Teaching & Learning
- Texas Tech does not set one uniform student rule for coursework across all courses
- Unauthorized use or submitting AI-generated work as one's own may be treated as an academic integrity violation
- Faculty are encouraged to state course-specific AI rules in the syllabus, and the provided model language shows that AI use may be permitted only for specific assignments, permitted for limited assistance, encouraged for planning tasks, or fully prohibited, depending on instructor direction
Faculty are encouraged to include a clear statement in their syllabus regarding the permitted or prohibited use of generative AI. The following examples offer baseline language you may adapt to fit your course objectives and pedagogical values.
Generative AI applications (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications) may only be used in this course for specific assignments where the instructor explicitly permits their use. Unless otherwise stated in the syllabus or assignment guidelines, AI assistance is not allowed. Using AI in unauthorized contexts or submitting AI-generated content as your own work may constitute a violation of academic integrity and may be referred to the Office of Student Conduct.
Artificial intelligence applications, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications, may be used to assist with specific tasks such as submitting a first draft to a generative AI application to assist with refining or evaluating original student-produced work, such as grammar or sentence structure assistance.
The use of artificial intelligence applications, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications may be used for planning activities such as brainstorming, outlining, and idea development. However, all final submissions should show evidence that students have developed and refined these ideas on their own without additional generative AI use.
All work in this course must be completed without the use of any artificial intelligence tools, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications. Students are expected to apply what they are learning in this course to produce work for this class — drawing on their own developing knowledge, understanding, and skills. AI is not permitted at any stage of the assignment process.
- Separately, the Provost states that faculty use of generative AI for grading is not approved at this time
- Texas Tech provides model language that prohibits student use of generative AI on tests, quizzes, and exams unless authorized by the course policy
Generative AI on Tests, Quizzes and Exams
To promote deep learning and critical thinking, students are expected to complete reading quizzes, tests, exams, etc. without the use of generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grammarly, or similar platforms).
Any unauthorized use of AI, or collaboration and sharing of answers
Using generative AI for grading is not approved. In addition to raising ethical concerns, the risks to data privacy underscore the need for comprehensive review before generative AI could potentially be employed as a tool for academic assessment.
- Where allowed, final submitted work must reflect the student's own development and refinement
- Texas Tech's teaching guidance allows instructors to permit AI for limited learning support such as brainstorming, outlining, and refining student-produced drafts, but this remains course-level and syllabus-based rather than a single university-wide student rule
Artificial intelligence applications, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications, may be used to assist with specific tasks such as submitting a first draft to a generative AI application to assist with refining or evaluating original student-produced work, such as grammar or sentence structure assistance.
The use of artificial intelligence applications, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications may be used for planning activities such as brainstorming, outlining, and idea development. However, all final submissions should show evidence that students have developed and refined these ideas on their own without additional generative AI use.
Faculty are encouraged to include a clear statement in their syllabus regarding the permitted or prohibited use of generative AI.
Research
- For theses and dissertations, Texas Tech prohibits treating AI as an author or co-author and prohibits using AI tools to write or significantly rewrite the document
- The Graduate School materials also provide an example framework for limited, disclosed AI use in preparation, with required human review and a chapter-level declaration when AI was used
With these goals in mind, the following guidelines govern the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLM) in theses and dissertations.
1. AI cannot be considered an author or co-author of a thesis or dissertation. Students may not use AI (generative or otherwise) tools to write or significantly rewrite the
Grammarly Grammar, style, clarity checks
Human review required
Under the chapter heading for every chapter in which AI was used, the following declaration MUST appear:
"This chapter was prepared with the assistance of [list all programs/services] for [list specific purposes, e.g., data analysis, grammar correction, and citation management]. After using this/these tool(s)/service(s), the author(s) reviewed and revised the content as needed to ensure academic integrity and originality and take full responsibility for the content."
- For thesis and dissertation work, Texas Tech allows AI tools for data analysis only under specific restrictions
- Data used with AI must remain on TTU servers, and sharing human-subject details with an AI tool may violate IRB requirements unless the tool has appropriate firewalls and explicit IRB approval
Consequently, a) AI tools used for data analysis must keep data on TTU servers for intellectual property and confidentiality reasons and b) that details of human subject data shared with an AI tool may violate IRB rules, unless the tool has appropriate firewalls and is explicitly approved under the project’s IRB protocol.
- Texas Tech's research-misconduct policy does not mention AI specifically, but it applies standard research integrity rules against fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism
- In thesis/dissertation guidance, the university also frames AI use as requiring academic integrity and transparency, and warns that breaches of the AI agreement can lead to sanctions
a. Fabrication – Making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
b. Falsification – Manipulating materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
c. Plagiarism – The appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
This agreement establishes guidelines for the ethical and responsible use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) programs in the preparation of [Insert Thesis/dissertation Title]. All co-authors agree to adhere to these guidelines to ensure academic integrity and transparency.
By signing below, each co-author agrees to abide by the ethical use of generative AI/LLM programs as specified in this agreement. The authors further acknowledge that if breaches to this agreement are discovered, at any time, then the authors will be subject to appropriate
Academic Integrity
- Texas Tech requires AI use to be cited and clearly disclosed when a course syllabus permits AI and instructs students to document it
- The Writing Center also provides citation guidance for APA and MLA, and the Graduate School requires a declaration in each thesis/dissertation chapter where AI was used and states that authors take full responsibility for the content
You are welcome to use generative AI applications (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, Grammarly, or similar applications) in this course, provided that your use aligns with course learning objectives and is properly documented according to instructions in this syllabus. You are responsible for ensuring that AI-generated content is properly cited, accurate, ethical, free of misinformation or intellectual property violations. AI-generated content must never be submitted as your own work.
Any generative AI use should be cited AND clearly disclosed according to the instructions in this syllabus.
The technology company serves as the author, and the software serves as the title. Many AI chat tools have a feature enabling users to share the content of a specific chat through a URL, so include that URL as part of the reference.
MLA does not consider AI tools as authors; therefore, the prompt or a description of what was generated is the first part of the citation. The prompt, AI tool, version of the tool, company, date it was generated, and, if available, a stable URL to the chat history.
Under the chapter heading for every chapter in which AI was used, the following declaration MUST appear:
"This chapter was prepared with the assistance of [list all programs/services] for [list specific purposes, e.g., data analysis, grammar correction, and citation management]. After using this/these tool(s)/service(s), the author(s) reviewed and revised the content as needed to ensure academic integrity and originality and take full responsibility for the content."
- No explicit university position on AI detection software is defined in the provided sources
- The Student Handbook says instructors may impose academic sanctions and should also refer academic integrity violations to the Office of Student Conduct
- Texas Tech's AI guidance directs faculty who suspect prohibited AI use to check syllabus and departmental policies, and its model syllabus language states that unauthorized AI use may be referred to the Office of Student Conduct
What to do if you suspect a student has used Generative AI and may be in violation of your course policy.
Check to see if there are departmental or college level policies for use in these situations.
Check your Syllabus
Do you have a specific AI usage policy in your syllabus that clarifies use on specific assignments: homework, exams, in-class work, etc.)?
Using AI in unauthorized contexts or submitting AI-generated content as your own work may constitute a violation of academic integrity and may be referred to the Office of Student Conduct.
The instructor should attempt to discuss the matter with the student and receive a response from the student about the allegations. Then, the instructor may notify the student of possible academic sanctions including, but not limited to assigning a paper or research project related to academic integrity, make-up assignment that is different than the
In addition to the assignment of academic sanctions by the instructor of record, a referral of the academic integrity violation should also be made to the Office of Student Conduct for the assignment of disciplinary sanctions.
Institutional & Administrative
- The Provost separately states that using generative AI for grading or for evaluating faculty and staff performance is not approved
- Texas Tech permits faculty to use AI in teaching preparation and materials development, but faculty must retain responsibility for content and accuracy, must not input other people's work or personally identifiable information, and should use AI transparently
I integrate generative AI into my teaching to enhance—not replace—human learning, creativity, and critical thinking. I use AI applications as collaborative partners for ideation, drafting, feedback, and refinement of teaching materials, but I maintain full responsibility for content and accuracy. I do not use this technology to assess student work. I do not input other people’s work or personally identifiable information into AI tools.
We acknowledge that careful consideration should be given to the implications of AI grading. At a minimum, faculty should disclose any AI grading practices with students to model expected behavior in terms of transparent disclosure of AI use.
Using generative artificial intelligence (AI) to evaluate the performance of faculty and staff members is not approved.
Using generative AI for grading is not approved.
- Texas Tech restricts what may be entered into AI tools
- Faculty guidance says personally identifiable information and student records should never be input into AI tools, even on university-supported platforms, and the university's contracting policy requires providers not to use TTU confidential information with AI engines except under mutually agreed procurement terms
Faculty should never input the following types of information into AI tools, even when using university-supported platforms:
• Personally Identifiable Information (PII) (e.g., names, eRaider, R-numbers, addresses, student records)
An assurance from the service provider that the provider will not use TTU’s information with any Artificial Intelligence (AI) engines except in accordance with mutually agreed upon procurement terms;
- The university says those guidelines will cover teaching, research, and institutional business operations, and that additional guidance is forthcoming
- Texas Tech states that it is actively developing broader AI guidance through an AI Working Group led by the Chief Information Officer with representation from faculty and academic units
As generative artificial intelligence continues to evolve at a rapid pace and institutions nationwide develop emerging policies and guidance, Texas Tech University is actively assessing appropriate uses of these technologies. The AI Working Group led by Chief Information Officer Lin Zhou and including representation from faculty and academic units, is currently creating guidelines for AI use in teaching, research, and institutional business operations.
Additional university guidance regarding appropriate uses of AI in academic and administrative contexts will be forthcoming.
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 Texas Tech University's AI Policies
Texas Tech University has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
Texas Tech requires AI use to be cited and clearly disclosed when a course syllabus permits AI and instructs students to document it. The Writing Center also provides citation guidance for APA and MLA, and the Graduate School requires a declaration in each thesis/dissertation chapter where AI was used and states that authors take full responsibility for the content.
Texas Tech's AI guidance directs faculty who suspect prohibited AI use to check syllabus and departmental policies, and its model syllabus language states that unauthorized AI use may be referred to the Office of Student Conduct. The Student Handbook says instructors may impose academic sanctions and should also refer academic integrity violations to the Office of Student Conduct. No explicit university position on AI detection software is defined in the provided sources.
Texas Tech restricts what may be entered into AI tools. Faculty guidance says personally identifiable information and student records should never be input into AI tools, even on university-supported platforms, and the university's contracting policy requires providers not to use TTU confidential information with AI engines except under mutually agreed procurement terms.