Students

Yes — with a few conditions. Using AI to improve the clarity, flow, grammar, or tone of writing you have already drafted is generally acceptable. This is similar to asking a writing tutor or using a grammar tool: the ideas, argument, and content are still yours.

What matters is that you started with your own thinking. If you wrote the draft and used AI to polish it, that is a legitimate use. If AI wrote the draft and you lightly edited it, that is a different situation — and most likely falls outside what your instructor intended.

Always check your course syllabus first. Some courses may require that all writing reflect your unaided voice, particularly in writing-intensive programs or assignments designed to assess your writing development directly. When in doubt, ask your instructor before submitting.

No — not unless your instructor has explicitly said so.

Submitting AI-generated text as your own work, without disclosure and without your instructor's permission, is a form of academic dishonesty under CSUEB's Academic Integrity policy. This applies even if the AI output is well-written and technically accurate.

Assignments exist to support your learning. When AI does the intellectual work for you, you miss the thinking, the struggle, and the skill-building that the assignment was designed to provide — and you arrive at the next course, the next internship, or your first job without the foundation you need.

There may be specific courses or assignments where AI-generated drafts are part of the exercise — for example, a class on AI literacy that asks you to generate and then critically evaluate AI output. In those cases your instructor will tell you clearly. If that has not been communicated, assume AI-generated submissions are not permitted.

Yes, cautiously — and with two non-negotiable steps: verify everything, and disclose when appropriate.

AI tools can be genuinely useful for getting oriented in an unfamiliar topic, generating search terms, summarizing background concepts, or brainstorming angles on a research question. Used this way, AI functions like a knowledgeable but fallible conversation partner — helpful for early exploration, not a citable source.

What AI cannot reliably do is provide accurate citations, up-to-date information, or expert-level analysis. AI tools are well-documented to fabricate references that look real but do not exist, misattribute quotations, and present outdated or simply incorrect information with complete confidence. Submitting research that contains AI-generated citations you have not independently verified is an academic integrity issue, even if the error was unintentional.

The practical rule: use AI to help you find and frame your research, but verify every source independently through the library, databases, or other credible channels. And if AI played a meaningful role in shaping your research approach, disclose that in your paper or project consistent with your instructor's guidance.

If you are unsure what counts as appropriate disclosure for a specific assignment, the CSUEB Library and your instructor are both good resources.

No. This is one of the clearest boundaries in CSUEB's AI guidance, and it applies to everyone on campus.

Student records, grades, personally identifiable information, employee information, personnel records, and confidential institutional data must not be entered into any AI tool — including tools that are institutionally licensed — unless that use has been explicitly reviewed and approved.

This matters because most AI systems process and may retain the information you submit. Even well-intentioned use — for example, pasting a roster to help draft a communication, or uploading a document that contains student names — creates real privacy and legal risk under FERPA and CSU data governance policy.

If you are working in a role — such as a student worker, teaching assistant, or employee — that gives you access to records or data about other people, treat that data with the same care you would expect for your own. When in doubt, remove all identifying information before using AI tools, or do not use AI for that task at all.

Questions about what counts as protected data in a specific context can be directed to the IT Service Desk or your supervisor.

No. AI can inform your thinking, but the decision — and the responsibility for it — always belongs to you.

This applies in academic contexts: AI cannot determine whether your interpretation of a text is correct, whether your argument is sound, or whether your research conclusion is valid. Those judgments require your reasoning, your knowledge of the course material, and your engagement with your instructor's feedback.

It also applies in any professional or administrative role you may hold on campus. Decisions that affect other people — advising recommendations, hiring, disciplinary matters, eligibility determinations — must be made by humans and reviewed by humans. Using AI to generate a recommendation or draft a decision is not the same as making that decision, and it does not transfer the responsibility.

Think of AI as a tool that can help you think through options, draft language, or surface considerations you might not have thought of on your own. The judgment call at the end of that process is still yours to make.