Teaching & Learning
- The university does not set a single, uniform student rule for using AI on graded coursework; instead, it recommends that instructors specify in their syllabus whether AI tools are allowed or prohibited, and if allowed, how they may be used and how they must be cited/reported for particular assignments
Instructors are recommended to develop language that will guide students in their use or prohibition of use of AI related tools. If an instructor allows the use of AI tools, they should clearly indicate in what ways they can be used, how they should be cited/reported, and for which assignments they are allowed.
- The guidance also notes that Turnitin has a ChatGPT filter and cites an estimated false positive rate
- The university's required syllabus-language guidance does not define a university-wide rule for student AI use during exams; it instead indicates instructors should specify permitted/prohibited AI uses for their course
Instructors are recommended to develop language that will guide students in their use or prohibition of use of AI related tools.
Note that Turnitin currently has a filter for ChatGPT, although there is approximately 2% rate of false positives.
- The university does not define a student-wide policy specifically allowing or prohibiting AI for personal studying/tutoring; instead, it recommends that instructors provide course-specific guidance on student use or prohibition of AI tools
Instructors are recommended to develop language that will guide students in their use or prohibition of use of AI related tools.
- The university does not define student rules specific to AI-assisted code generation for programming assignments at the university-wide level; it recommends that instructors specify course policies for student AI use or prohibition, including which assignments allow AI and how use must be cited/reported
Instructors are recommended to develop language that will guide students in their use or prohibition of use of AI related tools. If an instructor allows the use of AI tools, they should clearly indicate in what ways they can be used, how they should be cited/reported, and for which assignments they are allowed.
Research
- Faculty are instructed to review and edit AI-generated outputs before use
- Faculty use of generative AI is described as approved with a license, including use for writing and research support tasks (e.g., revising and improving writing clarity and brainstorming research topics or grant proposal ideas)
Yes. Three AI tools, Copilot, ChatGPT, and Gemini, are available for faculty use with an approved license.
Note: All AI-generated outputs should be reviewed and edited by faculty before use.
3. Writing and Research Support
* Refining written course materials like syllabi, slides, and documents
* Brainstorming research topics or grant proposal ideas
* Revising and improving clarity, tone, and organization in writing
- The System states AI tools may be used freely with non-university or public information or for creating new content, and it emphasizes verifying outputs for accuracy
- For system-level privacy and security guidance, the University of Houston System prohibits using AI tools with Level 1 and Level 2 data (including mission-critical research information as defined in the data classification policy)
Do not use confidential, sensitive, or mission critical data (Level 1 data) or protected information (Level 2 data) with AI tools.
You may use AI tools freely when using non-university or public information or creating new content through the use of the tools.
Mission-critical information includes all research data obtained from third parties pursuant to an agreement or grant and/or other data necessary to substantiate research results or to satisfy grant-funding requirements, regardless of whether such data was developed by the university or obtained from third parties.
- It also states that an official AI policy is being developed and that guidance may evolve as further policy is developed
- The University of Houston System provides security/privacy guidance for AI use that applies across contexts including research, and it directs users to consult the provost's office at their System university for curriculum-specific use cases
UHS is developing an official AI policy. During this process, please use these privacy and security guidelines, or contact security@uh.edu should you have any questions, comments or concerns.
Please check with the provost’s office at your System university regarding specific use cases of AI tools in your curriculum.
Please note that this security and privacy guidance may evolve as circumstances change and/or the System develops further policy regarding the use of AI.
Academic Integrity
- The university's required syllabus-language guidance recommends that if instructors allow AI tools, they should specify how AI use should be cited/reported, but it does not establish a single university-wide disclosure/citation rule for all students across all courses
If an instructor allows the use of AI tools, they should clearly indicate in what ways they can be used, how they should be cited/reported, and for which assignments they are allowed.
- Separate from AI detection, the academic honesty FAQs describe formal academic dishonesty processes and timelines (e.g., notifying the departmental hearing officer)
- The university's required syllabus-language guidance notes that Turnitin has a ChatGPT filter and provides an estimated false-positive rate, but it does not define a specific enforcement standard for AI detection results
Note that Turnitin currently has a filter for ChatGPT, although there is approximately 2% rate of false positives.
The departmental hearing officer must be notified in writing within five class days of discovery of suspected academic dishonesty.
Institutional & Administrative
- The FAQ also lists inappropriate uses, including uploading confidential/sensitive/student-identifiable information and using AI to replace professional judgment for grading and evaluation
- UH states generative AI is approved for faculty use via licensed tools (Copilot, ChatGPT, Gemini) and provides examples of appropriate uses for drafting course materials and generating ideas, with a requirement that faculty review and edit AI outputs before use
Yes. Three AI tools, Copilot, ChatGPT, and Gemini, are available for faculty use with an approved license.
What are appropriate ways for faculty to use generative AI?
* Drafting and refining course materials and plans
* Generating ideas for assignments, assessments, or discussions
* Reviewing and improving the clarity of written content
* Supporting coding, data exploration, or technical problem solving
Note: All AI-generated outputs should be reviewed and edited by faculty before use.
Faculty should not:
* Upload confidential, sensitive, or student-identifiable information.
* Rely on AI-generated content without review or verification
* Use AI tools to replace professional judgment for grading, student learning, and evaluation
- UH's faculty AI FAQ also instructs faculty not to upload confidential, sensitive, or student-identifiable information, and it identifies licensed tools available for faculty use (Copilot, ChatGPT, Gemini)
- The University of Houston System provides system-level security and privacy guidance stating Level 1 and Level 2 data must not be used with AI tools, while allowing use with non-university or public information or for creating new content
Do not use confidential, sensitive, or mission critical data (Level 1 data) or protected information (Level 2 data) with AI tools.
You may use AI tools freely when using non-university or public information or creating new content through the use of the tools.
Yes. Three AI tools, Copilot, ChatGPT, and Gemini, are available for faculty use with an approved license.
Faculty should not:
* Upload confidential, sensitive, or student-identifiable information.
- Separately, the University of Houston System states it is developing an official AI policy and that its AI security/privacy guidance may evolve as policy develops
- UH's UIT strategy page describes a plan to establish an AI Center of Excellence that will promote AI literacy, consult and collaborate, lead policy and best-practices development, and provision AI technologies "as a service" to students, faculty, staff, and research departments
The AI Center of Excellence will promote AI literacy, consult, facilitate, collaborate, lead in the development of policies and best practices, and provision AI technologies “as a service” to the broader organization.
UHS is developing an official AI policy.
Please note that this security and privacy guidance may evolve as circumstances change and/or the System develops further policy regarding the use of AI.
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 Houston's AI Policies
University of Houston has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
The university's required syllabus-language guidance recommends that if instructors allow AI tools, they should specify how AI use should be cited/reported, but it does not establish a single university-wide disclosure/citation rule for all students across all courses.
The university's required syllabus-language guidance notes that Turnitin has a ChatGPT filter and provides an estimated false-positive rate, but it does not define a specific enforcement standard for AI detection results. Separate from AI detection, the academic honesty FAQs describe formal academic dishonesty processes and timelines (e.g., notifying the departmental hearing officer).
The University of Houston System provides system-level security and privacy guidance stating Level 1 and Level 2 data must not be used with AI tools, while allowing use with non-university or public information or for creating new content. UH's faculty AI FAQ also instructs faculty not to upload confidential, sensitive, or student-identifiable information, and it identifies licensed tools available for faculty use (Copilot, ChatGPT, Gemini).