Cari rekod dasar AI universiti yang disokong sumber

Acceptable Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Academic Coursework Policy

Thinking about using generative AI like ChatGPT or Bing for your coursework?

Guidelines on using Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) for Coursework

The use of AI tools in coursework

Using Gen-AI in coursework and Assessment

For Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) MBA and MSx courses, instructors may not ban student use of AI tools for take-home coursework, including assignments and exams. Instructors may choose whether to allow AI for in-class work. For PhD and undergraduate courses, GSB follows the university-wide Generative AI Policy Guidance from the Office of Community Standards.

UC San Diego's Academic Integrity Policy says students may not let academic work or academic credit be completed for them by another human or by machine/artificial intelligence, and may not use unauthorized aids including artificial intelligence in coursework or assessments.

For UWA coursework assessments, AI tools may only be used where the Unit Coordinator explicitly permits them; permitted use must be cited, referenced, and clearly acknowledged.

Yale expects faculty to give clear instructions on permitted AI use and attribution, and expects students to follow instructor guidelines for coursework.

University of Alberta teaching guidance says instructors or programs determine whether students may use AI in coursework and for what purposes, rather than applying a blanket university-wide yes/no rule.

UNSW College recommends Microsoft Copilot as the only generative AI platform for staff and students, as it provides commercial data protection and is the only platform recommended where generative AI use is allowed in coursework and assessment.

Instructors must not require students to enter their own work into unlicensed AI tools or use such tools in assignments; unlicensed tools may be used optionally by students at the instructor's discretion, but Penn-licensed tools should be used for mandatory coursework components.

ASU Provost FAQs direct students to confer with their instructor about class policy before using AI tools in coursework.

Columbia Business School requires students to disclose to faculty their use of generative AI platforms and the manner of use in coursework.

Duke student-facing AI guidance says whether a student may use AI in coursework depends on instructor permission; unauthorized generative AI use is considered academic misconduct under the Duke Community Standard.

The Provost's GenAI syllabus guidance says instructors may allow or prohibit GenAI in courses, and that coursework use requires written instructor permission and may not occur except as explicitly authorized by the instructor.

Iowa State Student Conduct guidance says suspected AI-generated coursework referrals will be reviewed similarly to other forms of academic misconduct.

For Adelaide University coursework assessment, the Assessment Procedure states that course coordinators will ensure students are informed about appropriate use of generative AI and similar tools in the course.

Illinois Enterprise GenAI transparency guidance says students need to be transparent about AI use in coursework and cite AI tools according to faculty expectations.

MSU guidelines say students may use generative AI tools for coursework or research activities only when the instructor or research advisor explicitly permits that use.

For the 2025/26 transition year, University of Bath teaching guidance says course documentation should keep ABC labels and add a short AI-use statement to B and C coursework briefs.

Utah State University's AI Use & Compliance guidance says AI-generated content must be reviewed for accuracy, bias, and copyright compliance before use in coursework, research, or administrative communications.

Rice University's Responsible AI student guidance says use of AI tools for coursework is allowed only when the instructor explicitly permits it, and students should check the syllabus or ask the professor before using AI on assignments.

King's College London does not require students to reference generative AI as an authoritative source in the reference list, but does require explicit acknowledgement of AI tool use in coursework.

For coursework, UMD tells students to assume GenAI use for assignments and assessments is not allowed unless the syllabus or assignment instructions specify otherwise.

USC’s Office of Academic Integrity says students are expected to confirm with instructors what generative AI use, if any, is permitted in coursework before using it, and that ChatGPT Edu access does not change course policy expectations.

LUH student guidance says students should clarify with instructors how AI tools may be used for coursework or exams and remain responsible for lawful, responsible, and transparent use or non-use of AI tools; the ZQS page itself is explicitly non-binding.

Texas A&M CTE syllabus guidance recommends a hybrid approach that establishes clear course or assignment expectations for generative AI use, reinforces that AI use in coursework is governed by the Aggie Honor Code, and provides faculty support guidance.

UCR XCITE advises instructors to discuss when AI may be used in coursework and how it should be cited, and its sample syllabus language treats uncited AI use as a potential academic-integrity issue.

University of Gothenburg student guidance says the university does not prohibit generative AI in education; teachers and examiners decide whether, when, and how it may be used in coursework and examinations.