjects without IRB approval. For example, some GenAI tools pose a risk that qualitative research data (e.g., interview data) could become public and potentially allow research subjects to be identified. As part of your IRB submission, you will be required to confirm that any use of AI for transcription does not pose any risks to confidentiality of data, the release of sensitive information, or any violation of participants’ privacy.
Avoid uploading unpublished research or other confidential information into GenAI tools that do not protect that research from disclosure, store the research data, or use that research for training the tool.
- Stetson sets explicit research ethics requirements for AI use
- Researchers must disclose AI plans in IRB protocol descriptions, follow university IRB policies, protect participant confidentiality and privacy, acknowledge AI use where appropriate, and follow publication outlet and funding agency rules when publishing or seeking grants
When using GenAI for research, faculty, staff, and students should do so responsibly. Researchers should:
Disclose plans for GenAI use for research in the Institutional Review Board Protocol Description form for methods that are relevant for the IRB protocol (e.g., stimulus generation, transcription, experimentation, etc.).
Avoid uploading information on research subjects without IRB approval.
As part of your IRB submission, you will be required to confirm that any use of AI for transcription does not pose any risks to confidentiality of data, the release of sensitive information, or any violation of participants’ privacy.
Be transparent in reporting GenAI use and acknowledge that use where appropriate.
Follow the policies of publication outlets and funding agencies when publishing research or applying for research grants.
Follow University IRB policies.
Academic Integrity
- Faculty syllabus templates also include citation requirements in both unlimited and limited-use models
- Stetson requires or strongly expects disclosure and citation of AI use when course or writing policies call for it
- The university guidance says students must follow instructor directions, some assignments require citation of AI-generated text, AI-assisted writing contributions must be acknowledged, and transparency is emphasized
Know when to attribute or cite your use of Generative AI.
Another course or assignment may require that students cite AI-generated text when it is used.
Artificial intelligence (AI) language models, such as ChatGPT, may be used for any assignment with appropriate citation.
Artificial intelligence (AI) language models, such as ChatGPT, may be used for [assignment types A, B & C] with appropriate citation, but not for [assignment types D, E & F].
AI that is not cited
Cite AI sources properly
Be transparent about AI use
If AI tools helped you during your writing process, you must acknowledge their contributions.
• Direct AI Output: If you include texts generated by AI, cite the tool you used (ask your professor for citation style).
• Assistance: Even if AI helped you with brainstorming or structure, it’s good practice to mention this in your paper.
Failing to give credit can be considered plagiarism, so always err on the side of transparency.
Be transparent in reporting GenAI use and acknowledge that use where appropriate.
- Stetson treats unauthorized or undisclosed AI use as an academic integrity matter and routes enforcement through course policies and the Honor System
- The materials mention misconduct reporting procedures and possible sanctions, but they do not establish a university position endorsing AI detection tools; they only note that manipulating AI to bypass plagiarism detection or integrity tools is a violation
Syllabus statements, assignment instructions, or both, establish what is permitted or prohibited in the course and will be relevant to accusations of academic misconduct in situations involving GenAI misuse.
Using any form of AI without the professor's permission.
AI that is not cited
Using AI to complete quizzes or exams without authorization or while prohibited.
Manipulating AI to bypass plagiarism detection software or academic integrity tools.
Misrepresenting AI-generated content as your own.
Any use of Generative AI, in any form, to complete course assignments will be considered a violation of the academic misconduct policy and will be dealt with accordingly, which may include failure for the assignment or course, or other disciplinary actions as outlined in the institution's academic misconduct policy.
Faculty should use the Honor System in dealing with apparent breaches of academic integrity in their classes.
To report a violation to the Honor System Council, use the Academic Honesty Reporting form.
Institutional & Administrative
- Stetson provides faculty-specific AI guidance and asks faculty to set and communicate course AI rules
- The provided sources do not state detailed rules on grading, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
- Faculty are strongly encouraged to include syllabus statements on AI use, citation, and violation handling, and they are directed to review the employee guidelines that apply to all employees
The three sets of guidelines—a set for all employees, a specific set for faculty, and a specific set for students—are meant to provide guidance that balances risks and rewards.
These guidelines provide direction to faculty on the safe, sensible, and responsible use of artificial intelligence generative tools, or GenAI. In addition, they provide a framework for the University’s intentional efforts to provide resources for faculty GenAI literacy development and support.
Faculty should also review the Employee Guidelines for GenAI Use that apply to all employees.
Instructors are strongly encouraged to include a syllabus statement directly addressing their policy on the use of AI/ChatGPT, including material on appropriate citation styles and some statement of how instructors will handle violations of the stated syllabus policy.
The Honor Council supports faculty in promoting academic integrity through clear policies, educational materials, and reporting procedures. We provide guidance on syllabus statements for AI usage and handling academic misconduct cases, along with classroom materials.
- Stetson instructs students, and by extension the university community in the cited guidance, not to enter sensitive, private, confidential, or protected university information into AI tools without appropriate safeguards
- The guidance recommends using university-provided tools that follow proper data protection protocols, following the Acceptable Use Policy and Generative AI Use and Privacy Policy, and consulting tool usage and data classification guidance before sharing university data
Before you enter any data into GenAI, make sure you are not sharing any personal data, such as health data, grades, etc.
Thinking of subscribing to a GenAI product that Stetson does not have? Consider reviewing the AI tool usage guidance provided by IT.
Do not share sensitive, private, or confidential information with GenAI tools. In some instances, GenAI can store your information, use your information for future training, or both. To keep your GenAI use safe, avoid sharing personal details, such as campus ID numbers, social security numbers, and health information, with GenAI tools.
Additionally, it’s best to use University-provided AI tools that adhere to proper data protection protocols or opt out of allowing AI tools to use your data for training purposes.
Everyone in the University community, including students, must also protect University information from unauthorized disclosure and follow the University's Acceptable Use Policy and Generative AI Use and Privacy Policy when sharing University data with AI tools. Before sharing University information with a GenAI tool, you should know how AI tools handle and store the data they provide.
Don’t share confidential information with AI
- The sources do not identify a dedicated university-wide AI committee or formal roadmap beyond this governance approach
- Stetson has institution-level AI guidance structured around separate guidelines for employees, faculty, and students, and it frames these as balancing risks and rewards of generative AI
- The university also states that faculty guidance supports intentional university efforts to build AI literacy and resources, and that the guidelines will be updated as the technology evolves
Stetson recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies may present risks and rewards for the educational environment.
The three sets of guidelines—a set for all employees, a specific set for faculty, and a specific set for students—are meant to provide guidance that balances risks and rewards.
As GenAI technology evolves, Stetson will update these guidelines.
These guidelines provide direction to faculty on the safe, sensible, and responsible use of artificial intelligence generative tools, or GenAI. In addition, they provide a framework for the University’s intentional efforts to provide resources for faculty GenAI literacy development and support. Stetson acknowledges that society is in the early period of GenAI development and that these guidelines will likely need regular review and revision as technology changes.
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 Stetson University's AI Policies
Stetson University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Stetson requires or strongly expects disclosure and citation of AI use when course or writing policies call for it. The university guidance says students must follow instructor directions, some assignments require citation of AI-generated text, AI-assisted writing contributions must be acknowledged, and transparency is emphasized. Faculty syllabus templates also include citation requirements in both unlimited and limited-use models.
Stetson treats unauthorized or undisclosed AI use as an academic integrity matter and routes enforcement through course policies and the Honor System. The materials mention misconduct reporting procedures and possible sanctions, but they do not establish a university position endorsing AI detection tools; they only note that manipulating AI to bypass plagiarism detection or integrity tools is a violation.
Stetson instructs students, and by extension the university community in the cited guidance, not to enter sensitive, private, confidential, or protected university information into AI tools without appropriate safeguards. The guidance recommends using university-provided tools that follow proper data protection protocols, following the Acceptable Use Policy and Generative AI Use and Privacy Policy, and consulting tool usage and data classification guidance before sharing university data.