Teaching & Learning
- In the School of Medicine & Health Sciences, students may use AI for assigned coursework only with public data and subject to faculty requirements
- University-wide guidance says there is no single UND AI policy for coursework; instructors must set course-level expectations, and AI use on assignments is governed by those course policies and academic integrity rules
- Some programs impose stricter rules: the Counseling MA handbook prohibits ChatGPT or similar tools for assignments unless the syllabus explicitly permits it, the Counseling Psychology PhD handbook prohibits AI-generated text unless an instructor allows it, and the Space Studies handbook says AI text-generation tools are not allowed unless authorized by the instructor
UND does not have an AI policy. If an instructor believes a student has used AI for an assignment or exam in violation of a course policy, it is addressed through UND’s Academic Integrity Policy.
Faculty should p rovide clear expectations regarding academic integrity and AI. Clarify for students your expectations regarding using any generative AI tools or applications. State these expectations clearly on your course syllabus and in any assignment prompts.
When using AI for assigned coursework, students must check with the responsible faculty and comply with any additional requirements regarding the use of AI for coursework.
• Utilizing ChatGPT or similar generative AI tools of artificial intelligence for the completion of assignments, research, and examinations, unless permission is explicitly stated and specified in the corresponding course syllabus.
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is prohibited in terms of generating text, unless specified by an individual instructor.
For M.S. and PhD students working under the Department of Space Studies, the use of any AI assisted text-generation tools (e.g. ChatGPT) is not allowed, unless
- University-wide, exam use is not governed by a single UND AI policy; it depends on instructor course policy and is enforced through academic integrity procedures if violated
- The Counseling MA handbook explicitly prohibits generative AI for examinations unless the course syllabus specifically allows it, and warns this may be treated as unauthorized collusion with serious penalties
UND does not have an AI policy. If an instructor believes a student has used AI for an assignment or exam in violation of a course policy, it is addressed through UND’s Academic Integrity Policy.
• Utilizing ChatGPT or similar generative AI tools of artificial intelligence for the completion of assignments, research, and examinations, unless permission is explicitly stated and specified in the corresponding course syllabus.
Outside of this domain, Generative AI cannot be used and may be considered ‘unauthorized collusion’ (see below) which is a serious academic integrity issue which may result in the failure of an assignment, a class, and could even result in a remediation plan and/or dismissal from the program.
Recall that counselors cannot use AI when taking licensure exams, or if subpoenaed to court, as such, students should aim to organically learn all information.
- UND provides examples showing that some instructors may allow or even require AI as a learning aid, but this is at instructor discretion rather than a university-wide entitlement
- General guidance encourages faculty to discuss with students how AI is being used in courses, and students must follow instructor permissions for tools such as AI notetakers in class
I expect you to use AI (ChatGPT and image generation tools, at a minimum), in this class. In fact, some assignments will require it. Learning to use AI is an emerging skill, and I provide tutorials in Blackboard about how to use them. I am happy to meet and help with these tools during office hours or after class.
We encourage you to work with colleagues in your department to better understand the impact of these tools in your discipline. Check your disciplinary organizations and networks as well as journal and grant guidelines as well. We also recommend having conversations with your students about how they are using AI or to engage them in conversations around community guidelines for AI in your courses and disciplines.
If you are using an AI notetaker, it is important that you inform the other participants of the meeting of that use. Students should make sure use of an AI notetaker in class is permitted by the instructor.
Research
- UND’s general guidance requires transparency, citation, and attribution for generative AI use in research products
- Program-level policies are stricter in some areas: the Counseling Psychology PhD handbook prohibits AI-generated text unless an instructor or advisor permits it, and if allowed for written text or idea generation in papers or manuscripts, it must be cited
Document and be transparent about all uses of Generative AI—such clarity in citation and attribution is a critical aspect of any research product that uses Generative AI. Be sure to comply with academic and research integrity policies: review the Code of Student Life and Faculty Handbook.
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is prohibited in terms of generating text, unless specified by an individual instructor. If your instructor or advisor allows you to use AI to generate written text, in allowable circumstances, you must cite it appropriately. Additionally, the use of AI for idea generation in written papers or manuscripts should be used only with permission from your instructor or advisor, and must also be cited.
- The School of Medicine & Health Sciences policy applies the same restriction to sensitive research data and requires use only of compliant tools
- UND’s explicit research-data rule is about data protection rather than analytical uses: private or restricted data, including non-public research data, must not be entered into generative AI tools unless the tool does not retain, transfer, or use that data for other purposes
Guard Confidential Data – Data classified as private or restricted should not be entered into generative AI tools, including non-public research data, per SBHE 1202.3 Data Privacy Policy. When using these tools, do not disclose confidential, sensitive, or personally identifiable information. Do not disclose intellectual property that is not safeguarded.
This caution extends not only to sensitive data generated and used as part of a research project but also to protected student data and student information.
restricted or private in the use of AI, (including data such as, but not limited to that protected under FERPA and HIPAA as well as intellectual property and proprietary information) they may ONLY use generative AI tools that do not retain, transfer, or use this data for any other reason(s). If it cannot be confirmed that the AI tool complies with these requirements, then NO restricted or private data should be entered into the AI.
Restricted and private data, proprietary information, sensitive data from research projects, and intellectual property may not be shared publicly. Therefore, such data may only be used with generative AI systems that do NOT use data for training purposes.*
- UND also advises faculty to consult disciplinary organizations plus journal and grant guidelines
- UND requires AI use in research to comply with academic and research integrity policies and to be transparent
- The provided sources do not set a specific university rule for AI in grant proposals, IRB applications, or formal ethics declarations
Document and be transparent about all uses of Generative AI—such clarity in citation and attribution is a critical aspect of any research product that uses Generative AI. Be sure to comply with academic and research integrity policies: review the Code of Student Life and Faculty Handbook.
We encourage you to work with colleagues in your department to better understand the impact of these tools in your discipline. Check your disciplinary organizations and networks as well as journal and grant guidelines as well.
Further, the use of generative AI tools by faculty, staff, fellows, residents, and students at the UND SMHS must adhere to academic and research integrity policies as documented in the Code of Student Life, Faculty Handbook, and Staff Handbook.
Academic Integrity
- Sample course guidance says AI-generated content must be acknowledged like other software
- UND’s general guidance requires users to document and be transparent about all uses of generative AI, with citation and attribution treated as critical for research products
- Some programs add mandatory citation rules: the Counseling Psychology PhD handbook requires citation whenever AI-generated written text or idea generation is permitted, and Space Studies identifies submission of AI-generated text without citation as improper
Document and be transparent about all uses of Generative AI—such clarity in citation and attribution is a critical aspect of any research product that uses Generative AI.
The use of AI tools must be acknowledged just like the use of any other software package. For example, I used Grammarly to edit this syllabus. You might also use ChatGPT or help outline an essay or organize your notes.
If your instructor or advisor allows you to use AI to generate written text, in allowable circumstances, you must cite it appropriately. Additionally, the use of AI for idea generation in written papers or manuscripts should be used only with permission from your instructor or advisor, and must also be cited.
AI may be used inappropriately to generate text which a student then submits for academic credit, without citation, and without any intellectual or creative effort exerted on behalf of the student.
- The university warns that AI-detection websites are flawed and should be used cautiously and transparently if used at all
- UND states that suspected misuse of AI on assignments or exams is handled through the Academic Integrity Policy and may be reported through the Academic Integrity Concern Report
- Some programs specify penalties: the Counseling MA handbook says unauthorized AI use may be treated as unauthorized collusion and can lead to failure, remediation, or dismissal; it also references Safe Assign scores as a plagiarism review signal rather than a definitive determination
UND does not have an AI policy. If an instructor believes a student has used AI for an assignment or exam in violation of a course policy, it is addressed through UND’s Academic Integrity Policy. Academic concerns may be reported via the Academic Integrity Concern Report.
Note that websites that purport to detect the use of AI are flawed and have high occurrences of false positives and negatives. Use caution and be transparent with your students if you do decide to use these tools.
Outside of this domain, Generative AI cannot be used and may be considered ‘unauthorized collusion’ (see below) which is a serious academic integrity issue which may result in the failure of an assignment, a class, and could even result in a remediation plan and/or dismissal from the program.
• Submitting an assignment on “Safe Assign” with a high score; this could be an indication that more paraphrasing is needed and that the wording of the paper is too close to the original text.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty are directed to state AI expectations in syllabi and assignments and explain consequences for violations
- In SMHS, administrators and faculty may communicate additional AI restrictions for those they supervise or teach
- UND permits faculty and staff to use AI for teaching, research, and administrative work, but requires accuracy checking, compliance with integrity rules, and adherence to any added supervisory or teaching restrictions
Provide clear expectations regarding academic integrity and AI. Clarify for students your expectations regarding using any generative AI tools or applications. State these expectations clearly on your course syllabus and in any assignment prompts. Explain the consequences for the students if your expectations regarding the use of generative AI tools are not met.
Use of AI such as ChatGPT can be useful in putting together agendas, technical writing explaining a concept, or other administrative tasks, but always ensure the accuracy of the information you receive when using Generative AI.
Communicate additional AI restrictions or responsibilities for those you supervise or teach. Comply with academic honesty and integrity guidelines regarding the use of AI for teaching and research.
- In SMHS, restricted or private data may be used only with AI tools that do not retain, transfer, or reuse the data, and if compliance cannot be confirmed, the data must not be entered
- UND also requires procurement requests through Jaggaer before purchasing generative AI tools, and UIT is identified as the office to consult about available compliant tools and purchases
- UND prohibits entering private or restricted data into generative AI tools, including non-public research data, confidential information, personally identifiable information, and unprotected intellectual property
Guard Confidential Data – Data classified as private or restricted should not be entered into generative AI tools, including non-public research data, per SBHE 1202.3 Data Privacy Policy. When using these tools, do not disclose confidential, sensitive, or personally identifiable information. Do not disclose intellectual property that is not safeguarded.
Reach out to UIT Before Procuring Generative AI Tools – As with any software purchase, submit procurement requests via Jaggaer regardless of the dollar value. If you have already purchased a generative AI tool, please let UIT know.
restricted or private in the use of AI, (including data such as, but not limited to that protected under FERPA and HIPAA as well as intellectual property and proprietary information) they may ONLY use generative AI tools that do not retain, transfer, or use this data for any other reason(s). If it cannot be confirmed that the AI tool complies with these requirements, then NO restricted or private data should be entered into the AI.
Information Resources Consult with SMHS personnel and students regarding which AI tools are available, which comply with this policy regarding the use of restricted or private data, and how appropriate AI tools can be obtained using UND SMHS funds.
- UND has institution-level AI strategy and governance activity rather than a single comprehensive AI policy
- The Provost describes AI integration across teaching, research, and service as evolving and anticipates policy updates or new policies
- The president’s AI Forum is presented as a campus space to discuss responsible AI use, data privacy, transparency, and governance, and UIT’s 2025 initiatives describe Microsoft Copilot piloting and a broader AI and digital-transformation strategy with formal IT governance structures
The integration of generative AI into the teaching, research, and service activities of the modern university is also rapidly evolving, as we work to answer a variety of questions central to our mission:
As generative AI tools evolve, we expect these existing policies and guidelines to be modified or new policies to be created to align with the use of the technology.
An open space to explore, discuss, and shape the future of AI on campus.
Ethics & AI Governance: Join discussions on responsible AI use, data privacy, and transparency.
The CoPilot Collective launched as a campus pilot with 135 participants, offering early access to Microsoft Copilot in Microsoft 365. Through hands‑on workshops and practical training, participants explored real‑world ways AI can streamline daily tasks, enhance collaboration, and save time. They practiced drafting content, summarizing meetings, and generating insights from data, all while connecting across departments and contributing to UND’s broader AI and digital‑transformation strategy.
A structure was put into place to enable strategic decision-making, fostering transparency, collaboration, and accountability in technology prioritization.
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 North Dakota's AI Policies
University of North Dakota has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
UND’s general guidance requires users to document and be transparent about all uses of generative AI, with citation and attribution treated as critical for research products. Sample course guidance says AI-generated content must be acknowledged like other software. Some programs add mandatory citation rules: the Counseling Psychology PhD handbook requires citation whenever AI-generated written text or idea generation is permitted, and Space Studies identifies submission of AI-generated text without citation as improper.
UND states that suspected misuse of AI on assignments or exams is handled through the Academic Integrity Policy and may be reported through the Academic Integrity Concern Report. The university warns that AI-detection websites are flawed and should be used cautiously and transparently if used at all. Some programs specify penalties: the Counseling MA handbook says unauthorized AI use may be treated as unauthorized collusion and can lead to failure, remediation, or dismissal; it also references Safe Assign scores as a plagiarism review signal rather than a definitive determination.
UND prohibits entering private or restricted data into generative AI tools, including non-public research data, confidential information, personally identifiable information, and unprotected intellectual property. In SMHS, restricted or private data may be used only with AI tools that do not retain, transfer, or reuse the data, and if compliance cannot be confirmed, the data must not be entered. UND also requires procurement requests through Jaggaer before purchasing generative AI tools, and UIT is identified as the office to consult about available compliant tools and purchases.