This page provides guidance for instructors and teaching assistants on how the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools relates to academic integrity at York. It outlines when AI use is appropriate, when it may be considered academic misconduct, and the responsibilities of both students and instructors in ensuring its use is transparent and aligned with course expectations.
As AI tools become more common in academic contexts, this page also supports instructors in setting clear expectations, designing assessments, and responding in ways that promote learning. AI use is not inherently inappropriate; its acceptability depends on how it is used and the expectations of the course.
Communicating Expectations
As an instructor, you should expect that students will have questions about the use of AI tools in your course. Clear guidance on whether and how these tools may be used is essential to supporting academic integrity.
To support this, instructors are encouraged to provide clear guidelines on the use of AI tools in your course and explain how these expectations relate to academic integrity. Resources to assist with this are available below.
When communicating expectations, it can be helpful to specify:
- what students should do if they are unsure whether a particular use is permitted
- whether AI use is permitted in the course and/or for specific assessments
- which types of use are permitted (e.g., brainstorming, summarizing readings, explaining concepts, outlining, editing or refining work, coding support, or generating content)
- which uses are restricted or not permitted
- whether and how students should acknowledge or document their use of AI tools, if required, and
what level of detail is expected
- how AI use will be considered in the evaluation of their work, including what constitutes the student’s
own contribution
AI at York Hub
Explore the AI at York site for comprehensive information related to AI in teaching and learning. In particular, the For Faculty page includes resources that can be incorporated into your courses.
The For Faculty page features guidance on building digital literacy with students, adapting assessment strategies, and creatively integrating AI into the classroom. It also includes an editable slide deck that instructors can use as a starting point for conversations with students about AI.
The slide deck can be adapted to suit different disciplines, courses, guidelines, and approaches to AI. It also includes student engagement activities, reflective discussion questions, and links to additional resources.
Institutional Expectations
When discussing AI use with students, refer to institutional expectations outlined in the Senate Academic Conduct Policy and Procedures. This policy clarifies how the use of AI tools relates to academic integrity.
Unauthorized AI use typically involves using AI tools in ways that are not permitted in the course or failing to acknowledge their use when required. AI use can take different forms, such as supporting tasks (e.g., brainstorming or outlining), refining work (e.g., editing for clarity), or generating content. Clearly indicating which types of use are permitted, restricted, or not permitted can help reduce confusion and support academic integrity.
As outlined in the policy, unauthorized AI use may include:
- Using AI tools without appropriate acknowledgement may constitute a breach (section 5.2a(i))
- Using AI tools when not permitted by the instructor may constitute a breach (section 5.2a(ii))
The policy also outlines responsibilities for both students and instructors in supporting appropriate AI use (section 6):
- Students must follow instructor expectations for AI use and acknowledge their use of AI tools. If unsure, they are expected to seek clarification (section 6.2c)
- Instructors are responsible for clearly communicating expectations and supporting students in meeting them (section 6.3b)
Differing Instructor Expectations
Expectations for the use of AI-based tools may vary between instructors. To support students in following your expectations:
- Be clear and explicit about your expectations, particularly in assignment instructions
- Communicate expectations consistently and reinforce them in various ways, such as including them in eClass, within course syllabi, instruction guidelines and repeated in class
- Explain that expectations may differ across courses, and that permission to use AI in one course does not apply to others
Clear and consistent expectations help reduce confusion and support students in meeting academic integrity requirements. If AI use is permitted, provide guidance on how students should acknowledge or document use, as appropriate to the assessment.
You can also direct students to York University Libraries resources for support with citing AI tools, including:
- SPARK Creating Bibliographies module
Like the technology itself, citation guidelines on AI tools are evolving. You can direct students to the Libraries’ APA, MLA and Chicago (Author/Date and Notes & Bibliography) Style Overviews for specific instructions.
Student Questions
Encourage students to ask questions about the use of AI tools and let them know how you prefer to be contacted (e.g., email, office hours, discussion boards, or other preferred methods). Encourage them to seek clarification early, while emphasizing their responsibility to ensure that their use of AI tools aligns with course expectations.
Some students may feel hesitant to ask whether they can use AI tools, as they may worry this could be perceived as academic misconduct. To reduce this uncertainty, invite questions in a supportive and non-judgmental way. For example:
- “If you’re unsure how you can use AI in this course, please check with me: I’m happy to clarify.”
You can also direct students to York’s SPARK modules which include resources on academic integrity and citing AI tools. These can give students a starting point for understanding expectations before or after they reach out to you.
Clear and consistent communication about AI use helps students understand expectations, supports their learning, and promotes academic integrity. As AI technologies continue to evolve, it is important to review and update these expectations regularly.
Student Discussion Topics
Engaging students in discussion can help you understand their perspectives and concerns about the use of AI tools, identify areas of confusion, and clarify expectations. Some guiding questions could include:
- How could these tools be used appropriately to support learning in this course?
- When do you think the use of AI tools would be considered academic misconduct?
- What concerns do you have about students using AI tools in this course? In your program? More generally?
- What do you see as the potential benefits and risks of using AI in academic work in this course?
Student Survey on AI Use in Courses
You can gather input by surveying students to better understand how they are using AI tools and where they may need clearer guidance.
The “Student Survey on AI Use in Courses” resource provides a set of questions that you can use or adapt to explore students’ familiarity with AI tools, how they are using them in their academic work, how they verify AI-generated content, and where expectations may need clarification.
You can use and adapt this resource in the format that works best for your course:
You may also adapt the open-ended questions for class discussions or discussion board activities related to AI use in academic work.
Because AI tools and course contexts continue to evolve, it can be helpful to revisit these discussions and guidelines periodically. Checking in with students throughout the term can help ensure expectations remain clear and relevant.
Co-Create Class Guidelines with Students
Consider co-creating class guidelines or a charter with your students regarding the use of AI tools in your course. This can help clarify expectations and support appropriate use of AI tools. Because expectations may vary across different assessments or activities, it is helpful to be explicit about how AI tools can be used in each context. As part of this process, you can discuss some of the issues involved and explain that the use of AI-based tools should support learning while upholding academic integrity.
When developing guidelines, you may wish to highlight principles such as:
- Transparency: Be clear about when and how AI tools may be used, and how students should acknowledge or document their use.
- Contribution: Clarify what constitutes a student's own work (e.g., ideas, analysis, writing) and what role, if any, AI tools may play.
- Equity and Inclusivity: Consider issues of access and encourage students to critically evaluate AI-generated content for bias or discriminatory output.
- Critical Use: Emphasize the importance of evaluating AI-generated content for accuracy, bias, and reliability.
- Seeking Guidance: Encourage students to ask for clarification if they are unsure whether a particular use is permitted.
Because AI tools and course expectations may evolve, it is helpful to revisit these guidelines periodically to ensure they remain clear and relevant.
Redesigning Assessments
The rise of AI tools has prompted educators to rethink traditional assessment practices. While these tools can generate work that resembles student submissions, they also create opportunities to redesign assessments by using a wider range of formats, incorporating AI in structured ways, and emphasizing critical thinking, application, and engagement with course content.
These approaches can be adapted based on class size, disciplinary context, and the time available for instruction and assessment. They can also be combined within a single course to support different types of learning and reduce over-reliance on any one assessment format.
Expand/Replace Assessments
Consider expanding or replacing written assessments by:
- focus on the process of learning and development rather than only the final product (e.g., scaffold larger assignments through proposals, drafts, peer review, or other checkpoints)
- ask students to explain or document their thinking (e.g., brief reflections, process notes, drafts, or rationale for decisions)
- ask students to demonstrate critical thinking, disciplinary understanding, and context-specific reasoning through application and synthesis (e.g., applying concepts to real-world scenarios, comparing perspectives, evaluating evidence, or analyzing discipline-specific case studies)
- ask students to apply personal experience, reflection, or course-specific knowledge (e.g., connecting concepts to classroom activities, projects, labs, local or community contexts, or placements)
- design questions grounded in classroom discussions, course materials, or disciplinary contexts (e.g., using assigned readings, examples discussed in class, recent class debates, case studies, or field-specific problems)
- require students to verify that all sources and citations are accurate and authentic, as AI-generated content may fabricate or misrepresent them (e.g., checking that cited works exist and are represented accurately)
- create opportunities for students to critically evaluate and responsibly use AI tools where relevant to course learning outcomes (e.g., analyzing AI-generated responses for accuracy or bias, comparing AI and human-generated work, or reflecting on appropriate AI use within the discipline)
- incorporate accessible multimodal assessment formats (e.g., presentations, podcasts, infographics, or collaborative digital projects where appropriate)
Incorporate Oral Assessments
Oral assessments can provide authentic demonstrations of student learning by supporting dialogue, explanation, and real-time reasoning. They may also reduce reliance on AI-generated responses in some assessment contexts.
Options include:
- short individual or group presentations
- recorded video or audio responses in place of some written assignments
- viva-style Q&A examinations to assess understanding
- oral reflections that accompany written submissions
- structured peer discussions or debates
- brief in-class explanation activities tied to submitted work
- randomized oral check-ins to verify understanding of submitted assignments
Even small oral components can make assessments more personal, engaging, and less easily replicated using AI tools. As with any assessment approach, consider accessibility, flexibility, and student support when incorporating oral components.
Integrate AI Tools into Assessments
Some ways that students can use AI tools to apply critical thinking and analytical skills include:
- generate a response to a question and analyze its strengths and weaknesses
- evaluate AI-generated content for logic, consistency, accuracy, and bias
- fact-check AI-generated responses to identify inaccuracies
- trace claims in AI-generated responses back to credible sources and verify supporting evidence
- generate a response to a question and analyze its strengths and weaknesses
- compare their own work with an AI-generated version and reflect on differences in reasoning, evidence use, or style
- revise or improve an AI-generated response to better align with course expectations or disciplinary standards
- experiment with different prompts to examine how variations affect the quality or bias of responses
- use AI to generate or refine an outline that students further develop, evaluate, and revise
- document how AI tools were used in completing an assignment, where appropriate
- analyze ethical issues such as bias, privacy, or authorship when using AI in academic work
Note: When incorporating AI tools into assessments, consider accessibility, equity, privacy, and student support needs.
Update Grading Criteria
You may wish to update grading criteria or rubrics to place greater emphasis on how students use evidence, develop arguments, and interpret course material, rather than focusing primarily on writing mechanics or structure. This helps ensure that assessments reward authentic thinking and engagement with course concepts rather than generic outputs that AI tools can replicate.
Re-weighting assessments in this way places greater value on student learning while reducing reliance on skills that AI can easily perform.
Communicating Course Expectations through Syllabus Statements
To determine expectations for your course, consider whether and how students may use AI tools in their assessments (e.g., not permitted, permitted in limited ways, or fully permitted). Expectations may vary across different assessments or activities, so it is important to communicate these clearly in each context.
AI use in coursework can take different forms. For example, students may use AI tools to:
- support tasks (e.g., brainstorming, outlining, generating ideas)
- edit or refine work (e.g., improving clarity or structure)
- generate content or responses
Clearly indicating which types of use are permitted, restricted, or not permitted can help reduce confusion and support academic integrity.
Visit the Academic Integrity Syllabus Statements page for sample language you can include in your syllabus or post in eClass. These statements can also support ongoing discussions with students throughout the term.
If AI use is permitted, clarify how students should be transparent about their use of these tools. For example, you may ask students to:
- use AI tools only in ways defined as appropriate for the course (e.g., brainstorming, outlining, coding support, summarizing readings), and not in areas where you have restricted use
- disclose and document any use of AI tools, including which tool was used and how it was used
- seek clarification if they are unsure whether a particular use is permitted
- verify and critically evaluate AI-generated content
Requiring Students to Provide Further Information: Using Forms
To support transparency, you may ask students to provide structured information about how they used AI tools in an assessment. This can help clarify expectations, reduce ambiguity, and support more consistent evaluation across submissions.
Depending on your goals, you may ask students to:
- identify which AI tools were used and how they were used
- indicate the extent to which AI contributed to their work
- describe how they evaluated or verified AI-generated output
- explain how AI-generated content was incorporated into their assignment
- reflect on how using AI affected their approach to the task
Template forms are provided below to support this process. These are designed to be flexible and can be adapted to suit your discipline, course level, or assessment type.
| Form | Description |
| 1. AI-Based Tools: Declaration of Use (.docx format) AI-Based Tools: Declaration of Use (PDF format) | Records whether and how AI tools were used, including the extent and type of use in the assignment. |
| 2. AI Use: Review and Reflection (.docx format) AI Use: Review and Reflection (PDF format) | Prompts students to explain how they evaluated, revised, and learned from AI-generated content. |
Communicating Assessment Expectations through the AI Assessment Scale (AIAS)
The AI Assessment Scale (AIAS) provides a framework for clearly communicating expectations about AI use in assessments. It includes five levels, ranging from “no AI” to “full AI,” with examples that can be adapted across disciplines.
Incorporating the AIAS into assignment instructions or assessment guidelines can help clarify expectations, reduce confusion, and support a shared understanding of when and how AI use is appropriate. It can also be used to signal when expectations differ across assessments.
Using AI in Lectures or Discussions
Beyond formal assessments, AI tools can be used in ungraded or low-stakes activities during class time. Incorporating these tools into lectures or discussions can help students better understand how to use AI effectively, responsibly, and in ways that align with disciplinary expectations. These activities can be adapted based on your course context and comfort level with using AI tools in teaching.
Some learning activities you might consider include:
- Using AI-generated outputs (text, images, code, or media) as a starting point for critical discussion.
- What does it get right?
- What is inaccurate, biased, or misleading?
- How would it need to be revised to meet the scholarly standards of your field?
- Having small groups experiment with AI to create responses to a given prompt, then compare results. Students might evaluate outputs using a course rubric and reflect on how different prompts or iterations influenced the quality of the response.
- Engaging students in a debate using AI-generated counterarguments. This can help students explore different perspectives and strengthen their reasoning.
- Asking your students! Gather anonymous feedback about whether they are using the tool, what value it provides them, and how they think it should be used in your disciplinary or teaching context. This not only helps instructors better understand student perspectives but also encourages metacognitive reflection on learning practices.
While numerous AI detection tools are available, York does not currently recommend their use. These tools struggle to keep pace with the rapid evolution of AI and can be unreliable, producing both false positives and false negatives. This may unfairly impact students or create a false sense of certainty about AI use. Their use may also raise concerns related to privacy, data security, and intellectual property, as many tools require uploading student work to external systems.
Instead of relying on detection tools, instructors can draw on their knowledge of the course, assignment expectations, and student work when evaluating submissions. AI-generated content may exhibit patterns such as factual inaccuracies, fabricated references, superficial or generic analysis, repetitive phrasing, or overly generalized responses. These patterns may also appear in work where AI use is permitted, and should be interpreted in relation to course expectations.
However, these indicators are not definitive evidence of AI use. It is not always possible to determine whether AI tools have been used, and conclusions should not be based on suspicion alone.
If you suspect unauthorized AI use:
- Do not rely on AI detection tools as evidence
- Review the work in relation to course expectations and, where appropriate, the student’s previous work
- Seek clarification from the student where appropriate
Follow the process outlined in the Senate Academic Conduct Policy and Procedure if concerns remain. For assistance, contact academicintegrity@yorku.ca.
