Teaching & Learning
- In the School of Medicine, student AI use for coursework is at faculty discretion, and authorized use must still reflect the student's own work
- University-wide guidance defers student use of generative AI in coursework to instructor policy and says faculty should state that policy explicitly in the syllabus
- The university provides three sample course-level positions: prohibited for any assignment, allowed with prior instructor permission plus attribution/citation, or allowed without restrictions
Whatever decisions course directors and individual faculty make about the use of AI in their courses, the policies should be stated explicitly and transparently in the syllabus.
1.1.1 The use of GenAI is not permitted in this course for any assignment
1.1.2 GenAI may be used with prior instructor permission and appropriate attribution and citation
1.1.3 The use of GenAI will be allowed without any restrictions
Assignment Expectations: Before a student uses AI for any assignment or coursework, it is the student’s responsibility to ensure that they understand the AI policy for that specific activity, which is determined by the faculty. AI policies may vary among courses or activities within a single course. Students should contact the faculty/instructor for clarification as to if and how AI can be used.
Using AI as a Tool: Earning an MD signifies that a student has both acquired knowledge and completed rigorous coursework to apply that knowledge. Coursework completed with AI must therefore reflect the student’s own work: AI must be used as a tool and not in any way that replaces self-reflection, critical thinking, or knowledge synthesis.
- The committee report states that if no syllabus policy is provided, students should treat AI use on assignments or exams as prohibited
- Its proposed Student Code revision would classify unauthorized use of generative AI tools during testing or other academic exercises as cheating
- In the School of Medicine, the AI subcommittee is tasked with policies for assessments, but the operative student-use policy remains faculty- and activity-specific
Students should assume that in the absence of a policy on the syllabus, the use of GenAI tools to complete an assignment or exam is prohibited. Unauthorized use of AI shall be treated similarly to unauthorized assistance and/or plagiarism and be subject to Dean’s Discipline.
(a) Using or attempting to use books, notes, study aids, calculators, generative AI tools, or any other documents or devices designed to aid in taking tests or completing other academic work not authorized by the person administering the test or supervising the academic work
Responsibilities: The Artificial Intelligence Committee shall oversee the use, interpretation, integration and assessment of AI within the University of Louisville School of Medicine. It shall develop a comprehensive overview of AI within SOM as it interacts with varying aspects of curricular development. It shall also develop and maintain policies and procedures regarding use of AI for assessments / assignments by students, staff, and faculty.
- The committee report encourages instructors to consider how AI can support personalized learning, while course-level use still depends on syllabus policy
- In the School of Medicine, students may use the university-provided Copilot for some study-support activities such as making flashcards from lecture slides, subject to data-protection limits
- The university's AI materials present AI as something that can support teaching and learning, but they do not establish a single university-wide rule specifically for personal study assistance
Introduction for the UofL community on the best practice for generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) as part of teaching, learning and administrative use.
The Teaching and Learning Subcommittee took up the Provost’s charge to “assess how ChatGPT and AI-powered tools can be integrated into the teaching and learning process to improve student outcomes” and to “explore how generative AI can be harnessed to provide personalized learning paths, promote critical thinking, and address individual learning needs.”
Students could thus upload lecture slides to create flashcards into UofL-provided Co-Pilot but not into an external tool like ChatGPT or Google NotebookLM.
- The ITS AI page describes some tools as useful for coding and creative projects, but that is informational rather than a binding academic policy
- No university-wide student coding rule is separately defined; programming-related AI use falls under the same course-level discretion framework as other assignments
Whatever decisions course directors and individual faculty make about the use of AI in their courses, the policies should be stated explicitly and transparently in the syllabus.
The use of Generative AI may be used with prior instructor permission and appropriate attribution and citation.
Google’s most capable model (1.5 Pro or version 3) is a strong contender for users deeply embedded in the Google ecosystem. It excels at complex multimodal tasks, such as analyzing video and text simultaneously, and offers robust reasoning capabilities for coding and creative projects.
A favorite among developers, this model is widely regarded for its exceptional coding abilities and nuanced, human-like writing.
Research
- No AI-specific thesis/dissertation writing rule is defined on the Graduate School thesis and dissertation page provided
- For research generally, the committee recommends training researchers on ethical AI use, including acknowledgement and citation, but it does not set a single university-wide manuscript-writing rule in the provided sources
- In the School of Medicine, students must discuss AI use in research or scholarship with their research mentor and follow the most conservative applicable standard among mentor expectations, university policies, and target publication venues
Researchers should be trained on the ethical use of AI (including acknowledgement and citation) and on the potential data and research security issues surrounding GenAI.
AI in Student Research and Scholarship: Before a student uses AI for any research or scholarly projects, it is the student’s responsibility to discuss AI use with their research mentor. Students are expected to follow the most conservative guidelines among their mentor’s expectations, UofL policies, and any journals/conferences where they plan to submit their work.
The following guidelines help graduate students and mentors get their theses and dissertations ready, formatted and submitted to the Graduate School. If needed, exceptions might be considered based on scholarly norms; however, your Dissertation/EdD Capstone Project must be submitted to the Graduate School for approval.
- The provided sources do not define a separate university-wide rule on using AI for data analysis itself
- The university's AI guidance prohibits entering university-owned data into unauthorized generative AI tools
- The committee report specifically flags research security issues for researcher training, and the School of Medicine policy explicitly prohibits uploading research datasets to AI platforms
Security of personal and university-owned data should be a user's priority and university-owned data should not be provided to any non-authorized GenAI tool.
Researchers should be trained on the ethical use of AI (including acknowledgement and citation) and on the potential data and research security issues surrounding GenAI.
Additionally, research data protected by contracts, laws, or regulations often prohibit sharing with external sources. Uploading any non-public, university-owned data to AI is prohibited.
In alignment with UofL’s GenAI Guidelines, students are prohibited from uploading research datasets to AI platforms.
- In the School of Medicine, student research AI use must be cleared with the research mentor and follow the strictest applicable requirements
- The committee report recommends researcher training on ethical AI use, acknowledgement/citation, and research-security risks, but the provided sources do not set explicit university-wide rules for grant proposals, IRB submissions, or ethics declarations
Researchers should be trained on the ethical use of AI (including acknowledgement and citation) and on the potential data and research security issues surrounding GenAI.
AI in Student Research and Scholarship: Before a student uses AI for any research or scholarly projects, it is the student’s responsibility to discuss AI use with their research mentor. Students are expected to follow the most conservative guidelines among their mentor’s expectations, UofL policies, and any journals/conferences where they plan to submit their work.
Academic Integrity
- The School of Medicine requires students to appropriately cite or disclose authorized AI use so faculty can assess their knowledge and skills
- Disclosure expectations are addressed through course policy and recommendations rather than a fully adopted university-wide rule in the provided sources
- The committee report says unauthorized AI assistance or failure to disclose authorized AI use can constitute academic misconduct, and it recommends attribution and citation when instructors permit AI
Academic misconduct is present in academic work wherever AI assistance has been used when unauthorized, or when authorized, has not been disclosed as required.
1.1.2 GenAI may be used with prior instructor permission and appropriate attribution and citation
Researchers should be trained on the ethical use of AI (including acknowledgement and citation)
Disclosing AI Use: Students who use AI on authorized coursework, including clinical learning activities, must appropriately cite or disclose its use so that faculty or other individuals providing feedback may accurately assess the student’s knowledge or skills.
- The sources define enforcement consequences for unauthorized AI use but do not establish a university policy endorsing AI detectors
- The committee report says suspected violations should be reported to the Dean of Students and that unauthorized AI use should be treated like unauthorized assistance and/or plagiarism
- In the School of Medicine, suspected unauthorized AI use may result in a failing grade or referral to the Student Promotions Committee, and improper use may also be handled under the Honor Code or professionalism policies
Suspected violations of this nature will be reported to the Dean of Students.
Unauthorized use of AI shall be treated similarly to unauthorized assistance and/or plagiarism and be subject to Dean’s Discipline.
If a student is suspected of using AI in an unauthorized manner, the student may receive a failing grade on assignment/clinical evaluation depending on the circumstances and/or may be referred to the Student Promotions Committee for professionalism concerns.
AI Misuse: Medical students must use AI in accordance with ULSOM’s academic and professional ethics standards. Improper use of AI may be addressed under the ULSOM Honor Code and/or other professionalism requirements governed by ULSOM policies as applicable.
Institutional & Administrative
- The ITS AI guidance is written for teaching, learning, and administrative use and emphasizes thoughtful, ethical use and data protection
- In the School of Medicine, the AI committee is charged with developing policies for student, staff, and faculty use of AI in assessments and assignments
- The committee report recommends that every faculty member include a syllabus statement on GenAI and that the Delphi Center continue instructor training and integrate AI into existing programming
Introduction for the UofL community on the best practice for generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) as part of teaching, learning and administrative use.
Please use GenAI tools thoughtfully and ethically while following university and course use requirements.
Require every faculty member to include a statement about their policy on the use of GenAI on each syllabus.
The Delphi Center should continue to offer discrete training sessions for instructors on the use of GenAI, and they should begin integrating AI use into existing programming for instructors.
Responsibilities: The Artificial Intelligence Committee shall oversee the use, interpretation, integration and assessment of AI within the University of Louisville School of Medicine. It shall develop a comprehensive overview of AI within SOM as it interacts with varying aspects of curricular development. It shall also develop and maintain policies and procedures regarding use of AI for assessments / assignments by students, staff, and faculty.
- The university explicitly prioritizes data protection in AI use
- Only Microsoft Copilot is identified as a licensed UofL tool on the ITS page, and university-owned data must not be entered into non-authorized generative AI tools
- The School of Medicine adds that FERPA-, HIPAA-, research-, and other non-public university data cannot be submitted to AI, and it distinguishes UofL-provided Copilot from external platforms such as ChatGPT or Google NotebookLM
The information provided below is for a user's personal knowledge - we are not endorsing any specific AI or GenAI tool and, at this time, only Microsoft Copilot is a licensed UofL tool.
Security of personal and university-owned data should be a user's priority and university-owned data should not be provided to any non-authorized GenAI tool.
FERPA and HIPAA-protected data, such as student records, assignments, and personal details should not be submitted to Al. Additionally, research data protected by contracts, laws, or regulations often prohibit sharing with external sources. Uploading any non-public, university-owned data to AI is prohibited.
At the time of this policy creation, UofL-provided Microsoft Co-Pilot offers contractual data protection to UofL in which data do not leave UofL and are not used for AI model training.
Students could thus upload lecture slides to create flashcards into UofL-provided Co-Pilot but not into an external tool like ChatGPT or Google NotebookLM.
- The committee report recommends a standing university-wide AI committee, unit-level committees, and an AI governance structure
- Within the School of Medicine, an AI subcommittee has formal responsibility for overseeing AI integration and policy development
- The university has established governance activity around AI through the Committee on Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in UofL Academics, charged to assess AI's impact on academics and student research and to deliver recommendations
Committee will assess the potential applications and impact of ChatGPT and generative AI in the domains of academics and undergraduate/graduate student research at UofL
Expected to complete its work and submit final recommendations during Spring 2024
technological disruptions; this committee should propose an AI governance structure.
We also recommend that the Provost charge each unit with creating a committee to consider the impact of AI on the unit’s curriculum, academic policies, research, business policies, and so on. There should be a representative from each unit committee to report to the university-wide standing committee.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Subcommittee
Responsibilities: The Artificial Intelligence Committee shall oversee the use, interpretation, integration and assessment of AI within the University of Louisville School of Medicine. It shall develop a comprehensive overview of AI within SOM as it interacts with varying aspects of curricular development. It shall also develop and maintain policies and procedures regarding use of AI for assessments / assignments by students, staff, and faculty.
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 Louisville's AI Policies
University of Louisville has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Disclosure expectations are addressed through course policy and recommendations rather than a fully adopted university-wide rule in the provided sources. The committee report says unauthorized AI assistance or failure to disclose authorized AI use can constitute academic misconduct, and it recommends attribution and citation when instructors permit AI. The School of Medicine requires students to appropriately cite or disclose authorized AI use so faculty can assess their knowledge and skills.
The sources define enforcement consequences for unauthorized AI use but do not establish a university policy endorsing AI detectors. The committee report says suspected violations should be reported to the Dean of Students and that unauthorized AI use should be treated like unauthorized assistance and/or plagiarism. In the School of Medicine, suspected unauthorized AI use may result in a failing grade or referral to the Student Promotions Committee, and improper use may also be handled under the Honor Code or professionalism policies.
The university explicitly prioritizes data protection in AI use. Only Microsoft Copilot is identified as a licensed UofL tool on the ITS page, and university-owned data must not be entered into non-authorized generative AI tools. The School of Medicine adds that FERPA-, HIPAA-, research-, and other non-public university data cannot be submitted to AI, and it distinguishes UofL-provided Copilot from external platforms such as ChatGPT or Google NotebookLM.