We found 257 results that contain "ai incorporation"

 
Citing Generative AI (e.g., ChatGPT) in Higher Education Scholarship, Teaching, and Professional Writing
As generative AI tools like ChatGPT are increasingly used in academic settings—for teaching support, scholarly writing, and even faculty development—it's important to adopt citation practices that are centerend on ethics and that ensure clarity, transparency, and academic integrity. Below are structured guidelines across major citation styles (APA, MLA, Chicago), tailored to the needs of university instructors, researchers, and students. A final section also offers examples of less formal disclosures appropriate for drafts, instructional materials, and academic development work. 
 
Note that as large language models continue to develop, it will become increasingly important to cite the specific model or agent that was used to generate or modify content. It will also be important to regularly revisit citation guidelines, as these, too, are rapidly evolving to meet the demands of the ever-changing AI landscape. 
APA (7th ed.) Style
Official Guidance:APA Style Blog: How to Cite ChatGPT
Reference Entry Template:Author. (Year). Title of AI model (Version date) [Description]. Source URL
Example Reference:OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (May 24 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/
In-text citation:(OpenAI, 2023)
Higher Education Example:When asked to summarize Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy for use in an introductory education course, ChatGPT stated that “self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief in their ability to execute behaviors necessary to produce specific performance attainments” (OpenAI, 2023).
MLA (9th ed.) Style
Official Guidance:MLA Style Center: Citing Generative AI
Works Cited Template:“[Prompt text]” prompt. ChatGPT, Version Date, OpenAI, Access Date, chat.openai.com.
Example Entry:“Summarize Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy” prompt. ChatGPT, 24 May version, OpenAI, 26 May 2023, chat.openai.com.
In-text citation:("Summarize Bandura’s concept")
Chicago Manual of Style (17th ed.)
Official Guidance:Chicago recommends citing AI-generated text via footnote only, not in the bibliography.
Footnote Example:


Text generated by ChatGPT, May 24, 2023, OpenAI, https://chat.openai.com.


Higher Education Example:


Used in a teaching statement to describe inclusive pedagogy practices. ChatGPT, response to “Give an example of inclusive teaching in STEM,” May 24, 2023, https://chat.openai.com.


 
Less Formal Disclosures for Transparency
In many instructional or professional academic contexts—such as teaching statements, reflective memos, informal reports, or early-stage drafts—it may be more appropriate to disclose use of generative AI tools in a narrative or parenthetical style rather than a formal citation format. Below are examples of how this can be done responsibly and transparently:
Examples of Less Formal Attribution:


“This draft was developed with the assistance of ChatGPT, which helped generate an outline based on course goals I provided. All final content was authored and reviewed by me.”


“In preparing this teaching philosophy, I used ChatGPT to help articulate distinctions between formative and summative assessment. The generated content was edited and integrated with my personal teaching experiences.”


“Some of the examples included in this workshop description were drafted with the help of ChatGPT (May 2023 version). I adapted the AI-generated responses to better align with our institutional context.”


“This syllabus language on academic integrity was initially drafted using a prompt in ChatGPT. The AI output was revised significantly to reflect course-specific values and policies.”


(Used in slide footnotes or speaking notes): “Initial ideas for this section were generated using ChatGPT and reviewed for accuracy and alignment with our campus policy.”


When to Use Informal Attribution:


Internal memos or reports


Course or assignment drafts


Teaching statements or portfolios


Slide decks or workshop materials


Informal educational publications (e.g., blog posts, teaching commons)


Best Practices for Academic Use in Higher Education


Transparency is key. Whether using a formal citation style or a narrative disclosure, always clearly communicate how AI tools were used.


Human review is essential. AI-generated content should always be edited for accuracy, nuance, inclusivity, and disciplinary alignment.


Tailor to context. Use formal citation when required (e.g., published research); use informal attribution for pedagogical artifacts or collaborative drafts.

Video: Designing for Education with AI
New guidance from the Department of Education
How is the US governing the rapidly evolving landscape of AI in education? This month, the federal Office of Educational Technology released Designing for Education with Artificial Intelligence: An Essential Guide for Developers.  In the following video essay, I summarize the key takeaways and consider this guide in the context of higher education ed tech governance. Check it out!

1. Consider how AI technology might compel you to revise your course assignments, quizzes, and tests to avoid encouraging unethical or dishonest use of generative AI.  



Design For Generative AI: Sample Syllabus Language
Design Around Generative AI: Sample Syllabus Language



2. Develop and integrate a generative AI course-level rules throughout the all course materials/resources:  



Provide clear definitions, expectations, and repercussions of what will happen if students violate the rule.  
Explain the standards of academic integrity in the course, especially as related to use of AI technologies, and review the Integrity of Scholarship and Grades Policy.  






Be clear about what types of AI are acceptable and what versions of the technology students can use or not use.  
Put this rule into D2L and any assignment instructions consistently.  



3. Discuss these expectations when talking about course rules at the beginning of the course and remind students about them as you discuss course assignments:  



Take time to explain to students the pros and cons of generative AI technologies relative to your course. 
Explain the development of your course-level rules and make clear the values, ethics, and philosophies underpinning its development.  






Explain the repercussions of not following the course rules and submit an Academic Dishonesty Report if needed.  



4. If you want to integrate AI in the classroom as an allowed or required resource:  



Consult with MSU IT guidance about recommendations for use and adoption of generative AI technology, including guidelines for keeping you and your data safe.  
Determine if MSU already has access to the tools you desire for free, and if not available through MSU, consider the cost and availability of the resources you will allow or require, and go through MSU's procurement process.   
If you want to require students to use an AI technology that comes with a cost, put the resource into the scheduling system as you would a textbook, so students know that is an anticipated cost to them.  



Photo by Alexander Sinn on Unsplash

Ban [This syllabus statement is useful when you are forbidding all use of generative AI tools for any purpose in your class. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.] 
The use of generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.) is not permitted in this class; therefore, any use of AI tools for work in this class may be considered a violation of Michigan State University’s policy on academic integrity, the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge andStudent Rights and Responsibilities, since the work is not your own. The use of unauthorized AI tools will result in [insert the penalty here*].

CONCERN: The ubiquity of generative AI tools, including their integration into Google search results and MS Office products, means that an outright generative AI ban is implausible for any activity that makes use of the Internet or MS Office Suite.

* It is highly recommended that you have conversations in your department about the appropriate penalties for unauthorized use of an AI. It is important to think about the appropriate level of penalty for first-time offenders and those who repeatedly violate your policies on the use of AI. 



Photo by Mathew Schwartz on Unsplash

AI Brief Guide by Jay Loftus
 
Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash

This collection of example statements are a compilation from a variety of sources including Faculty Learning Community (FLC) at Cleveland State University, Ohio University’s AI, ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning, and some of Michigan State University’s own educators! (If you have an example generative AI policy from your course that you’d be willing to share, please add it to the comments below or e-mail it to MSU Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation at teaching@msu.edu). NOTE: making your own course-level determination of "ban", "restrict", "permit", or "require" and using the sample language is the best, first place to start!
 “AI (artificial intelligence) resources such as ChatGPT can be useful in a number of ways. Because it can also be abused, however, you are required to acknowledge use of AI in any work you submit for class. Text directly copied from AI sites must be treated as any other direct quote and properly cited. Other uses of AI must be clearly described at the end of your assignment.” -Claire Hughes-Lynch
 “While AI tools can be useful for completing assignments and detecting plagiarism, it is important to use them responsibly and ethically. Practice based on these guidelines as a future or current K-12 teacher. The following are some guidelines for what not to do when using AI in your assignments and for plagiarism detection:

Do not rely solely on AI tools to complete assignments. It is important to understand the material and complete assignments on your own, using AI tools as a supplement rather than a replacement for your own work.
Do not use AI tools to plagiarize*. Using AI to generate or modify content to evade plagiarism detection is unethical and violates academic integrity.
Do not assume that AI responses are always correct. It has been noted that AI can generate fake results.* Please see the plagiarism/academic integrity policy in the course syllabus.” -Selma Koc

“Intellectual honesty is vital to an academic community and for my fair evaluation of your work. All work submitted in this course must be your own, completed in accordance with the University’s academic regulations. Use of AI tools, including ChatGPT, is permitted in this course. Nevertheless, you are only encouraged to use AI tools to help brainstorm assignments or projects or to revise existing work you have written. It is solely your responsibility to make all submitted work your own, maintain academic integrity, and avoid any type of plagiarism. Be aware that the accuracy or quality of AI generated content may not meet the standards of this course, even if you only incorporate such content partially and after substantial paraphrasing, modification and/or editing. Also keep in mind that AI generated content may not provide appropriate or clear attribution to the author(s) of the original sources, while most written assignments in this course require you to find and incorporate highly relevant peer-reviewed scholarly publications following guidelines in the latest publication manual of the APA. Lastly, as your instructor, I reserve the right to use various plagiarism checking tools in evaluating your work, including those screening for AI-generated content, and impose consequences accordingly.” -Xiongyi Liu
“If you are ever unsure about whether collaboration with others, including using artificial intelligence, is allowed or not, please ask me right away. For the labs, although you may discuss them in groups (and try using AI), you must all create your own code, output and answers. Quizzes will be done in class and must be solely your own work. You alone are always responsible for the correctness of the final answers and assignments you submit.” - Emily Rauschert on AI as collaboration partner
“Chat GPT: The use of Chat GTP is neither encouraged nor prohibited from use on assignments for GAD 250. Chat GPT is quickly becoming a communication tool in most business settings. Therefore, if you choose to use Chat GPT for assignments, please be sure to revise the content for clarity, conciseness, and audience awareness. Chat GPT is simply a tool and should not be used as a way to produce first and only drafts. Every assignment submission will be graded using the rubric provided in the syllabus. Be aware that Chat GPT may not develop high-quality work that earns a passing grade. It is your responsibility to review and revise all work before submitting to the instructor.” -Leah Schell-Barber for a Business Communications Course
“Use of Generative AI, such as ChatGPT and Microsoft Bing-Chat, must maintain the highest standards of academic integrity and adhere to the OU Code of Student Conduct.  The use of Generative AI should be seen as a tool to enhance academic research, not as a replacement for critical thinking and originality in assignments. Students are not permitted to submit assignments that have been fully or partially generated by AI unless explicitly stated in the assignment instructions. All work submitted must be the original work of the student. Any ideas garnered from Generative AI research must be acknowledged with proper in-text citation and reference. Students may be asked to save the AI chat as a PDF file for verification.” -Ohio University College of Business Generative AI Use for Academic Work Policy
“‘The policy of this class is that you must be the creator of all work you submit for a grade. The use of others’ work, or the use of intelligent agents, chat bots, or a.i. engines to create your work is a violation of this policy and will be addressed as per MSU and Broad College codes of conduct.’ - Jeremy Van Hof… Or, you might consider this, which I asked ChatGPT to write for me: ‘Sample Policy Language: Students should not use ChatGPT to complete course assignments or for any other academic activities. ChatGPT should be used as a supplemental resource and should not replace traditional academic activities.’ (ChatGPT per Jeremy Van Hof’s prompting) 
Or this much longer version, also written by ChatGPT: ‘The following course policy statement prohibits the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the’ completion of assignments and activities during the duration of the course. At the Broad College, we strive to create an academic environment where learning is the foremost priority. We strongly believe that learning is best achieved through the hard work and dedication of our students. As such, we prohibit the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the completion of assignments and activities during the course.  Our policy is in line with our commitment to providing a fair and equitable learning environment for all students. We believe that AI should not be used to substitute human effort, as it defeats the purpose of our educational goals, which are to encourage critical thinking and problem-solving.  We understand that AI can be a useful tool in many contexts, and we do not discourage its use in other courses. However, in this course, we will not accept assignments or activities that have been completed through the use of AI. We expect our students to be honest and to complete their work independently.  We will be monitoring student work closely to ensure compliance with this policy. Violations of this policy will be met with disciplinary sanctions. All students are expected to adhere to this policy and to abide by the standards of the University.’ (ChatGPT per Jeremy Van Hof’s prompting)” -Jeremy Van Hof, Broad College of Business
“I study AI. I research it in my role as faculty in the Experience Architecture and Professional & Public Writing majors. And I don’t think it’s inherently bad or scary, in the same way that a calculator isn’t bad/scary for math. Artificial intelligence technologies such as ChatGPT can be an excellent starting point and a place to begin inquiry. But they are not a replacement for human thinking and learning. Robots lack empathy and nuance. As such, here is my policy:
You may use AI as a tool, but you may not use AI to replace your own beautiful brain. That means that you may ask ChatGPT, for example, to give you a list of bands similar to one that you hear and appreciate in this course. You may ask ChatGPT to give you an overview of a punk scene in a geographic location at a particular time. You may ask it for the history of punk rock and punk cultures. You may ask it what happened to Sid Vicious. 
But you may not ask it to write on your behalf, and you must not turn in anything that has been written by ChatGPT and pass it off as your own for any assignment in this class, including discussion responses, papers, and exams. If you do so, I will know, and that will lead to an uncomfortable moment–and to you failing the assignment.
This is not meant to be punitive. It’s meant to reinforce how much I value you and your ideas and your intellect. In a face-to-face environment, we would have a lengthy conversation about AI, ethics, and human learning. If you want to have that conversation, I’m happy to do so via Zoom–email me!” -Kate Birdsall, asynchronous US23 course on punk-rock politics"The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the interior design program is permitted with certain tasks and with attribution: You can choose to use AI tools to help brainstorm assignments or projects or to revise existing work you have written. For example, AI-generated concepts can serve as a starting point for exploration but must be substantially transformed and personalized by the student. When you submit your assignment or project, you must clearly attribute what text or images were generated by any form of AI content generator. You must save and submit to the instructor draft assignments or sketches that document your progress and originality. Final papers, projects, and design submissions must reflect the student's original work, ideas, and expression. By adhering to these guidelines, students will develop a balanced understanding of AI's potential in interior design while maintaining the integrity of their individual creativity and expression. Any misuse or misrepresentation of AI-generated content as one's own work will be considered a violation of academic integrity. Violations will be subject to disciplinary actions as outlined by MSU’s academic integrity policies. If you are unsure about whether something may be plagiarism or academic dishonesty, it is your responsibility to ask your instructor for clarification or assistance. This policy is subject to change based on the instructor's discretion. Any updates will be communicated to students through course announcements." -Linda Nubani & the Interior Design Faculty at MSU School of Planning, Design & ConstructionIf you have an example generative AI policy from your course that you’d be willing to share, please add it to the comments below or e-mail it to MSU Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation at teaching@msu.eduPhoto by Alessandro Bianchi on Unsplash 

Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI 
Taken, with slight modification, from “Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT” by Ryan Watkins, Professor of Educational Technology Leadership, and Human-Technology Collaboration at George Washington University in Washington DC (2022), via Medium. 
Beyond Syllabi Language 
Communicate your perspective about AI use. In addition to syllabus statements, consider talking with your students about AI tools like ChatGPT. Regardless of your orientation to generative AI use, it is important that you clearly communicate your expectations with the introduction of each assignment/assessment.   
Different levels of familiarity: As an emerging technology, students will have differing levels of familiarity with these tools. For instance, while ChatGPT can write a grammatically correct paper or appear to solve a math problem, it may be unreliable and limited in scope. Discuss with students the uses and limitations of AI tools more broadly in addition to your perspective on their use in your class. 
Connect to critical thinking skills: AI tools have many implications beyond the classroom. Consider talking with students about how to be engaged-consumers of AI content (e.g., how to identify trusted sources, reading critically, privacy concerns). Discuss how you and colleagues use AI in your own work.
Adapt assessments. AI tools are emerging and it can be incredibly difficult to make any assessment completely free from AI interference. Beyond a syllabus statement, you may also consider adapting your assessments to help reduce the usefulness of AI products. However before revising any assignment, it’s helpful to reflect on what exactly you want students to get out of the experience and share your expectations with your students. Is it just the end product, or does the process of creating the product play a significant role? 

Create assessments that allow students to develop ideas over time. Depending on your class size, consider scaffolding assessments to be completed in small components (e.g., proposal, annotated bibliography, outline, first draft, revised drafts). 
Ask students to connect their writing to specific course materials or current events. Students can draw from the course textbook, additional readings on Moodle or Blackboard, and even class discussion boards or in-class discussions.  
Incorporate personal experiences and reflections. Provide students with opportunities to connect what they are learning to their own lives and experiences—stories unique to each individual. 
Incorporate Multimedia Assessments. Consider developing or adapting assessments to include multimedia submissions (e.g., audio or video components). Also, consider peer-review and social annotation tools like Eli Review or Google Docs for students to use when responding to assigned readings or other materials.  
Use class time. Ask students to complete writing assignments during class time (e.g. complete reading reflections at the beginning of class, or use exit tickets). Asking students to organize their ideas by writing during class may also support student engagement in other class activities such as discussions and group work.  

Get Creative With Your Assignments: Visit “Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT” by Ryan Watkins (Medium article) for 10 ideas for creative assignments adapted for a classroom with chatGPT. You can mitigate the risk of students using chatGPT to cheat, and at the same time improve their knowledge and skills for appropriately using new AI technologies inside and outside the classroom.
Additional Considerations for Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI

Students are Using AI: So What Now?
A conundrum for college instructors
I want to spend time researching and sharing how AI can be a teacher, but in truth, AI is much better at being a student.  
It makes sense, then, that the first response most universities had to the release of ChatGPT was immediate guidance about academic integrity, plagiarism, and misuse. Teaching with technology is a constant balance for instructors between authenticity and policing: I have had many consultations with instructors who must always consider how an assignment could be plagiarized, a resource misused, or a quiz completed with the help of the internet. Between Chegg, Wikipedia, and now generative AI, instructors are right to be weary of how their students use technology in their courses. 
But it is not without the structures of power that students lean on technology to do their learning for them. A sophomore undergraduate student pays over $1600 for a three-credit class.  A year at MSU for a freshman is budgeted at $35,588, (that's over half of my annual salary)! For some, it is financially detrimental to fail a class; and a lowered GPA could put scholarship eligibility at risk. No wonder that some students will use technology to get a good grade. 
I know that quantifying education in terms of dollars is only one lens to evaluate student conduct. Young people get far more out of college than a degree– experiential learning, travel opportunities, and relationships with world-class instructors: these are things that MSU especially excels in.  
So, if AI is really good at getting assignments done–at answering discussion posts and brainstorming research ideas and editing essays: can we as educators help guide students in their use? We fear that AI will make it easier to be a student, and I wonder if that is at the core of our anxiety.  
There are many on campus who are thinking about this conundrum as they prep for the upcoming fall semester. They are: 

Exploring how AI will be used in their fields. 


Creating lessons on using AI for their class. 


Measuring student AI literacy. 


Discussing the impact of AI on the environment. 


Revamping assignments to be AI-proof. 


Adding language about AI use into their syllabi. 


Attending workshops and collaborating with colleagues. 


Using AI for lesson planning and course design. 

By doing any of these activities, instructors are not just getting ready for AI—they’re getting a real sense of how their students might be using it too. And I think that’s critical to where we are right now in conversations about higher ed and generative AI use: students are using it, so let’s find out how. Maybe then we can address those larger structural barriers of what academia is facing.  
Side note: I asked Claude to review this post, and it told me to add a call to action, provide concrete suggestions, and provide a vision for the future. So, here’s a call to action to sweeten the pot: 
If any of this resonates with you, let’s chat! I’m happy to help brainstorm or find resources or help you learn a new tool. And speaking of resources, AI Commons launches this week. Featuring stories from all over campus, AI Commons is a space for educators describing their experiences and sharing their ideas. Check out the site or submit a story! 
Freyesaur out.