Bringing C.H.A.O.S to Chaos: Syllabi with an AI Usage Policy – Faculty Focus

It is no secret that Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology is transforming college classrooms. AI tools can easily and quickly assist students in various tasks such as essay writing, literature reviews, analyzing data, formulating code, solving equations, image generation, music composition, and so much more. With minimal or no effort, within minutes, students have most assignments, test questions, or discussion problems figured out and done…enter the chaos! 

As educators, this means everything that we experienced in our own education and have worked years to develop is changing. We need to rethink our role, assignments, as well as formative and summative assessments of student learning all while AI capabilities change daily. 

Through all this, we feel educators can take one concrete step to control the chaos by Communicating How AI Operates in the Syllabus (C.H.A.O.S). This article highlights the significance of AI usage policies and what elements should be considered in the policy. It also provides a few useful tips to implement AI policies.   

Is there a need to specify the AI usage policy in the class syllabus?

Including an AI usage policy offers clarity to students regarding acceptable usage of AI tools. Although educators are making attempts to develop campus-wide consensus about AI tools, different sections of the same course may have different AI usage policies and practices depending on the instructor and their comfort level. When an explicit AI usage policy is stated in the syllabus, students (and faculty members) can be held accountable for upholding that policy. Any incidents of inappropriate AI usage or cheating can be dealt with within the framework of the policy mentioned.       

What are the elements of an AI policy?

A clear AI usage policy needs to have at least three elements – acceptable use, citations necessary, and consequences of non-adherence to the policy. The first element, a well-formulated AI usage policy, specifies acceptable AI usage in learning processes, e.g. brainstorming and creating outlines. In the policy, it is beneficial to provide examples of unacceptable usage, e.g. using whole paragraphs of AI text or writing the whole essay. To develop the acceptable use portion, faculty need to take time and honestly reflect on how they see AI tools being integrated into classroom learning, career fields, and life in general. This can range from absolutely no AI usage to intentional integration of the tools in the classroom space. Your level of familiarity, acceptance of, and perceived value in AI will help shape what is allowed. 

The second element is to determine how AI usage needs to be acknowledged and cited appropriately. Again, it is helpful to provide a sample citation as students may be unfamiliar with the norms of citations while taking initial undergraduate courses. 

Furthermore, AI tools often include biases, inaccuracies, or sometimes hallucinations. Humans using AI tools, in this case students, need to be aware of these shortcomings and understand that even with proper citations they will be held accountable for not reviewing and verifying the accuracy of their work before submitting. So, the citation element in the syllabus must explain that the ultimate responsibility of academic rigor for the assignment submitted lies with the student.  

The last element should outline information about how the instructor will deal with non-adherence to the policy. As an instructor, will you provide a chance for students to resubmit the work? Will the usage result in a loss of points, a zero for the assignment, or a failing grade in the course? How will AI usage be checked? How will you communicate it to students? What is the process and who is involved? These are a few questions that can help an educator shape their usage policy.  

Implementing AI usage policy

A few additional steps can be taken when implementing an AI usage policy to make the process smoother. Given the varied nature of AI use policy in various courses, it would be helpful to have a classroom discussion early on (day 1) and throughout the semester with each assignment and exam. Researchers have suggested using a stoplight framework e.g., Red – No AI is allowed in this course; Green – AI tools are allowed and encouraged; and Yellow- AI is permitted for following activities only (Urbaczewski, 2025).  

Regularly talking about AI usage may remove some of the pressure from students who want to express themselves through their essays or art and feel seen/heard but may be afraid that their grades will be poorer if they don’t use AI tools. Sharing stories of how past students have effectively, or ineffectively, utilized AI in their work can be helpful in mitigating inappropriate usage. 

Another possible step is to introduce scaffolding in high stakes summative assignments such as end of the semester projects. Instead of a one-time submission worth 100 points, students could submit intermediate steps and include the prompts they may have used to get a response from AI tools such as ChatGPT or Perplexity. Some instructors may offer extra credit for such intermediate steps.     

Unlike grading or attendance policies in the syllabus, AI usage policies will be dynamic. As AI technology advances, the definition of academic integrity may need to be revisited. Faculty members may need to revise this policy each semester and update it to ensure that students are meeting learning outcomes. As the educational landscape continues to evolve, remember you can get a handle on the chaos by introducing C.H.A.O.S to keep your syllabi in alignment with the current times.    

AI Disclosure: AI tools such as Editor in MS Word were used for checking grammar and spelling. No AI tools were used for brainstorming or writing this article.  

Simantini Karve, PhD, is a professor of biology and professional development co-coordinator at Skyline College, San Bruno, CA. 

Jessica Hurless was a professor of Communication Studies and currently serves as the Dean STEM division at Skyline College, San Bruno, CA.  

Reference

Urbaczewski, Andrew, “Developing a syllabus for is course usage in the ai era” (2025). Proceedings of 2024 AIS SIGED International Conference on Information Systems Education and Research. 16. https://aisel.aisnet.org/siged2024/16