Teaching & Learning
- Use of generative AI for coursework varies by instructor and, in some units, by department or program
- Additional unit-level examples show stricter rules in some courses or departments, including prior instructor permission requirements and assignment failure for unauthorized use
- The FCBE policy says students may use AI for papers, projects, presentations, and other assignments only as instructed in the syllabus or assignment directions, with misuse treated as academic misconduct
Instructors have the discretion to define how, if, and when generative AI may be used in their courses to support their teaching goals.
Guidelines for the application of AI tools in a course must be clearly communicated to students and included in the course syllabus.
As per university policy, students may only use generative AI tools to complete exams, papers, projects, computer programs, oral presentations, or other assignments following all instructions provided by the instructor in the course syllabus or assignment instructions.
Any use of generative AI that exceeds the scope of instructor permission or that fails to follow stated requirements will be considered academic misconduct.
In this course, you must obtain permission from the instructor before using ChatGPT or other AI tools to assist with assignments in this course. Once permission is granted, AI may only be used as directed.
The use of genera-ve AI tools (such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.) are not permiBed without specific permission by the instructor; therefore, any use of AI tools for work may be considered a viola-on of the University of Memphis Academic Misconduct policy and Student Code of Rights and Responsibili-es. The unauthorized use of AI tools will result in a leBer grade of "F" on assignments and projects.
- Policies for AI use in exams and assessments are generally set at the instructor or course level, but explicit restrictions exist in sample syllabus guidance and the School Psychology doctoral handbook
- FCBE states AI may be used for exams only if it follows instructor instructions, while other sources state AI is prohibited for quizzes, exams, and in-class assessments unless explicitly approved by the instructor
As per university policy, students may only use generative AI tools to complete exams, papers, projects, computer programs, oral presentations, or other assignments following all instructions provided by the instructor in the course syllabus or assignment instructions.
Tier 1 – Prohibited -- No AI use is allowed.Examples: Quizzes, exams, oral practicals, or any closed-book assessments.
• Use of AI tools during in-class assessments or exams is not permitted unless explicitly approved by the instructor.
- The university provides examples showing AI may be used as a learning aid in some courses, but this is not a uniform entitlement
- Program-specific policies, like the School Psychology handbook, permit exploring academic content as long as sensitive data is excluded
- Sample syllabus materials describe AI as a valuable learning partner, and the Career Services office provides a toolkit for using AI in job searches, resume building, and interview prep
Artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, Grammarly, or Perplexity can be valuable learning aids when used responsibly.
Tier 3 – Guided/Encouraged -AI use is encouraged as a learning partner when directed by the instructor.
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.
When used ethically and thoughtfully, these tools can improve the quality of your work, and help you land the job of your dreams! Examples of how you can use AI in your job search include: Resume and Cover Letter assistance...Interview Preparation...Career Exploration...
- There is no single university-wide rule specific to programming beyond these conditional permissions
- The FCBE policy explicitly includes computer programs within work where AI use is allowed only under instructor directions
- In the School Psychology doctoral handbook, AI may assist with coding tasks only with faculty approval and after human review
As per university policy, students may only use generative AI tools to complete exams, papers, projects, computer programs, oral presentations, or other assignments following all instructions provided by the instructor in the course syllabus or assignment instructions.
With the approval of the faculty member overseeing their work, students may use AI tools in research for specific, transparent purposes within the following guidelines:
• Appropriate uses include summarizing existing literature, checking grammar, outlining ideas, or assisting with coding tasks after human review.
Research
- Research writing use is defined at the graduate-program level rather than through a single university-wide rule in the provided sources
- The School of Music allows AI to play a role in research only with committee approval and requires documentation in footnotes and a bibliography/references statement
- The School Psychology doctoral handbook allows specified uses such as literature summarizing, grammar checking, and outlining with faculty approval, but requires students to retain responsibility, avoid replacing their own thinking, and disclose AI use in theses, dissertations, manuscripts, posters, or presentations
It is possible that LLMs (Large Language Models) and other forms of AI may play a role in students' research process. If so, students must confirm the approval of their committee for AI use and must document their use of AI in footnotes and in a statement in their bibliography/references. The statement will explain where and how AI was used, and it will include a citation such as: Chat GPT-4, month, day, year [of query], “text of query.” Generated using [link].
Anyone using AI is responsible for ensuring that the information is factually correct, and that its use does not violate copyright, intellectual property laws, or other laws. Unapproved use of AI and/or failure to acknowledge its use will constitute academic misconduct.
With the approval of the faculty member overseeing their work, students may use AI tools in research for specific, transparent purposes within the following guidelines:
• Appropriate uses include summarizing existing literature, checking grammar, outlining ideas, or assisting with coding tasks after human review.
• Students should not replace their own critical thinking processes, including integrating content, with AI.
• When AI tools are used to assist theses/dissertations, manuscripts, posters, or presentations, students must include a brief note of disclosure indicating when and how the tools were used.
- The clearest research data and analysis rules come from the School Psychology doctoral handbook
- The handbook prohibits using AI to fabricate, manipulate, or analyze data and bars entry of identifiable or sensitive data into AI systems
- Students may use AI in research only with faculty approval for limited transparent purposes, and coding help is allowed only after human review
With the approval of the faculty member overseeing their work, students may use AI tools in research for specific, transparent purposes within the following guidelines:
• Appropriate uses include summarizing existing literature, checking grammar, outlining ideas, or assisting with coding tasks after human review.
• AI tools must not be used to fabricate, manipulate, or analyze data.
• Students may not enter identifiable or sensitive data into AI systems.
- Research ethics guidance in the provided sources is program-specific
- The School of Music requires committee approval and formal acknowledgment for AI use in student research, and states that users are responsible for factual accuracy and legal compliance
- The School Psychology handbook requires ethical, appropriate, and legally compliant AI use, prohibits use that compromises confidentiality, and treats misuse as grounds for discipline or removal from practicum or internship settings
It is possible that LLMs (Large Language Models) and other forms of AI may play a role in students' research process. If so, students must confirm the approval of their committee for AI use and must document their use of AI in footnotes and in a statement in their bibliography/references.
Anyone using AI is responsible for ensuring that the information is factually correct, and that its use does not violate copyright, intellectual property laws, or other laws. Unapproved use of AI and/or failure to acknowledge its use will constitute academic misconduct.
This policy outlines expectations for the ethical, appropriate, and legally compliant use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools by students in the MS/PhD program. These expectations apply across all domains of training, including academic work, clinical practice, and research.
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.
Violations. Misuse of AI tools may result in the development of a student intervention plan (see p. 31), academic discipline (see above), or removal from practicum or internship settings, depending on
Academic Integrity
- Disclosure of AI use is explicitly required in several provided sources
- Sample syllabus guidance also requires disclosure or proper citation where AI is permitted
- FCBE requires students to acknowledge any AI use in writing or by citation at submission, while the Music and School Psychology graduate handbooks require documentation describing where, when, and how AI was used in research-related work
In all cases, students must acknowledge any use of generative AI in writing or via citation at the time of assignment submission, as required by university policy.
Content within an assignment submission that has been generated by Artificial Intelligence must be properly cited and revised for clarity, correctness, and audience appropriateness.
Tier 2 – Limited (with Disclosure) -- Examples: AI may be used to check grammar. Students must disclose how AI was used.
If so, students must confirm the approval of their committee for AI use and must document their use of AI in footnotes and in a statement in their bibliography/references. The statement will explain where and how AI was used, and it will include a citation such as: Chat GPT-4, month, day, year [of query], “text of query.” Generated using [link].
• 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."
• When AI tools are used to assist theses/dissertations, manuscripts, posters, or presentations, students must include a brief note of disclosure indicating when and how the tools were used.
- The university provides both detection guidance and sanctions-related language
- The Turnitin guidance states AI detection should not be used as the sole basis for adverse action and requires further scrutiny and human judgment
- Sample syllabus language and departmental policies warn that submissions may be checked with AI detection software and that unauthorized AI use can lead to failing grades, resubmission, or academic misconduct findings
Assignment submissions may be run through AI detection software.
If your submission appears to have been written using AI, you may receive a failing grade or be asked to resubmit the assignment.
Any assignment that is found to have used generative AI tools in unauthorized ways may result in failure on the assignment or other consequences, see section above titled Plagiarism for more information.
Any use of generative AI that exceeds the scope of instructor permission or that fails to follow stated requirements will be considered academic misconduct.
The unauthorized use of AI tools will result in a leBer grade of "F" on assignments and projects.
Turnitin released the AI Writing Detection tool in April 2023 to help instructors detect the use of AI writing tools, including ChatGPT, in students’ written work using Turnitin’s Similarity Report.
Our AI writing assessment is designed to help educators identify text that might be prepared by a generative AI tool. Our AI writing assessment may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.
Institutional & Administrative
- They do show that faculty may set syllabus statements and course rules, and that example statements are optional rather than mandated
- The provided sources do not set a substantive university-wide policy on faculty or staff use of AI for grading, feedback, recommendation letters, or administrative communications
The following syllabi statements have been shared by our faculty for others to use and adapt for their own courses.
These statements are offered as suggestions and starting points for faculty member to utilize if they wish for their own syllabi. These are not mandated or required, but simply offered as a resource.
- The provided sources define several platform and data-protection restrictions
- The School Psychology handbook further restricts students from entering real client information into AI tools that are not institutionally approved and notes that most public AI tools are not HIPAA- or FERPA-compliant
- ITS states Read AI is not allowed on university accounts, devices, or services because its terms violate university data security and privacy policies, while ITS also states university accounts include access to Microsoft Copilot
Read AI’s terms of service violate IT6005 – Data Security Policy and IT6010 – Data Privacy Policy. As such, Read AI will not be allowed on University accounts, devices or services.
As part of your University of Memphis account, Microsoft Copilot is included. It is an AI-powered assistant. As part of your University Account, ITS provides access to Microsoft Copilot, the AI-powered assistant available through any supported browser.
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 enter identifiable or sensitive data into AI systems.
- However, the sources do not contain a single, comprehensive, university-wide AI strategy document
- Support structures include an AI Community of Practice for faculty and staff and institutionally provided access to Microsoft Copilot
- The university shows institutional AI governance activity, including a Faculty Senate motion to recommend an AI policy and a task force created to study its impact
M2023.11.28 Motion to Recommend Adoption of AI Policy
The Faculty Senate Academic Policies Committee was charged with investigating the impact that recent artificial intelligence tools (i.e. ChatGPT) might have on academic integrity at the University on February 22, 2023.
The Academic Policies Committee created a taskforce co-chaired by Dr. Melanie Conroy, World Languages and Literatures and Dr. Andrew Hussey, Economics...
Welcome to the UofM Generative AI Community of Practice page! We are a group of faculty and staff from across the university who meet on a regular basis to learn and share about the emerging technologies of Generative AI.
As part of your University of Memphis account, Microsoft Copilot is included. It is an AI-powered assistant.
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 Memphis's AI Policies
University of Memphis has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Disclosure of AI use is explicitly required in several provided sources. FCBE requires students to acknowledge any AI use in writing or by citation at submission, while the Music and School Psychology graduate handbooks require documentation describing where, when, and how AI was used in research-related work. Sample syllabus guidance also requires disclosure or proper citation where AI is permitted.
The university provides both detection guidance and sanctions-related language. Sample syllabus language and departmental policies warn that submissions may be checked with AI detection software and that unauthorized AI use can lead to failing grades, resubmission, or academic misconduct findings. The Turnitin guidance states AI detection should not be used as the sole basis for adverse action and requires further scrutiny and human judgment.
The provided sources define several platform and data-protection restrictions. ITS states Read AI is not allowed on university accounts, devices, or services because its terms violate university data security and privacy policies, while ITS also states university accounts include access to Microsoft Copilot. The School Psychology handbook further restricts students from entering real client information into AI tools that are not institutionally approved and notes that most public AI tools are not HIPAA- or FERPA-compliant.