Writing an AI use policy for your course syllabus

Usage context

A university instructor who needs to define — in writing, in the course syllabus — what AI use is permitted, what is prohibited, and what is part of the course's assessment design. Used before the semester begins. The prompt generates three distinct policy statements so the instructor can choose the one that fits their context and pedagogical stance.

Paste before

• Course name and level (undergraduate/graduate).
• Types of assignments and assessments in the course (essays, case analyses, code, lab reports, presentations, etc.).
• Any existing department or faculty policy (e.g., "the academic integrity code states that undisclosed AI use is treated as plagiarism").
• Whether the institution has an official policy that must be cited.

You are a university curriculum design advisor specializing in academic integrity in the age of large language models. I need to draft the AI use section for my course syllabus.

Course context:
- Course name: {{course_name}}
- Level: {{level}}
- Assessment types: {{assessment_types}}
- Existing institutional policy (if any): {{institutional_policy}}

Generate three versions of an AI use policy for my syllabus, using these three approaches:

**Version A — Clear prohibition**: generative AI use on course assessments is not permitted. Make clear what counts as prohibited use, what the consequences are, and why the restriction is pedagogically coherent with the course objectives — not just "because cheating is possible."

**Version B — Permitted with disclosure**: students may use AI as a tool but must declare how they used it, in which parts of the work, and what they contributed beyond the AI output. Include the disclosure format students must attach to submissions.

**Version C — AI integrated into assessment**: AI use is part of the course design. Students work with AI and are assessed on how they use, critique, correct, and go beyond what the model produces. Describe how AI competence is evaluated as a specific skill.

For each version:
- Write the text ready to insert into a syllabus (max 200 words per version).
- Add a brief note (3–4 lines) about the course profile where that version makes most sense.

Expected output

VERSION A — CLEAR PROHIBITION

"In this course, the use of generative AI tools (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, and similar) in the preparation of written assessments is not permitted. The reason is pedagogical, not technical: learning [central competency] requires students to build and articulate their own argument...

Violations will be handled under the university's Academic Integrity Policy, section XX."

Course profile: appropriate for courses where the writing process is central to learning (writing workshops, first-year courses, research seminars).

---

VERSION B — PERMITTED WITH DISCLOSURE

"You may use AI as a support tool in this course, provided you disclose its use..."

[Attached disclosure form]

Watch out for

• The model can produce policies that sound reasonable but contradict your institution's academic integrity regulations. Always cross-check against your university's official policy before including any version in a syllabus.
• Avoid policies that are impossible to enforce: saying "prohibited" without assessment design that supports it is an empty statement. Version A only works if the assessment design also makes it hard to outsource the core task.
• AI detection tools (Turnitin AI, GPTZero, etc.) have significant false positive rates. Do not base academic sanctions solely on automated detection results.

Suggested iteration

If you've chosen a version and want to adapt it: "I'm using Version B but I need to adapt it for oral exams and presentations. How does the disclosure form change for those formats?"

If your department is developing a unified policy: "Draft a version that works as a faculty-wide policy for all courses in the department, with blank spaces for individual instructors to specify additional restrictions for their own course."