The permitted use of AI tools may vary across courses , based on the particular learning and assessment goals of your instructors. Remain aware that the AI policies of some instructors may not reflect the policies of others. So students should always confirm with instructors that they are adhering to the appropriate and correct guidelines for a particular course. As such, students should make every effort to familiarize themselves with the syllabi for the courses in which they are enrolled, so that they are aware of that course’s Gen AI use policies. An example of a syllabus statement can be found below.

Instructors may choose to provide specific guidelines for use of GEN AI tools for course assignments, exams, or other assessments, or not permit the use of these tools. Instructors must be clear about their expectations including if they are permitting use of AI tools for specific assignment/s for the course, or not at all. If a student believes the appropriateness of use of a particular AI tool is ambiguous or unclear, they must seek clarification from the instructor before using it for an assignment. Instances of using Gen AI-- whether unauthorized, lacking proper documentation, or inadequate citation or attribution-- are considered academic misconduct. This encompasses (but is not limited to) actions such as cheating, deception, inappropriate collaboration, and plagiarism. (See ‘Academic Misconduct’ in VCU’s Honor System and Standards of Academic Conduct for details on how these are defined.) Using Gen AI in a way that violates an instructor’s course policies and/or guidelines violates the VCU Honor System.

In general, the best policy is to seek clarification from an instructor if you have any questions, concerns, or curiosities about the appropriateness of a specific AI tool, especially ones that may already be integrated into word processing software (like Microsoft Word or Google Docs). Students are responsible for reviewing and understanding the general guidelines (below) for course Gen AI usage.

• AI is not a substitute for critical thinking. Gen AI does not think for you, and should not be used for this purpose. While AI may sometimes help support activities that facilitate learning, it is not a substitute for the process of learning itself as it does not involve active engagement, critical inquiry, and reflection. Focus on developing your own knowledge, critical thinking skills, and ethical decision-making capabilities, for deeper understanding and creative problem solving.
• Student responsibilities for coursework. As was the case before access to Gen AI, you are 100% responsible for the assignments you turn in for a course. When permitted by your instructor, if you use any sort of Gen AI content, you are responsible for any mistakes or inaccuracies. Always research/confirm if Gen AI output is factual, including verification of any sources provided by Gen AI. If you find that any output is fabricated or inaccurate, remove it from your coursework.
• Seek clarification about AI policies for your course(s). If you are not sure what the policies are regarding Gen AI use in your course, contact your professor. Expectations for ethical and responsible use should always be communicated clearly, however, this is still new territory for many people, including your instructors. If you are not sure if a specific AI tool is allowed/appropriate or not, always ask and never assume it is acceptable. 
• Gauge quality against efficiency. Gen AI can help increase your efficiency, such as with some assignment components (when permitted by your instructor). However, students should critically assess the overall quality of what has been generated with the assistance of Gen AI, to determine if its output is suitably aligned with your curriculum.
• Transparency in use of AI. If GenAI tools are allowed in your course, you should regularly document and describe the ways in which it was used during the assignment. For more information about citation and attribution of AI, reference the official guidance from APA and MLA.
• Data privacy risks. Data privacy is not guaranteed, as there is no standardized data management protocol across AI systems. Therefore, any personal or sensitive information that is collected and stored in these systems is vulnerable to potential unauthorized access, misuse, and exploitation. Never enter your personal data, nor the personal data of others.
• AI is a supplement to work, not a replacement for it. The user is always responsible for the output of an AI tool. (Spotlight U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 2024).

In addition to the general guidelines, there is a need to understand the potentially different roles of graduate students -- as doing research, serving as a research assistant, and in some instances teaching independently. Overall, students conducting research should familiarize themselves with the following guidelines. Graduate level work requires critical thinking skills for doing research and contributing to knowledge and developing new insights. While AI may be helpful in various ways, the responsibility of ethical conduct of research falls directly on the shoulders of the student. Ultimately, students conducting research should comply with the guidelines of their respective schools and programs regarding the use of Gen AI, unless express permission is accorded to do otherwise. The following guidelines include some elements that have been adapted from documents created by the VCU School of Medicine and Georgia Institute of Technology.

• Maintain a critical perspective when assessing outputs/results. While Gen AI may generate results that sound plausible, the information may be incorrect or misleading. Always check Gen AI output, and exercise critical thinking skills when evaluating the quality and reliability of Gen AI-produced results. For example, Gen AI may assist with areas such as idea generation or refinement of writing, but it should not take the place of insightful, critical, and creative human-based thinking. 
• Assess and validate information. Remain aware that responses generated by Gen AI are based on data used to train it, which can potentially result in erroneous information. Always assess and evaluate the information provided, to confirm reliability and validity. Do not depend on Gen AI as a reliable resource, alone. Use additional resources to cross-check information, and always verify that ‘facts’ provided by Gen AI can be traced back to reliable sources. If you choose to add information from Gen AI into your writing, do so only after carefully considering the quality of the information and acknowledging the use of the AI tool (see next point). Verification of information remains the responsibility of the student. 
• Acknowledgement of Gen AI use. Students engaging in use of Gen AI tools (with express permission allowed in a course, or by a program or director) must appropriately cite the tool and content, if the information is used when completing assignments/projects/research. As with all research, clearly provide attribution to Gen AI sources to the Gen AI tools(s) as necessary, to avoid circumstances that may be considered plagiarism. Failure to cite the content will constitute plagiarism (see ‘Academic Misconduct’ in VCU’s Honor System and Standards of Academic Conduct). The student remains fully responsible for any content used that may be deemed inaccurate, biased, or otherwise unethical. 
• Experiment to optimize results from prompts. Repeatedly experiment with questions and prompts, to ensure Gen AI is providing outputs directly related to your queries. Create clear and specific prompts, and continue to work through multiple iterations to fine-tune responses that are relevant to your work/research.
• Remain aware of all concerns regarding intellectual property, privacy, and confidentiality. Avoid sharing information that is private, of a sensitive nature, contains personal identifiers, or is protected by IRB guidelines. Gen AI tools should not be used to process private or sensitive data collected for research purposes. Remember that any information you provide, including your unpublished research, may be added to that tool’s set of collected data and potentially result in output for other peoples’ inquiries. (Also see information from the VCU Office of the CIO, regarding protection of confidential data.)
• Avoid significant assistance by Gen AI (as opposed to editing assistance). Gen AI tools can be useful for editorial assistance, such as checking grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure. Students should remain aware of the difference between general editorial-type assistance and more substantial assistance, such as using Gen AI to write portions of a paper, generating novel ideas, or creation of datasets.
• Publishing policies. Publishers and professional societies may have specific restrictions or guidelines regarding the use of Gen AI in research and writing, and these may vary across organizations. It should also be expected that those guidelines will continue to evolve over time. Students conducting research and attempting to present and/or publish that research should follow those guidelines, both before and after submitting their writing/research for consideration. At minimum, students should expect that these organizations will hold authors accountable for the information (and errors of that information) found within their submissions, as well as require full transparency regarding the use of content generated by AI.

• Emphasize ethical use of Gen AI. You should confirm that Gen AI resources you use are free from bias, prejudice, and inaccuracies in the information they produce, while also adhering to ethical standards. This includes respecting privacy, confidentiality, and intellectual property rights, and using data in a responsible manner that complies with relevant regulations.
• Intellectual property concerns. Using Gen AI raises many questions about intellectual property. For instance, responses or content generated by AI may lead to concerns about citing, copyright, or ownership. Currently, ownership of content generated by Gen AI remains unresolved at the federal level, and there is no clear standard regarding its ownership.
• As a student, your data is protected. All graded work done by students is protected under FERPA, therefore it should not be uploaded to a Gen AI tool without your written permission.
• Confirm accessibility of Gen AI resources. Gen AI resources used in courses should be accessible and freely available for all students, to ensure equitable access. If you find that the Gen AI required in a course is not readily accessible or freely available, let your instructor know immediately.
• Performance limitations. Among various important limitations, as noted in a report by Open AI (2023), Gen AI does not perform well with multiple elements such as providing (accurate) citations, knowing current events, multi-step math problems, along with being, “confidently wrong in its predictions.” In fact, when ChatGPT itself was prompted about its limitations at the time of this write-up, it listed current events, contextual understanding, critical thinking, emotional understanding, and factual accuracy as potentially problematic. 
• Process of Generating Answers is Unclear. While Gen AI provides output to queries, the internal processes it uses to generate content are still unclear.
• Bias and quality of data. Gen AI output is based on existing data, including data taken from online sources, as well as data input when training. This may result in output that reflects biases, inaccuracies, or complete fabrication. ChatGPT, itself, provides various disclaimers such as: 

“While we have safeguards in place, the system may occasionally generate incorrect or misleading information and produce offensive or biased content. It is not intended to give advice.”

• Intellectual property concerns. Using Gen AI raises many questions about intellectual property. For instance, responses or content generated by AI may lead to concerns about citations/attribution, copyright, or ownership. Currently, ownership of content generated by Gen AI remains unresolved at the federal level, and there is no clear standard regarding its ownership.

Students may use Gen AI to assist with basic language mechanics (such as grammar, spelling, sentence structure), but it should not be used to generate new ideas, arguments, or frameworks. All intellectual content, critical thinking, and analysis found within a thesis, dissertation, etc. must be the student's own work. Students must clearly document the use of AI in their work. This includes specifying the tools used and explanation of the type of assistance and the extent of assistance. Prior to using any AI tools, students must inform their advisor(s) about their intended use, and consult with them to ensure the appropriateness of the tools. Advisors may provide additional guidance or restrictions on AI usage. If Gen AI alters any aspect of the content, framework, or critical thinking in a thesis or dissertation, students are required to identify such changes and consult their advisor(s) immediately. Students are also strongly encouraged to save multiple versions of their work over time. This will help ensure transparency regarding any revisions generated by AI, and will distinguish them from content generated by the student.

Initial drafts and extensive edits of the guidelines were created by Dr. Susan Coombes, Dr. Oscar Keyes, and Dr. Mangala Subramaniam. Additional edits and suggestions contributing to the current version of the guidelines were also provided by Dr. Andrew Arroyo, Jake Belue, Dr. Jonathan Becker, Professor TyRuben Ellingson, Dr. Rochelle Jordan, Dr. Jennifer Rhee, Dr. Shraddha Mainali, Dr. Elaine Reeder, and Kristin Calleja. The input and guidance of all contributors is greatly appreciated.