Faculty Guidance and Responsibilities

Faculty Guidance and Responsibilities

Plagiarism detectors cannot confirm AI use with full accuracy.

Focus on clarity, transparency and guidance rather than detection alone.

Faculty Responsibilities

• Communicate Expectations: Syllabi and individual assignments must clearly articulate acceptable AI uses, expectations for academic integrity, and consequences for unauthorized use.
• Class Discussions: Faculty members are encouraged to discuss the implications of AI use in academic and professional settings to help foster their critical thinking and understanding.
• Design Ethical Assessments: Instructors are encouraged to create assignments that assess critical thinking, collaboration, and ethical AI use, i.e., assignments that are aware of AI and structured to support genuine learning.
• Learn the tools – break your assignments
  • Run your own assignments through them to see how assignments will look if students use AI to complete their assignments
• Caution with Detection Tools: Faculty should avoid using AI detection tools as the sole basis for disciplinary action due to reliability concerns, such as the risk of false positives and algorithmic bias, as outlined by the TBR AI Collaborative.
• If AI is prohibited, reserve the option to talk with students on one-on-one basis
• Use the Academic Misconduct Form and Process: Faculty should refer to the Employee Forms for links to the Academic Misconduct Forms and Processes and Vol State Policy III:00:05 Student Conduct and Disciplinary Standards, which includes academic misconduct and definitions for plagiarism, cheating, and fabrication.

Revise your AI Statements

• Revise Ambiguities
  • Identify unclear sections in AI syllabus statements and rewrite them
    • Use ONE clear, specific rule to improve clarity
• Focus on Student Understanding
  • Create Policy sentences that a first-year student can easily understand
    • Avoid technical jargon
    • Include “Why”
• Align AI Use with Learning Outcomes
  • Align AI Policy with Course Goals

IDEA: Use your preferred AI tool to review your AI syllabus statement

Prompt for AI: Review my AI Syllabus Statement. Identify unclear language, vague limits, missing documentation rules, and any parts students may misinterpret. Suggest specific improvements in simple student-friendly wording, but do not rewrite the entire statement.

Student Confusion Points

• Unclear limits - Students cannot tell where the boundary sits, so they create their own rules.
• Tool uncertainty - Students do not know which tools count as AI. Built-in features in Google, Microsoft, and others cause confusion without clear guidance.
• Missing documentation rules - Students are unsure how to cite AI use. Some over document, others leave it out.
• Inconsistent Rules Across Sections - When sections in the same course use different AI expectations, students question fairness and lose confidence.
• Undefined AI Usage Terms - Students need clear definitions for brainstorming, editing, revising, and rewriting. These terms shape how they understand boundaries.

Research Use

• Faculty and students conducting research with AI tools must adhere to data security, intellectual property, and human subject’s protection standards.
• Use of AI in federally defined human subjects research at Vol State must be approved by an Institutional Review Board.
• Researchers are responsible for citing AI tools and clearly delineating AI contributions in any research outputs.

Additional Faculty Resources 

• The Teaching & Learning Center has compiled a list of resources for faculty regarding artificial intelligence and teaching and learning. Access the TLC Generative AI Resources.
• Bridging Mind and Machine: TBR AI Resources. This is a website/resource hub for TBR educators exploring the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in teaching and learning. 
• Lance Eaton's Syllabus Repository  is a collection of syllabus AI policies from the past few years.
• Student Guide to AI. This is a student-centered document created by AAC&U to help students navigate questions about responsible use in academic settings.  
• For additional help email TBR support:  ailearning@tbr.edu

Feedback from other institutions Red/Yellow/Green pilot syllabi statements*

• Clear categories reduce confusion
• Yellow zone needs clear examples to work well
• Students need simple documentation steps
• Many assignments are not yet AI ready
• Inconsistent rules across sections create fairness rules
• Students prefer guided use over strict bans
• Detection tools cannot stand alone
• Faculty modeling builds better judgement