Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly Ryerson University)

5.4. withholding or altering academic information, portfolios, essays, transcripts, or documents, including during the admissions process; 5.5. submitting work created in whole or in part by artificial intelligence tools unless expressly permitted by the faculty/contract lecturer, or clinical faculty; 5.6. submitting work that does not reasonably demonstrate your own knowledge, understanding, and performance; 5.7. use of AI, without explicit permission, in documents submitted for academic purposes, including but not limited to awards, academic appeals, and/or the Policy 60 process.

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 505–508
SHA-256: 6876cc57ed25e74200a9e1c84d1c961ab19f29b404d18c0b4bd31aa3b58e059d

Policy Number: 60 Current Senate approval Date: June 2, 2026 Revision Dates: June 2, 2020, November 3, 2020, May. 28, 2024, June 3, 2025. Revision effective: Fall 2026

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 167–174
SHA-256: 6876cc57ed25e74200a9e1c84d1c961ab19f29b404d18c0b4bd31aa3b58e059d

How your data is protected in Google's AI tools Open All Close All How does Google protect my data? When accessing the Gemini App or NotebookLM using your TMU account, your data is not used or human-reviewed to improve AI models. This feature is covered by the Google Workspace for Education Terms of Service (external link) . Keep in mind that access to a Google Gemini or NotebookLM account outside of TMU does not fall under these terms of service and therefore any data you enter in an account outside of TMU is subject to review or could be used to improve their AI models. We recommend that you always confirm you are accessing Gemini or NotebookLM from your TMU account each time you begin a new prompt by clicking your profile picture in the top-right corner. You’ll want this to show your @torontomu.ca email address instead of your personal one. By using your TMU account, you can ensure that your data will not be used to train Google's AI models. Prior to the release of the Gemini App and NotebookLM at TMU, we conducted privacy and AI impact assessments with the Office of the General Counsel and Board Secretariat, and a security risk assessment with the Office of the Chief Information Security Officer. Can others at TMU view my prompt history and activities? Although your activities in the Gemini App and NotebookLM are not public, TMU's Google administrators in Computing and Communications Services (CCS) can view prompt histories in the Gemini App, but not in NotebookLM. Our administrators cannot access any files you upload to either Gemini or NotebookLM. For more on how the university’s technologies are monitored, please visit TMU's Student Computing Guidelines under the "Privacy" section (for students) and TMU’s Electronic Monitoring Policy (for employees). Responsible use guidelines Open All Close All What information is appropriate to share with TMU's Google AI tools? Each person is responsible for ensuring they don't share inappropriate information with TMU's Google AI tools. Only public or low-sensitivity information should be input to these tools. Sensitive and confidential information should never be used in prompts, uploaded files or other activities. For help defining what is considered sensitive information, please review TMU’s Information Classification Standard and Handling Guidelines. Do not upload, input or share any personal information about yourself or any TMU student, faculty or staff member into Google's AI tools. Examples of personal information include any data that is personally identifiable such as protected health information, social insurance numbers, student/staff numbers, birthdates, credit card data, etc. Failure to abide by this guidance may result in a privacy breach and/or non-compliance with privacy legislation. It isn't appropriate to share copyrighted information nor the intellectual property of others with Google's AI tools, including your students' work and resources provided through the TMU Libraries.

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 179–194
SHA-256: 3c987b05a23298d47dbed11733548c1df121797c9fb35d40a90fa7b0ea6365f4

The Google Gemini App (“Gemini”) and NotebookLM are conversational generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools that process information and respond to prompts you provide. While both tools are available to TMU employees and students, they serve different purposes: Gemini is designed for open-ended brainstorming and web-based research, while NotebookLM is grounded specifically in the documents you provide. Both tools can be used to: Assist with writing tasks Summarize documents Repurpose content for various uses Support brainstorming and idea-generation Create resources in various formats, including image, audio and video TMU's access to the Gemini App and NotebookLM are a safer alternative to other GenAI tools such as ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot, as it is covered by our Google Workspace for Education Terms of Service (external link) . Your activities will not be used to train Gemini's AI models. Please note that some functionality is only available to users 18 years of age and older. Protect TMU data by only using public or low-sensitivity information with Google Gemini. Sensitive and confidential information should never be used in prompts, attached files, or other activities in Gemini. Copyrighted material and the intellectual property of others should never be used as source materials without consent from the copyright holders. Gemini's responses are likely to have inaccuracies. You are responsible for reviewing and correcting them before using or sharing them with others. Begin your journey with (google doc) Generative AI Literacy (external link) and building your (google doc) prompt writing (external link) skills. These are crucial to getting good outputs from generative AI. About Google's generative AI tools Unlike a search engine that provides a list of existing websites, these tools use language patterns to build entirely new, conversational answers to your specific instructions. TMU provides access to two options: the Gemini App for open-ended exploration and NotebookLM for focused work with your own documents. The Gemini App is an ideal tool for brainstorming about broad topics because it creates responses using information from across the public web. In contrast, NotebookLM acts as a focused assistant that helps you find details and make connections using only the specific files and links you choose to provide. Like other large language models (LLMs) this system can make mistakes, and you are unlikely to get the exact same result twice. Open All Close All How do I access Google's AI tools? After logging into your TMU account, you can access the tools through the following web addresses: gemini.google.com (external link) notebooklm.google.com (external link) You can also access these tools by clicking the Google Apps button in the upper right-hand corner of your TMU Gmail account. Your TMU account should be visible in the upper-right corner upon opening NotebookLM. By using your TMU account, you can ensure that your data will not be used to train Google's AI models.

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 108–131
SHA-256: 3c987b05a23298d47dbed11733548c1df121797c9fb35d40a90fa7b0ea6365f4

Google NotebookLM is now available for all TMU Google accounts April 28, 2026 To: All faculty and staff All TMU Google account holders can now use their university Google Workspace account to access the education version of Google NotebookLM, an artificial intelligence (AI) tool designed for analysis, content organization and note-taking. While the Google Gemini app (external link) (which became available at TMU a year ago) serves as a general prompt-based assistant using publicly-available information from the internet, NotebookLM is designed to work with files and data of your choice. Key features of NotebookLM Targeted analysis: You can upload or select specific files from your TMU Google Drive (such as documents, PDFs or videos) or link to websites. NotebookLM only analyzes these selected materials to summarize information, create study guides and answer questions with citations. Collaboration: The "notebooks" you create in NotebookLM can be shared. You can grant others viewer or editor access to contribute to the sources used and generate content. You can access the tool at notebooklm.google.com (external link) or by clicking the Google apps button in the upper right hand corner of your TMU Gmail account. Your TMU account should be visible in the upper right corner upon opening NotebookLM. Protecting TMU data

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 99–108
SHA-256: 171777b0342ddb9f1a521c0193c7cfe4acc555a501514c43cadffe63279b1b67

6.3. Notification to student 6.3.1. Students must be notified of a suspicion of academic misconduct in a confidential and timely manner. The notification occurs as part of the registration process and will include an invitation for the opportunity to discuss the matter with the decision maker. Concerns about academic misconduct should be discussed during the scheduled FD/NFD rather than in advance or outside of the formal process. (See Procedures, Sections 1 and 2) 6.3.2. Any evidence that can be shared in advance of the discussion will be made available to the student. While every effort will be made to provide as much information as possible in advance, additional evidence may be presented to the student at the discussion. 6.3.3. Students may not drop a course in which there is a suspicion of academic misconduct. At the start of the process, the Registrar’s Office, will place a DEF on the student’s academic record for the course in which there is an active investigation. If the student drops the course before the DEF is placed, the RO will re-enroll the student. (See Procedures, Section 5) 6.4. Discussion (FD/NFD) 6.4.1. The purpose of a discussion is to allow the decision maker to present the basis for their suspicion and for the student(s) to offer their perspective and answer questions. Discussions are to be carried out in a spirit of inquiry, rather than in an accusatory or adversarial manner. The discussion is a continuation of the preliminary investigation and therefore may result in changes to the nature of the suspected academic misconduct (e.g., the initial suspicion indicated “plagiarism” but the discussion clarified that what had actually occurred was “contract cheating”). 6.4.1.1. If, during an NFD, either party fails to engage in a respectful manner, either party may choose to terminate the discussion and request an FD. 6.4.1.2. If, during an FD, either party fails to engage in respectful manner, the facilitator will intervene. 6.4.2. At a discussion, the decision maker, the student(s) suspected of academic misconduct, and the facilitator (for an FD) will be present. When appropriate, other parties may be present (see Section 11). 6.4.3. No decisions related to the suspected academic misconduct should be made prior to the discussion nor should any decision be communicated during the discussion. 6.4.4. If a student fails to attend the discussion and fails to notify the AIO within 24 hours of the scheduled meeting to provide a reasonable explanation for their absence, the decision maker may proceed without the student’s input. If the decision maker fails to attend the discussion and fails to notify the AIO within 24 hours of the scheduled meeting to provide a reasonable explanation for their absence, the matter will be dismissed. The AIO may make exceptions due to extenuating circumstances. 6.4.5. Discussions are not to be audio or video recorded. A written record of the meeting will be maintained. With the permission of all parties, a university approved transcription tool may be used to create the written record. In the case of FDs, the AIO will create the record and issue a copy to the student and decision maker.

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 292–304
SHA-256: 6876cc57ed25e74200a9e1c84d1c961ab19f29b404d18c0b4bd31aa3b58e059d

1 International Centre for Academic Integrity (2013) 5. University Resources 5.1. The mandate of the AIO is to ensure that this policy and the accompanying Procedures are carried out in a fair and transparent way, and to provide educational resources to the University community regarding academic integrity and misconduct. 5.1.1. The AIO provides guidance and support to students and decision makers and ensures that these parties are aware of their rights and responsibilities. 5.1.2. The AIO is neutral with respect to decision-making. 5.2. Members of the University community may consult with the AIO regarding any academic misconduct procedure or concern. 5.3. The Office of the Ombudsperson (which is confidential, impartial, and independent) may be consulted at any time. 5.4. Faculty/contract lecturers, clinical faculty may consult with the Faculty Academic Integrity Advisor. 5.5. Students may consult with an advocate (as defined in Policy, Section 3.3).

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 263–271
SHA-256: 6876cc57ed25e74200a9e1c84d1c961ab19f29b404d18c0b4bd31aa3b58e059d

5.7. use of AI, without explicit permission, in documents submitted for academic purposes, including but not limited to awards, academic appeals, and/or the Policy 60 process.

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 508–508
SHA-256: 6876cc57ed25e74200a9e1c84d1c961ab19f29b404d18c0b4bd31aa3b58e059d

2.1. A notification of discussion will be sent to the student, informing them of the basis for the suspicion and advising who will be acting as the decision maker (e.g., their course instructor, DDM, or designate). An updated notification may be issued if relevant details change (e.g., rescheduled discussion, updated decision maker). 2.2. Any requests by students,faculty/contract lecturers, or clinical faculty for accommodations, or to advise of a scheduling conflict, should be communicated to the AIO in a timely manner and in advance of the scheduled meeting. Without verifiable documented evidence of exceptional circumstances, a discussion will not be rescheduled. 2.3. The discussion (FD/NFD) should normally take place within three (3) to five (5) business days of the date of notice. In cases where an external investigator is required, as in the case of suspected academic misconduct in supervised research activities, this timeline may be extended. 2.4. If the decision maker wishes to schedule subsequent discussions to bring forth other information, this should occur as soon as possible and, normally, before a decision is registered. In such cases, the student must be notified that there will be further discussions with no less than two (2) days notice. 3. Discussions: FD or NFD 3.1. Decision makers must be prepared to speak to their suspicion and/or any evidence in support of that suspicion at the discussion (e.g. course outlines, assignment guidelines, similarity reports). 3.2. Students may present rough notes, drafts, or other supporting materials during the discussion, or they can be sent in advance to the AIO (for FDs) and directly to the Decision Maker (for NFDs).

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 163–169
SHA-256: f244f726d01b8d3e7e9935ce62252b36df16d3f60517e1bbd85f1ae3976c0789

11. Appeals and Penalty Hearings 11.1. Students must appeal first to the AIC, RAC or GAAC (as appropriate) and may only appeal further to the SAC on the grounds provided in Policy, Section 14.1 , with the exception of appeals relating to a recommendation of a DW or expulsion, where the student can waive the first level hearing and go directly to SAC. 11.2. Hearings are not open to the public due to privacy and confidentiality issues. 11.3. Hearings are not to be audio or video recorded. No minutes are taken. The decision letter is the only official record of the hearing. 12. Appeals - General Regulations 12.1. Appeals are initiated by students. 12.2. Students have ten (10) business days from the date of issue of the decision letter to submit an appeal to the AIC/RAC/GAAC. 12.2.1. If an appeal is not filed by the deadline, the decision will stand. Where mitigating circumstances exist, and appropriate supporting documentation is provided, the Director of the AIO (or designate, for the AIO), the Registrar (or designate, for the RAC), the Vice-Provost and Dean YSGPS (or designate for the GAAC) or the Secretary of Senate (or designate, for the SAC) may accept a late appeal. 12.3. In specified circumstances a further appeal may be made to the SAC (See Policy Section 14). Students have ten (10) business days from the date of issue of the appeal decision letter to submit an appeal to the SAC. 12.4. Where a full appeal hearing is to be held, if the student fails to attend, the appeal will be withdrawn and no further appeals will be accepted. Where mitigating circumstances exist, and appropriate supporting documentation is provided, the Director of the AIO (or designate for the AIC) , the Registrar (or designate for the RAC), the Vice-Provost and Dean YSGPS (or designate for the GAAC) or the Secretary of Senate (or designate for the SAC) have discretion to reschedule the hearing. 12.5. Students may remain in class and may enroll in courses while their case is under appeal. However, if the assigned penalty is removal from placement, co-op program option, internship, or practicum, the student may not remain in the associated course(s) during the appeal process.

Zebrano: 2026-10-08 · 379–389
SHA-256: 6876cc57ed25e74200a9e1c84d1c961ab19f29b404d18c0b4bd31aa3b58e059d