Towson University AI Policy

They are meant to orient, not to mandate. They apply the university's long-standing values to this new technology. The principles do not replace disciplinary judgment or existing university policy. They do not change the academic-integrity code: it continues to govern, including where AI-generated work is presented as a person's own. Nothing here is an enforcement instrument.

Departments and programs are encouraged to develop more specific guidance consistent with them, as some already have.

Passing off materials generated by artificial intelligence (AI) technology constitutes plagiarism. AI technology and other assistance tools should only be used if approved by the instructor. All authorized use of such technologies must be properly cited (see below).

AI tools may be used in coursework with instructor permission and within the following guidelines:

• Permitted uses include outlining, grammar checking, brainstorming, or reviewing APA formatting.

• Students may not submit AI-generated content as their own.

When designing assignments and assessments, whether you currently prohibit the use of AI or allow it within prescribed limits, you may want to make changes considering current developments in generative AI tools.

Some Examples: Copying from another student’s paper or receiving unauthorized assistance during a quiz, test or examination; using books, notes or other devices (e.g., calculators) when these are not authorized; procuring without authorization tests or examinations before the scheduled exercise (including discussion of the substance of examinations and tests when it is expected these will not be discussed); copying reports, laboratory work, computer programs or files and the like from other students; collaborating on laboratory or computer programs or files and the like from other students; collaborating on laboratory or computer work without authorization and without indication of the nature and extent of the collaboration; sending a substitute to take an examination.

• Use of AI tools during in-class assessments or exams is not permitted unless explicitly approved by the instructor.

Courses can be structured with AI from the beginning through the adoption of AI assistants, tutors and support.

Through careful prompting, faculty can build tutorial assistance into their course. Those can be tailored not only to the particular course but to the needs of the student. However, doing this is not without caveats. Faculty should be conscious of the limitations of generative AI in providing reliable answers and guidance to students.

Students may use AI tools to explore academic content related to school psychology (e.g., reviewing intervention strategies or theoretical frameworks), provided that no client information is included.

We treat what AI produces as a claim to check rather than an answer to trust, and we choose uses that deepen inquiry and build judgment rather than replace the effort by which expertise is formed.

not defined

Faculty should refer to publishing guidelines and conference codes of conduct when considering AI usage to prepare conference proposals and presentations as well as research reports.

Many publishers and grantors h ave instituted guidelines for AI-generated content, including prohibition, prop er us age an d cit ation.

So me publishers a nd grantors have also published guidelines on the usage of generative AI f or peer review. It is th e responsibility of a researcher to ensure that they have understood and incorporated guidelines for AI use in their submission to ac ade mic journals.

Students are responsible for the content of all academic, clinical, and research work they submit, regardless of whether AI tools were used. Any work supported by AI must be critically reviewed, edited, and appropriately attributed. AI tools must not replace the student’s own academic writing, clinical reasoning, or research decision-making.

In faculty scholarship and research, primary responsibility for the integrity of scholarly efforts rests with the principal investigator. Other faculty and staff who collaborate in the scholarly work share responsibility for its integrity. Responsibility for joint faculty and undergraduate or graduate research projects is shared by the student(s) and the principal faculty advisor.

Falsification or Misrepresentation of Data. This includes falsification, fabrication, manipulation and/or alteration of data or background information, inaccurately quoting the work of others, deceptively selective reporting, purposeful omission of conflicting data and willful suppression, distortion or destruction of data.

When using generative AI tools, be cognizant that loading text or data onto a third-party site is not without risk.

Faculty and staff should avoid loading d ata (from students, from research or from finances) onto sites where there is a question about mis us e of data b y those sites.

Under no circumstances should students enter information about real clients into AI tools that are not institutionally approved. This includes both identified and de-identified clinical material.

Faculty should refer to publishing guidelines and conference codes of conduct when considering AI usage to prepare conference proposals and presentations as well as research reports.

IRB Guidance on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Human Subjects Research

Many publishers and grantors h ave instituted guidelines for AI-generated content, including prohibition, prop er us age an d cit ation.

So me publishers a nd grantors have also published guidelines on the usage of generative AI f or peer review. It is th e responsibility of a researcher to ensure that they have understood and incorporated guidelines for AI use in their submission to ac ade mic journals.

In faculty scholarship and research, primary responsibility for the integrity of scholarly efforts rests with the principal investigator. Other faculty and staff who collaborate in the scholarly work share responsibility for its integrity. Responsibility for joint faculty and undergraduate or graduate research projects is shared by the student(s) and the principal faculty advisor.

This policy outlines expectations for the ethical, appropriate, and legally compliant use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools by students in the MA/CAS program. These expectations apply across all domains of training, including academic work, clinical practice, and research.

Students are encouraged to consult with faculty or supervisors before using AI tools in any new or uncertain context.

“Plagiarism” is presenting work, products, ideas, words, or data of another as one’s own is plagiarism. Indebtedness must be acknowledged whenever:

Because expectations about academic assignments vary among disciplines and instructors, students should consult with their instructors about any special requirements related to citation.

If your professor has directed you to use generative AI for an assignment, then you must cite your source and explain how you used it. According to the APA, authors who use generative AI like ChatGPT should devote a paragraph or section of their paper to describe how the tool was used.

The APA also recommends that authors provide the prompt they used in the AI tool and the corresponding response. AI-generated material should be cited in the text of the assignment with a corresponding entry in the reference list.

Students should also provide a link to the generative AI tool used.

• When AI tools are used to assist with academic work, students must include a brief note of disclosure indicating when and how the tools were used. For example:

"Portions of this paper were assisted using ChatGPT on July 7, 2025 for outlining and grammar checking. All written content reflects the student's own original work."

If AI is allowed in your course, it may be helpful to establish guidelines for proper citation.

They are meant to orient, not to mandate. They apply the university's long-standing values to this new technology. The principles do not replace disciplinary judgment or existing university policy. They do not change the academic-integrity code: it continues to govern, including where AI-generated work is presented as a person's own. Nothing here is an enforcement instrument. These principles should not be cited on their own in evaluation, integrity, or personnel proceedings.

Plagiarism is a serious offense. Towson University's Student Academic Integrity Policy defines plagiarism as "presenting work, products, ideas, words, or data of another as one’s own," and it often leads to significant penalties.

Misuse of AI tools may result in remediation, academic discipline, or removal from practicum or internship settings, depending on the severity of the situation. Repeated or serious violations may lead to dismissal from the program.

Our AI resources are designed to empower faculty with the knowledge and tools to excel in a dynamic higher education environment.

Learn more AI tools and resources that affect teaching, research, service and university operations.

Many models for syllabus language reflect different approaches to using AI in teaching and learning. FACET has developed sample content that can be used i n course syllabi.

When designing assignments and assessments, whether you currently prohibit the use of AI or allow it within prescribed limits, you may want to make changes considering current developments in generative AI tools.

Courses can be structured with AI from the beginning through the adoption of AI assistants, tutors and support.

Faculty and staff should avoid loading d ata (from students, from research or from finances) onto sites where there is a question about mis us e of data b y those sites.

When using generative AI tools, be cognizant that loading text or data onto a third-party site is not without risk.

Prompts, data, photos and other media loaded onto many AI sites become training data for the AI agent. In some cases, th e data may be retrievable through “jailbreaking” (or escape the con strain ts of) the AI agent.

D ata breaches become the material through which new media will be generated. Faculty and staff should avoid loading d ata (from students, from research or from finances) onto sites where there is a question about mis us e of data b y those sites.

Under no circumstances should students enter information about real clients into AI tools that are not institutionally approved. This includes both identified and de-identified clinical material.

Most publicly available AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) are not HIPAA- or FERPA-compliant, and their use to process clinical information constitutes a serious breach of ethical and legal standards.

Students may not use AI tools to draft psychological reports, treatment plans, clinical notes, or emails involving client material.

• Students may not input clinical, client-related, or school-based case material into AI tools.

This is a living statement, authored and maintained by the Towson University AI Institute. It will evolve as understanding matures and as people respond, and we welcome feedback from across the university.

The Towson AI Institute advances the practical, ethical and sustainable application of artificial intelligence through transdisciplinary research, education and community engagement.

The Towson AI Institute (TAI) is Towson University's home for work on artificial intelligence: research, teaching, and partnerships with the region.

TAI works as a coordinating partner, not a replacement, for the strong AI efforts already underway across campus. The Institute collaborates with colleges, the Albert S. Cook Library, and university centers dedicated to AI. Partners include the FACET AI Hub and the Cyber4All Center, a national leader in cybersecurity and CyberAI education. TAI's role is to connect these efforts and bring in resources, partners, and funding that no single unit could reach alone.

The AI Hub seeks to leverage the talents of faculty, students and staff across the university for innovations in teaching and research in order to position Towson University as a leader.

The AI Hub will serve as a one-stop academic center for faculty and student research and pedagogical advancement in artificial intelligence. It will host an AI resource depot, bringing together AI-related resources from across the campus.

The AI Hub is developing multiple initiatives, which are being phased in over the course of the 2025-2026 academic year.