Drafting Generative AI Statements
This guide supports faculty in developing clear and effective syllabus and assignment statements related to the use of GenAI. Given that GenAI use is often difficult to detect, it is essential to articulate explicit expectations — doing so promotes responsible use and reduces the risk of unintentional misuse.
Start with the learning, not the tool.
A strong GenAI statement should explain what students are expected to do themselves, not just which tools they may or may not touch. The core learning in a business-school course is often judgment, diagnosis, recommendation quality, ethical reasoning, and communication tailored to a case, client, or audience.
Ask first: What are the learning objectives, and what elements of course work — if any — can GenAI support without replacing the intended learning?
- Write the policy in plain language and repeat it in the syllabus, assignment instructions, and class discussions.
- Add assignment-level directions whenever the rules differ from the general course statement.
- Clearly communicate expectations around citing and use disclosure, and model this in your own GenAI use.
- Include a clear warning not to upload confidential, proprietary, employer, client, peer, or personal data into external GenAI tools.
Schulich GenAI Framework: Five Practical Permission Levels
This framework outlines five permission levels to help faculty determine what GenAI use is appropriate for a given assignment or activity. Different assignments in the same course can sit at different levels.
⛔
Level 1
AI-Forbidden
No GenAI use at any stage. All work must be entirely original and completed without AI assistance.
Good fit for
- Timed exams
- Oral assessments
- Closed-book quizzes
- Individual reflections
📏
Level 2
AI-Regulated
GenAI allowed only for clearly defined surface tasks. Instructor specifies exactly which tools, for what purpose, and at which stage.
Good fit for
- Grammar and spell-check
- Citation formatting
- Accessibility tools
- Low-stakes prep tasks
🌿
Level 3
AI-Enriched
GenAI may assist with brainstorming or clarity, but core work stays student-driven. Disclosure required when used.
Good fit for
- Brainstorming and outlining
- Improving draft clarity
- Practice questions
- Research framing
🤝
Level 4
AI-Enabled
AI plays a significant role. Students must critically evaluate all outputs. Disclosure, verification, and clear accountability required.
Good fit for
- Case memos
- Market scans
- Research-supported reports
- Data analysis write-ups
🌐
Level 5
AI-Incorporated
AI fully embedded and expected. Instructor assesses how thoughtfully students use AI and how clearly their own judgment shapes the final work.
Good fit for
- AI-integrated projects
- Innovation exercises
- Consulting simulations
- Prompt design tasks
* Adapted with permission from The AI Ready Framework, developed by Andrew Reszitnyk, Mohawk College.
A syllabus statement should include:
- Scope: Make clear which generative AI tools the statement applies to, and that non-generative supports such as spellcheckers or citation managers may still be allowed.
- Permission level: State whether the assignment is AI-Forbidden, AI-Regulated, AI-Enriched, AI-Enabled, or AI-Incorporated.
- Conditions: Make clear when disclosure, citation, reflection, prompt documentation, or verification is required.
- Responsibility: Make clear that students remain responsible for accuracy, bias checking, citation, originality, and academic integrity.
- Priority: Make clear that assignment-specific GenAI instructions override the course GenAI statement.
- Privacy: Explicitly prohibit uploading sensitive organizational, employer, client, peer, or personal information into public tools. Remind students of York University-supported tools better aligned with privacy expectations.
Sample: Course-level statement
Suggested syllabus language
In this course, the use of generative AI tools may vary by assignment. Unless otherwise stated, assume an AI-Enriched baseline: you may use GenAI for limited developmental support such as brainstorming, question generation, early outlining, or surface-level editing, but not to generate the substantive analysis, recommendations, reflections, or other work being assessed as your own thinking. Some assignments may instead be AI-Forbidden, AI-Regulated, AI-Enabled, or AI-Incorporated. When GenAI is used, you must disclose the tool used, the purpose of use, and the part of the work it influenced. You remain responsible for the accuracy, quality, citation, and integrity of anything you submit. Assignment-specific instructions take precedence over this general course statement. Public GenAI tools must not be used with confidential, proprietary, client, employer, peer, or personal data.
Sample: Assignment-level statements
| Assessment Type | Level | Sample Language |
|---|---|---|
| Exam, oral quiz, or timed case analysis | ⛔ AI-Forbidden | Generative AI tools are not permitted at any stage of this assessment, including planning, drafting, revising, or editing. This task is designed to assess your independent analysis, judgment, and communication. |
| Low-stakes preparation task, draft polishing, or accessibility support | 📏 AI-Regulated | You may use GenAI only for clearly defined surface tasks such as grammar and spell-check, citation formatting, or approved accessibility supports. You may not use it to generate ideas, analysis, argumentation, or substantive wording. Follow the instructor's directions about which tools are allowed, for what purpose, and at which stage. |
| Reflection, discussion post, or short personal response | 🌿 AI-Enriched | You may use GenAI to brainstorm questions, test an outline, or help you notice gaps before drafting. The final submission must be written in your own words and must reflect your own analysis, interpretation, or experience. If used, include a brief disclosure note. |
| Case memo or recommendation report | 🤝 AI-Enabled | You may use GenAI as part of your workflow — for example to explore options, organize material, or improve draft clarity. You may not outsource judgment to the tool. The diagnosis, argument, recommendations, and final decision logic must be critically evaluated and substantially shaped by you. Disclosure and verification are required. |
| Market scan, literature-informed brief, or research-supported report | 🤝 AI-Enabled | GenAI may be used to help identify search terms, organize an outline, or summarize material for checking. You must manually verify references, fact-check claims, and ensure the final synthesis and implications are your own. Disclosure and clear student accountability are required. |
| AI-integrated project, innovation exercise, prompt design task, or consulting simulation | 🌐 AI-Incorporated | GenAI use is expected as part of the assignment workflow. Your grade will depend on how thoughtfully and responsibly you use the tool, how rigorously you verify important claims, and how clearly you explain where AI helped, where it misled you, and how your own judgment shaped the final deliverable. |
Common mistakes to avoid
- Being too vague. "Use AI responsibly" lacks the detail students need to avoid unintentional misuse.
- Assuming students are equipped to comply. Provide specific resources for citing, disclosure, and prompting.
- Using one blanket rule for every assessment when learning goals differ across the course.
- Requiring burdensome documentation when a short disclosure note would suffice.
- Allowing AI-generated text to substitute for the independent judgment the course is designed to assess.
- Ignoring privacy and data-governance concerns in client, employer, internship, or peer-based work.
Quick drafting checklist
Before you finalize a statement, test it against these five questions:
- What is this assignment really assessing: thinking process, product quality, communication skills, disciplinary knowledge, or some combination?
- At which stage could GenAI help without undermining the intended learning? At which stage would it substitute for learning?
- Which permission level best fits this task: AI-Forbidden, AI-Regulated, AI-Enriched, AI-Enabled, or AI-Incorporated?
- What do students need to know in plain language about allowed uses, prohibited uses, and disclosure expectations?
- What ethical or practical guardrails should be named explicitly — including verification, citation, bias checking, and confidentiality?
Need support?
One-on-one drafting support
Support is available for GenAI statement drafting. If you have questions or would like a review of your statement prior to posting in your course, reach out to:
askit@yorku.ca
Attn: Instructional Designer
Studio T Redesigner
The Schulich Teaching Innovation Studio has developed the Redesigner — a tool to help instructors convert existing assignments into AI-ready assignments incorporating the Schulich GenAI framework.
Developed by the CITE and Studio-T "GenAI Working Group."
This guide adapts and builds on the following resources: Andrew Reszitnyk, Mohawk College, The AI Ready Framework; Shehroze Saharan, Christopher Laursen, Mary McCaffery and Adora Liu, Step-by-Step Guide to Creating Course and Assessment Policies for GenAI (Teaching with AI Conference, University of Guelph, June 10, 2025); and Lance Eaton's Syllabi Policies for Generative AI Repository. This Schulich version narrows the focus to common business-school teaching contexts.
This guide adapts and builds on the following resources: Andrew Reszitnyk, Mohawk College, The AI Ready Framework; Shehroze Saharan, Christopher Laursen, Mary McCaffery and Adora Liu, Step-by-Step Guide to Creating Course and Assessment Policies for GenAI (Teaching with AI Conference, University of Guelph, June 10, 2025); and Lance Eaton's Syllabi Policies for Generative AI Repository. This Schulich version narrows the focus to common business-school teaching contexts.