We found 235 results that contain "open textbooks"

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY
In How to Build an Online Learning Community (In 2020)
https://www.learnworlds.com/build-online-learning-community/ via @learnworlds
"Asynchronous discussion allows time for reflection and encourages more careful consideration of the answers given.
Learners can reflect and think about their responses rather than having to respond immediately.
The shaping of discussions takes some proper forethought.
A discussion based on specific readings in the textbook, coupled with your guideline questions, will likely be more productive.
One way of promoting meaningful dialogue and questioning is to provide a set of rubrics of the kinds of questions students may want to ask each other:

Your point about…is not clear to me. Can you state it another way, or provide an example?


Do you have any additional evidence to support your thinking about…?


You describe how your thinking has changed. What influenced that change?


What assumptions are you making about…? How would your statements change with different assumptions?


What are the implications of your statement?


What evidence is there to support your point of view? Does anyone want to dispute or verify that?

 
Tips for great asynchronous conversation:

Start the significant topic threads yourself. It’s a good idea for the instructor to start all considerable topic threads unless you have designated a forum for learner presentation.
Address learners by name and encourage them to signal topics and clarify responses.
Mention the learner’s name in response to their message.
Clarify the portion of the message to which you are responding through the copying of the statement.
Engage yourself actively. When they see that an instructor rarely participates, learners are discouraged from posing questions and comments and may even not buy another course from you.
Contribute comments which summarize what learners have posted, as well as follow-up questions that stimulate further discussions. In some cases, it might be appropriate to invite learner’s responses to their classmates’ ideas:


Anyone else want to comment on Jill’s observation?


Did anyone reach a different conclusion about this issue?


Provide follow- up responses that ask for more information or more in-depth consideration.
Prepare a strategy for potentially controversial discussions. Especially in asynchronous discussions, it is more likely to see a broader range of learners posting."

Putting it into Practice

Microsoft Teams is a great tool for Asynchronous conversation because it's easy to access without accessing the D2L. The tool also allows for synchronous live meetings, links, and files that were shared are retained in the chat threads.

How to use Microsoft Teams for Remote and Online Learning
D2L to Microsoft Teams Integration


D2L Discussion Forums:

Navigate Brightspace Learning Environment - Engage in Discussions - Learner
Discussions - Create a Forum - Instructor
Discussions - Create a Discussion Topic - Instructor
Discussions - Discussion Statistics - Instructor


Piazza is a free platform for faculty to efficiently manage class Q&A.

Integrating Piazza into D2L

Alternative Text
Alternative (alt) text describes visual images or objects within the context that they appear. It helps individuals that rely on assistive technology, such as screen readers to understand the provided content. A good description of an image or table can also help all students understand the purpose of the content and begin to practice viewing images and tables as experts.  
It may sounds like a simple process of describing an image, but depending on your content (graphic, animation, or table) or the purpose of your content, generating alt text can be challenging.  
In addition to providing alt-text resources below, we have compiled some alt text related experiences from faculty. We asked what challenges they have faced surrounding alt text in their academic content, what they have done to tackle these challenges, and what resources they would like to see to help with alt text concerns. Please share your own challenges or solutions in the comments! 
Who are We? 
We are the Accessible Course Design Learning Community. We are a group of faculty and staff that meets once a month and takes a practice-based approach to exploring accessibility and Universal Design for Learning.  
Alt-text Resources 

The DigitalX Team at MSU has created tutorial about adding alt text to images, charts, and graphs  

Microsoft Word  
Microsoft PowerPoint  


Tips for creating meaningful alternative text from WebAIM 
The Diagram Center is striving to ensure that accessible educational material is created, published and available for all types of disabilities and learning styles 

Faculty Experiences with Alt Text 
Questions 

What dilemmas or difficulties with alt text have you experienced? Are there any important types of images in your field that are particularly tricky to describe? Why? 
How have you solved your difficulties/dilemmas (for now)? 
Do you feel more is needed? Are there any technologies (real or imagined) that could help?  

Casey Henley, Neuroscience & Physiology 

My undergraduate course content centers on students analyzing data from primary literature research articles. Alt text has proven to be quite challenging. The simple solution would be to describe the results of the graph, and tell the students the main takeaway message from the graph. However, the skill I am teaching in the course is for students to interpret the data and generate a conclusion on their own.  
My current solution is to provide numerical data points. Sometimes this requires a rather detailed table if there are multiple time points and/or multiple experimental groups.  
I do not feel my alt text solution gives an equivalent educational experience to students. As an individual without sight impairment, visualizing data in a graph is a completely different, more efficient experience for interpreting data compared to reading a clump of numbers in a table. I believe a technology that could create braille-like representations of the graphs would help the situation. A raised version of the graph could allow individuals to compare bars or lines. However, even this solution might not work for more complex graphs.  

Emilia Marcyk, Libraries Teaching & Learning 

When I create tutorials with screenshots that show important features of websites or interfaces that students will need to notice in order to complete an assignment, I find it difficult to decide how much alt text to provide. Should I just describe the important features (such as search boxes or menu buttons that the student needs to interact with) or describe everything in the screenshot? 
Currently, I provide a link to the active page with the screenshot, and only describe the important features that I am calling out in the screenshot in the alternate text. If the student needs greater context, they can go to the live page.  
I would be nice to have the ability to embed directions into the live version of pages, rather than rely on screenshots to emphasize important aspects. There are tools that do this, but I don't have access to them currently.  

Heidi Chen, Online Master of Science in Food Safety program 

For complicated data graphs, the instructors only talk about what the graph demonstrates or takeaways as Casey mentioned above. For posters we try to describe the content on them but it can get really long 
No good solution for screenshots. We try to persuade our instructors to reduce using screenshots. 

Scott Mulrooney, Microbiology and Molecular Genetics 

In my Introductory Microbiology MMG 301 (enrollment ~500), we use PowerPoint slides containing over 700 images. Almost all of these do not have alternative text, so I added the text to each image. It took several days of being "in the zone" but I got the job done. 
As I said, a brute force approach was used to simple get the job done. 
Textbook publishers are addressing this issue. I have spoken to several publisher reps and they all say that future editions of their textbooks will address accessibility. The problem I faced was that the edition we are currently using does not have alternative text for its images. In addition, I use images from other creative commons sources that does not have alternative text. I suppose that undergraduates who are very familiar with the subject could enter much of the alternative text. In recording material for online presentations, I do a lot of drawing and creation of diagrams. I am now careful to describe what I am creating as I speak in the recording. 

Antoinette Tessmer, Department of Finance 

My challenge is in using alt text (or more likely another tool) to describe the content of an Excel sheet. (My course is 100% Excel-based) 
I have not found a solution... 
I am curious to learn about existing technology that could help. 

Anne Violin-Wigent, Romance and Classical Studies 

 I teach French and teaching methods for foreign language teaching. The main dilemma is that the current methods encourage us to use visuals to present the meaning of new vocab and to avoid the use of English and translations. In addition, when teaching grammar, we highlight endings or whatever grammar point we're teaching so that we can make it salient and help students figure out grammatical rules on their own. For example, we use pink for feminine endings and blue for masculine endings (I know, stereotypical but it's helpful for what we do). Therefore, using alt text may go against the method we use. And I'm not sure how to reconcile this. 
For some elements, it's easy to use bold or underline or italics to replace color. But at the same time, sometimes, it feels like something underlined is not as salient as something in bold. I personally like to use bold and color. 
 We do not get a lot of students who request accessible material in French, and I'm not sure if it's because RCPD waives language requirements for them or because of other reasons. Regardless, I'm working (with a team) on developing new class material, especially the hybrid/online component and I'd love some guidelines.  

Enhancing Academic Success Early, or EASE, was developed by MSU as a tool for faculty to report early signs of academic trouble – low grades, missing classes or failing to participate actively in courses. If signs of academic trouble are identified early, advisers and other Student Success Team members can swiftly take action to help the student get back on the path to success.According to Dr. Kris Renn (Professor of Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education & Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies for Student Success Research), the EASE Reports:

Confidential report on grade, attendance, or engagement
Uses Registrar’s course grade system
Alert goes to academic advisor and student
Fall 2017: over 75,000 reports on over 18,000 unique students

Advisors followed up on 80% of reports of <2.5 



The Instructor System provides instructors and academic administrators a secure interface with the Office of the Registrar and other administrative units. The system includes: Academic Dishonesty Reports, Class Lists and Graded Class Lists, Class Lists with Student Images, Email Students in a Class, Grade Reporting Form, Grade Upload, Grade Submission Summary, Enhancing Academic Success Early (EASE) Reports and Archive, and Textbook and Material Entry/Update.

As an Instructor, how do I get access?
How is one identified as an Instructor of a specific course?
Can Teaching Assistants (TA) have access?
Can Office Assistants gain access?
Can Undergraduate Assistants have access?

Photo by Andre Hunter on Unsplash

Topic Area: DEI
Presented by: Anne Violin-Wigent, Matt Kanefsky
Abstract:
In recent years, there has been a push to supplement a communication-based approach to language teaching with a systematic inclusion of cultural content and cultural literacy. Most textbooks, however, fail to do so and restrict culture to a page or two at the end of each chapter or cultural vignettes sprinkled throughout, while remaining focused on grammar. For this project, Matt Kanefsky and I decided to develop teaching material that uses culture as the source and context for all learning. In addition, we seek to represent the diversity of the French-speaking world, to include material from and about various countries, and to give voices to minorities groups telling their stories. This is done in particular through the development of online learning activities since our program is hybrid/flipped.In this presentation, we will share how we chose to implement our focus on culture and diversity in deliberate, systematic, and cyclical ways in each aspect of the course. We will share a list of questions we used as guiding principles to make sure that we reach our goals and provide a truly inclusive representation of French speakers. Lastly, we will share preliminary experiences and feedback from both instructors and learners.
 

The following is a proposed system of “Generative AI Use Codes” (GAUC) for academic assignments to provide clearer communication between instructors and students. These can be used to communicate the allowed level of generative AI assistance and desired degree of citation in academic tasks. The codes are meant to be simple and easy to use, reminiscent of the approach of Creative Commons licenses. There are two parts to the code: Part 1 communicates the role of AI in the task, and Part 2 communicates the desired attribution of the work requested.
Part 1: Generative AI Use Codes (GAUC)
GAUC-0: No Generative AI Allowed

Symbol: AI 🚫
Description: Students are not permitted to use generative AI in any capacity for the assignment. 

GAUC-1: Generative AI for Brainstorming Only

Symbol: AI ⛈️
Description: Students can use generative AI for brainstorming ideas, but the final content must be entirely their own. 

GAUC-2: Generative AI as a Reference

Symbol: AI 📚
Description: Students can use generative AI as a reference, similar to how one might use a textbook. However, direct output from the AI should not be included verbatim in the final assignment. 

GAUC-3: Generative AI for Editing and Refinement

Symbol: AI ✍️
Description: Students can draft their own work and use generative AI tools to edit, refine, and polish their content. The initial ideas and content must originate from the student. 

GAUC-4: Collaborative Creation with Generative AI

Symbol: AI 🤝
Description: Students can collaborate with generative AI to create content. While students should be actively involved in the creation process, they can interweave their own content with content generated by the AI. 

GAUC-5: Unrestricted Generative AI Use

Symbol: AI 🌍
Description: Students can use generative AI in any capacity, including generating the entirety of the assignment with the AI. They’re encouraged to experiment and innovate using the technology.

Part 2: Generative AI Attribution Codes (GAAC)
N: No Attribution Required

Symbol: 🆓
Description: Students are not required to provide any citation or acknowledgment for using generative AI, irrespective of the extent of AI’s contribution.

S: Source Attribution Required

Symbol: 🔗
Description: Students are required to mention the AI tool or platform they used (e.g., OpenAI’s GPT-4), but no specific citation format is mandated.

C: Comprehensive Attribution Required

Symbol: 📝
Description: Students should provide a comprehensive citation, detailing not just the AI platform/tool, but also specifying parameters, prompts, or any other specifics of how the AI was utilized.

R: Reflection on AI Use

Symbol: 💭
Description: Beyond merely citing the tool, students need to include a short reflection or description of how the AI was used, its influence on the outcome, and any human-AI collaborative dynamics involved.

Implementation:
Example: On assignment sheets or syllabi, faculty can employ both the GAUC and GAAC codes side by side, for instance, “GAUC-3-C” or “AI✍️📝”. This would indicate that students can use generative AI for editing and refinement, and they need to provide comprehensive attribution for the AI used.
Educational Materials: In addition to the code, it would be beneficial to provide students with a brief guide or overview of the GAUC system, explaining each code and its implications. This could include examples of how to cite or reflect on AI use appropriately.
Honor Code Integration: The concept of proper attribution, even to AI tools, should be ingrained in academic integrity guidelines. Stressing the importance of honest and transparent communication regarding AI assistance aligns with principles of academic honesty.
Faculty Discretion: While these codes provide a structured approach, faculty should retain the discretion to make specific clarifications or exceptions based on the nature of the assignment or the objectives of the exercise.
GAUC – 4S – OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Aug 3rd version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat

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

(Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash )
You can also access the Generative AI Syllabus Guide Playlist with this content broken down into the following sections. Table of Contents:

MSU Guidance and [Non]Permitted Uses
Developing and Communicating a Course-level Generative AI Use policy
Example Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course

Design For Generative AI (restrict, permit, require)
Design Around Generative AI (ban)


Example Statements from Current USA, Higher Education Educators
Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI
Beyond Syllabi Language
Additional considerations to help you develop your generative AI philosophy (Watkins, 2022)
References

The following MSU-specifics should be used to inform your decisions...
Overall guidance: We collectively share the responsibility to uphold intellectual honesty and scholarly integrity. These are core principles that may be compromised by the misuse of GenAI tools, particularly when GenAI-generated content is presented as original, human-created work.  
Permitted uses in Teaching & Learning: Instructors are expected to establish a course-specific guidance that defines the appropriate and inappropriate use of GenAI tools.

Students may only use GenAI tools to support their coursework in ways explicitly permitted by the instructor.  

Non-permissible uses: 

Do not Use GenAI to deliberately fabricate, falsify, impersonate, or mislead, unless explicitly approved for instruction or research in a controlled environment.
Do not Record or process sensitive, confidential, or regulated information withnon-MSU GenAI tools.
Do not Enter FERPA-protected student records, PII, PHI, financial, or HR data into unapproved tools; comply with MSU’s data policy and all regulations.
Do not Use export-controlled data or CUI with GenAI tools unless approved for MSU’s Regulated Research Enclave (RRE).

Developing and Communicating a Course-level Generative AI Use policy 
A well-prepared course should be designed for ("restrict", "permit" or "require") or designed around ("ban") generative AI. Courses designed for AI should detail the ways and degrees to which generative AI use will be incorporated into activities and assessments. Courses designed for AI may incorporate AI for some activities and not others and depending on course AI may be explicitly excluded or included at different stages. Courses designed around AI may discuss impacts of generative AI as a topic but expectations are that students will not use these types of tools, and the course should be intentionally designed such that the use of generative AI would either not be conducive to the completion of assessments and activities, or such that the attempt to do so would prove overly cumbersome. 
Regardless of your approach, communicating your expectations and rationale to learners is imperative.
Set clear expectations. Be clear in your syllabus about your policies for when, where, and how students should be using generative AI tools, and how to appropriately acknowledge (e.g., cite, reference) when they do use generative AI tools. If you are requiring students to use generative AI tools, these expectations should also be communicated in the syllabus and if students are incurring costs, these should be detailed in the course description on the Registrar’s website. 
Regardless of your approach, you might include time for ethics discussions. Add time into your course to discuss the ethical implications of chatGPT and forthcoming AI systems. Talk with students about the ethics of using generative AI tools in your course, at your university, and within your discipline or profession. Don’t be afraid to discuss the gray areas where we do not yet have clear guidance or answers; gray areas are often the places where learning becomes most engaging.
Example Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course 
There is no “one size fits all policy” for AI uses in higher education. Much like attendance/participation policies, GenAI course-level rules and statements will be determined by individual instructors, departments, and programs. The following resource is provided to assist you in developing coherent policies on the use of generative AI tools in your course, within MSU's guideline. Please adjust these examples to fit your particular context. Remember communication of your course generative AI policies should not only be listed in your syllabus, but also explicitly included  in assignment descriptions where AI use is allowed or disallowed. 
It is your responsibility as instructor to note and explain your individual course-level rule. A conversation with your department is highly recommended so that generative AI use in the classroom reflects broader use in the unit and  discipline. If you have specific questions about writing your course rules, please reach out to the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation. 
Design For Generative AI
Restrict [This syllabus statement is useful when you are allowing the use of AI tools for certain purposes, but not for others. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.] 
Example1:  

The use of generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) is permitted in this course for the following activities:

[insert permitted your course activities here*]


The use of generative AI tools is not permitted in this course for the following activities:

[insert not permitted your course activities here*]


You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.

Example2: Taken, with slight modification, from Temple University’s Center for the Advancement of Teaching  to demonstrate the kinds of permitted/restricted activity an instructor could denote.
The use of generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) is permitted in this course for the following activities: 



Brainstorming and refining your ideas; 
Fine tuning your research questions; 
Finding information on your topic; 
Drafting an outline to organize your thoughts; and 
Checking grammar and style. 



The use of generative AI tools is not permitted in this course for the following activities: 



Impersonating you in classroom contexts, such as by using the tool to compose discussion board prompts assigned to you or content that you put into a Zoom chat. 
Completing group work that your group has assigned to you, unless it is mutually agreed within your group and in alignment with course policy that you may utilize the tool. 
Writing a draft of a writing assignment. 
Writing entire sentences, paragraphs or papers to complete class assignments. 



You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge. For example, [Insert citation style for your discipline. See these resources for APA guidance, and for other citation formats.]. Any assignment that is found to have used generative AI tools in unauthorized ways [insert the penalty here*]. When in doubt about permitted usage, please ask for clarification. 
 
Use permitted [This syllabus statement is useful when you are allowing, and perhaps encouraging, broad use of generative AI tools. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use in your course. The following is an example.] 
Example:
You are welcome to use generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) in this class as doing so aligns with the course learning goal [insert the course learning goal use of AI aligns with here*]. You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Use required [This syllabus statement is useful when you have certain assignments that will require that students use generative AI tools. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.] 
Example:
You will be expected to use generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) in this class as doing so aligns with the course learning goal [insert the course learning goal use of AI aligns with]. Our class will make use of the [insert name of tool(s) here*] tool, and you can gain access to it by [insert instructions for accessing tool(s) here*]. You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
 
Design Around Generative AI
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. 



Example Statements from Current USA, Higher Education Educators
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
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 to help you develop your generative AI philosophy (Watkins, 2022)
Expand your options. Consider your repertoire of instructional strategies. Atsusi Hirumi offers a guide to research-grounded strategies for any classroom. These are not, however, “a la carte” menus; you must use all of the steps of any strategy to gain the evidence-based benefits.
Reflect on your values. As Tyler Cowen pointed out, there will be those who gain and those that lose with the emergence of chatGPT and other generative AI tools. This is as true for students as it is for faculty and instructors. Be ready to openly discuss the ethical implications of generative AI tools with your students, along with the value of what you are teaching and why learning these are important to their futures.
Consider time. As discussed during Bryan Alexander’s webinar, chatGPT and other generative AI tools offer a short-cut to individuals who are short on time. Examine your course schedule to determine if you are unknowingly pushing students to take short-cuts. Some instructors try to cover too much content in their courses already.
Remember, AI is not human. Be careful not to anthropomorphize chatGPT and other generative AI tools. ChatGPT is a language model, and if we anthropomorphize these technologies, then it will be much harder to understand their promise and perils. Murray Shanahan suggests that we avoid statements such as, “chatGPT knows…”, or “ChatGPT thinks…”; instead, use “According to chatGPT…” or “ChatGPT’s output…”.
Again, AI is likely to be a part of your students’ life to some extent this semester, so plan accordingly. Critically considering your course design in the context of generative AI is an important educator practice. Following the Provost’s call, MSU instructors are encouraged to 1) develop a course-level generative AI use policy and actively discuss with students about expectations for generative AI use in the work for your class, 2) promote equitable and inclusive use of the technology, and 3) work with colleagues across campus to determine ethical and scholarly applications of generative AI for preparing students to succeed in an evolving digital landscape. MSU does not currently have a university-wide policy on AI in the classroom, so  it is your responsibility as instructor to note and explain your individual course policy. A conversation with your department is highly recommended so that generative AI use in the classroom reflects that in the discipline. 
References
This resource is collated from multiple sites, publications, and authors with some modification for MSU context and links to MSU specific resources. Educators should always defer to University policy and guidelines. 

MSU Office of Student Support & Accountability Faculty Resources, including Academic Dishonesty Report form. 
Watkins, R. (2022) Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT. Educational Technology Leadership, The George Washington University via Medium: https://medium.com/@rwatkins_7167/updating-your-course-syllabus-for-chatgpt-965f4b57b003 
Center for the Advancement of Teaching (2023). Sample Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course. Temple University 
Center for Teaching & Learning (2023) How Do I Consider the Impact of AI Tools like ChatGPT in My Courses?. University of Massachusetts Amherst. https://www.umass.edu/ctl/how-do-i-consider-impact-ai-tools-chatgpt-my-courses 
Center for Teaching, Learning and Assessment (2023). AI, ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning. Ohio University. https://www.ohio.edu/center-teaching-learning/instructor-resources/chat-gpt
Office of Teaching, Learning, and Technology. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Tools and Teaching. Iowa University. https://teach.its.uiowa.edu/artificial-intelligence-tools-and-teaching 
Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship (2023). Chat GPT and Artificial Intelligence Tools. Georgetown University. https://cndls.georgetown.edu/ai-composition-tools/#privacy-and-data-collection 
Office for Faculty Excellence (2023). Practical Responses to ChatGPT. Montclair State University. https://www.montclair.edu/faculty-excellence/practical-responses-to-chat-gpt/ 
Teaching and Learning at Cleveland State University by Center for Faculty Excellence is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
 

Updated text accessible any time via the Registrar's Office. Also, visit the HR Faculty Handbook for more policy information. posted 08/19/2021Satisfaction of teaching responsibilities by instructional staff members (herein referred to as instructors) is essential to the successful functioning of a university. This University conceives these responsibilities to be so important that performance by instructors in meeting the provisions of this Code shall be taken into consideration in determining salary increases, tenure, and promotion.

Course content:  Instructors shall be responsible for ensuring that the content of the courses they teach is consistent with the course descriptions approved by the University Committee on Curriculum and the University Council. Instructors shall direct class activities toward the fulfillment of course objectives and shall evaluate student performance in a manner consistent with these objectives.
Course syllabi:  Instructors shall be responsible for distributing a course syllabus (either in print or electronic form) at the beginning of the semester. The syllabus shall minimally include:(a)    instructional objectives;(b)    instructor contact information and office hours;(c)    grading criteria and methods used to determine final course grades;(d)    date of the final examination and tentative dates of required assignments, quizzes, and tests, if applicable;(e)    attendance policy, if different from the University attendance policy and especially when that attendance policy affects student grades;(f)     required and recommended course materials to be purchased, including textbooks and supplies; and(g)   any required proctoring arrangements to which students must adhere. 
Student Assessment and Final Grades:  Instructors shall be responsible for informing students, in a timely manner so as to enhance learning, of the grading criteria and methods used to determine grades on individual assignments.  Instructors shall be responsible for assessing a student’s performance based on announced criteria and on standards of academic achievement. Instructors shall submit final course grades in accordance with University deadlines. Assessment methods should be appropriate to the learning objectives of the course. In that context, instructors are expected to take reasonable steps to create an assessment environment that promotes academic integrity. When proctoring or other security measures are necessary to ensure integrity of assessments, then such measures should be administered in a manner consistent with the design and delivery of the course.
Testing Documents:  Instructors shall be responsible for returning to student's answers to quizzes, tests, and examinations with such promptness to enhance the learning experience.  Instructors shall retain final examination answers for at least one semester to allow students to review or to retrieve them.  All testing questions (whether on quizzes, tests, or mid-semester or final examinations) are an integral part of course materials, and the decision whether to allow students to retain them is left to the discretion of the instructor.
Term Papers and Comparable Projects:  Instructors shall be responsible for returning to student's term papers and other comparable projects with sufficient promptness to enhance the learning experience.  Term papers and other comparable projects are the property of students who prepare them.  Instructors shall retain such unclaimed course work for at least one semester to allow students to retrieve such work.  Instructors have a right to retain a copy of student course work for their own files.
Class Meetings:  Instructors shall be responsible for meeting their classes regularly and at scheduled times.  To allow units to take appropriate action, instructors shall notify their units if they are to be absent and have not made suitable arrangements regarding their classes.
Applicability of  the Code of Teaching Responsibility to Student Assistants:  Instructors of courses in which assistants are authorized to perform teaching, grading, or other instructional functions shall be responsible for acquainting such individuals with the provisions of this Code and for monitoring their compliance.
Instructor Accessibility to Students:  Instructors shall be responsible for being accessible to students outside of class time and therefore shall schedule and keep office hours for student conferences.  Office hours should be scheduled at times convenient to both students and instructors with the additional option of mutually convenient prearranged appointments for students whose schedules conflict with announced office hours.  Each teaching unit shall determine the minimum number of office hours for instructors in that unit.  Instructors who serve as academic advisors also shall be responsible for maintaining appropriate office hours before and during enrollment periods.  In addition to office hours, instructor accessibility through e-mail and other means is encouraged.
Commercialization of Course Notes and Materials:  The University prohibits students from commercializing their notes of lectures and University-provided class materials without the written consent of the instructor.  Instructors may allow commercialization by including permission in the course syllabus or other written statement distributed to all students in the class.

Hearing Procedures

Students may register complaints regarding an instructor's failure to comply with the provisions of the Code of Teaching Responsibility directly with that instructor.
Students may also take complaints directly to teaching units' chief administrators or their designates. If those persons are unable to resolve matters to the student's satisfaction, undergraduate students may request a formal grievance hearing before the University Academic Grievance Hearing Board (see SRR Article 7. III). Unsatisfied graduate students may request a formal grievance hearing before their department hearing board (see GSRR Article 5). Before doing this, all students are encouraged to meet with the University Ombudsperson.
Such complaints must normally be initiated no later than the middle of the semester following the one wherein alleged violations occurred. Exceptions shall be made in cases where the involved instructor or student is absent from the University during the semester following the one wherein alleged violations occurred.

Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash