Teaching & Learning
- Vanderbilt indicates that course-level generative AI rules vary by instructor, including allowing, limiting, or banning AI use
- Vanderbilt’s Honor Code materials define generative AI software as a potential form of unauthorized aid when the instructor prohibits it
- The Academic Affairs guidance states that if an instructor does not provide a statement on generative AI use, then use is permitted but must be disclosed
While some instructors may decide to incorporate generative AI into every part of their course, others may limit or outright ban its use. Because policies vary across courses and instructors, it is important to communicate with students early about expectations on how generative AI should or should not be used in a course.
Faculty should clearly communicate expectations to students. If a statement on the use of generative AI tools is not provided by an instructor, the use of such tools is permitted but must be disclosed.
• Giving and/or receiving unauthorized aid or attempting to give and/or receive unauthorized aid on an assignment, report, paper, exercise, problem, test or examination, presentation, film, or computer program submitted by a student to meet course requirements or to gain an advantage. Such aid includes, but is not limited to, the following:
◦ viewing, use, or production of unauthorized aids, which may include cheat sheets, answer keys, websites, generative AI software, computer programs, or any other resource prohibited by the course instructor;
- Vanderbilt’s Honor Code materials treat use of generative AI software as a form of unauthorized aid when such resources are prohibited by the course instructor, and this applies to “test or examination.” Vanderbilt also emphasizes that instructors’ AI policies vary by course, including the possibility of banning AI
• Giving and/or receiving unauthorized aid or attempting to give and/or receive unauthorized aid on an assignment, report, paper, exercise, problem, test or examination, presentation, film, or computer program submitted by a student to meet course requirements or to gain an advantage. Such aid includes, but is not limited to, the following:
◦ viewing, use, or production of unauthorized aids, which may include cheat sheets, answer keys, websites, generative AI software, computer programs, or any other resource prohibited by the course instructor;
While some instructors may decide to incorporate generative AI into every part of their course, others may limit or outright ban its use.
- Vanderbilt provides students with examples of using generative AI for practice and feedback as part of learning, while warning that outputs may be inaccurate and should be assessed for quality
- Vanderbilt’s faculty-facing learning support guide also frames generative AI as able to support (but not replace) student learning and describes its use to brainstorm, organize, review concepts, and revise/edit
Create activities and problems to practice learning a skill or concept.
* Benefit: If you have exhausted all available practice problems in your textbook, this can be an easy, on-demand way to continue to practice learning a skill.
* Risk: Depending on the discipline or topic, the solutions provided may not be accurate. There is also a chance that the problems and activities are not relevant or accurately framed, so you should be prepared to assess the quality of the output.
Request real-time feedback on your ideas
* Benefit: Generative AI may be able to provide counterarguments to a claim, identify holes in your logic, or identify opportunities to incorporate additional evidence to support a claim.
This guide shows how Generative AI can support, not replace, student learning. AI can scaffold the process for students who struggle to brainstorm, organize, understand, or refine ideas.
- At the university level, Vanderbilt frames AI use policies as varying by instructor and requires disclosure when an instructor has not provided a statement on AI use
- Vanderbilt’s Honor Code materials include “computer program” and “generative AI software” within the scope of potential unauthorized aid when prohibited by the instructor
- Vanderbilt’s sample syllabus statements document includes example language (from a Vanderbilt faculty member) allowing generative AI use in coursework with detailed citation and verification requirements, but this is presented as a sample instructors can review rather than a uniform rule
Faculty should clearly communicate expectations to students. If a statement on the use of generative AI tools is not provided by an instructor, the use of such tools is permitted but must be disclosed.
• Giving and/or receiving unauthorized aid or attempting to give and/or receive unauthorized aid on an assignment, report, paper, exercise, problem, test or examination, presentation, film, or computer program submitted by a student to meet course requirements or to gain an advantage. Such aid includes, but is not limited to, the following:
◦ viewing, use, or production of unauthorized aids, which may include cheat sheets, answer keys, websites, generative AI software, computer programs, or any other resource prohibited by the course instructor;
Below are examples of statements, language, and policies that instructors can review when considering if they should add such statements to their own courses.
You are free to use generative AI algorithms such as Chat-GPT in your work.
However, You must:
1. Cite any text that the AI generated (even if you edited it) with a bibliography entry that includes the name and version of the AI model that you used, the date and time it was used, and includes the exact query or prompt that you used to get the results.
2. Cite, as described in rule 1, any code that you had it generate for you.
Research
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance states that faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research and that they are responsible for AI-generated content as authors
- Vanderbilt’s research guidance also notes that journals, grant agencies, and other stakeholders may have AI-related policies that can influence research writing and practices, and it advises adherence to applicable university or disciplinary guidelines
Faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research, service work, reviews, data collection, and creative expression and are responsible for using it appropriately and ethically.
Faculty and students are the authors of content generated by AI and are responsible for that content as they are with content that they author.
Keep in mind that journals, grant funding agencies and other stakeholders in your work may have policies related to generative AI use that may influence both your writing and, in some cases, your research practices.
These suggestions are based on some of the emerging trends; however, they do not supersede any applicable university or disciplinary guidelines—you should always adhere to and consult any specific policies that may apply to you.
- It also states that the user is responsible for the accuracy, impact, and compliance of content produced with AI
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance includes research-related AI use in “data collection” and requires disclosure of how and when AI is used, with an expectation that AI be used ethically and in ways consistent with confidentiality and privacy policies
Faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research, service work, reviews, data collection, and creative expression and are responsible for using it appropriately and ethically.
When AI is used, it should be used in ways that are consistent with university policies on confidentiality and privacy. This applies to all aspects of research, service work, and creative expression.
You are the author of content that you produce with AI and responsible for its accuracy, impact, and compliance with relevant laws and policies.
- It also requires disclosure of AI use in research and holds faculty and students responsible for using AI appropriately and ethically and for the content generated
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance directs AI users to follow applicable laws and policies and to strive to use AI ethically, including respecting confidentiality and privacy
- Vanderbilt’s research guidance further emphasizes that external stakeholders (e.g., journals and grant agencies) may impose additional AI-related policies affecting research practices
Artificial Intelligence is a valuable, dynamic, and vital tool. As with all other tools, you must abide by all applicable laws and policies when you use AI, and you should strive to use AI ethically.
AI should be used in ways that respect confidentiality and privacy.
Faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research, service work, reviews, data collection, and creative expression and are responsible for using it appropriately and ethically.
Keep in mind that journals, grant funding agencies and other stakeholders in your work may have policies related to generative AI use that may influence both your writing and, in some cases, your research practices.
Academic Integrity
- It also states that faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research, service work, reviews, data collection, and creative expression
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance recommends disclosure of AI use generally and specifically states that if an instructor does not provide a statement on generative AI use, use is permitted but must be disclosed
- Vanderbilt’s sample syllabus statements include an example requiring citation of AI-generated text and code with details such as model name/version and the exact prompt, but this is presented as an example instructors can adopt
You should disclose the use of AI in an appropriate way.
Faculty should clearly communicate expectations to students. If a statement on the use of generative AI tools is not provided by an instructor, the use of such tools is permitted but must be disclosed.
Faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research, service work, reviews, data collection, and creative expression and are responsible for using it appropriately and ethically.
You must:
1. Cite any text that the AI generated (even if you edited it) with a bibliography entry that includes the name and version of the AI model that you used, the date and time it was used, and includes the exact query or prompt that you used to get the results.
2. Cite, as described in rule 1, any code that you had it generate for you.
- The provided sources do not define a university position on AI detection tools (e.g., Turnitin AI detection) in the retrieved text
- Vanderbilt’s Honor Code materials state that acts violating the Honor Code are prohibited and are cause for disciplinary actions, and they define unauthorized aid to include generative AI software when prohibited by the course instructor
Acts that inhibit learning or that violate the Honor Code and thereby break the trust of the academic community are prohibited. Violations of the Honor Code are cause for disciplinary actions imposed by the appropriate honor council.
• Giving and/or receiving unauthorized aid or attempting to give and/or receive unauthorized aid on an assignment, report, paper, exercise, problem, test or examination, presentation, film, or computer program submitted by a student to meet course requirements or to gain an advantage. Such aid includes, but is not limited to, the following:
◦ viewing, use, or production of unauthorized aids, which may include cheat sheets, answer keys, websites, generative AI software, computer programs, or any other resource prohibited by the course instructor;
Institutional & Administrative
- The provided sources do not define a specific institutional rule on using AI for grading, recommendation letters, or administrative decisions in the retrieved text
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance applies AI expectations across “research, service work, and creative expression” and directs users to follow guidelines (including prohibitions) from supervisors or others overseeing their work
- The faculty checklist recommends that instructors create and communicate a clear AI usage policy for their courses, including examples of acceptable and unacceptable uses, and it suggests running assignments or test questions through a GenAI tool (e.g., Amplify) for data protection
You should follow guidelines (including prohibitions) provided by your dean, instructor, supervisor, or other individual(s) overseeing your work.
This applies to all aspects of research, service work, and creative expression.
Craft a clear AI usage policy specifying if and when AI tools are allowed.
Include examples of acceptable and unacceptable uses, so students have a concrete understanding of expectations (e.g., for brainstorming, research assistance, or not at all in graded work).
Run a few of your assignments or test questions through a GenAI tool, like Amplify for data protection.
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance states that AI should be used in ways consistent with university confidentiality and privacy policies
- Vanderbilt communications about Amplify indicate it is intended to provide “safe and secure” use and that data processed through the platform stays within Vanderbilt’s technological “sandbox.” The provided sources do not define specific institutional data-classification tiers or an explicit list of approved/prohibited third-party AI platforms in the retrieved text
When AI is used, it should be used in ways that are consistent with university policies on confidentiality and privacy.
Vanderbilt is empowering its users to tap into the possibilities of AI in a safe and secure way—setting the stage for institutions of higher education across the nation. All data processed through the platform stays within Vanderbilt’s technological “sandbox.”
- Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance establishes institution-level principles for AI use (ethical use, confidentiality/privacy alignment, authorship responsibility, and disclosure), and it places course-level decisions about AI use with faculty
- Vanderbilt also describes institution-level investment in a secure, proprietary AI platform (Amplify) and reports launching the Amplify Generative AI Innovation Center to catalyze ethical, human-centered use of generative and agentic AI across research, teaching/learning, student success, and administrative operations
PRINCIPLES/GOALS:
• Faculty should decide whether and how generative AI is used in courses.
AI should be used ethically and reasonably.
AI should be used in ways that respect confidentiality and privacy.
ChatGPT has, quite literally, entered the chat at Vanderbilt. The university has officially launched Amplify GenAI, a custom generative AI software for use by all faculty, staff and students.
Vanderbilt University’s College of Connected Computing has launched the Amplify Generative AI Innovation Center, a “living laboratory” that will catalyze ethical, human-centered use of generative and agentic AI in research, teaching and learning, student success, administrative operations, and external partnerships.
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 Vanderbilt University's AI Policies
Vanderbilt University has defined AI policies in 12 of 12 categories, with an overall coverage score of 100%.
Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance recommends disclosure of AI use generally and specifically states that if an instructor does not provide a statement on generative AI use, use is permitted but must be disclosed. It also states that faculty and students must disclose how and when AI is used in research, service work, reviews, data collection, and creative expression. Vanderbilt’s sample syllabus statements include an example requiring citation of AI-generated text and code with details such as model name/version and the exact prompt, but this is presented as an example instructors can adopt.
Vanderbilt’s Honor Code materials state that acts violating the Honor Code are prohibited and are cause for disciplinary actions, and they define unauthorized aid to include generative AI software when prohibited by the course instructor. The provided sources do not define a university position on AI detection tools (e.g., Turnitin AI detection) in the retrieved text.
Vanderbilt’s Academic Affairs guidance states that AI should be used in ways consistent with university confidentiality and privacy policies. Vanderbilt communications about Amplify indicate it is intended to provide “safe and secure” use and that data processed through the platform stays within Vanderbilt’s technological “sandbox.” The provided sources do not define specific institutional data-classification tiers or an explicit list of approved/prohibited third-party AI platforms in the retrieved text.