Policies
University Policy
“The question of how to acknowledge [AI-generated intellectual work], and whether it is to be allowed at all, is answered by individual course policies. It is, as always, the students’ responsibility to be sure that they are following the rules laid out by their professors. Note that, as with all source material, this applies both to work taken directly from the AI generator and to work that has been paraphrased before being used in coursework. If you didn’t generate the words yourself, say so by quoting and citing the source; if you generated the words but not the content and ideas, say so by citing the source.” (Georgetown Honor Council’s Standards of Conduct Policy, 2023)
As students become more familiar with these tools, clear policies related to their use will ensure students understand what is and isn’t acceptable in your course. As always, be clear with your assessment criteria, how they relate to learning goals, and share successful examples of assignments to best support learning.
Perhaps most important, communicating clear expectations and policies creates a climate of trust in an equitable and inclusive teaching practice. In a recent survey conducted by Inside Higher Ed and College Pulse with support from Kaplan, 2,000 students from 98 universities indicated that “Black and Asian/Asian American students reported being accused of plagiarism more than any other group (12 percent for both groups, versus 6 percent of all students). Further, Black students were the most likely to report being accused of cheating in college (9 percent of Black students reported being accused of cheating in a college course, compared to 6 percent of all students)” (Tichavakunda, 2022). Be clear with your students about what constitutes plagiarism, considering these biases.
Syllabus Policy Approaches
Keep in mind that the Georgetown Honor Code's Standards of Conduct directs students to refer to course syllabi for specific policies related to plagiarism and using AI. The policy also states that students using AI-generated text and representing it as their own work constitutes a violation of academic integrity. If your students are permitted to use AI tools in your course, in any capacity, be sure to discuss your expectations with them. More University and course-level policies can be found on our Teaching Related Policies page.
At bird's eye view, there are three general approaches to addressing AI in your course policy. Feel free to adapt the language below as it fits your course:
Integrate AI tools into assignments
"New AI text generation tools may be helpful tools for this course and indeed your future professional lives. Some assignments in this course will require the explicit and intentional use of generative AI. When using and AI generator in your work, including in those assignment, the AI generator used to support your work must be included as a source/citation."
| Rationale for this approach | Rationale against this approach |
|---|---|
| An interesting way to help students think critically about these new tools; can help them develop metacognitive skills and reflect on their own work. May also reflect professional trends of how AI will be used in the industry or field, better preparing them for their next professional steps. Leverages the fact that students are already using these tools to introduce how to use them effectively, and how to critically think about their output. trust in students. Inclusive to a wide range of learning needs. | Assignments will need to be constructed to incorporate AI’s use and may would mainly be relevant only in certain courses (e.g., writing and computer science) and would in other contexts distract from the main points of the content or the specific learning objectives. |
AI Tools permitted at certain stages
"New AI text generation tools may be able to generate ideas/topics for your assignments, formulate structure for your written work, and can even help you find existing research on the topic. These uses are permitted in this course. The writing and revising, however, must be your own; you may not use AI text generators to write any portion of the paper itself, and using AI tools in this way will be treated as a case of plagiarism and referred to the Honor Council. The AI generator used to support your work must be included as a source/citation."
| Rationale for this approach | Rationale against this approach |
|---|---|
| Can be useful in courses where you’re more interested in what students do with ideas in a polished final project than in how they get started generating or organizing those ideas. This could also be useful when assignments are conducted during class-time to allow the students to learn directly from the faculty member on how generative AI can and could be used and when its use is not optimal. | More complicated than a no-use policy. Could leave room for misinterpretation, where students may not see a clean line between what they should contribute/write and what AI is ‘allowed’ to do for them. |
No AI tools permitted
"In this course, your ideas and your voice are what matters. Using AI text generation tools at any stage of working on your assignments (idea generation, looking for sources, outlining/organizing, writing, revising, etc.) would make it much harder for me to evaluate and respond helpfully to your work, since I wouldn’t be able to tell what’s coming from you. As such, you’re not permitted to use AI text generating tools at any point when working on your assignments, and I will treat the use of AI text generators as academic dishonesty, and will report the incident to the Honor Council."
| Rationale for this approach | Rationale against this approach |
|---|---|
| Can be useful in courses where you’re more interested in what students do with ideas in a polished final project than in how they get started generating or organizing those ideas. This could also be useful when assignments are conducted during class-time to allow the students to learn directly from the faculty member on how generative AI can and could be used and when its use is not optimal. | Takes a potentially useful tool away from students, who might be able to use AI to help them organize ideas. May also be unrealistic given our current ability to detect what is AI-generated. May also be misaligned with future workplace practices. |
Syllabus Policy Examples from Georgetown Faculty
Fr. Carnes (Government & Vice Dean for Faculty and Graduate Affairs)
The Use of Artificial Intelligence, ChatGPT, and Other Tools in this Course
The rapidly changing technological landscape opens up important opportunities for learning and inquiry, and in general, we will seek to integrate AI into the course in a constructive way (rather than prohibit or penalize its use). Throughout the semester, Fr. Carnes will suggest ways to use AI to enhance your learning, and you are free to use it when conducting research, studying, and writing. In some cases, you may be explicitly required to use it.
In keeping with academic integrity, you will be expected to cite and disclose every use of AI, and this should be done in the fullest, most transparent way possible. In other words, rather than simply noting that ChatGPT or Bard was used in your paper, say exactly where and how it was used, employing footnotes or bubble comments to provide a running commentary on what the AI did, how you used or adapted it or even rejected it, etc. For example, this might be that you used it to generate the initial question or hypothesis you employed, or to propose possible data sources or interesting comparisons, or even to provide precise language or text (which of course would then need to appear within quotation marks). Being more complete is always to your advantage, and conversely, not disclosing use of these tools will be considered a violation of the Honor Code.
By describing exactly how you use these tools, you will be able to distinguish the unique contribution you make as a thinking, breathing Georgetown student. Hopefully this will help us all clarify and refine how these tools can best be utilized, and also aid you in being able to tell future employers what you will add to their efforts over and above what they could get through AI.
Kate McNamara (Government)
AI/ChatGPT Use
As a wise person once said, writing is thinking. That is why it is often hard. You may use AI programs such as ChatGPT to help generate ideas and brainstorm, but you may not submit any text generated by an AI program as your own. Instead, if you include text generated by an AI program, it must be cited like any other reference. However, keep in mind that the material generated by these programs may be flat-out wrong, correct but mediocre, or otherwise problematic. This means your own expertise will be crucial for allowing you to successfully integrate this tool into your work. The only way to develop that expertise is use the class to learn about the subject matter of global politics—which means limiting your use of AI.
Also, keep in mind that the development of your expert analytic and writing skills will determine your post-Georgetown success. If you do not want to be replaced by AI, you therefore need to make sure you are doing the foundational work that will provide value added in any future endeavor.
To help you to navigate the new world of AI, all of your writing must be done using the “Collaborations” google doc workspace in Canvas. See the Appendix for more information.
Abe Newman (Director of the Mortara Center for International Studies)
Artificial Intelligence in the Classroom
The goal of this course and any tool used to submit work is to enhance your own learning and understanding, not to undermine or stifle it. AI tools (like chatGPT) may be used as you would any other reference source – to help generate ideas and brainstorm. It is not a replacement for your original work. As with other reference tools, the use of such tools must be appropriately acknowledged and cited. It is also your responsibility to assess the validity and applicability of any AI output; you bear the final responsibility of your work. The use of AI tools is limited to those that are currently free to the public to use and open access. For any questions on the use of AI in the classroom please ask the instructor.
Jill Dougherty (Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies)
AI Policy
Here is the Georgetown University policy:
“The question of how to acknowledge [AI-generated intellectual work], and whether it is to be allowed at all, is answered by individual course policies. It is, as always, the students’ responsibility to be sure that they are following the rules laid out by their professors. Note that, as with all source material, this applies both to work taken directly from the AI generator and to work that has been paraphrased before being used in coursework. If you didn’t generate the words yourself, say so by quoting and citing the source; if you generated the words but not the content and ideas, say so by citing the source.” (Georgetown Honor Council’s Standards of Conduct Policy, 2023)
Here are my rules for this course:
In this course, your ideas and your voice are what matters. I allow using AI text generation tools ONLY as a tool for idea generation and looking for sources. If you use Ai tools you must cite that. As the Georgetown policy states: "If you didn’t generate the words yourself, say so by quoting and citing the source; if you generated the words but not the content and ideas, say so by citing the source.”
When it comes to outlining and organizing your papers, please note in the Syllabus that I require you to send me a short outline or concept of your paper before you write. I plan to sit down with each student separately to discuss how you will approach organizing and writing about your selected subject.
Using AI text generators to write your papers defeats the purpose of going through the learning process of writing and revising. So I will treat the use of AI text generators to write your papers as academic dishonesty, and will report the incident to the Honor Council.
Nathan Schneider (Computer Science)
Statement on the Use of ChatGPT
Part of treating others with respect is giving appropriate credit for ideas and scholarly works (including code). If you consult with other students on an assignment, report this in the work that you turn in. If in your code you use a library or implementation from another source, indicate that as well (minimally by including a URL in a comment). Do not generate new content with prompt-based AI tools like ChatGPT or CodePilot without permission from instructors unless specifically allowed by the assignment. (Using, for example, Grammarly as a language aid is OK.) Instructors reserve the right to request an oral explanation of answers.
Andrew Zeitlin (Public Policy)
Statement on the Use of AI-Assisted Programming Tools
Large language models, such as ChatGPT (chat.openai.com) are rapidly changing the tools available to people writing code. Given their use out in the world, the view we will take in this class is that it does not make sense to ban the use of such tools in our problem sets or projects. For now, here is my guidance on how these can and should be used in our class: First and foremost, note that output from ChatGPT can often be confidently wrong! Run your code and check any output to make sure that this actually works. Such AI assistants will give you a good first guess, but these are really empowering for users who invest in being able to tell when the output is correct or not.If you use ChatGPT or similar resources, credit it at the top of your problem set as you would a programming partner. Where you use direct language or code from ChatGPT, please cite this as you would information taken from other sources more generally.
Save the content above in this document version of Syllabus Policies developed by Georgetown faculty.
Assignment Policies
Because AI technology has been incorporated into teaching and learning for some time—think of tools like Grammarly or even simple spell check—it can be difficult to decide what students are and are not permitted to use in your course, and even in each assignment. (Polishing a document using Grammarly may not be in the same category as generating an entire essay using GPT-4, for example.)
Below, see sample language faculty have used to distinguish what students are able to use per assignment/assessment:
| Task-specific use | “You may choose to enable proctoring tools for assessments taken on a computer, which limits student access to a single window and prevents Internet usage.” |
|---|---|
| Case-by-case | “Please obtain permission from me before collaborating with peers or using AI chatbots (like ChatGPT, Quillbot, or others) on this assessment.” |
| Idea generation | “You may use Grammarly, Google autocomplete, and other AI tools to polish the ideas you submitted in an outline prior to this exam.” |
See examples of redesigned and new assignments on the Assignments tab.
Common Questions About Policies
What's the University's policy on students using AI in the classroom?
See University Policy above.
Do I need an AI policy in my syllabus?
The short answer is yes. Students are being guided to refer to individual course and assignment policies outlined by the instructor to determine whether or not they're able to use AI tools at any stage in an assignment. The Chronicle's "Should You Add an AI Policy to Your Syllabus?" by Kevin Gannon (July 2023) offers guiding questions to help you get started.
How would I know if one of my policies has been violated (i.e. that student has used AI)?
While there are many AI-detection tools available, it's more likely that students would use AI in instances where the expectations and parameters were unclear. Review your course and assignment instructions, and consider where AI could be used at various stages in an assignment's development process. University policy states that "If you didn’t generate the words yourself, say so by quoting and citing the source; if you generated the words but not the content and ideas, say so by citing the source."
If you suspect an assignment has been completed dishonestly, refer to the Honor Council's resources for faculty.
What do I do if I think a policy has been violated?
If an assignment's policy is clear, and an assignment submission still seems like it has been partly or fully developed by an AI tool, it may make sense to talk to your student(s) first to clear up any confusion. If the assignment is clearly in violation of a course policy, it may warrant following the Honor System’s procedure.
CNDLS staff are available to consult with faculty regarding all matters of teaching, including how to manage, innovate, and integrate AI tools. Reach out to us at cndls@georgetown.edu for an individual or group consultation.
Where can I learn more about data collection and privacy policies?
Learn more about data collection and privacy on our Resources by Topic page.
