Teaching & Learning
- Texas Wesleyan states that student AI use in coursework is governed at the course level by instructor policy, within broader university guidelines
- The university indicates that instructors are expected to establish their own AI policies for their courses, including what students may and may not do on assignments, projects, and discussions
Within that policy, it is established that faculty and instructors establish their own policy that directs students to AI use within that specific course.
Most universities have created a general policy guiding the overall use of AI by students, faculty, and staff. Similarly, most universities have established that instructors develop their own policy (in line with the university) for their own course. The instructor knows how AI is used within the discipline and, therefore, should develop their policy to mirror that. This is the case at Texas Wesleyan University.
This includes specifics regarding the use of AI within specific assignments, projects, and tasks.
Remember that students should disclose AI use in any situation, from papers and projects to assignments and discussions.
- Texas Wesleyan does not provide a university-wide rule specifically governing AI use during examinations or quizzes
- The faculty guidance page indicates instructors determine whether AI is prohibited, limited, or integrated within their course, which would encompass assessments; no separate exam-specific policy is defined in the retrieved sources
Most universities have created a general policy guiding the overall use of AI by students, faculty, and staff. Similarly, most universities have established that instructors develop their own policy (in line with the university) for their own course.
Integrated: AI use is openly encouraged and integrated into learning tasks and assessments.
Prohibited: AI use is not allowed for any assignments or class activities.
Limited: AI is permitted in specific ways, with clear boundaries and rationale.
- Texas Wesleyan indicates that student AI use is governed by instructor course policy rather than a single uniform rule in the retrieved text
- The source frames AI as something instructors may allow in varying degrees and says course policies should explain how students may use AI, which can include learning support if the instructor permits it
When developing your AI policy, revert back to the section Questions to Consider and determine the level of acceptance that works best for the specific course.
Limited: AI is permitted in specific ways, with clear boundaries and rationale.
How students may use AI
How students may not use AI
How do I expect my students to use AI in my course? (good or bad)
- Texas Wesleyan does not set a student-wide coding rule in the retrieved academic-facing source text
- The employee AI policy expressly identifies coding development or debugging as a possible AI use, while the course-policy guidance indicates student use would depend on the instructor's course-specific AI policy
• Coding development or debugging.
Within that policy, it is established that faculty and instructors establish their own policy that directs students to AI use within that specific course.
Research
- No explicit university-wide policy on AI use in research writing or manuscript preparation was found in the primary policy documents reviewed
- However, Texas Wesleyan's West Library hosts AI literacy and AI in higher education resources that may address this area; the employee AI policy's general accuracy-review requirement would apply to any AI-assisted written work by staff
All AI-generated content must be reviewed for accuracy before relying on it for work purposes.
[Note: Additional guidance may exist at westlibrary.txwes.edu/AIandhighered and westlibrary.txwes.edu/ai_literacy which were not fully extracted in this review.]
- The West Library AI resources may provide additional relevant guidance not captured in this extraction
- No explicit university-wide policy on AI use in research data and analysis was found in the primary policy documents
- However, the employee AI policy prohibits submission of proprietary, confidential, or sensitive data into generative AI tools, which has direct implications for research data handling
No proprietary, confidential, or sensitive company data of any kind may be submitted (copied, typed, etc.) into generative AI tools. The submission of any personal, confidential, or otherwise private information into generative AI tools is prohibited. This includes any information that is protected by FERPA, HIPPA, or any other state or federal privacy regulations.
- Texas Wesleyan does not have a standalone research ethics AI policy, but the university's broader AI framework addresses integrity concerns relevant to research: the employee policy prohibits submitting proprietary or third-party protected information into AI tools, the faculty guidance emphasizes that AI-generated content is not the student's or user's original work and must be disclosed, and course policies are expected to include academic integrity provisions and consequences for misuse
Since work generated with the assistance of AI is not the student's original work, acknowledgement of the source needs to be made.
Consider incorporating the following information when writing your AI policy:
* Consequences of misuse
* Academic Integrity
* Procedures for addressing violations
Employees may not submit any information belonging to the University or a third party that is protected by trademark or other intellectual property laws.
Academic Integrity
- Texas Wesleyan's retrieved source text says students should disclose AI use, but the exact disclosure method is left to instructor course policy
- The university guidance gives examples such as citation, a use statement, or Canvas comments, and says instructors should make disclosure expectations clear for all submitted work
Since work generated with the assistance of AI is not the student’s original work, acknowledgement of the source needs to be made.
Depending on the level of use determines how the student will disclose the use. A research paper will be cited differently than a discussion board assignment. This should be made clear to students within the policy.
Citation: Similarly to how a student will quote a peer review article, a student will quote AI.
Use Statement: Students could provide a brief statement at the end of an assignment, noting how AI was used, and which tool was used.
Comments: Students could enter a short disclosure via a comment when submitting work through Canvas LMS.
What are your expectations for students when disclosing that they used AI in this course? Include specifics (including using APA format) and provide examples. Remember that students should disclose AI use in any situation, from papers and projects to assignments and discussions.
- Texas Wesleyan does not define a university-wide stance on AI detection tools in the retrieved sources
- For employees, the university AI policy states that policy violations may result in disciplinary action up to and including termination
- For students, the CETL faculty guidance directs instructors to include consequences of misuse, academic integrity provisions, and violation procedures within their course AI policies
This is where you include consequences related to unacceptable use of AI in your course.
Consider incorporating the following information when writing your AI policy:
* Consequences of misuse
* Academic Integrity
* Procedures for addressing violations
Any violation of this policy will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination.
Institutional & Administrative
- The university also indicates faculty must establish course-specific AI policies for students, and the employee policy controls if it conflicts with the academic policy
- Texas Wesleyan permits employee use of generative AI for work-related purposes under university and departmental guidelines, with supervisor transparency, adequate expertise, security compliance, and human review for accuracy
This policy applies to all employees of Texas Wesleyan University and to all work associated with Texas Wesleyan University that those employees perform, whether on or off company premises (“University Policy”).
The University’s Academic Policy on the Use of Generative Tools (“Academic Policy”) applies to AI tools in the academic setting. In the event of a conflict between the University Policy and Academic Policy, the University Policy will control and supersede the Academic Policy.
Employees are encouraged to discuss acceptable uses of generative AI tools in their departments and with their supervisors. Use of generative AI tools should be used to promote the mission of the University, and should be consistent with the particular department’s policies and practices.
Employees must be transparent in their use of generative AI tools. Employees wishing to use generative AI tools must inform their supervisor about how the tools will be used. Employees must demonstrate that they have sufficient knowledge or expertise to use generative AI tools in the requested manner.
All AI-generated content must be reviewed for accuracy before relying on it for work purposes.
Within that policy, it is established that faculty and instructors establish their own policy that directs students to AI use within that specific course.
- Employees must use reputable AI tools, adhere to all security policies, and may consult IT regarding account appropriateness and security requirements
- The faculty course-policy guidance separately notes that instructors may specify approved versus prohibited AI tools (e.g., a university-provided Grammarly subscription) within their syllabi
- Texas Wesleyan prohibits employees from entering proprietary, confidential, sensitive, personal, FERPA-protected, HIPAA-protected, or otherwise private information into generative AI tools, and bars submission of university or third-party trademark-protected intellectual property
Employees should only use reputable AI tools and must adhere to all security policies in connection with their use.
Employees are encouraged to contact the IT department to learn more about applicable security requirements and policies.
Company email addresses, credentials or phone numbers can be used to create an account with these technologies; employees are encouraged to consult with IT if they have questions about whether using a particular account is appropriate under University policy.
No proprietary, confidential, or sensitive company data of any kind may be submitted (copied, typed, etc.) into generative AI tools. The submission of any personal, confidential, or otherwise private information into generative AI tools is prohibited. This includes any information that is protected by FERPA, HIPAA [note: source document reads 'HIPPA'], or any other state or federal privacy regulations. Employees may not submit any information belonging to the University or a third party that is protected by trademark or other intellectual property laws.
Approved vs. Prohibited tools (i.e. university provided subscription to Grammarly) [from faculty course-policy guidance]
- Texas Wesleyan has a university-wide AI governance framework
- The employee AI policy, approved by the President's Cabinet on October 28, 2024, states its purpose is to provide general guidelines for the responsible use of new artificial intelligence technologies and applies to all employees
- The CETL faculty guidance page references a broader Texas Wesleyan AI policy that reportedly encompasses ethical guidelines, acceptable and non-acceptable use cases for students and faculty, privacy and data protection, compliance with laws, procedures for addressing violations, and the role of the Provost's Council, though these bullet points appear to be a descriptive summary of the policy's scope rather than direct verbatim text
This Policy is intended to provide general guidelines for the responsible use of new artificial intelligence technologies.
Approved by the President's Cabinet on October 28, 2024.
The Texas Wesleyan AI policy includes [paraphrased scope description from CETL page]:
* Ethical guidelines for AI use
* Acceptable use cases for students
* Non-acceptable use cases for students
* Acceptable use cases for faculty
* Non-acceptable use cases for faculty
* Potential benefits and risks of AI
* Privacy and data protection
* Compliance with laws and regulations
* Procedures for addressing violations
* Role of Provost's Council
* Importance of responsible AI usage
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 Wesleyan University's AI Policies
Texas Wesleyan University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Texas Wesleyan's retrieved source text says students should disclose AI use, but the exact disclosure method is left to instructor course policy. The university guidance gives examples such as citation, a use statement, or Canvas comments, and says instructors should make disclosure expectations clear for all submitted work.
Texas Wesleyan does not define a university-wide stance on AI detection tools in the retrieved sources. For students, the CETL faculty guidance directs instructors to include consequences of misuse, academic integrity provisions, and violation procedures within their course AI policies. For employees, the university AI policy states that policy violations may result in disciplinary action up to and including termination.
Texas Wesleyan prohibits employees from entering proprietary, confidential, sensitive, personal, FERPA-protected, HIPAA-protected, or otherwise private information into generative AI tools, and bars submission of university or third-party trademark-protected intellectual property. Employees must use reputable AI tools, adhere to all security policies, and may consult IT regarding account appropriateness and security requirements. The faculty course-policy guidance separately notes that instructors may specify approved versus prohibited AI tools (e.g., a university-provided Grammarly subscription) within their syllabi.