Students designed draft AI policies designed to be university wide. These were their priorities. Remember that students were encouraged not to use AI in their writing and to get used to messy first drafts. This is what a messy draft looks like and we embraced that!
Draft Policy1
Policy on AI use at SFU:
Overview:
This AI policy is designed for both students and faculty members across all departments to ensure equality and universality. AI will be banned to create graded assignments and generate images to ensure originality of student produced work. Faculty cannot grade work or develop classes. However, students will be allowed to use for self-studying outside of class for extra practice as students have different learning styles. Students will also be permitted to use AI to check spelling and grammar. This policy takes into consideration that the impact of AI on the critical thinking skills of students that are essential aspects of academic, professional and personal development.
· Who is it for
-Students -Faculty
· When/how it can be used
- Self-studying – To practice (For example, students can ask AI to generate practice problems that they can solve, show them steps and logic behind a particular concept in different language)
- It cannot be used to produce work or assignments
- Cannot be used to grade work or generate classes
- Cannot be used to generate images
-Strict use of AI to fix grammar, use the prompt: Check spelling and grammatical structure
-AI cannot be used for research
· Rational
- Equality for both students and faculty
-You cannot learn when you use AI to create for you (Abubakar, 2025)
- beneficial to grammatical corrections and is a good efficient support, not to be confused with replacement
- Student produced work and originality are important
- Negative impact on learning essential writing, problem-solving and critical thinking skill with the continued reliance on AI
- Beneficial for self-studying because students have different learning styles and learning about a concept in a different way, language can foster their understanding of key themes
- Keeping TA jobs and human relationships in the classroom
· Enforcement
-Existing mechanism: Turnitin
-Proof knowledge: Quiz on work
-Request proof of process
· Consequences
- First time: Automatic 0 on assignment and Library 201 workshop to teach people who used AI and lack essential skills (research)
-Second time: Automatic 0 on assignment and FD on transcript/academic record (Academic dishonesty) right away
· Declaration
-Acknowledgment that AI must not be used for graded assignments, projects, exams
-When it is used for proofreading purposes, it must be disclosed and only the provided prompts should be use
· Guidance
-Prompts that can be used to during proofreading (Example: “Check Spelling”)
-Library 101 class/workshop on appropriate usage, when they begin first year
-Students and faculty will only be permitted to utilize the same AI model, “Co-Pilot” to ensure equality of access
References:
Abubakar, S., Jeilani, A., & Yusuf, M. (2025). The role of over-reliance on AI in the negative consequences of student learning: The moderating effects of ethical concerns and institutional policies. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2591503
Vieriu, A. M., & Petrea, G. (2025). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on Students’ Academic Development. Education Sciences, 15(3), 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030343
Draft Policy 2
Policy: Invest and add in AI literacy education within preexisting SFU W courses
For whom: Primarily students
Universities could introduce mandatory AI literacy training for first-year/second-year students, teaching them how to use AI responsibly while maintaining critical thinking and independent learning skills.
This could include understanding AI's limitations, identify misinformation, and recognize when AI use becomes academic dishonesty. Rather than restricting AI entirely, this policy would help university students develop the skills necessary to use AI effectively without becoming overly dependent on
Implementing this policy would require SFU to provide AI literacy resources, establish clearer academic guidelines, and train educators to support responsible AI use. Although this would require additional funding and resources, it could create a more consistent approach to AI education and ensure students have equal opportunities to develop AI literacy skills.
All first-year/ second-year students would be required to complete AI literacy training that focuses on responsible AI use, critical thinking, and academic integrity.
A positive consequence could be students becoming more confident in evaluating AI-generated information while maintaining independent thinking skills. It could also reduce academic integrity violations caused by unclear expectations. However, negative consequences include increased university expenses, additional student workloads, and difficulties keeping training materials updated as AI technology continues to evolve/change. Without such a policy, students could become increasingly dependent on AI without fully understanding its limitations.
Draft Policy 3
1. For everyone:
a. Students:
b. Faculty: no usage for grading submitted work. They can use it for prep of class materials as long as it is declared.
2. Its for everyone: students and profs: When/how it can be used:
- Professors should make at least half (50%) of their course work in-person assignments: things like oral exams, in-class written essays, participation, quizzes, inclass activites. – chirikov 2026
- Students can use AI for brainstorming, research, but their submitted work should be written entirely by them. Any usage of AI in the production of submitted work must be thoroughly explained/justified. Provide the exact prompts you’ve used in your work cited.
3. Rational:
- Professors: It can be used as long as the user specifically declares how it has been used. One would assume a professor wouldn’t hand out course work generated by AI if that generated work is of poor quality.
- We don’t want students using AI to write their work because siobhan neary’s, Wenxiu jia, and li pan (2025) by research shows that AI dependency negatively affects academic achievement and led to students overestimating their competence
4. Guidelines:
- Students/professors should not upload original work, without the original authors permission, to AI tools.
5. Enforcement/Consequences:
- Professors must undergo training for how to identity AI usage and how to follow SFUs plagiarism policy.
- Misuse of AI is plagiarism and the same consequences will apply
6. The policy should be reviewed annually to keep up with the times because AI and how it is used changes all the time.
Draft policy 4
Rational:
study reveals AI negatively impacts critical thinking skills, writing skills, academic honesty and deeply engaging with course materials
It further reveals that safe AI strategies can enormously benefit higher education
Move away from punishment mindset and towards AI literacy (students reveal fear of punishment even when prompted to use AI)
Faculty:
No faculty allowed to use AI to mark or create course materials, can use detection softwares only as a starting point
Faculty should require learning process grading methods,
Require a AI course after first year, before 60 credits or declaring major
Every department is required to have an AI literate member holding AI certifications
Students:
Students are allowed to use AI, but all usage must be declared through the AI Usage Declaration Sheet produced by SFU
First year “lite” version
Attempt to make using AI more work, than not
Required to take a AI course that cover both the broader ethical implications and practical elements of usage in class project, will take place after first year and before 60 credits or major declaration
Consequences:
Three strikes throughout your SFU career and complete loss of scholarships/ funding
F on assignment
Potentially re-take AI course
SFU should provide a premium AI membership to all students to mitigate the privilege gap produced between those that can and cannot afford it
Could also provide a AI detection programDraft Policy 3
