Teaching & Learning
- University academic dishonesty policy also treats submitting AI-generated material as one’s own without proper documentation as plagiarism
- In the College of Law, the default rule permits limited support uses such as research and grammar correction, but prohibits using generative AI to compose any part of a submitted assignment
- The university does not impose a single institution-wide rule for AI use in coursework; it provides optional syllabus language and expects instructors to state what AI use is authorized in assignments
UToledo has provided optional syllabus language for instructors who wish to include a statement on AI. The examples are to assist in establishing clear guidelines concerning the integration of generative AI tools within your course. Customize these suggestions to suit your unique teaching context. Also include explicit instructions in assignment descriptions regarding the permissibility or restrictions on AI tool usage.
The class of generative AI software:
* May be used to perform research in ways similar to search engines such as Google, for correction of grammar, and for other functions attendant to completing an assignment. The software may not be used to compose any part of the submitted assignment.
(1) Plagiarizing or representing the words, ideas or information of another person or artificial intelligence program as one’s own and not offering proper documentation;
Faculty members are expected to inform their students explicitly as to what materials and procedures are authorized for use in the preparation of assignments or in examinations (e.g., the use of a calculator, computer, artificial intelligence programs, text materials, etc.).
- In the College of Law, generative AI may not be used for any purpose in any exam situation
- Optional online syllabus language also includes a fully prohibited model under which any AI use for class-related work is forbidden
- The university’s academic dishonesty policy requires instructors to tell students what materials, including AI programs, are authorized for exams, and unauthorized assistance or materials during exams is prohibited
(2) Giving or receiving, prior to an examination, any unauthorized information concerning the content of that examination;
(3) Referring to or displaying any unauthorized materialsinside or outside of the examination room during the course of an examination;
(4) Communicating during an examination in anymanner with any unauthorized person concerning the examination or any part of it;
(5) Giving or receiving substantive aid during the course of an examination;
Faculty members are expected to inform their students explicitly as to what materials and procedures are authorized for use in the preparation of assignments or in examinations (e.g., the use of a calculator, computer, artificial intelligence programs, text materials, etc.).
* May not be used for any purpose in any exam situation.
The use of generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, etc.) is strictly forbidden in this class. Any utilization of AI tools for class-related work may violate The University of Toledo’s Academic Honesty Policy, as it involves using work that is not solely your own.
- The College of Law default rule likewise permits AI for research and grammar correction, and instructors may deviate from that default in writing
- The university provides optional course-level language allowing AI for brainstorming, information gathering, outlining, grammar, and style support, but this is not a uniform student rule and is left to instructor choice
The following language is optional for instructors who wish to include a statement on AI. These examples are to assist in establishing clear guidelines concerning the integration of generative AI tools within your course. Customize these suggestions to suit your unique teaching context.
Students are permited to utilize generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, etc.) within this course for specific purposes, including refining ideas during brainstorming sessions, information gathering on assigned topics, constructing outlines for organizing thoughts, and/or checking grammar and style.
* May be used to perform research in ways similar to search engines such as Google, for correction of grammar, and for other functions attendant to completing an assignment.
Instructors have the discretion to deviate from the default rule, provided that they do so in writing and with appropriate notice.
Research
- It also instructs reviewers not to submit any portion of a manuscript to an AI platform during manuscript review
- Research guidance advises against using generative AI with complete manuscripts intended for publication when priority of reporting matters
Do NOT use generative AI technology with the following inputs or prompts:
* * Complete manuscripts you plan to submit for publication when being the first to report critical findings is important
When serving as a reviewer for a research proposal for a funding agency or for manuscript review for a publisher do not submit any portion of the research proposal, manuscript, or any personal information to an AI platform
- Separately, research guidance says not to use generative AI with proprietary information, inventive information, confidential information, or personal identifying information, and identifies public data as lower risk
- For human-subjects research using online tools, researchers must describe confidentiality and data security steps in their IRB submissions and use specified university-approved platforms or case-by-case approved alternatives
This guidance intends to assist researchers in protecting human research subjects by minimizing risk of breach of confidentiality when using online tools. The following guidelines should be used in alignment with current UToledo policies and procedures related to human research subjects, information technology, and data security.
In your submission to the IRB, please be sure to clearly describe the confidentiality and data security steps you will take while using online tools.
The following online tools may be used to conduct research online, as described:
Video conferencing:
o UToledo Cisco Webex
o UToledo Microsoft Teams
o Zoom may be used on a case-by-case basis for minimal-risk research where video recording is not taking place.
Surveys:
o UToledo QuestionPro is the preferred survey tool.
o UToledo Microsoft Forms
Data Storage and Data Sharing:
o UToledo Microsoft OneDrive
o UToledo-owned devices that are password, fingerprint, or facial recognition protected
o UToledo Z drive
o Other devices may be approved on a case-by-case basis for minimal risk research where identifiers are not collected.
Do NOT use generative AI technology with the following inputs or prompts:
* * Proprietary information– this could be a violation of non-disclosure agreements
* Inventive information or intellectual property that you may be able to protect through copyright or a patent application
* Confidential or personal identifying information
Low risk inputs to or uses of AI
* * Publicly known data
- Research guidance states that NSF and NIH prohibit AI use in proposal reviews, and it bars reviewers from uploading proposal or review materials to non-approved generative AI tools
- It also says NSF proposers are encouraged to disclose the extent and manner of any generative AI use in project descriptions, and IRB guidance requires researchers to clearly describe confidentiality and data security steps when using online tools in IRB submissions
NSF and NIH expressly prohibit use of AI for proposal reviews
* * NSF reviewers are prohibited from uploading any content from proposals, review information and related records to non-approved generative AI tools.
* "NIH prohibits NIH scientific peer reviewers from using natural language processors, large language models, or other generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies for analyzing and formulating peer review critiques for grant applications and R&D contract proposals."
* NSF proposers are encouraged to indicate in the project description the extent to which, if any, generative AI technology was used and how it was used to develop their proposal.
In your submission to the IRB, please be sure to clearly describe the confidentiality and data security steps you will take while using online tools.
Academic Integrity
- When AI use is allowed under the optional syllabus language, students must properly document and cite that use
- The undergraduate academic dishonesty policy also requires proper documentation when AI-generated words, ideas, or information are used, and NSF proposal guidance encourages proposers to indicate the extent and manner of generative AI use
Properly documenting and citing AI tool usage is mandatory to comply with university policies and any unauthorized use of generative AI tools in assignments may be considered academic dishonesty.
Students are responsible for the content generated using AI tools and should adhere to intellectual property laws and ethical standards. Proper documentation and citation of AI tool usage is crucial to comply with university policies on academic honesty.
(1) Plagiarizing or representing the words, ideas or information of another person or artificial intelligence program as one’s own and not offering proper documentation;
NSF proposers are encouraged to indicate in the project description the extent to which, if any, generative AI technology was used and how it was used to develop their proposal.
- The sources do not define an AI-detection-tool policy
- The university does state that academic dishonesty will not be tolerated, that unauthorized AI use in assignments may be considered academic dishonesty, and that graduate academic dishonesty policy provides appeal procedures for adverse decisions
Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated.
Properly documenting and citing AI tool usage is mandatory to comply with university policies and any unauthorized use of generative AI tools in assignments may be considered academic dishonesty.
The purpose of the policy is to outline the procedures that allow graduate students to appeal an adverse decision by their college procedures of an instance of academic dishonesty.
Institutional & Administrative
- Faculty are expected to communicate explicitly what AI use is authorized in assignments and examinations
- The university also provides optional syllabus language for instructors to adapt to their teaching context, and its AI task force includes work on training and best practices for faculty and staff across teaching, research, clinical practice, and administrative operations
Faculty members are expected to inform their students explicitly as to what materials and procedures are authorized for use in the preparation of assignments or in examinations (e.g., the use of a calculator, computer, artificial intelligence programs, text materials, etc.).
UToledo has provided optional syllabus language for instructors who wish to include a statement on AI. The examples are to assist in establishing clear guidelines concerning the integration of generative AI tools within your course. Customize these suggestions to suit your unique teaching context.
This committee will work to examine best practices and resources to ensure our students can competently and comfortably utilize AI-based tools, to understand acceptable and unacceptable uses of AI-based tools in their respective disciplines, and to disseminate information, resources, and best practices with our faculty.
This committee will examine training needs for the use of AI-based tools in all aspects of University operations, including teaching, research, clinical practice, and administrative operations.
- It also warns researchers not to use generative AI with proprietary, inventive, confidential, or personally identifying information
- For research use of online tools, the university specifies approved or preferred platforms and requires confidentiality and data security protections in IRB submissions
This guidance intends to assist researchers in protecting human research subjects by minimizing risk of breach of confidentiality when using online tools. The following guidelines should be used in alignment with current UToledo policies and procedures related to human research subjects, information technology, and data security.
In your submission to the IRB, please be sure to clearly describe the confidentiality and data security steps you will take while using online tools.
The following online tools may be used to conduct research online, as described:
Video conferencing:
o UToledo Cisco Webex
o UToledo Microsoft Teams
o Zoom may be used on a case-by-case basis for minimal-risk research where video recording is not taking place.
Surveys:
o UToledo QuestionPro is the preferred survey tool.
o UToledo Microsoft Forms
Data Storage and Data Sharing:
o UToledo Microsoft OneDrive
o UToledo-owned devices that are password, fingerprint, or facial recognition protected
o UToledo Z drive
o Other devices may be approved on a case-by-case basis for minimal risk research where identifiers are not collected.
Do NOT use generative AI technology with the following inputs or prompts:
* * Proprietary information– this could be a violation of non-disclosure agreements
* Inventive information or intellectual property that you may be able to protect through copyright or a patent application
* Confidential or personal identifying information
- The university has an institutional AI governance structure centered in the Provost’s office, including an Artificial Intelligence Task Force with named members and subcommittees
- Its stated strategy includes examining acceptable and unacceptable AI uses, disseminating resources and best practices, and developing training for AI use across teaching, research, clinical practice, and administrative operations
## Artificial Intelligence Task Force
### 2025-26 AI Task Force Members
This subcommittee will work to examine the impact of artificial intelligence on practices, interests, and concerns in the arts and humanities. It will identify acceptable and unacceptable uses of AI-based tools as well disseminate information about resources and best practices to A&H faculty, students, and staff as they pertain to their respective departments and areas of concentration at the university.
This committee will work to examine best practices and resources to ensure our students can competently and comfortably utilize AI-based tools, to understand acceptable and unacceptable uses of AI-based tools in their respective disciplines, and to disseminate information, resources, and best practices with our faculty.
This committee will examine training needs for the use of AI-based tools in all aspects of University operations, including teaching, research, clinical practice, and administrative operations.
Artificial Intelligence can bring significant value to a university in several ways.
Enhance Teaching and Learning
Advance Research and Innovation
Optimize Campus Operations and Student Experience
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 Toledo's AI Policies
University of Toledo has defined AI policies in 11 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 92%.
When AI use is allowed under the optional syllabus language, students must properly document and cite that use. The undergraduate academic dishonesty policy also requires proper documentation when AI-generated words, ideas, or information are used, and NSF proposal guidance encourages proposers to indicate the extent and manner of generative AI use.
The sources do not define an AI-detection-tool policy. The university does state that academic dishonesty will not be tolerated, that unauthorized AI use in assignments may be considered academic dishonesty, and that graduate academic dishonesty policy provides appeal procedures for adverse decisions.
For research use of online tools, the university specifies approved or preferred platforms and requires confidentiality and data security protections in IRB submissions. It also warns researchers not to use generative AI with proprietary, inventive, confidential, or personally identifying information.