Teaching & Learning
- Student use of AI to complete graded coursework and other work submitted for credit is prohibited unless the instructor explicitly permits it
- The university emphasizes that uncited AI-generated work is an academic integrity violation, and provides faculty-approved syllabus language ranging from prohibited to restricted to unrestricted AI use, with reporting to Academic Initiatives and Integrity when AI is used outside permitted bounds
* Student use of AI to satisfy course requirements or assessments is prohibited without the explicit permission of the course instructor. It is the responsibility of the student to seek permission from the instructor if there is any doubt as to how AI may be used to generate an academic submission (e.g. homework, project, quiz, exam).
* An example of prohibited use would be the utilization of an AI tool to generate the solution to an assigned homework problem without instructor permission.
* Student general use of AI must adhere to the University's Academic Integrity Policy. Use of AI in a manner not approved by the course instructor is subject to this policy.
* Uncited use of the work of others, whether a person or AI, is a violation of the University's Academic Integrity Policy.
* The use of generative artificial intelligence tools in any capacity while completing academic work that is submitted for credit, independently or collaboratively, will be considered academic dishonesty in this course and reported to the Office of Academic Initiatives and Integrity.
* Specific permissions will be provided to students regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence tools on certain graded activities in this course. In these instances, I will communicate explicit permission as well as expectations and any pertinent limitations for use and attribution.
* Without this permission, the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in any capacity while completing academic work submitted for credit, independently or collaboratively, will be considered academic dishonesty and reported to the Office of Academic Initiatives and Integrity.
* Students have permission to use generative artificial intelligence tools in any capacity to complete academic work in this course.
* The use of content generated by artificial intelligence, without proper citation, will be considered academic dishonesty and reported to the Office of Academic Initiatives and Integrity.
* The use of AI tools can be considered academic dishonesty if a student has not received permission to use such tools from an instructor in advance.
- The university’s AI guidelines explicitly include quizzes and exams as academic submissions requiring permission for AI use
- Using AI during quizzes, exams, or other assessments is treated as prohibited unless the instructor explicitly authorizes it
* Student use of AI to satisfy course requirements or assessments is prohibited without the explicit permission of the course instructor. It is the responsibility of the student to seek permission from the instructor if there is any doubt as to how AI may be used to generate an academic submission (e.g. homework, project, quiz, exam).
- The university states that students may use AI to enhance learning as long as it does not violate instructor rules or the Academic Integrity Policy
- It also warns users not to passively accept AI output and emphasizes that students are ultimately responsible for what they produce, share, and submit
* The guiding principle is that students may use AI in a manner that enhances learning without violating rules set forth by a course instructor and the University's Academic Integrity Policy.
* For these reasons, users should not passively accept its outputs without critical engagement. Students and University employees are ultimately responsible for the content that they produce, share, and submit.
- The Academic Integrity Policy explicitly includes “computer program” among the types of work covered by the prohibition on submitting work prepared by another person or entity, including AI, without proper attribution
- AI use for programming work submitted for credit is governed by instructor permission and academic integrity requirements; AI-generated work submitted as one’s own without appropriate attribution is treated as plagiarism
* Student use of AI to satisfy course requirements or assessments is prohibited without the explicit permission of the course instructor. It is the responsibility of the student to seek permission from the instructor if there is any doubt as to how AI may be used to generate an academic submission (e.g. homework, project, quiz, exam).
* Submitting as one’s own any theme, report, term paper, essay, computer program, speech, painting, drawing, sculpture, or other written or creative work or project of any nature prepared totally or in large measure by another person or entity/plagiarizing, in work completed for a class assignment, when that copying/plagiarizing constitutes less than 10% of the assignment and is a second offense, or when that copying/plagiarizing constitutes 10% or more of the assignment.
* Submitting as one’s own work or plagiarizing is the offering as one’s own work, the words, ideas, or arguments of another person or entity or using the work of another without appropriate attribution by quotation, reference, or footnote. This includes work generated by artificial intelligence.
Research
- For research outputs, the university requires attribution to faculty and/or student researchers and requires transparent documentation of AI-assisted contributions
- For student research tied to academic milestones (e.g., theses/dissertations), AI use is at the discretion of the student’s graduate advisory committee, and using AI without committee permission is treated as an Academic Integrity Policy violation
* All research outputs must be attributable to faculty and/or student researchers, with transparent documentation of any AI-assisted contributions.
* The acceptable use of AI for students conducting research towards an academic milestone (e.g. honors thesis, master's thesis, dissertation) is at the discretion of the student's graduate advisory committee. The use of AI without permission from the committee is a violation of the University's Academic Integrity Policy.
- The university provides data-classification-based restrictions for using AI tools with research data, including rules about when data may be uploaded only to university-licensed or UITS-approved tools
- It also provides research data categories and tool-usage guidance that distinguishes protected sponsored research data (subject to sponsor protocols), publicly available research data, and other categories, with “University-approved tools” or “University-approved tools only” requirements depending on category
* Data or information classified as either restricted or highly sensitive may only be uploaded to University licensed AI tools or tools approved by University Information Technology Services for explicit use with restricted data declared by the user.
* Data or information classified as sensitive (internal) may only be uploaded to University licensed AI tools or tools approved by University Information Technology Services for specific use with this data classification. If a non-licensed approved University tool is utilized, the user should seek permission from the group that is responsible for the data before uploading into the tool.
* The allowable use of research data in AI depends on a number of factors.
* Protected Sponsored Research Data
* University-approved tools that are also allowed by research sponsor ONLY - Required by sponsor security protocols
* Sponsored Research Data for Public Dissemination
* University-approved tools only
* Publicly Available Research Data
* University-approved tools only
* Generated or Collected Research Data from Unsponsored Research
* University-approved tools only if used on a University System or for University Business
* Copyrighted Data
* University licensed tools only unless permission from copyright holder is obtained or AI tool is limited to Fair Use policy compliance
- The university states that researchers and units using AI must follow ethical guidelines and, where applicable, research protocols
- It also links academic dishonesty matters involving research or scholarly misconduct to the Research Misconduct Policy (as an exception to standard academic integrity processing) and points to Research and Scholarly Misconduct Policies and Procedures as applicable to affiliated persons (including students and collaborators)
* University researchers and units making use of AI must follow ethical guidelines and, where applicable, research protocols.
* The Academic Integrity Monitor is also responsible for initial review of all cases involving allegations of academic dishonesty in other academic work (with the exception of those cases reviewed under the Research Misconduct Policy)
* These policies apply to any person paid by, under the control of, or affiliated with the university, such as administrators, faculty, scientists, trainees, technicians and other staff members, students, fellows, guest researchers, or collaborators at the University of Arkansas.
Academic Integrity
- For research outputs, it requires transparent documentation of AI-assisted contributions
- The university requires appropriate attribution for AI-generated content and treats uncited AI-generated work as an Academic Integrity Policy violation
- It also provides guidance that instructors may set attribution standards in syllabi and that, under unrestricted-use syllabus language, students are expected to properly attribute AI-generated content using a specified citation style
* Uncited use of the work of others, whether a person or AI, is a violation of the University's Academic Integrity Policy.
* Faculty are encouraged to clearly communicate their policies regarding AI in their syllabi, outlining permitted and prohibited uses and attribution standards.
* Additionally, you are expected to properly attribute any content generated by artificial intelligence tools using [INSERT STYLE] format.
* The use of content generated by artificial intelligence, without proper citation, will be considered academic dishonesty and reported to the Office of Academic Initiatives and Integrity.
* Submitting as one’s own work or plagiarizing is the offering as one’s own work, the words, ideas, or arguments of another person or entity or using the work of another without appropriate attribution by quotation, reference, or footnote. This includes work generated by artificial intelligence.
* All research outputs must be attributable to faculty and/or student researchers, with transparent documentation of any AI-assisted contributions.
- The university supports the use of Turnitin to assist instructors in identifying AI-generated writing and other forms of academic dishonesty, and it states students may be required to submit work to Turnitin
- It emphasizes that AI use without instructor permission can be considered academic dishonesty and describes formal academic misconduct processes (review standards, sanctions, and transcript notations such as suspension/expulsion and XF)
* Faculty at the University of Arkansas are provided access to Turnitin software, which can assist in identifying different types of academic dishonesty. Students may be required to submit their work to Turnitin as part of their enrollment in a course.
* Turnitin is now available to all UARK instructors. One component of this software will improve an instructor’s ability to assess whether the written work submitted by a student contains text generated by artificial intelligence (AI).
* The use of AI tools can be considered academic dishonesty if a student has not received permission to use such tools from an instructor in advance.
* Records of suspension and expulsion due to academic misconduct will be noted on the student’s transcript.
* The Board is responsible for making sure that any finding of responsibility for academic misconduct is supported by a preponderance of the evidence and for imposing sanctions consistent with the Sanction Rubric when a student is found responsible for a violation.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty are encouraged to disclose substantive AI use in creating course content, grading, or providing feedback
- Separately, the university states that final decisions arising in the course of employment must be made by authorized humans and that AI must not be used as the sole decision-maker for critical or sensitive decisions without a human review process
* To promote transparency and consistency with the ethical use of AI, faculty are encouraged to disclose substantive use of AI in creating course content, grading, or providing feedback.
* Accountability is crucial: consistent with Act 848 of 2023, authorized humans make any final decision arising in the course of employment, regardless of what is recommended by an AI or automated decision tool.
* AI must not be used as the sole decision-maker for any critical or sensitive decisions without a human review process.
- It maintains a list of approved AI tools for faculty, staff, and graduate assistants, and provides a process to request exceptions for unapproved tools
- It also states AI use must comply with privacy laws and university privacy policies and references the Code of Computing Practices as applicable to AI and computing resources
- The university restricts what data can be uploaded into AI tools based on data classification, requiring restricted/highly sensitive data and sensitive (internal) data to be used only with university-licensed tools or UITS-approved tools (with additional permission expectations for some non-licensed approved tools)
* Data or information classified as either restricted or highly sensitive may only be uploaded to University licensed AI tools or tools approved by University Information Technology Services for explicit use with restricted data declared by the user.
* Data or information classified as sensitive (internal) may only be uploaded to University licensed AI tools or tools approved by University Information Technology Services for specific use with this data classification. If a non-licensed approved University tool is utilized, the user should seek permission from the group that is responsible for the data before uploading into the tool.
* The following AI tools are now available and approved for use by University of Arkansas faculty, staff and graduate assistants.
* If an employee or student would like to use an AI tool that isn't approved, this tool exception request form will need to be completed.
* All use of AI tools must comply with privacy laws, regulations, and university privacy policies to ensure that personal information is handled lawfully and ethically.
* All federal and state laws that protect privacy or regulate data apply to the use of computing resources, including AI (Code of Computing Practices | University of Arkansas).
- It also provides a timeline indicating the creation of the AI Task Force and its membership
- The university describes governance structures for AI on campus, including an AI Task Force, an AI Executive Steering Committee, and AI Working Groups focused on teaching/learning, research, data security, and ethics and training
* Following the recommendation of the AI Task Force and the AI Executive Steering Committee, four AI Working Groups were established across campus to focus on teaching/learning, research, data security, and ethics and training. These AI working groups were created to address AI use on campus.
* Former Provost Terry Martin creates AI Task Force consisting of the following members:
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 University of Arkansas's AI Policies
University of Arkansas has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
The university requires appropriate attribution for AI-generated content and treats uncited AI-generated work as an Academic Integrity Policy violation. For research outputs, it requires transparent documentation of AI-assisted contributions. It also provides guidance that instructors may set attribution standards in syllabi and that, under unrestricted-use syllabus language, students are expected to properly attribute AI-generated content using a specified citation style.
The university supports the use of Turnitin to assist instructors in identifying AI-generated writing and other forms of academic dishonesty, and it states students may be required to submit work to Turnitin. It emphasizes that AI use without instructor permission can be considered academic dishonesty and describes formal academic misconduct processes (review standards, sanctions, and transcript notations such as suspension/expulsion and XF).
The university restricts what data can be uploaded into AI tools based on data classification, requiring restricted/highly sensitive data and sensitive (internal) data to be used only with university-licensed tools or UITS-approved tools (with additional permission expectations for some non-licensed approved tools). It maintains a list of approved AI tools for faculty, staff, and graduate assistants, and provides a process to request exceptions for unapproved tools. It also states AI use must comply with privacy laws and university privacy policies and references the Code of Computing Practices as applicable to AI and computing resources.